Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	die_v	sin_n	sin_v	13,883	5	9.2456	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A82528	A friendly debate on a weighty subject: or, a conference by writing betwixt Mr Samuel Eaton and Mr John Knowles concerning the divinity of Iesus Christ: for the beating out, and further clearing up of truth.	Eaton, Samuel, 1596?-1665.; Knowles, John, fl. 1646-1668.	1650 (1650)	Wing E121; Thomason E609_16; ESTC R205964	49,997	66

suppose will be silence Master Eaton's Scriptures and Instances THe Doctrine against Christ being God is not onely contradictory to the Scripture which doth most clearly hold him out to be so as when he is called God in Psal 45.6 Thy throne O God is for ever and ever The mighty God Isa 9.6 The great God and our Saviour in Tit. 2.13 The true God Joh. 5.20 and when the incommunicable name Jehovah is attributed to him in Jer. 23.6 which signifies one that hath being of himself and gives being to his promises and so becomes proper to the most high God alone and when he is called The everlasting Father Isa 9.6 and in that saying of Christ to the Jews Before Abraham was I am Joh. 8.58 and in that Rev. 1.8 I am Alpha and Omega the Beginning and the End saith the Lord which was is and which is to come the Almighty and when he is said to be in the beginning and to be with God and to be God Joh. 1.1 and when it is said that by him all things were made and without him nothing is made that was made and when Christ saith that he is always and so with all the faithful to the end of the world Matth. 28.20 and when he asserts that he knew all the works of the Churches which at that distance as meer man he could not do Rev. 2.2 and when he is said to be the first-born of every creature where his eternal generation is held out Col. 1.15 and that by him all things were created vers 16. Now because Creation is a making of all things out of nothing and required an infinite power God could make use of no instrument inasmuch as God cannot give an infinite power to any creature because no creature is capable of such a divine attribute for it would make him God to be almighty or to be infinite in power And when he is resembled in reference to his eternity to Melchizedek Without beginning of days or end of life Heb. 7.3 and that in Prov. 8.22 The Lord possessed me in the beginning of his way saith Christ Before his works of old I was set up from everlasting vers 30. Then was I by him as one brought up with him c. And that in Zech. 13.7 Awake O sword against my Shepherd against the man that is my fellow And that in Joh. 3.13 No man hath ascended up into heaven but he that came down from heaven even the Son of man that is in heaven And that in Joh. 17.5 Glorifie me O Father with that glory I had with thee before the world was There be many other pregnant Scriptures which would be too long to mention for the proving of Christ to be God in that sence which we usually speak of God and therefore that opinion that denies it contradicts these Scriptures But further it may be truely said that this Doctrine that makes Christ a meer creature brings in as it were another Gospel destroys the true Gospel in many of the parts of it and brings in another Scripture in many points 1. As first if Christ be but a meer creature and not God then the giving of Divine worship and honour and service to a meer creature is lawful and warrantable and yet everywhere forbidden in reference to any creature but is practised to Christ in Rev. 5.12 13 14. and would be Idolatry if Christ were not God 2. If Christ be a meer creature then it is lawful and warrantable to believe in a meer creature which is against the tenour of the whole Scripture but is commanded in reference unto Christ Joh. 14.1 and salvation is annexed to it Joh. 3.36 3. If Christ be but a meer creature then faith in a meer creature can save man which is absurd and gross and contrary to the Scriptures for Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness Rom. 4.3 and so was saving 4. If Christ be but a meer creature then a meer creature is the Saviour of men saving them with a mighty and eternal salvation as the Scripture speaks but this is against the whole current of the Gospel which speaks of God our Saviour Tit. 2.10 13 and in many other places 5. If Christ be but a meer creature then a meer creature is Mediator betwixt God and Man which cannot be because a meer creature is no way meet to be a days-man for God and because a Mediator must either partake of both God and Man or of neither else he will rather be a party then a Mediator if he partake of Mans nature and not of Gods if he be Man and not God Therefore this Mediator betwixt God and Man is called Emmanuel that is God with us or God in our nature God manifested in the flesh 1 Tim. 3.16 or God made flesh as in Joh. 1.14 6. If Christ be but a meer creature then the righteousness of Christ which is imputed to believers is not