Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	good_a	reason_n	see_v	3,316	5	3.1434	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81229	The originall cause of temporall evils. The opinions of the most ancient heathens concerning it, examined by the sacred Scriptures, and referred unto them, as to the sourse and fountaine from whence they sprang. / By Meric Casaubon D.D.	Casaubon, Meric, 1599-1671.	1645 (1645)	Wing C809; Thomason E300_12; ESTC R200256	58,479	71

the literall sense of those of the Prophet where he saith Vsque adeò res humanas vis abdita quaedum Lucret. I ib. v. Obterit pulchros fasceis saevasque secures Proculcare ludibrio sibi habere videtur Of Scripture Histories that of holy Iobs more then ordinary prosperity as it is recorded in the first Chapter and the sudden alteration which upon Satan there said to have appeared among the sons of God his wicked and malitious suggestion and crimination ensued so ancient and so remarkable as it cannot be conceived that it should altogether be unknown unto them so what they might ignorantly inferre upon it they that are versed in their mythologies may easily guesse Through the instigation of the same Satan as is expressed I Chron. XXI v. 1. David King of Israel would needs have the people numbred whereupon Gods wrath and a great plague upon the people of God ensued Of this there is no question the Text is plaine that God was angry and the people plagued but what was Davids crime doth not so clearly appear by the Text neither are Expositors of one minde about it Josephus of old and some Rabbins since him make this to have been Davids trespasse because he did not impose the redemption mony half a sicle commanded by God Exod. XXX v. 12 13. upon such occasions Learned Diodatus his opinion slipt over in the late English Edition of his Notes upon II Sam. c. 24. is that David besides some other concurring provocations offended in that he did not observe the law concerning the right age to wit 20 years from which and upwards the people was to be numbred Exo XXX 14. Num. I. 2. So they but the current opinion of Interpreters saith P. Martyr upon the place is that elatio animi and superbia was his fault God saith he had given him peace He had got a Catalogue of his valiant men and now he sets his minde upon it to know the number of his thousands of Subjects So Rev. Dr. Rivet also Quando tuleris summam filio●um Isr c. When thou takest the summe of the children of Israel that is When thou shalt number them either by me commanded or of thy selfe when thou shalt think it expedient for the publicke good For the numbring of the people upon such occasions was not displeasing unto God which neverthelesse in David for other causes was reprehended Not certainly as some Hebrews are of opinion because he took no care for the tribute money which was to be payed unto God this could not be the reason why Joab disswaded him from it but because he saw that it was not done out of a good minde but rather out of vanity and pride as may appear from the whole context II Sam. XXIV So he And this indeed all circumstances as he saith of the story well weighed will appear the most probable conjecture multitude of subjects according to that of Solomon In the multitude of people is the Kings honour but in the want of people is the destruction of the Prince Prov. XIV 28. being a very likely object of a Princes pride and carnall confidence Now if pride was the cause both of this anger and plague and the matter so publickly noysed and construed it is very likely that the fame of so memorable a judgement the sudden operation and cessation of it if not the plague it selfe being apparently miraculous spread it self to many parts of the world then inhabited by Heathens Of Ambassadours sent by the Princes of Babylon to enquire of the wonder in the land vouchsafed unto King Hezekiah in confirmation of his recovery and prolongation of dayes by the immediate hand of God we are told expresly II Chr. XXXII v. 31. And since I have mentioned this of Hezekiah I cannot passe by being so pertinent to our purpose Isidore Pelusiota Isid Pelus Epist l. 11. Ep. 74. that elegant and witty Writer his observation concerning him as it followeth In the reign of King Hezekiah the King of Persia came with all his power against Ierusalem and was overthrowne by a divine miracle one of the greatest that ever was Whereupon Hezekiah being puffed up and now through immoderate joy entertaining thoughts of himself above a man God with a sicknesse as with a bridle curbed him to compose his swelling minde and to make him sensible of his naturall frailty and to cure him of that disease which his soule had contracted through excesse of joy So Isidore and it is in that Epistle that he writes of Epaminondas the Theban Commander of whom we had somewhat in the beginning What ground this Isidore might have either from the Scriptures themselves by way of inference or from tradition for this observation I know not But in my judgement Hezekiah's miraculous in some circumstances of it recovery of that sicknesse he speaks of and upon it his vaine ostentation of all his treasures and pretious things in all