Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	adam_n	natural_a	sin_n	5,693	5	5.6599	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48461	A treatise of particular predestination vvherein ar[e] answered three letters. 1. Tending to disprove particular predestination. 2. To shew the contradiction betwixt Christ dying for all, and Gods election of some. 3. To prove that the soule doth not come from the parent, and consequently that there is no originall sinne. By Thomas Lamb.	Lamb, Thomas, d. 1686.	1642 (1642)	Wing L212A; ESTC R216650	13,022	22

what g●●●●ing w●●● there bee 〈◊〉 of soule 〈◊〉 body wh●●●●s on the other side if you conjoyn 〈◊〉 together in the ge●i●●● wh●● should hinder but that there should be the same conjunction 〈◊〉 g●neration 〈◊〉 thing gendered 〈◊〉 ●●ing to the 〈…〉 command of God to every creature gendering that they should goe forth multiply according to their kind not a part but the whole of their kind such as they themselves are you alledge Zach. 12.1 which saith God formeth the Spirit of a man and so he doth the body too Iob. 31.15 and the body of the corne also 1 Cor. 15.36 37 38. But this hindereth not but that he useth the meanes which hee hath appointed in nature for the effecting of these formes for it is plaine that they are all naturall formes and essentiall to the nature of the creature formed so man soule and body both parts are essentiall to his nature and effected by meanes of man whose nature it is you alledge Psal 33.15 Hee fashioneth their hearts every one of them which is to bee understood of Providence whereby he ordereth their hearts in their severall operations and affections and nothing pertinent to creation or infusion of soules As for Heb. 12.9 I shewed that the Apostle cals God the Father of Spirits in respect of his absolute authority over them secondly in communicating grace and goodnesse to them you say you can see no reason to take it so and why you say he opposeth the soule to the body this I grant but whereas you say he opposeth the fountaine of the one to the fountaine of the other that remaines yet for you to prove that hee opposeth the fatherhood of the one to the fatherhood of the other cannot be denied but that by fatherhood should be meant fountaine cannot be clearly concluded in respect of the essence of soule and body unlesse you meane by fountaine author of the spirituall life of grace and salvation communicated to the soule by the Gospell of God as Iam. 1.18 1 Pet. 1.23 for to speak as the thing is it's Grace communicated which gives the soule its true being for before the soule is dead in trespasses but grace makes it alive and God by communicating the same grace by which the soule lives is cal'd the Father of Spirits or spirituall Father opposed to our naturall Father of whom wee are carnally begotten and borne and the Apostle would have the beleeving Hebrewes to submit themselves unto his chasticements who as he is the Author of our spiritual life so is he the preserver of the same spirituall life useth the same for their profit and life as he doth expresse himselfe and therefore seeing you have submitted your selves to your naturall Father much more should you submit your selves to this spirituall Father for your profit and spirituall benefit that you might be partakers of his holinesse You say if the soule comes by generation then there must be a conjunction of Spirits at the same time as is of bodies and this you deny Ergo. To this I answer that bodies of mankind abstracted from their spirits have no conjunction you say if soules of Parents begets the soules of the children then a learned man must beget a learned child and a gracious man a gracious child as well as a sinfull man a sinfull child seeing learning grace and sin are all accidents having a being in the man not being with the man for a man say you may be a perfect man as Adam was without them First I deny the consequence which is if a soule begets a soule then a learned man must beget a learned child and so of grace as well as of sin beca●se if the soule doe beget a soule it is to bee supposed that it begets such a soule in likenes as it was in natures being and not such a one as it was by art or gift but learning is artificiall and grace is of gift but sin is naturall for it is the corruption of nature and did enter in●o the world by one man over all men Rom. 5.12 and therefore wee are by nature the children of wrath Ephes 2.3 and not by accident Secondly I answer to the antecedent that the soule doth not beget the soule but the person soule and body doth beget the person soule and body and such as is the person begetting in his nature such is the person begotten And whereas you say all persons are free from sin till they commit actions of sinne and thereby onely doe become in bondage to it to which you alledge Ioh. 8. which place doth more directly shew the person that is in bondage than the thing which brings him into bondage as if he should say hee that committeth sinne doth plainely declare himselfe serviceable and subject thereunto Romans 6.12 and