Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	discourse_n	ease_n	great_a	16	3	2.1033	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30486	A short consideration of Mr. Erasmus Warren's defence of his exceptions against the theory of the earth in a letter to a friend.	Burnet, Thomas, 1635?-1715.	1691 (1691)	Wing B5947; ESTC R36301	36,168	44

He that should go about thus to expose our Saviours parable would have a thankless office and effect nothing for the substance of it would stand good still namely that mens Souls live after death and that good Souls are in a state of ease and comfort and bad Souls in a state of misery In like manner his ridiculing some circumstances in the comparison made by the Psalmist does not at all destroy the substance of that discourse namely that the Sun moves in the firmament with great swiftness and lustre and hath the circuit of its motion round the Earth This is the substance of what the Psalmist declares and the rest is but a similitude which need not be literally just in all particulars After this he would fain perswade the Theorist that he hath excused the Excepter for his receding from the literal sence as to the motion of the Earth Because he hath granted that in certain cases we may and must recede from the literal sence But where pray hath he granted that the motion of the Earth was one of those cases yet suppose it be so may not the Theorist then enjoy this priviledge of receding from the literal sence upon occasion as well as the Excepter If he will give as well as take this liberty let us mutually enjoy it But he can have no pretence to deny it to others and take it himself It uses to be a rule in writing that a man must not stultum fingere Lectorem You must suppose your Reader to have common sence But he that accuses another of blasphemy for receding from the literal sence of Scripture in natural things and does himself at the same time recede from the literal sence of Scripture in natural things one would think quoad hoc either had not or would not exercise common sence in a literal way Lastly He comes to the common known rule assign'd to direct us when every one ought to follow or leave the literal sence which is not to leave the literal sence when the subject matter will bear it without absurdity or incongruity This he repeats in the next page thus The rule is When no kind of absurdities or incongruities accrue to any Texts from the literal sence If this be his rule to what Texts does there accrue any absurdity or incongruity by supposing the Sun to move for Scripture always speaks upon that supposition and not one word for the motion of the Earth Thus he states the rule but the Answerer supposed that the absurdity or incongruity might arise from the subject matter And accordingly he still maintains that there are as just reasons from the subject matter and better authorities for receding from the literal sence in the narrative of the six-days Creation than in those Texts of Scripture that speak of the motions and course of the Sun And to affirm the Earth to be mov'd is as much Blasphemy and more contrary to Scripture than to affirm it to have been dissolv'd as the Theorist hath done Sir I beg your excuse for this long Letter and leave it to you to judge whether the occasion was just or no. I know such jarrings as these must needs make bad musick to your ears 't is like hearing two instruments play that are not in tune and consort with one another But you know self-defence and to repel an assailant is always allow'd and he that begins the quarrel must answer for the consequences However Sir to make amends for this trouble I am ready to receive your commands upon more acceptable subjects Your most Humble Servant c. FINIS P. 31. p. 1● Exe. p. 77. c. Def. p. 12. Ex● p. 77 78. Def. p. 73. lin 12 13. P. 97 98 99 100 101 Gen. c. 21. Def. p. ●●● Def. p. 99. Ibid lin 19. P. 289. Ex● p. 289 290. Ex● p. 158 159. Ibid. p. 159. Exc. p. 187. P. 78 79 80 81. P. 38. Def. p. 82. P. 181 182. Gen. 6. 17. Def. p. 182. Gen. 9. ●● Def. 165. 180. P. 300. P. 180. Def. p. 90. Def. p. 48. P. 108. P. 214. P. 113. 〈◊〉 Def. p. ● Eng. Theo. p. 287. Excep p. 293. Def. p. 168 169. Exc. p. 211. Def. p. 69 p. 98. Gen. 13. 10. P. 60. Ibid. P. 61. Def. p. ●● 86. Def. p. 9● Ans. p. 49 50. Com. li. 5. Ibid. Def. p. 103. Answ. c. 11. P. 114. Def. p. 125. P. 131. P. 139. P. 141. Gen. 6. 4. P. 142. P. 144 145. P. 153 154. P. 160 161. P. 16● Gen. 11. 3. P. 166. Exc. p. 302. Answ. p. 67. Des. p. 168. Ibid. P. 16● 16● Exc. p. 300. See the Citations in the Answ. p. 68. Def. p. 170. P. 171. 〈◊〉 Exc. p. 312. Def. p. 171. Exc. p. 325. Def. p. 136. Def. p. 183 184 185 c. Def. p. 191. Exc. p. 312. Ib. p. 105. Engl. Th. p. 81 c. Def. p. 215. Eng. The. p. 105. c. Eng. The p. 18 19. The. Lat. p. 53. Eng. p. 107 108. Theor. li. 2. c. 8. P. 288. C. 12. P. 82 83. c. Def. p. 202. Def. p. 206. P. 207. Luk 16. Def. p. 208. p. 215.