his Kingdome before those Ambassadours whom forein Princes had sent to congratulate him so particularly noted in the Scripture II Kings XX. 12 13 c. and upon this ostentation that dreadfull denunciation of future heavie judgements upon his posterity do sufficiently evince that Hezekiah in his prosperity after his recovery at least did forget himself and that God in mercy to him did use means to recall him before he should be too far gone These words besides the story seem to me to import as much II Chr. XXXII 25 26. But Hezekiah rendred not againe according to the benefit done unto him for his heart was lifted up therefore there was wrath upon him and upon Judah and Jerusalem Notwithstanding Hezekiah humbled himself for the pride of his heart both he and the inhabitants of Jerusalem so that the wrath of the Lord came not upon them in the dayes of Hezekiah These and the like passages of Scripture might and did as I conceive at the first in part occasion that observation of the Heathens of the danger of more then ordinary worldly prosperity But their ignorance of the Scriptures or want rather of perfect knowledge of them made them upon this observation to inferre in the manner I have said before this wicked and impious conclusion that God was of a maligne and envious disposition I see here a large field open but I will not enter into it as not being within the compasse either of my undertaking which was only to shew the originall of the opinion or my leisure and opportunity at this time I shall only take notice of two reasons which are touched upon by ancient Heathens not Philosophers I do not meane who have written of purpose and more generally concerning Providence but Historians upon the by and in this very subject of either great prosperity suddenly blasted or sorrowes intermingled with joyes their reasons as I conceive being very agreeable to the doctrine of the sacred Scriptures Herodotus in one of those places where he chargeth God with

was though not approved by all yet generally known and agitated among ancient Heathens that men themselves had been the cause of those evils they commonly complained of And that this was the opinion of some though not of them only who either brutishly denied the providence or blasphemously the goodnesse of God which opinion as commonly known being here by our Author but briefly set down and not understood by some that read him principally as we conceive occasioned this imaginary at the first but now reall as the words are printed imperfection Homer shall leade not for his antiquity only but for his credit also among ancient Heathens In his first Odyssie he makes Jupiter himself to expostulate the matter with mortall men in these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The sense of which words is That men do wrongfully accuse the Gods as the authors of their evils whereas they may thank their own 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wretchednesse or wickednesse through which they bring griefs upon themselves which never were destinated unto them So the Golden verses as they commonly call them containing the chiefe doctrine and instructions of Pythagoras 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. He shall know he that takes a right course to knowledge and wisdome that is how men by acts of their own free-wils bring mischiefs upon their own heads c. Crantor an ancient Academick Xenocrates his Scholar in his Consolation to Hippocles cited by Plutarch in his Consolation to Apollonius had these words All these things doth that ancient philosophy well teach and admonish all which if we shall not altogether allow of yet this that concernes the troubles and travels of this life is certainly true For if it be not so by any order of nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are his words yet by our selves it is brought to this degree of wretchednesse and corruption Now these and so divers others whom we may spare though they derive the chiefest miseries of men from men themselves yet doe acknowledge certain 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unavoidable chances or casualties which proceeded from another cause as by Crantor his words that follow in Plutarch and by other passages not of Homer only but even of those Aurea carmina though not many may appear The Stoichs might be thought to say the same but do not That concourse of free-will and fatall necessity they speak of is quite another thing as will appear to them that shall examine the particulars of the opinions which we shall not now stand upon But Seneca in his Naturall Questions comes off more roundly and charges men to the purpose Never did man I think upon one single subject as that is the benefit of windes with more wit or Rhetorick plead for providence then he doth in that Chapter His words some of them that chiefly concerne us here are these Ingens naturae beneficium si illud in injurtam suam non vertat hominum furor c. Adeò quicquid ex illis utile necessarium est non potest his repensari quae in perniciem suam generis humani dementia excogitat Sed non ideò non sunt naturâ suâ bona si vitio malè utentium nocent And againe Non