whereas you say a present bondage presupposeth a former freedom this is not denyed so as you have respect to Adam who was created good and so free from sin till he fell from that state into sin into which he brought all his posterity together with himselfe Rom. 5.12 otherwayes there are many of the sonnes of Adam which should need no redemption by Christ if they be free from sinne in themselves and besides as it overthrowes Christs dying for all so I see not why they should not continue free by a carefull use of their power they have in nature even in keeping the Law and so consequently be saved thereby which is the opinion of divers and then should Christ die in vaine and to no purpose at all Gal. 2.21 and by the same reason one may all may nay if there had been a Law which could have given life surely r●ghteousnes should have beene by that Law Gal. 22. but the Scripture hath concluded all de●●●r sin therefore since the fill of Adam free from sinne no otherwise then by 〈◊〉 faith in Christ and so I 〈…〉 questions That all m●n have as much benefit 〈…〉 without 〈…〉 Adam 〈◊〉 and death 〈…〉 as all die in Adam 1 Cor. 15.21 22. To which I say all have not to much benefit 〈◊〉 Christs resurrection 〈…〉 their actuall Faith as they have 〈…〉 death by Adams sin or death without actuall sinne because ●hey 〈◊〉 have naturall union with Adam without their actuall sinne but none have spirituall union with Christ without actuall Faith or I had ra●her say personall Faith because I conceive faith may bee potentiall as well as actuall as for the Scripture 1 Cor. 15.21 22. by which you back your question I conceive it is by you mistaken very much because you gather from thence that all men have benefit by Christs resurrection without their personall faith which I conceive is not the mind of Paul but onely to shew that Christ was the head or first fruits whose resurrection is both the beginning and also a sure pledg of the resurrection of his body or whole lump that have being in him by faith ver 18. and have his spirit in them Rom 8.10.11 Christ by his Spirit quickens their mortall bodie● the certainty whereof makes them debters to live after the spirit ver 12 And Christ in foure severall places in Ioh. 6. speaks of this matter as of a speciall benefit belonging to the faithfull 1 in ver 39. 2d in v. 40. 3d. in ver 44. 4d in ver 54. It is true the wicked also shall rise but not as a benefit from Christs resurrection in or unto which they have no relation but by an effect of his glorious power to their utter confusion and condemnation Ioh. 5.19 ●est And whereas you aske how Christ restores all things from the bondage of corruption I conceive by a●l things you will understand a limitation in relation to the univers● ●●s or else I will ask you whether wicked persons be not things and whether those things bee restored from the bondage of corruption by Christ therefor by all things must be meant a●l the faithfull and all things in relation to them for their happinesse Your last qu●st●●n is whether Christ the righteous Jud●● wil judge by the law given to Adam before the f●● or by the Gospel af●er or by both by both ●s for the law given to Adam before he sinned is it which he sinned against thereof it comes that man hath need of a Gospell or glad t●dings of grace and mercy which grace and mercy if it bee received it delivers from the curse of the Law if it bee not received hee lies under the curs● of the Law still and under the refusall grace also according a● the meanes of making ●●owne this grace hath been aforded FINIS

therefore the former stands upon the same ground And whereas it is said that if Adam had resisted the Tempter and stood he had crossed the decree of God which is impossible because Gods Decree is unalterable I answere and affirme the like of his prescience or foreknowledge which is as infallible as his decree for if Adam had resisted the tempter and had stood God had beene deceived in his foresight concerning his fall and this Argument is as much as if the skie fall wee shall have Larkes but it doth not fall and therefore they be not easily had And where it is further said that if it should bee granted that God decreed that Adam should eat and die and yet commanded him that hee should not eat to the end that hee might live this were to make the Lord contrary to himselfe I answer denying the consequence for these things are not contrary namely for God to command Adam not to eat as having Authority so to doe to the end hee might trie his willing obedience and in case he fell to discover the hainousnesse of his sinne and disobedience and God foreseeing hee would fall to permit him so to doe is no contradiction at all but a pure truth for if men were elected in Christ before the foundation of the world then was the fall presupposed and that they were so Paul affirmeth it Ephes 1.3.4 and therefore in this point there is no danger at all And where it is further said if there were no such decree concerning Adam then not concerning his posterity neither To which I answer that there is such a Decree concerning Adam