Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	life_n	see_v	word_n	6,856	5	4.0124	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46990	A suddain essay with a sincere desire to vindicate Christianity, or the common faith, from the superlative heresies or phantasticall novelties of all selfe-particular Sciolists endeavouring the subversion of the same by seven arguments used in opposition to Mr. John Biddle, Febr. 18 and Febr. 25, 1654 at his school in Coleman Street by Richard Jackson.	Jackson, Richard, 1621-1677.; Biddle, John, 1615-1662.	1655 (1655)	Wing J87A; ESTC R28947	13,237	28

Christ could not be a slain sacrifice as the word signifieth but by the wounding of his body and powring out of his bloud then the bloud of Christ so powred out is much more properly stiled a sacrifice The reason is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Assumpt But Christ could not be as the word signifieth a slaine sacrifice but by the wounding of his body and powring out of his bloud Ergo the bloud of Christ so powred out is much more properly stiled a sacrifice I never had Socinus his writings nor any time to read Mr. Biddles Books having my spirit oppressed and memory burdened with importunate businesse of far baser nature and therefore according to Aristotle more Narcotical to all intellectuall abilities such pettifogging Mammonists as pride themselves and fatten their insulting envy if they can captive poore suiters and intangle Scholars in the wofull Labyrinth of Law practise are spitefull enemies of the publike good no lesse then of truth and piety Hence it is that I cannot certainly say how farre this Argument reacheth him for his Answer was neither directly nor distinctly returned but he seemed to me by shuffling so to overshadow the Text as if Christ were not a sacrifice in being wounded upon the Crosse and slain heer on earth but only by his personall appearance in heaven where he ever liveth to make c. Heb. 7 25. Therefore that this Argument may clearly reach him and conclude absolutely against him I shall frame another Syllogisme from Eph. 5 2 Heb. 9 26 cap. 7.27 with 1 Cor. 5 7. That which is expressed in the preterperfect tense as a thing done on earth in the sight and for the example and imitation of all true Christians in one kind of way and which could not be effected but by sufferance which was but once nor could nor needed to bee reiterated that can never be interpreted truly of his personall appearance in heaven to make intercession for us but must needs intend some proper sacrifice of himselfe heere upon the earth Assumpt But that Christ should be a slaine or bloudy sacrifice unto death as Divine Justice required for due satisfaction and the word signifieth 1 Cor. 5 7 is expressed in the preterperfect tense as a thing done in the sight of men and for their example and imitation in a kind Eph. 5.2 which could not be but by sufferance and was but once nor could or needed to be reiterated Heb. 9 25 26 Heb. 7 26 as the very letter of these Texts doth clearely intimate Ergo that Christ should be such a slaine Sacrifice or bloudy unto death c. can never be interpreted of his personall appearance in heaven by the act of intercession but must needs intend some sacrifice heere on earth which is that of the nature assumed both of body and bloud especially so often inculcated The Proposition is undeniable from the Law of Dissentanees or rather Disparataes for of Christs intercession in heaven how can it be sayd hee hath given himselfe for us as a slaine sacrifice which the word thusia there signifieth being derived of thuein to kill as in Hebrew Zebach a slain sacrifice of Zabach Mactare to kill which none will contradict not disposed to cavill Secondly how can that giving or presenting of himselfe be presented to us for example seeing in that action hee never fell under humane sight or observation Thirdly in that sense it may be said he will give himselfe for us again and againe so often as we stand in need of the spirit and of speciall application in times of perillous tentation but cannot as a slain sacrifice for that death can have no more dominion over him nor he any more to suffer in the flesh Rom. 6 9 with 1 Pet. 4 1. For the Assumption called the minor it is evident in every part of it from the expresse words of the Texts recalling but to mind the true signification of thusian a slain sacrifice which may bee cleared from Matthew 22 4. 