Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	enter_v	sin_n	sin_v	10,991	5	9.5827	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A85957	The fort-royal of Christianity defended. Or, a demonstration of the divinity of scripture, by way of excellency called the Bible. With a discussion of some of the great controversies in religion, about universal redemption, free-will, original sin, &c. For the establishing of Christians in truth in these atheistical trying times. / By Thomas Gery, B.D. and Rector of Barwell in Leicestershire.	Gery, Thomas, d. 1670?	1657 (1657)	Wing G618; Thomason E1702_1; ESTC R209377	93,977	264

is the guilt of Adam's sin whereof S. Paul speaks Rom. 5.19 where he saith By one man's disobedience many were made sinners Secondly There is the defect and want of original righteousnesse whereof he speaks Rom. 3.23 All have sinned and come short of the glory of God i.e. of God's image which was in man's first creation stamped upon him And for this exposition I have warrant from 1 Cor. 11.7 in that the Apostle there joyned these together as synonimas image and glory when he saith That man is the image and glory of God Thirdly There is the succession of a vitious habit and corrupt disposition in man's nature in place of his primitive righteousnesse whereof we read Gen. 6.5 where God himself witnesseth That the whole imagination of the thoughts of man's heart was only evill continually And Psal 14.2 ● verse David saith That the Lord looked down from Heaven upon the children of men to see if there were any that did understand and seek God They are all gone aside they are altogether become filthy And here I desire the Reader to consider how these three parts of this our native sin do produce and bring forth one another the first namely the guilt of Adam's sin being the sole cause of the other two as these Texts beside many other declare Rom. 3.23 All have sinned that is in Adam and come short of the glory of God i.e. come short of that glorious image of God by reason of that sin of Adam's whereof all are guilty And Rom. 5.19 By one man's disobedience many wert made sinners By which one man Adam is understood as all acknowledge And so these two Texts make it clear that childrens want of Original or Primitive righteousnesse and the inquination and depravation of their natures do both flow from their guilt of Adam's sin and are the sad consequents of it The third point opened The evident proofs of Scripture for it BEsides the Texts already named it 's plentifully taught elsewhere Gen. 5. the 1 3. verses compared In the first verse it 's said that Adam was created in the likeness of God And in the 3. verse it 's said that He begat a child in his own likeness after his image which imports that he begat not a child in the likenesse of God which consisted in holinesse but in the likenesse of himself who then was stained with sin Gen. 8.21 The imagination of man's heart is evill from his youth Which Text is rendered by Junius and Tremellius The imagination or frame of man's heart is evill from his childhood Now children are free from actual sins and therefore the evill of their hearts must need be Original because all evill of sin is comprehended under one of these two sorts Job 14.4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean not one Which is spoken in reference to man's birth as it 's there most apparent in the first verse Job 15.14 What is man that he should be clean or he that is born of a woman that he should be righteous And again chap. 25.4 How then can man be justified with God or how can he be clean that is born of a woman The interrogations in both these Texts imply an impossibility that any woman should bring forth a child free from the pollution and tincture of sin in the ordinary way of conception and parturition Psal 51.5 Behold saith David I was shapen in iniquity If David then all others but our Saviour only whose conception was not after the ordinary manner but by the miraculous and incomprehensible operation of the holy Ghost The Anabaptists to avoid the repugnancy between their Tenet and this Text have devised this shift They say that David spake this of his mother's sin in his conception and not of his own fin But this is so weak a subterfuge and evasion and so dissonant from the scope and purpose of the Psalm that I should think that any judicious man that seeks the truth should blush to own it for this is one of David's penitential Psalms wherein he makes humble confession of his own sins to God and not of his mother's and makes earnest request and supplication for the expiation of them as all the precedent verses declare And again though the latter words in the verse might be wrested to be spoken of his mother's sin as well as his own because mention is made of her yet the first words which are these Behold I was shapen in iniquity must of necessity be understood of himself and can have no reference to his mother without violence to the Text and wilful wresting of it Psal 58.3 It 's said That the wicked are estranged from the womb And the like place is in Isa 48.8 where the Lord calls the house of Jacob A transgressor from the womb which is as much to say as a sinner by birth Ezek. 16.4 5 6. verses Jersalem's nativity is affirmed by God to be polluted and he saith That he saw her polluted in her own bloud which Text though it should be granted to be allegoricall as some Interpreters would have it yet inevitably concludes mans birth to be unclean Joh. 3.6 That which is borne of the flesh is flesh saith our Saviour that is is sinfull For when the flesh is opposed to the Spirit as it is here in this Text it usually denoteth and is put to signifie the pravity or sinfullness of nature as Gal. 5.17 The flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the flesh and these are contrary one to another Roman 5.12 By one man sin entred into the world and death by sin and so death pasled upon all men for that all have sinned If all have sinned then have infants sinned as well as others for we do not find them any where excepted Now infants have no actuall sin while they are infants and therefore that sin which they are said to have must needs be originall all sin whatsoever being comprehended under one of these two kinds as was said before The fourth Point opened namely Arguments drawn from Scripture to prove original sin by necessary consequence Argument 1. IF children be not conceived and born in sin then is there no need of their regeneration or second birth to their salvation before they have made themselves sinners by actual transgression for nothing hinders from salvation but sin But children have need of a regeneration or second birth to their salvation before they have committed any actual sin as is clear from our Saviour's words twice affirmed with vehement asseveration John 3.3 5. verses Verily verily I say unto thee except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God And this is spoken without any exception of Infants either there or in any other place of Scripture and is also proved by our Saviour in the verse next following to concern Infants as well as men of years because whatsoever is born of the flesh that is of fleshly