the righteousness of God but the righteousness of a meer creature But this is against the tenour of the Scripture Phil. 3.9 7. If Christ be but a meer creature then to pardon sin belongs not to him because Scripture testifies that none can forgive sin but God because all sin is against God therefore none can forgive it but God But it is evident Christ took the authority of forgiving sin Son saith Christ thy sins are forgiven thee and Luke 7.48 8. If Christ be but a meer creature then the value of that offering which Christ offered when he offered himself to God is taken away and the satisfaction which Christ gave to Divine justice is destroyed for if the person that died were a meer man and the blood that was shed the blood of a meer man and not of God as it is called Acts 20.28 then how could it satisfie for the sins of many transgressors for there is no proportion betwixt one meer man dying for sins and many men sinning and deserving death each of them for the sins they have committed And how an infinite Justice offended should be satisfied with a sacrifice finite in value is unconceiveable and against the tenour of the Scripture 9. If Christ be a meer creature then the intercession of Christ is utterly overthrown for Christ if meer man being in heaven cannot know the state of his Church in all places upon earth therefore cannot intercede for it 10. If Christ be a meer creature then how can he protect and defend and save and direct and rule and govern his Church in all the world in every condition and against all enemies he being at such a distance and remoteness from the Church and yet it is said of him that he is able to save to the utmost those that come to God by him Heb. 7.25 and that he is with them to the end of the world and Christ stood by Paul and strengthned him in suffering Acts 23.11 and Rev. 3.10 Because thou hast kept the word of my patience I

proportion betwixt one meer man dying for sin and many men sinning and deserving death each of them for the sins they have committed And how an Infinite Justice offended should be satisfied with the sacrifice finite in value is unconceivable and against the tenure of the Scripture Answ Considering the words of this Instance with its scope we may draw up this Argument That Doctrine which takes away the value of Christs offering and destroys the satisfaction which he gave to Divine Iustice brings in as it were another Gospel c. But that Doctrine which makes Christ a meer creature doth so Therefore I shall grant the Major but how prove you the Minor You would confirm your Doctrine by asking two Queries 1. If Christ was say you a meer creature then who could he satisfie for the sins of many transgressours c Sir if it please you to consider Rom. 5.12 and so forward you may answer your own Query or see as good Reason of this which I shall now propound If Adam were a meer creature how could his sin make many transgressours If through the offence of one many be dead much more the grace of God and the gift by grace by one man Iesus Christ hath abounded unto many Rom. 5.15 Christ as well as Adam was a common person and therefore the Lord having laid upon him the iniquities of us all and he bearing the curse of the Law his Members are delivered from both the sin and the curse Your Second Query is this How is it conceivable that an Infinite Iustice offended should be satisfied by a Sacrifice finite in value What matters it Sir if it be unconceivable must it therefore be uncredible Doubtless in all Controversall doctrines you will not hold this for an Orthodoxall tenent In the Doctrine of the Trinity credit must be given to things unconceivable but the like liberty it seems will not be allowed in Christs Mediatorship Eut Sir the foundation you build upon is not a little questionable you take that for granted and so infer from it which you are to confirm Sure I am that not a few errours may lie under your Non-Scripturall-Language Ye tell us of an Infinite Sacrifice but what you mean by it and where Scripture tells us I am yet for to learn The Scripture tells us that Christ was made sin or a sin offering for us by taking our sins and bearing the curse But how this Sacrifice was infinite remains to me unconceivable If the suffering of Christ had been Infinite there had been no end of it If the curse had been Infinite man could not have born it being uncapable of any thing Infinite in the Infinity of it It is enough for me to believe that my Lord Jesus suffered for me whatever I deserved to suffer and that was the curse of the Law be that what it will There is a Scripture which I finde in your Instance and that is Acts 20.28 and I knew no fitteer place then the close of my Answer for it Sir I shall offer these few things to your consideration 1. That there may be some mistake in the Text. God may be put for Lord or Christ which if granted the words are thus to be read Take heed therefore to your selves and to all the slock