Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	body_n	heaven_n	soul_n	11,370	5	5.1820	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63754	Deus justificatus. Two discourses of original sin contained in two letters to persons of honour, wherein the question is rightly stated, several objections answered, and the truth further cleared and proved by many arguments newly added or explain'd. By Jer. Taylor D.D.	Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667.; Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667. Deus justificatus, or, A vindication of the glory of the divine attributes in the question of original sin.; Taylor, Jeremy, 1613-1667. Answer to a letter written by the R.R. the Ld Bp of Rochester.	1656 (1656)	Wing T311A; ESTC R220790	75,112	280

account suspect the usuall discourses of the effects and Oeconomy of Originall sinne 8. For where will they reckon the beginning of Predestination will they reckon it in Adam after the fall or in Christ immediately promised If in Adam then they return to the Presbyterian way and run upon all the rocks before reckoned enough to break all the World in Pieces If in Christ they reckon it and so they do then thus I argue If we are all reckoned in Christ before we were borne then how can we be reckoned in Adam when we are born I speak as to the matter of Predestination to salvation or damnation For as for the intermedial temporal evills and dangers spirituall and sad infirmities they are our nature and might with Justice have been all the portion God had given to Adam and therefore may be so to us and consequently not at all to be reckoned in this inquiry But certainly as to the maine 9. If God lookes upon us all in Christ then by him we are rescued from Adam so much is done for us before we were born For if this is not to be reckoned till after we were borne then Adam's sin prevailed really in some periods and to some effects for which God in Christ had provided no remedie for it gave no remedie to children till after they were born but irremediably they were born children of wrath For if a remedy were given to children before they were born then they are born in Christ not in Adam but if this remedy was not given to children before they were born then it followes that we were not at first looked upon in Christ but in Adam and consequently he was caput praedestinationis the head of predestination or else there were two the one before we were born the other after So that haeret lethalis arundo The arrow sticks fast and it cannot be pulled out unlesse by other instruments then are commonly in fashion However it be yet me thinks this a very good probable argument As Adam sinned before any childe was born so was Christ promised before and that our Redeemer shall not have more force upon children that they should be born beloved and quitted from wrath then Adam our Progenitor shall have to cause that we be born hated and in a damnable condition wants so many degrees of probability that it seems to dishonour the mercy of God and the reputation of his goodesse and the power of his redemption For this serves as an Antidote and Antinomy of their great objection pretended by these learned persons for whereas they say they the rather affirm this because it is an honour to the redemption which our Saviour wrought for us that it rescued us from the sentence of damnation which we had incurred To this I say that the honour of our blessed Saviour does no way depend upon our imaginations and weak propositions and neither can the reputation and honour of the Divine goodnesse borrow aids and artificial supports from the dishonour of his Justice and it is no reputation to a Physitian to say he hath cured us of an evil which we never had and shall we accuse the Father of mercies to have wounded us for no other reason but that the son may have the Honour to have cured us I understand not that He that makes a necessity that he may finde a remedie is like the Roman whom Cato found fault withal he would commit a fault that he might begge a pardon he had rather write bad Greek that he might make an apologie then write good latine and need none But however Christ hath done enough for us even all that we did need and since it is all the reason in the World we should pay him all honour we may remember that it is a greater favour to us that by the benefit of our Blessed Saviour who was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world we were reckoned in Christ and born in the accounts of the Divine favour I say it is a greater favour that we were born under the redemption of Christ then under the sentence and damnation of Adam and to prevent an evil is a greater favour then to cure it so that if to do honour to Gods goodnesse and to the graces of our Redeemer we will suppose a need we may do him more honour to suppose that the promised seed of the woman did do us as early a good as the sin of Adam could do us mischief and therefore that in Christ we are born quitted from any such supposed sentence and not that we bring it upon our shoulders into the World with us But this thing relies onely upon their suppositions For if we will speak of what is really true and plainly revealed From all the sins of all mankinde Christ came to redeem us He came to give us a supernatural birth to tell us all his Fathers will to reveal