tamen ut paulò ante dicebam queri possumus de auctore nostri Deo si beneficia ejus corrumpimus ut essent contraria efficimus And afterwards more generally yet If we shall weigh saith he the benefits of nature by the perversenesse of them that use them we may say we have received nothing but to our hurt Who useth his eyes that he may be the better for them who his tongue to whom is not his very life a torment There is not any thing so apparently good and profitable which abuse or vitiousness may not turne to a contrary use Much more to the same purpose is there to be found Later Philosophers that have written of this subject to mans wickednesse they joyn Gods justice punishing or preventing which how conformable it is to the Scriptures no Christian need to be told So Hierocles upon the Aurea Caerminae in few words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Our wickednesse saith he and Gods righteousnesse these two concurring are the cause of all our calamities It is very well said but it is not unknown to them that are versed in these Philosophers that lived since Christianity began to spread in the world that they borrowed even those that were their greatest enemies as Porphyrius this very Hierocles divers things from Christians and so might in divers points come nearer to our doctrine then former Philosophers did There is not any thing that I more admire in this this kinde then what Virgil hath to this purpose in his fourth Ecloge Sicelides Musae c. which consideratis considerandis what he was when he lived c. I conceive to be a very good comment upon GODS words Gen. III. v. 17 18 19. But to return to Aul. Gel. or rather for we have not digressed what hath been said to apply to him as it often fals out that men may speak the same thing but upon different grounds and which much alters a case to contrary ends so we noted before that many who derived the evils and miseries of this life from men did it not to maintaine but to overthrow providence so far as in them lay which must now againe be remembred because to such especially these words of Gellius seem to have reference Those many I speak of were for the most part Epicureans professed Epicureans I mean who positively maintained That God had nothing at all to do with the affairs of men no nor with the World in generall which they did not acknowledge to have been created by God and consequently what either good or evill happened unto men in this World they must needs fetch from some other cause Epicurus as Dio. Laertius witnesseth in his life made this very thing to be the chiefest occasion of evils among men that men adscribed the cause of their goods of their evils unto God So Diogenes of Epicurus so Tully Plutarch divers others But the Latin Interpreter of Diog. Laert. as if he had studied how to make him ridiculous and to speak contradictions he turnes it to a quite contrary sense and makes Epicurus of the worst of Heathens by Heathens thens themselves for his opinions extreamly abhorred rather a Christian then a heathen The same Epicurus as the same D. Laer recordeth maintained 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is That most evills men suffered or were subject unto in this life proceeded from men themselves either hatred or envy or comtempt being the cause Upon which foundation was that famous saying of his erected that Fortuna sapienti rarò intervenit as his words are translated by Seneca that is That Fortune suddaine evill chances and alterations had little or no power upon a wise man because he held none

wise but such as did altogether sequester themselves from all such imployments and courses of life as were liable to either hatred or envy What religion Pliny the elder was of may easily be known from himselfe It appeares clearely by him that his religion in point of doctrine and opinions was Epicurus his religion and therefore we may probably suppose that his aime was no other then that of Epicurus where he makes this observation it is in the Proem of his seventh book that Homini plurima ex homine sunt mala Now all this that hath been brought from severall authors of men being the cause of evills well considered let us see what there is in Aul. Gellius his words justly to be excepted against why they should not passe for perfect as in former editions Homines fecisse dicitur saith he tantam vim esse aerumnarum malorum Adversus ea Chrysippus cùm in libro 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quarto dissereret Nihil est inquit c. that is It is commonly said that men themselves have bene the cause that this world doth so abound with evills and miseries Against which opinion Chrysippus in his fourth book of Providence disputing There is nothing saith he c. That this was the opinion of many hath sufficiently been shewed and that Chrysippus writing of and for Providence had reason to take notice of the opinion may also as clearly appeare by what hath been said If the Latine of the words were it that they stuck at a poore businesse to be stood upon when the meaning is knowne then this happily fecisse tantam esse vim for ut tanta vis esset which indeed is more ordinary as facere ut numerarent