over which the holy Ghost hath made you overseers to feed the Church of Christ which he hath purchased with his own bloud The Churches of the Saints are called the Churches of Christ Rom. 16.16 This conceit of a mistake may receive countenance from the possibility probability and facility thereof It is possible that the Scribe through carelesness or something worse might here put God for Christ There are two places one in the Old Testament another in the New which Willet conceiveth to have been mistaken by the Scribes negligence or something worse The first is Psal 22.16 where Caari signifying as a Lion is put for Caru they pierced The other is Rom. 12.11 we have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 time for Lord Also it is probable that here is a mistake for as Grotius observes many Copies have Lord and the Syriack Christ not God Lastly it was easie to mistake taking one for the other from that compendious writing which was anciently much in use where for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they wrote onely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. But in the next place if it be proved that there is no mistake in the Text yet there may be a defect in the words For the last clause some Greek copies thus have it which he hath purchased with the blood of his own and so the word Son is to be understood with the blood of his own Son 3. Last of all if both these may bee removed yet the words may have another meaning then what you and many others allot to them Christs blood may be said to be Gods own blood in way of eminency it being more excellent by farre then the blood of the Legall Sacrifices In the old Testament tall trees are called Cedars of God the like Phrases are frequently there to be found And the New Testament is not wholly a stranger to the like Phrases In this sence Christ is called the Lamb of God Joh. 1.36 because he was far more excellent then either the Paschall Lamb or any other Lamb which was to be slain in way of Sacrifice under the Leviticall Priesthood The Divine Authour to the Hebrewes speaking both of the blood of legall sacrifices and of Christ Jesus preferres the blood of Christ far before all other blood that was shed for the expiation of sinne Heb. 9.13.14 Now I hasten to your ninth substance which is this Instance 1 If Christ be a meere creature then the intercession of Christ is overthrown for Christ if meere man being in heaven cannot know the state of the Church in all places upon earth therefore cannot intercede for it Answ Sir the reducing of this your Instance into an Argument will be sufficient to discover its vanity and weaknesse Thus it may be formed without the least injury to your meaning if your mind agree with the import of your words That Doctrine which utterly overthrows the Intercession of Christ brings in as it were another Gospel c. But the Doctrine which makes Christ to be a meere creature utterly overthrows the intercesson of Christ Therefore Sir to your major I yield the fullest concession being so much a friend to Christs Incercession Your minor brings in an high accusation but pray Sir how is it attended with probation you onely say that if Christ were a meere creature being in heaven he could not know the state of the Churches in all places upon earth and therefore if he were but a meere creature he could not intercede What must we again take your word for a proffer I wish a better for there is no goodnesse in that We have already been too long troubled with the word I say in

is the mystery of godliness which mystery was manifested in the flesh c. And Hincmarus addeth that this word God was put in the Text by the Nestorians But if we allow our Reading this Text will make nothing for your purpose for it is not denied but that Christ was a God and the Text saith but this a God was manifest in flesh that is appeared visibly amongst men when he took unto him a body YOur third and last Scripture is John 1.14 where 't is said That the Word Was made flesh the meaning is this That Creature which was immediately made by God took unto it a body I finde no place where the flesh of Christ signifies any thing more then his body according to which he died 1 John 14. and is nowhere taken for the Humane Nature Let me now oppose your Proposition by two or three Reasons which I shall leave you to pause upon Christ the Mediatour is a meer Creature 1. Because whole Christ is a creature For this see before Now if whole Christ be a creature then either a meer creature is the Mediatour or Christ is not a Mediator 2. Because a Mediatour is not of one Gal. 3.20 now if Christ be God then he is a Mediatour of one for he cannot be a Mediatour to himself and there is but one God 3. Because Christ is a Mediatour betwixt God and Men 1 Tim. 2.5 Now if he were God he could not be a Mediatour betwixt God and Men for he could not be a Mediatour to himself And Paul in that of Timothy cals the Mediator betwixt