to us those glorious promises upon the expectation of which we might be enabled to do every thing that is required He came to bring us grace and life and spirit to strengthen us against all the powers of Hell and Earth to sanctifie our afflictions which from Adam by Natural generation descended on us to take cut the sting of death to make it an entrance to immortal life to assure us of resurrection to intercede for us and to be an advocate for us when we by infirmity commit sin to pardon us when we repent Nothing of which could be derived to us from Adam by our natural generation Mankinde now taking in his whole constitution and designe is like the Birds of Paradice which travellers tell us of in the Molucco Islands born without legs but by a celestial power they have a recompence made to them for that defect and they alwayes hover in the air and feed on the dew of heaven so are we birds of Paradice but cast out from thence and born without legs without strength to walk in the laws of God or to go to heaven but by a power from above we are adopted in our new birth to a celestial conversation we feed on the dew of heaven the just does ●live ●oy faith and breaths in this new life by the spirit of God For from the first Adam nothing descended to us but an infirm body and a naked soul evil example and a body of death ignorance and passion hard labor and a cursed field a captive soul and an imprisoned body that is a soul naturally apt to comply with the appetites of the body and its desires whether reasonable or excessive and though these things were not direct sins to us in their natural abode and first principle yet there are proper inherent miseries and principles of sin to us in their emanation But from this state Christ came to redeem us all by his grace and by his spirit by his life and by his death by his Doctrine and by his Sacraments by his promises and by his

your eyes as it is in all its own colours and proportions But first Madam be pleased to remember that the question is not whether there bee any such thing as Originall Sin for it is certain and confessed on all hands almost For my part I cannot but confess that to be which I feel and groan under and by which all the World is miserable Adam turned his back upon the Sun and dwelt in the dark and the shadow he sinned and fell into Gods displeasure and was made naked of all his supernaturall endowments and was ashamed and sentenced to death and deprived of the means of long life and of the Sacrament and instrument of Immortality I mean the Tree of Life he then fell under the evills of a sickly body and a passionate ignorant uninstructed soul his sin made him sickly his sickliness made him peevish his sin left him ignorant his ignorance made him foolish and unreasonable His sin left him to his nature and by his nature who ever was to be born at all was to be born a child and to do before he could understand bred under Laws to which he was alwayes bound but which could not always be exacted and he was to choose when he could not reason and had passions most strong when he had his understanding most weak and was to ride a wilde horse without a bridle and the more need he had of a curb the less strength he had to use it and this being the case of all the World what was every mans evill became all mens greater evill and though alone it was very bad yet when they came together it was made much worse like Ships in a storm every one alone hath enough to do to out-ride it but when they meet besides the evills of the storm they find the intolerable calamitie of their mutuall concussion and every ship that is ready to be oppressed with the tempest is a worse tempest to every vessell against which it is violently dashed So it is in mankind every man hath evill enough of his own and it is hard for a man to live soberly temperately and religiously but when he hath Parents and Children brothers and sisters friends and enemies buyers and sellers Lawyers and Physitians a family and a neighbourhood a King over him or Tenants under him a Bishop to rule in matters of Government spirituall and a People to be rul'd by him in the affaires of their Souls then it is that every man dashes against another and one relation requires what another denies and when one speaks another will contradict him and that which is well spoken is sometimes innocently mistaken and that upon a good cause produces an evill effect and by these and ten thousand other concurrent causes man is made more then most miserable But the main thing is this when God was angry with Adam the man fell from the state of grace for God withdrew his grace and we returned to the state of meer nature of our prime creation And although I am not of Petrus Diaconus his mind who said that when we all fell in Adam we fell into the dirt and not only so but we fell also upon a heap of stones so that we not onely were made naked but defiled also and broken all in pieces yet this I believe to be certain that we by his fall received evill enough to undoe us and ruine us all but yet the evill did so descend upon us that we were left in powers capacities to serve and glorifie God Gods service was made much harder but not impossible mankind was made miserable but not desperate we contracted an actuall mortality but we were redeemable from the power of Death sinne was easie and ready