1 Cor. 5 7. Mine oxen and my fatlings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 slaughtered c What in Scripture were called Sacrifices espetially explatory were to be destroyed If living creatures by slaughter as other things by combustion and some by effusion and the bodies of those offered for sin to be burned without the Camp which is the reason why some one in Euseb called it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a fume or exhalation which ascendeth from the burning when God by inspiration did order Abel and others successively to officiate by expiatory sacrifice he intended but to shadow out the supream sacrifice of all to be expected Dan. And therfore not only the use of the thing was to be offered unto God but also the very life and substance of it which occasioneth this word and phrase Ephes 5.2 in correspondence to the types And because I would have Arguments to exceed in weight rather then number Mr. Biddle may for further illustration take notice that the Apostle in Heb. 8.3 plainly gathereth and concludeth that hee could not have been an high Priest except he had that sacrifice which he could offer viz our humane nature both of body and bloud Vid. Gen 22 7. That Divine Justice required such a sacrifice for due satisfaction may be easily made manifest afterwards and illustrated also from the eminent instance of Zaleucus This third Argument is coincident with that which I used upon our former day of Debate Febr. 18. 1654. viz. whatsoever agreeth to the whole principally in respect of any essentiall part is more properly praedicated of that essentiall part then it is of the whole Assumpt But to be a proper sacrifice expiatory agreeeth to the person of Christ 2. Cor. 2.10 by reason of the humane nature assumed viz. the body Heb. 10.10 and the bloud especially Heb. 9 22 with Math. 26 27 28. Ergo the bloud or the body is more properly stiled a sacrifice This Argument thus urged intangled us in a tedious and disorderly contest before the non-intelligent Mr. Biddle denying the Proposition and giving an instance against it which seemed too grosse and insufficient so that at length by a comparison I brought him off it to the acknowledgement of Theologicall axiome viz. that if any one should call him or me Gowry fellow in reference to a Gowty legge then Gowtinesse were more properly praedicated of that integrall part then of the whole c. So likewise for the other alleadged viz that whosoever denominateth any thing so or so is much more properly such then that which it so denominates If Apollos for his tongue be entituled an eloquent man then his tongue is much more properly so intituled I hope Mr. Biddle will not balk the best sence of what is alleadged Argument 4. SEeing the slight esteem Mr. Biddle had of Divines I durst not alleadge that axiomaticall Assertion of the most Dianoeticall Doctor amongst all those Latine lights who from the Church have shined unto the world in life and Doctrine

however casually by increasing snuffes obscured viz. that the passion and death of Christ is a most true and perfect sacrifice Which Mr. Biddle seemeth for as yet I have found no clearnesse or constancy in his assertions to make together with the blood powred out but onely as certaine previous actions to that sacrifice or oblation without any distinction of these words used by him in my hearing which was not made upon the Crosse when hee lost his owne life But onely by his presentation in Heaven where hee liveth for ever To which purpose as I remember he used an illustrating assertion viz. that the bringing and killing of the beast the powring out of the bloud and the burning of the body were not the sacrifice but the taking of the bloud of the Goat or Bullock so making an atonement by carrying it into the Holiest of all c. Therfore some things heere had need be interposed not to increase the number or trouble the tenour of our Discourse used in our Diatribe but onely to clear the candle of whatsoever obscureth or may entangle the inexpert in the word of righteousnes Heb. 5.13 Wee must proceed to a fourth Argument against that pretence of some previous actions as distinct from and therefore not formally proper to the sacrificing If the presenting of the Beast before the Tabernacle made it a sacrifice the killing and powring out of the bloud were the proper sacrificing of that beast and then that the taking of the bloud and the sprinkling of it about the Altar of Incense in the holy place were only a typicall circumstance to shew the efficacy of that bloud formerly sacrificed c. and so to shadow out Heb. 10 1. the vertue and efficacy of Christs bloud once offered by which he entred as it is assorted already and now ever liveth to intercede for us so to obtaine for our consolation the Holy Ghost in our greatest calamities of conscience Then the denying of Christ to bee a proper sacrifice by assuming our nature