God and Men the Man Christ Jesus Thus having taken away the Major though the Minor were granted yet would not your Conclusion stand having but one legge to rest upon I am now come to your sixth Instance which is this Instance 6 If Christ be but a meer creature then the Righteousnes of Christ which is imputed to Believers is not the Righteousness of God but the righteousness of a meer creature but this is against the tenure of the Scriptures in Phil. 3.9 Answ Sir I suppose from some terms in this your Instance and from the Text you alledge that by Righteousnesse you mean that righteousness Whereby Believers stand in the sight of God free and clear from all sin in reference to the curse of the Law This is the Righteousness of God by the Faith of Jesus Christ that is that in Jesus Christ which is to be the object of our faith unto all and upon all that believe Rom. 3.22 God is the Principal Authour of this Righteousness and Christ is an Instrumental Agent therein Now that in Christ which is imputed to us for righteousness is his obedience which was both active and passive The opinion now-a-days is that the active obedience of Christ whereby he did perfectly fulfill the Law and his passive obedience whereby he did perfectly suffer the curse of the Law are imputed to us for righteousness Now he could not obey the Law as he was God nor could the suffer the curse of the Law but as he was Man and so that righteousness of Christ which was imputed unto us was a creatures righteousness Now I shall hasten to your seventh Instance which here follows Instance 7 If Christ Were a meer creature then to pardon sin belongs not to him because the Scripture testifies that none can forgive sins but God because all sin is against God therefore none can for give it but God but it is evident that Christ took the Authority of forgiving sin Son saith Christ thy sins are forgiven thee Luke 7.48 Answ Because many think that some weight lies in these words I shall be a little the more large in my Answer to it I shall without marring it make this Argument of it None can forgive sin but God But Christ did forgive sin Luke 7.48 Therefore Christ is God I shal reply to your Major that none can forgive sin but God 1. By objecting against the witness you bring for it for your proof alludes to that which we have in Mark 2.7 Who can for give sins but God only This though it be in the Scripture yet is it no part of the Standard for the dark Scribes who were enemies to Christ did speak it 2. By objecting against the Doctrine you teach in it That none can for give sin in any sense but God onely may pass for an errour for it is the duty of all men to for give others those sins they commit against them Matth. 6.14 And it is the priviledge of some men to forgive all sins in reference to the curse of the Law John 20.23 Whose soever sins ye remit they are remitted unto them and Whose soever sins ye retain they are retained That none can forgive sins as God doth shall have my leave to pass for a truth God in forgiving of sin is Principall doing it by his own Authority not receiving power from another Now for your Minor That Christ did for give sin 'T is true that Christ did forgive sin and that he the Sonne of Man had on Earth power to do it as he himself speaks Mar. 2.10 But what will this help to bring in the Conclusion that Christ is God Doubtless no because meer creatures as above have in some sense power to forgive sin If it can be proved that Christ is Principall in forgiving something may done But that cannot be because the Scripture cannot oppose it self The Scripture tells us that we are justified by the Man Christ Iesus Acts 13.38 39. Be it known unto you therefore men and brethren that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins And by him all that believe are justified from all things from which yee could not be justified by the Law of Moses And it also shews us that Christ is not the Principall forgiver of sins in that he prayed to another on the Jews behalf for the forgiveness of sin Luke 23.34 Then said Jesus Father forgive them for they know not What they do And in that he received from another his power of forgiving sins Acts 5.30 31. The God of our Fathers raised up Jesus whom yee slew and hanged on a tree Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour for to give repentance unto Israel and forgiveness of sins Thus I have blockt up the way that your Conclusion cannot pass but opened a way for my self to pass from your seventh Instance to that which follows Instance 8 If Christ be a meer creature then the value of that offering which Christ offered when he offered himself to God is taken away and the satisfaction which Christ gave to Divine Justice is destroyed for if the person that died were a meer man and the bloud that was shed were the bloud of a meer man and not of God as it is called Acts 20.28 then how could it satisfie for the sins of many transgressours for there is no