Selected quad for the lemma: death_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
death_n	word_n	write_v	writing_n	140	3	9.0529	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57655	Leviathan drawn out with a hook, or, Animadversions upon Mr. Hobbs his Leviathan by Alex. Rosse.	Ross, Alexander, 1591-1654.	1653 (1653)	Wing R1960; ESTC R1490	70,857	139

Gods word By the same means he may prove that Aristotle's Logick or Hippocrate's Aphorisms are the undoubted word of God for in them is nothing contrary to it But was not Peter's reason contrary to Gods word when he would have disswaded Christ from suffering whereas all the prophets had spoken that Christ ought to have suffered those things and to enter into his glory Luke 24. 26. And no less weak is his argument cap. 32. by which he will prove that divine dreams are not of force to win belief from any man that knows dreams are for the most part natural and may proceed from former thoughts c. He may as well infer that the pen-men of the Holy Scriptures are not of force to win belief from us seeing the prophet saith All men are lyers what if it had said that men for the most part are lyers there had been less reason to have inferred that the pen-men of Scriptures were such and yet Mr. Hobbs will infer that because dreams are for the most part natural therefore divine dreams are of no credit that such dreams are of force sufficient to win belief is plain by the dreams of Ioseph Iacob's son and Ioseph the husband of Mary with divers others in Scripture cap. 33. He is troubled that Moses before his death should write that he died that his Sepulcher was not known to this day but in this he troubles himself needlessly for he writes of his death and sepulcher by anticipation which is an usual way of writing amongst some besides the Jewish tradition is that Iosua wrote that last chapter of Deuteronomy long after the death of Moses Cap. 33. So he is troubled about the words of Moses Gen. 12. 6. which are And the Canaanite was then in the land Hence he infers that Moses wrot not that book but one who wrot when the Canaanite was not in the land for Moses dyed before he came to it but I say that if the Canaanite was not in the land when he wrot these words The Canaanite was then in the land he wrot a lye but indeed Moses wrot the History and writes no waies absurdly in showing that the Canaanite was then in the land but purposely to let us see the condition of Gods children in this life who though they have right to all they enjoy yet the wicked keep them under and they live in fear still of their enemies as Abraham did of the Canaanites who domineered in that land which Abraham received from God and at the same time he receiv'd it such like exceptions he makes against some other writers of the old Testament but they are of no moment or validity therefore I will spend no paper nor time in their refuration In his thirty fourth chapter he tells us That there is no real part of the universe which is not also a body and that bodies are called substances because subject to various accidents and that an incorporeal substance is as if a man should say an incorporeal body If there were no real parts of the universe but bodies then the universe were not universe but an imperfect system as d●ficien● in the most noble of all created entities● to wit incorporeal substances but God made the world perfect consisting both of material and immaterial substances such are Angels and Mens souls which are neither corporeal in their beeing nor operation for if they were corporeal they must be mortal and corruptible and compounded at least of matter and form they must be also quantitative local by circumscription and movable by physical motion all which are absurd and if a substance be the same that a body is then he must make God corporeal for he is a substance now to say that a thing is called substance because subject to changes is vain for substances are so called because they subsist by themselves and not in another entity as accidents do besides accidents may be called subjects because one accident may be the subject of another as the superficies of a wall is the subject of colours but accidents can never be called substances for they cannot subsist of themselve● By the spirit of God moving upon the face of the waters Gen. 1. 2. He will have to be meant a winde because if God himself were understood then motion must be attributed to him and place I know in this he follows Tertullian's opinion but the Church hath constantly held that there is meant not a winde but the spirit of God by which place they both prove the mystery of the Trinity the first person being expressed by the word Elo●●m the second by the word Berisheth or Beginning and the third by the word Ruah or Spirit they also by the same place prove the dignity and power of baptism in the waters of which Sacrament the Spirit moveth as in the beginning and indeed it is childish to think that a winde should be there meant for what use could there be of a winde then before the creatures were produced And wheras he is afraid to ascribe motion and place to God it seems he hath not well observed the Scripture phrase which ordinarily speaketh of God Anthropopathos as if he were a man therefore he is said sometimes to speak to see to hear to discend to laugh to be angry to greet to rejoyce and in this History of the Creation he is said to speak to bless to walk in the Garden to examine Adam to condemn the Serpent c. Now whereas Mr. Hobbs saith that the spirit here mentioned is the same that is spoken of Gen. 8. 1. I will bring my Spirit upon the Earth He is mistaken and misalledgeth the words for thus it is written And God made a winde to pass over the Earth for winde in Scripture is never called the Spirit of God The spirit then that dried up the waters of the flood was the same that afterwards divided the red Sea for Moses and the Israelites to pass through to wit a drying winde which God had raised He saith The word Ghost signifieth nothing but the imaginary inhabitants of the brain But there he is also mistaken for it signifieth a real immaterial substance which we call from the Latin word Spirit and so it was alwaies used by the Saxons and at this day Gheest and Gheist in low and high Dutch do signifie the same thing or spirit Cap. 34. When Christ walked on the waters the Disciples thought they had seen a spirit or fantasm which Mr. Hobbs will have to be an aerial body But I wonder who ever saw an aerial body the two grosser Elements are visible to us but not the two superior by reason of their subtilty and purity And he is deceived also in saying That the delusions of the brain are not common to many at once For I have observed that divers men together have seen imaginary castles temples armed men and such like apparitions in the clouds Now Spirits or Angels have been