at the door but it was resistable Our Will was abused but yet not destroyed our Understandding was cosened but yet still capable of the best instructions and though the Devill had wounded us yet God sent his Son who like the good Samaritan poured Oyle and Wine into our wounds and we were cured before we felt the hurt that might have ruined us upon that Occasion It is sad enough but not altogether so intolerable and decretory which the Sibylline Oracle describes to be the effect of Adams sin 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Man was the worke of God fram'd by his hands Him did the Serpent cheat that to deaths bands He was subjected for his sin for this was all He tasted good and evill by his fall But to this we may superadde that which Plutarch found to be experimentally true Mirum quod pedes moverunt ad usum rationis nullo autem fraeno passiones the foot moves at the command of the Will and by the empire of reason but the passionsare stiff even then when the knee bends and no bridle can make the Passions regular and temperate And indeed Madam this is in a manner the sum total of the evill of our abused and corrupted nature Our soul is in the body as in a Prison it is there tanquam in alienâ domo it is a so journer and lives by the bodies measures and loves and hates by the bodies Interests and Inclinations that which is pleasing and nourishing to the body the soul chooses and delights in that which is vexatious and troublesome it abhorres and hath motions accordingly for Passions are nothing else but acts of the Will carried to or from materiall Objects and effects and impresses upon the man made by such acts consequent motions and productions from the Will It is an useless and a groundless proposition in Philosophy to make the Passions to be distinct faculties and seated in a differing region for as the reasonable soul is both sensitive and vegetative so is the Will elective and passionate the region both of choice and passions that is When the Object is immateriall or the motives such the act of the Will is so meerly intellectuall that it is then spirituall and the acts are proper and Symbolical but if the Object is materiall or corporall the acts of the Will are adhaesion and aversation and these it receives by the needs and inclinations of the body now because many of the bodies needs are naturally necessary and the rest are made so by being thought needs and by being so naturally pleasant and that this is the bodies day and it rules here in its own place and time therefore it is that the will is so great a scene of passion and we so great servants of our bodies This was the great effect of Adams sin which became therrefore to us a punishment because of the appendant infirmity that went along with it for Adam being spoiled of all the rectitudes and supernatural heights of grace and thrust back to the form of nature and left to derive grace to himself by a new Oeconomy or to be without it and his posterity left just so as he was left himself

he was permitted to the power of his enemy that betray'd him and put under the power of his body whose appetites would govern him and when they would grow irregular could not be mastered by any thing that was about him or born with him so that his case was miserable and naked and his state of things was imperfect and would be disordered But now Madam things being thus bad are made worse by the superinduced Doctrines of men which when I have represented to your Ladiship and told upon what accounts I reprove them your Honour will finde that I have reason There are one sort of Calvins Scholars whom we for distinctions sake call Supralapsarians who are so fierce in their sentences of predestination and reprobation that they say God look'd upon mankinde onely as his Creation and his slaves over whom he having absolute power was very gracious that he was pleased to take some few and save them absolutely and to the other greater part he did no wrong though he was pleased to damn them eternally onely because he pleased for they were his own and Qui jure suo utitur nemini facit injuriam saies the law of reason every one may do what he please with his own But this bloody and horrible opinion is held but by a few as tending directly to the dishonour of God charging on Him alone that He is the cause of mens sins on Earth and of mens eternal torments in Hell it makes God to be powerfull but his power not to be good it makes him more cruel to men then good men can be to Dogs and sheep it makes him give the final sentence of Hell without any pretence or colour of justice it represents him to be that which all the World must naturally fear and naturally hate as being a God delighting in the death of innocents for so they are when he resolves to damn them and then most tyrannically cruel and unreasonable for it saies that to make a postnate pretence of justice it decrees that men inevitably shall sin that they may inevitably but justly be damned like the Roman Lictors who because they could not put to death Sejanus daughters as being Virgins defloured them after sentence that by that barbarity they might be capable of the utmost Cruelty it makes God to be all that thing that can be hated for it makes him neither to be good nor just nor reasonable but a mighty enemy to the biggest part of mankinde it makes him to