and presenting himselfe in the same heer upon the earth Heb. 10 6 7 8 9 and especially by powring out his bloud upon the Crosse Heb. 10 10 as if yet hee were no sacrifice for all that nor any purgative efficacy in his bloud so offered but only by the offering and presentation of his person in heaven is a most abominable slighting of the bloud of God Act 20 28 and brainsick errour as shall be evidenced Assumpt But the former part of the Antecedent is most evident from those Books of the Law Exod. Levit. Numbers And the other clause or part of it is apparently proved by what is already alleadged from Heb. 9. Ergo the Consequent is conclusive and infallible Truth like vertue cleareth its way as it goeth so heere I hope And to this purpose on Febr. 18. I insinuated against his mysticall asseverations from Heb. 9 27 that there was a vast disparity between these two terms 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to offer and to appeare but it was not resented or observed except by himselfe though the Apostle in that Chapter separateth the apparition from the oblation far enough bringing in and establishing the one upon the by passed efficacy of the other which is already evidenced and upon his appearing utterly denying all further oblation Observe but the Text and you must needs see it Heb. 9 24 25 not that hee should offer himselfe c. though some may easily see a difference between sacrifice and oblation for that some things may be offered which are not sacrificed yet are they promiscuously used in reference to the person of Christ Eph. 5 2 Heb. 10 10 with cap 9 ●6 But neither the Holy Ghost nor the Greeks I trow did ever use 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. an oblation for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. an apparition If they did then produce an instance from some Classick Author for I suppose you able for such a purpose if it be possible for any to find such a place Lastly to clear all this upon which I have interposed between the Arguments briefly If Christs entring once by the sacrifice of himself that is to say of his own bloud Heb. 9 11 12 be holden forth by the spirit as in a certain Antitypicall opposition onely proper in being opposed to the entrance of the High Priest each yeere with others bloud Heb. 9 25.26 with v. 11 12 then the spirit never intended to teach us any comparative opposition between Christs oblation and the high Priests entrance into the holiest of all as if Christ could not offer or sacrifice himselfe till hee came in Heaven the oblation consisting in Christs entrance by which he became to be the high Priest of our profession as Mr. Biddle seemeth of opinion though that overthroweth the proportion and long coherence of the parallell so apt and Grammatically plain Argument 5. From Rev. 3 6 9 with John 1 29 1 Joh. 1 7 and 1 Pet. 1 18 19 with Rom. 3 25. THat which purgeth and redeemeth from sin both Positively and Negatively and effectually reconcileth us unto God upon our faith or application that must needs be offered as a true and proper sacrifice to the same end and purpose Assumpt But the bloud of the Lambe the Lord Jesus purgeth and redeemeth from sin both Positively and Negatively and effectually reconcileth us to God upon our saith or application Ergo The bloud of the Lamb the Lord Jesus was offered as a proper sacrifice to the same end and purpose The Proposition or major as they call it is manifest from the third Book of Moses declaring the end and institution of the sin or trespasse offerings Levit. 5 5 6 7 8 9. with verses 15 and 16. So also cap. 6 6 7. with cap. 9.7 8 9 10 11 15. and cap. 16.16 7 8 9. and verses 11 12 13 14. so he shall not die So in verse 16 17 18 19. All which and divers other places make it evident that these were sacrifices instituted for such ends and purposes because they did so purge and make atonement that is to say reconcile and redeem from death temporall according to the tenour of that Covenant under which the people then stood though in comparison they were but carnall ordinances extending only to the purifying of the flesh Heb. 9 1 13. The Assumpt or minor as he calls it is clear from those places alleadged Revol 5 6 9. Joh. 1 29. 1 Joh. 1 7. Heb. 9 15. 1. Pet. 1 18 19. Rom. 3.25 with Eph. 1 7. Ergo The Conclusion is infallible and undeniable To the Assumption Mr. Biddle sayd that the bloud of Christ had an influence upon the remission of sins and towards reconciliation But what is this influence think we For wheras he would and did tie me to the expresse words of the text this word is strange to the text and serving only for some untouth interpretation Doth it imply any