and facere ut scirent in Cornelius Nepos and the like and there is an old Grammarian whether Servius or Priscian I know not well who somewhere passeth his judgement that one Infinitive to governe another is against the custome of the Latine tongue but how much the good man did overshoot himselfe in so saying let latter accurate Grammarians Alvarez Vossius and others or rather let any ancient Latine authors be looked upon and it will easily appear If all that is not ordinary may be suspected that I say not condemned I durst undertake out of this one author to produce five hundred places that may seeme more strange then this such as these Ibi scriptum est tum multa alia c. Faceret me ut earum rerum essem prudentior c. and Omnia quae pater jusserit parendum and the like Or was it because adversus ea they thought was improper after a single sentence But if so they should have considered that antea postea praeterea and the like before that through much use they did coalescere in one word were so taken and used divided as now joyned they are commonly antea after one single thing spoken of as well as after many and so of the rest I say commonly so I take it though I find that Hadrianus the Cardinall in his learned Observations De sermone Latino modis Latinè loquendi dedicated Carolo Principi Hispaniarum makes it a particular observation of the word praeterea Haec quoque clausula praeterea observatione praecipuè digna videtur nam certo modo loquends non post multa solum connumerata à perfectis illis autoribus ponitur verum etiam post singularem aliquam vel personam vel rem Cicero c. And so is postilla to this day sometimes joyned and sometimes divided to be found in Plautus And so much to that passage of Aulus Gellius we are beholding to him that he gave us the hint of so much pertinent matter and we hope we have in some measure requited him We are now come to the etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and it is more then reason that Grecians themselves of whom we received it should be first heard about it Plato in his Cratylus where he doth purposely intreat of the derivation of ancient Greek words among others he takes this into his consideration and his opinion is which hath since been followed by most that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so contracted of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is as much as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wise or prudent as Plato himselfe there expounds it or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Hesychius and the Etymologist that is skilfull well experienced And so indeed we find the words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the contrary of it used by Homer and others so that of that word or what it signifieth no question at all can be made though Plato mention it or at least the sense of it as out of use and in a manner antiquated in his dayes And this etymology of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taking it in the worst sense for an evill spirit would very well agree with what is written Genesis III 1. and elsewhere of the subtilty of the Serpent Some question may be made whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which would much confirme this derivation were ever used for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some passages perchance yet to be found in ancient Greek authors might induce some to beleeve that it hath As for example this distich of the Anthology 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Some to whom the Greek tongue hath been much beholding produce this very passage to prove that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof much hath been said before is sometimes taken for cacodaemon that is a devill Whether they were led into this error by those that first wrote upon those Epigrams or led them into it I know not but an error it is as will easily appeare to any that shall wel examine the construction of the words which cannot stand with that interpretation neither is the jest or acumen of them any wayes improved by it but rather obscured and impaired I did wonder saith the Poet to see a black Maure Professor of Rhetorick such eloquence from such lips in another Epigram to the very same purpose called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 triple lips to proceed so white an attire such was the custome of those times upon so black a skin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore here must of necessity be translated either peritus or Deus but the latter being not onely more warrantable because common and ordinary but also in that sense that Tully calls Plato Deum philosophiae farre more emphaticall here is doubtlesse to be preferred and so indeed I find the word by some others that have written upon the same Epigrams well rendred And so much I had to say concerning this Etymology which makes the word originally a Greek word Others there be of the same kinde mentioned by Greek Grammarians and others but obvious enough and in my judgement so little considerable that I thinke it needlesse to insist upon them here Neither indeed would I eagerly contend with