hate what himself hath made and to punish that in another which in himself he decreed should not be avoided it charges the wisdom of God with folly as having no means to glorifie his justice but by doing unjustly by bringing in that which himself hates that he might do what himself loves doing as Tiberius did to Brutus and Nero the Sons of Germanicus Variâ fraude induxit ut concitarentur ad convitia et concitati perderentur provoking them to raise that he might punish their reproachings This opinion reproaches the words and the Spirit of Scripture it charges God with Hypocrisy and want of Mercy making him a Father of Cruelties not of Mercie and is a perfect overthrow of all Religion and all Lawes and all Goverment it destroyes the very being and nature of all Election thrusting a man down to the lowest form of beasts and birds to whom a Spontaneity of doing certain actions is given by God but it is in them so naturall that it is unavoidable Now concerning this horrid opinion I for my part shall say nothing but this that he that sayes there was no such man as Alexander would tell a horrible lie and be injurious to all story and to the memory and fame of that great Prince but he that should say It is true there was such a man as Alexander but he was a Tyrant and a Blood-sucker cruel and injurious false and dissembling an enemy of mankind and for all the reasons of the world to be hated and reproached would certainly dishonour Alexander more and be his greatest enemy So I think in this That the Atheists who deny there is a God do not so impiously against God as they that charge him with foul appellatives or maintain such sentences which if they were true God could not be true But these men Madam have nothing to do in the Question of Originall Sin save onely that they say that God did decree that Adam should fall and all the sins that he sinn'd and all the world after him are no effects of choice but of predestination that is they were the actions of God rather then man But because these men even to their brethren seem to speak evil things of God therefore the more wary and temperat of the Calvinists bring down the order of reprobation lower affirming that God looked upon all mankind in Adam as fallen into his displeasure hated by God truly guilty of his sin liable to Eternal damnation and they being all equally condemned he was pleased to separate some the smaller number far and irresistibly bring them to Heaven but the far greater number he passed over leaving them to be damned for the sin of Adam and so they think they salve Gods Justice and this was the designe and device of the Synod of Dort Now to bring this to passe they teach concerning Original sin 1. That by this sin our first Parents fell from their Original righteousnesse and communion with God and so became dead in sinne and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body 2. That whatsoever death was due to our first Parents for this sin they being the root of all mankinde and the guilt of this sin being imputed the same is conveied to all their posterity by ordinary generation 3. That by this Original corruption we are utterly indisposed disabled and made opposite to all good and wholly inclined to all evill and that from hence proceed all actual trangressions 4. This corruption of nature remaines in the regenerate and although it be through Christ pardoned and mortified yet both it self and all the motions thereof are trulie and properly sin 5. Original sin being a transgression of the righteous Law of God and contrary thereunto doth in its own nature bring guilt upon the sinner whereby he is bound over to the wrath of God and curse of the Law and so made subject to death with all miseries spiritual temporall and eternal These are the sayings of the late Assembly at Westminster Against this heap of errors and dangerous propositions I have made my former discoursings and statings of the Question of Original sin These are the Doctrines of the Presbyterian but as unlike truth as his assemblies are to our Church for concerning him I may say Nemo tam propè proculque nobis He is the likest and the unlikest to a Son of our Church in the world he is neerest to us and furthest from us and to all the world abroad

been a personal but a natural evil I am sure so the Article of our Church affirms it is the fault and corruption of our Nature And so S. Bonaventure affirms in the wo●ds cited by your Lordship in your Letter Sicui peccatum actuale tribuitur alicui ratione singularis persona ita peccatum origiuis tribuitur ratione naturae Either then the Sacrament must have effect upon our Nature to purifie that which is vitiated by Concupiscence or else it does no good at all For if the guilt or sin be founded in the nature as the Article affirms and Baptism does not take off the guilt from the nature then it does nothing Now since your Lordship is pleas'd in the behalf of the objectors so warily to avoid what they thought pressing I will take leave to use the advantages it ministers for so the Serpent teaches us where to strike him by his so warily and guiltily defending his head I therefore argue thus Either Baptism does not take off the guilt of Original Sin or else there may be punishment where there is no guilt or else natural death was not it which God threatned as the punishment of Adam's fact For it is certain that all men die as well after baptism as before and more after then before That which would be properly the consequent of this Dilemma is this that when God threatned death to Adam saying On the day thou eatest of the tree thou shalt die the death he inflicted and intended to inflict the evils of a troublesome mortal life For Adam did not die that day but Adam began to be miserable that day to live upon hard labour to eat fruits from an accursed field till he should return to the earth whence he was taken Gen. 3. 