to permit him to doe the evill which was forbidden Ergo there is such a Decree concerning his posterity Also to permit them to doe those things which they doe that are forbidden And whereas it is further said that if any still will hold that God decreed any mans condemnation then it is for transgression of the Law which no man could doe before he was created I answer that although no man could transgresse the Law befor hee was created yet God could foresee that man would transgresse a Law before man was created and decreed to suffer him so to doe and decreed to punish him accordingly And wherereas it is further demanded whether God decreed the condemnation of Adams person and supposed the answer will be no because God decreed to send his sonne to redeeme him from Death and if him why not all his Posterity seeing it is written Ioh. 3.16 That God so loved the World that he gave his onely begotten Sonne that whosoever beleeved in him should not perish but have Everlasting Life To which I answer that it doth not follow from hence that God hath decreed to doe for all alike in causing of them to beleeve Ezek. 3.6.7 Mat. 11.21 for though it may be concluded that God gave Christ and Christ gave himselfe for all alike yet he doth not give the Doctrine of the same to all alike Ephes 2.8 Phil. 1.28 much lesse doth he give Faith which is the effect of the same Doctrine to all alike and therefore is said to be the gift of God not in common as the Preaching is but in speciall and peculiar as the Election is Rom. 11.7 and therefore true Faith is called the Faith of Gods elect Tit. 1.1 given onely to some and not to others Mat. 13.11 as being those that are Predestinated and therefore effectually called justified and glorified Rom. 8.30 but others he suffers to walke in their owne wayes Act. 14.16 as the Vessels of wrath fitted to destruction Rom. 9.22 And the Reprobates and wicked of the World could not do such wickednesse as they doe but that it pleaseth God to suffer such dishonourable wayes and practises to be for a time as knowing how to bring forth his owne glory in their just deserved damnation But he doth not suffer his Elect to walke in their owne wayes but doth prevent them that they escape Eternall Damnation 1 Cor. 11.32 That he might glorifie himselfe in them in his mercy as upon the Vessels of mercy which he hath prepared unto glory Whereas you conclude with this request that your positions against particular Election may be either receiv'd or answered I now conclude with the like having as I suppose sufficiently answered this that you would either shew wherein the insufficiency of my answer lies or yeeld thereunto An Answer to a Letter written by R. H. sending to shew the contradiction that is betwixt Christs dying for all and Gods Election of some The which Answer sheweth that there is no contradiction betwixt these two but a sweet concord by T. L. First you say you write to shew the contradiction that is betwixt universall redemption and particular election and how doe you doe this you aske the question how Christ died for all men seeing he never intended salvation to them To this I answer that Christ may be said to have died for all men although he never intended to make all men to believe in his death for salvation you say if God hath onely elected some persons and rejected all the rest then there is no way of recovery made for them that are rejected But Christ hath made a way of recovery out of the lost estate for all those for whom be died Ergo. To this I answer that Christ hath made or purchased away of recovery for all men if they doe not reject him and it also but election is a fore-apointment that such persons are elected shall believe and be recovered and if the rest doe not it is their owne fault because they beleeve not the truth which preached Rom. 11.5.7 Iohn 16.9 Mar. 3.5 You say generall redemption extends it selfe to all particular Election it opposeth it and saith no not to all but to some onely This I deny and say Election doth effect that some doe believe but it doth not oppose any in point of beleeving and so it doth not follow that although man doe not effect in himselfe in himselfe faith and cause himselfe to be elected as is imagined that he is not the cause of his owne destruction by the refusall of grace offered and I put the case that none were elected at all would it then come to passe that generall redemption which extends it selfe to all would save all because you say particular Election intends onely the salvation of some if not then would I aske the reason why if you say because all doe not believe then you say true and what if none believe then none should be saved whereby you may see that although generall Redemption extends it selfe to all to all yet neverthelesse if none beleeve none should be saved and that none would beleeve unlesse they were elected appeares in that none would beleeve unlesse God worke it such evill is in mans nature as doth continually oppose the Doctrine of grace untill they bee overcome thereby which Doctrine for God to afford to