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 soul_n think_v 6,986 5 4.7772 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A67390 A fourth letter concerning the sacred Trinity in reply to what is entituled An answer to Dr. Wallis's three letters / by John Wallis ... Wallis, John, 1616-1703. 1691 (1691) Wing W583; ESTC R34710 20,498 40

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

A Fourth LETTER Concerning the Sacred Trinity IN REPLY To what is Entituled An ANSWER TO D r WALLIS's Three Letters By JOHN WALLIS D. D. LONDON Printed for Tho. Parkhurst at the Bible and Three Crowns in Cheapside 1691. A Fourth LETTER Concerning the Sacred Trinity SIR IN a former Answer from I know not whom to my First and Second Letter we had Two Persons a Friend and his Neighbour in One Man Of which I have given account in my Third Letter We have now an Answer to that also But whether from the Friend or the Neighbour or from a Third Person he doth not tell me Yet all the Three Persons may for ought I know be the same Man However whether it be or be not the same Man it is not amiss for him to act a Third Person as of an Adversary as being thereby not obliged to insist upon and maintain what was before said but may fairly decline it if he please The one may Grant what the other Denies and Deny what the other Grants And still as the Scene changes the Man may Act another Person And so I find it is As for instance The former Answerer takes it unkindly and would have it thought a Calumny that I charged it on some of the Socinians That How clear soever the Expressions of Scripture be for our purpose they will not believe it as being Inconsistent with natural Reason And though they do not think fit to give us a bare-faced Rejection of Scripture yet they do and must they tell us put such a Forced Sense on the words as to make them signify somewhat else Therefore to shew that this is not a Calumny but a clear Truth I cited their own Words and quoted the Places where they are to be found wherein themselves say the same things in as full Expressions as any that I had charged them with That every one is to interpret the Scripture according to his own sense and what so seems grateful to him he is to imbrace and maintain though the whole World be against it That he is not to heed what Men teach or think or have at any time taught or thought whoever they be or have been or how many soever That though even in the sacred Monuments it be found written not Once only but Many times he should not yet for all that believe it so to be That what plainly appears cannot be or as was before explained what He thinks so though all the World beside think otherwise is not to be admitted even though in the sacred Oracles it appear to be Expresly affirmed But those sacred Words are to be interpreted though it be by Unusual Ways or Tropes to some other Sense than what they speak That because it seems to him absurd he must with Augustine's good leave and of the rest who think as he doth put a Force how great soever upon Paul's words rather than to admit such Sense That if our Reason dictate to us ought otherwise than the Scripture doth it is an Errour to say That in such case we are rather to believe the Scripture Now our new Answerer though he would still have it to be a Calumny shuffles it off with this He is not concerned that Socinus or any other Author has dropt imprudent words and leaves it to the Socinian to answer pag. 10. for he is now to act the Arian pag. 11 12 14 16 17. This point therefore I look upon as yielded concerning the slight opinion which some of the Socinians have of Scripture in competition with Humane Reason Again when I had spoken of our Immortal Soul in its separate Existence after Death as of an Intellectual Being but with an IF at lest those who deny the Blessed Trinity will allow that there are such Beings To shew the suspicion intimated was not groundless I cited Socinus's own words where he expresly tells us that the Soul after death doth not subsist nor doth so Live as to be then in a capacity of being Rewarded or Punished that is in effect It is no more Alive than is the Dead Body not sensible of pain or pleasure Which I think is ground enough for such a suspicion without being uncharitable Nor doth this new Answerer clear Socinus or himself from this suspicion Onely tells us pag. 10. it is an Insinuation as if they believe not Angels Which is nothing to the purpose of the Soul 's separate Existence which is that I insisted on nor doth he so much as tell us that he doth believe Angels much less that he doth believe the Souls separate Existence so that the ground of suspicion still remains I had shewed him how different Socinus's Opinion is from that of St. Paul when he desired to be dissolved or to depart hence and to be with Christ as much better for him than to abide in the flesh Phil. 1. 23 24. And to be absent from the Body which must be after Death and before the Resurrection and to be present with the Lord 2 Cor. 5. 8. And this new Answerer though he takes notice of the charge doth not so much as tell us that he is not of Socinus's Opinion herein Which if it be so he might reasonably have told us upon this occasion I might have added that of Christ Mat. 10. 28. Fear not those who kill the Body but are not able to kill the Soul Whereas if the Soul after Death be as insensible as the Body That is as much killed as This. And that of Christ to the Converted Thief on the Cross Luk. 23. 43. This day shalt thou be with me in Paradise For surely by Paradise he did not mean Purgatory nor yet that he should be with him in Hell amongst the Devils and the Damned nor that his Soul should be in a condition as senseless as his Body For Paradise doth not sound like any of these I might have added also that of Lazarus and the Rich Glutton Luk. 16. 23 24 25 28. For though Parables are not strongly Argumentative as to all the Punctilio's of them yet as to the main scope of them they are else to what purpose are they used Now here we have that Glutton represented as Tormented in Hell and Lazarus at Rest in Abraham's Bosom and there Comforted while the other is Tormented And all this while yet he had Brethren upon Earth to whom he desires Lazarus might be sent All which is not agreeable to a condition not capable of reward or punishment And upon the whole we have reason to suspect that Socinians may have some other odd Tenents which they think fit rather to conceal than to Deny So that I look upon this point as gained also That Socinus uncontrouled by this Answerer doth deny the subsistence of the Soul after Death as then capable of Reward or Punishment Another point which I look upon as granted is concerning that place Joh. 1. In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was