Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	call_v	law_n	life_n	4,826	5	4.9748	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85382	The apologist condemned: or, A vindication of the Thirty queries (together with their author) concerning the power of the civil magistrate in matters of religion. By way of answer to a scurrilous pamphlet, published (as it seems) by some poposalist, under the mock-title of An apologie for Mr John Goodwin. Together with a brief touch upon another pamphlet, intituled, Mr J. Goodwin's queries questioned. By the author of the said Thirty queries.	Goodwin, John, 1594?-1665.	1653 (1653)	Wing G1148; Thomason E691_16; ESTC R202305	21,381	34

Nature is not sufficient to discover the worshipping of God in a false manner at least not every worshipping of him in such a manner For then wherein should the light of the Scriptures themselves exceed the light of Nature in that important affair of Christian Religion Therefore certainly there is a real Distinction and this broad enough between worshipping God in a false manner and doing evil against the light of Nature And if he would have pleased only to peruse those few Pages in another Treatise of mine which for brevity sake I refer unto in the end of this Query he might I suppose have been better satisfied touching the Apostles meaning Rom. 13. 4. by him that doth evil and that by this expression he could not mean or intend any such Spiritual Delinquent as I describe by some particular instances in the said Query He yet addeth that the Law of Nature teacheth the Magistrate to make Laws against false Worship and Idolatry I beleeve my Apologist speaketh this without Book For what Laws against false Worship and Idolatry can he produce or instance the making whereof was taught by the Law of Nature All Laws of this kind made by Christian States and Magistrates he hath no reason to judg were taught by the light of Nature but rather by the Scriptures whether rightly or amiss as to this point understood I now dispute not If there were any such Laws made by Pagan States or Magistrates I mean Laws made against some particular kinds of false Worship and Idolatry the spirit and intent of these Laws was rather for the countenance and support of one kind of Idolatry or false Worship viz. that which was more generally practised and perhaps commanded in this State then for the punishing or suppressing of those prohibited and made punishable by such Laws as Lerinensis reports of Nestorius the Heretique that to make way for the credit and propagation of his own he fiercely opposed all other Heresies a In which case supposing the Laws we speak of made against particular Idolatries were taught by the Law of Nature which yet is evident enough in the case in hand that they were not they cannot be looked upon as Laws made against but rather for Idolatry and false Worship 2. If the Law of Nature teacheth the Magistrate to make Laws against false Worship and Idolatry I would gladly know of my Apologist whether it teacheth him to do it against all and all manner of false Worships and Idolatries whatsoever or whether against some particulars only in this kind If against all in general then are the teachings of the Law of Nature in this great Affair of Christian Religion as compleat and absolute as the teachings of the Scriptures yea and of the Spirit of God himself which I know is none of my Apologists thoughts If against some particulars only let my Apologist either by the light of the Scriptures or by any other light that shineth clearly particularize them and separate them from their fellows against which the said Law of Nature teacheth no making of Laws and his reward shall be this Erit mihi magnus Apollo As Great Apollo he shall be to me If he shall not do this and that secundum sub suprà i. e. as well in all particulars against which the Law of Nature teacheth him to make Laws as in all those also against which this Law of Nature teacheth him no such thing but rather prohibiteth him the doing of it he doth but entangle and ensnare the Magistrate in telling him that the Law of Nature teacheth him to make Laws against false Worship and Idolatry These Premisses of my Apologist p. 7. warily understood are good Ignorance of the true God is the greatest plague I presume his sence is causalis not formalis of all Commonwealths And again He pulls down the foundation of all humane Society I suppose he speaks of the best and most worthy foundation who takes away Religion or abolisheth it out of the minds of men But the Conclusion which he infers from hence is extreamly inconsequent Whence it is that all Impiety is to be punished with the greatest and most grievous punishments How doth the man wring the nose of his Premisses to force the blood of this Conclusion from it Certainly this grape that all Impiety i. e. all and all manner and all degrees of Impiety is to be punished with the greatest and most grievous punishments is so harsh and sowre that it never grew upon any vine of Gods planting Nor hath the said inference any tolerable connexion with his Premisses For if the Ignorance of God be the greatest plague in all Commonwealths then ought the Magistrate to use all wisdom and diligence and good conscience to introduce and plant the knowledg of the true God in his Commonwealth But to punish ALL Impiety with the greatest and most grievous punishments is so far from being a prudential or likely method or means to produce this effect that of the two it is more proper and likely to abolish all Religion and true knowledg of God out of the minds of men And where a Nation is generally prophane or Atheistically disposed as all those are who deny God in their works which is more then to be feared is not morbus Epidemicus but Oecumenicus also the temper of the generality of all or the greatest part of the Nations under the whole Heavens in case my Apologist's Conclusion should take place and ALL Impiety be punished with the greatest and most grievous punishments the Inhabitants of such a Land though before as the stars of Heaven for multitude would soon be left few in number that a child may write them So that the Conclusion we now speak of may very properly be called The Abomination of Desolation Whereas in process of discourse viz. p. 8. he saith He disturbs Religion who speaks or writes impiously of the Nature of God therefore he is to be punished and truly with death hath he not spoken this against himself and his own life yea and against the lives of all his beloved fellow-Proposalists if the severity and strictness of his own Law should be put in execution upon him For doth not He that representeth God whether by words or writing either as unmerciful or as unjust as tyrannical as a Dissembler as walking contrary to his Oath as imprudent as mutable c. speak or write impiously of the Nature of God And hath not the Apologist himself if not by writing which whether he hath done or no certain I am that many of his Judgment touching the Nature of God have yet by words represented him under the Reproach and deep dishonor of some or all of these Abominations Dies indicabit The day will declare it I know the men of this demerit and guilt will resent the Charge with as much indignation as the Jews did that of our Saviour against them wherein he charged them with going about to kill him