and sinful Parents is flesh that is is fleshly and finful for so we find in other places of Scripture as was said before that where the flesh and spirit are opposed one to another as they are in this verse there by spirit is understood the regenerate part in man and by flesh the unregenerate part as beside the former Text quoted Gal. 5.16 17. verses is to be seen in Rom. 8. several times verse the 5. They that are after the flesh do mind the things of the flesh but they that are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit And in the next verse To be carnally minded is death but to be spiritually minded is life and peace And in the 9. verse Ye are not in the flesh but in the spirit And again in the 13. verse If ye live after the flesh ye shall die but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the deeds of the body ye shall live In all which places as also in most other in the New Testament where the Spirit and the flesh are set in opposition one to another there by flesh is meant the unregenerate part in man unless some circumstances in the context do necessarily require that such places should be otherwise understood Hence therefore it follows undeniably That children are conceived and born in sin namely because they stand in need of regeneration to their salvation Argument 2. THey that are subject to diseases and death in their conception and birth are in their conception and birth sinful for these namely diseases and death are affirmed to be the fruits and effects of sin in Scripture very frequently Rom. 5.12 By one man sin entred into the World and death by sin and so death passed upon all men for that all have sinned Rom. 6.23 The wages of sin is death So that where we see death or sicknesse sieze upon any young or old there we may surely conclude that sin hath gone before But Infants are subject to diseases and death in their very conception and birth Therefore they are in their conception and birth sinful To evade the force of this argument one of note amongst the Anabaptisie n●mely one Mr. Brown in a Treatise which he hath penned and published entituled Scripturerede●ption freed from restraint and in page the 7. of the said discourse restrains the death mentioned in the forenamed Texts to a bodily death only affirming that Adam by his sin exposed himself and his posterity not to eternal or the second death to the death of soul and body both but to bodily death only Yet lest he should seem to contradict Scripture which every-where affirms all sin to provoke God's anger and to deserve death and to bring forth fruit unto death he confesseth that any sin deserves death but not every kind of death His words are these I grant saith he that the wages of sin is death but the wages of any sin is not every kind of death And so denies that Adam incurred any other death by his sin then the death of the body Touching this answer and this exposition of the foresaid Texts of Scripture I desire the Reader to take notice of these two failings and falts therein First it extenuates the hainousness of sin and minceth and diminisheth that just demerit and penalty of it which throughout the whole Scripture is denounced against it which is death both of body and soul Secondly It 's a concession and confession in effect that children are by nature sinful born with fin upon them and in them for if the wages of any be death which is truth and he ingeniously affirms it then where there is any death there must needs be some sin or else the wages and penalty of sin should be inflicted where there is no sin Whereas therefore some children suffer in their infancy some kind of death namely bodily death they must needs be guilty of some kind of sin otherwise they should be punished with bodily death undeservedly which to affirm were blasphemy But they can have no actual sin as is confessed of all men and therefore the sin which exposeth them to death must needs be some latent sin wherewith their natures are stained from the womb as the Scripture speakes which is that which we call originall And so ye may see that his answer to the argument is in effect a concession of the unaswerable force of it and of that which he would seeme to deny But I will display Mr. Brown his gross errour about this point yet a little further He confesseth in the same place of his book that actuall sins in men deserve eternall death though not origin all sin Now I would know of him whether Adam's first sin was not actuall sin This I am sure he cannot deny Nay a very hainous actuall sin it was as might be laid open by many circumstances This then being granted I demand of him why actuall sins in us should be punishable with eternall death and not this first hainous actuall sin of Adam's I dare answer for him that he cannot tel For if our actuall sins deserve eternall death much rather that of Adam's as who had greater light and more grace and less temptations then we have All which considerations are so many aggravations of his sin Lastly to trample this vile errour yet once more under foot that it may never lift up it selfe againe I demand of these Anabaptists whether Adam did not by his sin divest and disrobe himselfe of that glorious image of God after which he was made which consisted especially in righteousnesse and true holiness as the Apostle hath declared Eph. 4.22.23 and 24. verses for there he exhorts to put of the old man by which he means the vitiosity sinfulness of our natures transmitted and propagated into us by old Adam and then to be renewed in the spirit of our minds and to put on the new man which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness which implyes that Gods image after which man was first created did consist in righteousness and holiness Now if they deny that Adam by his sin deprived himselfe of God's image consisting in righteousness and holiness they must deny the 5. chapter of Pauls epistle to the Romans to be Canonicall Scripture for there the Apostle affirmes severall times in the five last verses that by Christ we regain both righteousness and life which Adam lost And againe the word renewed which the Scripture useth in speaking hereof implyes a deprivation of that which was before for nothing can properly be said to be renewed but where there hath been a precedent deprivation of that which is renewed Again on the other side if they confess that Adam by his sin deprived himselfe of God's image then they confess by conseqvence that his sin brought upon him spirituall death which is a further penalty then corporall death and so impugneth their tenet that Adam incurred by his first sin no other death then the