17 18 19. So that death in the common sense of the word was to be the end of his labour not so much the punishment of the sin For it is probable he should have gone off from the scene of this world to a better though he had not sin'd but if he had not sin'd he should not be so afflicted and he should not have died daily till he had died finally that is till he had returned to his dust whence he was taken and whither he would naturally have gone and it is no new thing in Scripture that miseries and infelicities should be called dying or death Exod. 10. 17. 1 Cor. 15. 31. 2 Cor. 1. 10. 4. 10 11 12. 11. 23. But I only note this as probable as not being willing to admit what the Socinians answer in this argument who affirm that God threatning death to the Sin of Adam meant death eternal which is certainly not true as we learn from the words of the Apostle saying In Adam we all die which is not true of death eternal but it is true of the miseries and calamities of mankinde and it is true of temporal death in the sense now explicated and in that which is commonly received But I add also this probleme That which would have been had there been no sin and that which remains when the sin or guiltiness is gone is not properly the punishment of the sin But dissolution of the soul and body should have been if Adam had not sin'd for the world would have been too little to have entertain'd those myriads of men which must in all reason have been born from that blessing of Increase and multiply which was given at the first Creation and to have confin'd mankinde to the pleasures of this world in case he had not fallen would have been a punishment of his innocence but however it might have been though God had not been angry and shall still be even when the sin is taken off The proper consequent of this will be that when the Apostle sayes Death came in by sin and that Death is the wages of sin he primarily and literally means the solemnities and causes and infelicities and untimeliness of temporal death and not meerly the dissolution which is directly no evil but an inlet to a better state But I insist not on this but offer it to the consideration of inquisitive and modest persons And now that I may return thither from whence this objection brought me I consider that if any should urge this argument to me Baptism delivers from Original Sin Baptism does not deliver from Concupiscence therefore Concupiscence is not Original Sin I did not know well what to answer I could possibly say something to satisfie the boyes young men at a publique disputation but not to satisfie my self when I am upon my knees and giving an account to God of all my secret and hearty perswasions But I consider that by Concupiscence must be meant either the first inclinations to their object or the proper acts of Election which are the second acts of Concupiscence If the first inclinations be meant then certainly that cannot be a sin which is natural and which is necessary For I consider that Concupiscence and natural desires are like hunger which while it is natural and necessary is not for the destruction but conservation of man when it goes beyond the limits of nature it is violent and a disease and so is Concupiscence But desires or lustings when they are taken for the natural propensity to their proper object are so far from being a sin that they are the instruments of felicity for this duration and when they grow towards being irregular they may if we please grow instruments of felicity in order to the other duration because they may serve a vertue by being restrained And to desire that to which all men tend naturally is no more a sin then to desire to be happy is a sin desire is no more a sin then joy or sorrow is neither can it be fancied why one passion more then another can be in its whole nature Criminal either all or none are so when any of them growes irregular or inordinate Joy is as bad as Desire and Fear as bad as either But if by Concupiscence we mean the second acts of it that is avoidable consentings and deliberate elections then let it be as much condemned as the Apostle and all the Church after him hath sentenc'd it but then it is not Adam's sin but our own by which we are condemned for it is not his fault that we choose If we choose it is our own if we choose not it is no fault For there is a natural act of the Will as well as of the Understanding and in the choice of the supreme Good and in the first apprehension of its proper object the Will is as natural as any other faculty and the other faculties have degrees of adherence as well as the Will so have the potestative and intellective faculties they are delighted in their best objects But because these only are natural and the will is natural sometimes but not alwaies there it is that a difference can be For I consider