Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	flesh_n	person_n	union_n	3,543	5	9.2603	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A78222	Apodeixis tou antiteichismatos. Or, a tryall of the counter-scarfe, made 1642. In answer to a scandalous pamphlet, intituled, A treatise against superstitious Iesu-worship: written by Mascall Giles, Vicar of Ditchling in Sussex. Wherein are discovered his sophismes: and the holy mother our church is cleered of all the slanders which hee hath laid on her. By the author of the Antiteichisma.	Barton, Thomas, 1599 or 1600-1682 or 3.	1643 (1643)	Wing B997; Thomason E87_13; ESTC R209874	118,628	143

is answered that the Name Iesus is a common Name to every Person in Trinitie and therefore though it be above other Divine Names yet it doth not make inequality betweene the Persons and in bowing at that onely they honour all alike Now thus they goe about to prove their Assertion God say they was called Saviour before Christ was incarnate and Iesus and Saviour is all one therefore the Name Iesus denominates every Person of the Trinitie First I reply If Saviour Iesus be all one why then doe they not bow as well at the sound of Saviour as Iesus for their reason is the same for both Secondly I affirme that they are not all one the word Saviour indeed before Christ was incarnate shewed what God would doe in the fulnesse of time viz. send his Sonne to be our Redeemer but it is no proper Name Iesus is a proper Name never appropriated ●o the second Person till Christ was incarnate and some good Authors affirme that it is the Name of his humanitie onely because given him upon his Incarnation and he being called generally by that Name in the dayes of his flesh and sundry men being so called as Types of Christ though if it be so it doe denominate unto us his whole Person God and Man Sermon on Phil. 2. because of the inseperable union of the two natures But Bishop Andrewes assertion here is very strange who affirmes that the Name Iesus is the proper and chiefe Name of God but how can it be so when it is not the proper Name of Gods eternitie but was given unto the second Person in time by reason of mans fall But the Name Iehovah denotes Gods eternall Being and therefore is the proper and chiefe Name of God indeed And how doth the Bishop agree with himselfe in that place For thus he saith The Person is taken out of our sight all that we can doe cannot reach unto it but his Name he hath left behind to us that we may shew by our reverence and respect to it how much we esteeme him For if the Name Iesus doe denominate the Person of Christ as taken out of our sight then it denominates onely his humanitie which onely was in our sight for the Deitie was never in our sight But if it be true as he saith that Iesus is the proper Name of Christs Deitie then in this sense he is not gone from us but is with us alwayes unto the end of the world Mat. 28.20 and lives and dwells in the hearts of his Saints Eph. 3.17 Answer The third received answer if from me you had it thus Iesus is an essentiall Name though not attributed to God till in the fulnesse of time God put it on the Sonne of Man and at his exaltation declared it the highest and the Person to be the Lord God which is the blessed Trinitie Being therefore the highest expression of God it cannot make one higher then another because one is all and every one the same God See my Antiteich Tract 9. p. 94. 95 To your first reply I answer that Saviour is expositio Nominis an exposition of not the Name The second is not against my assertion I confesse the Name was given in type to Joshuah not imposed on the second Person till the Word was incarnate But with your Good Authors I shall not affirme that the Name of Jesus is a Name of the Humanitie onely If you be so inclined 't is no marvell that you slight the Name and them that honour it Origen Tertullian Cyprian Lactantius Chrysostome Augustine Bernard c. thought otherwise Nor need you thinke it strange that Bishop Andrewes calls it one of Gods owne Names and the Chiefe for it being given in time it 's not the lesse nor the lesse his Jehovah in former time given is yet the Name of his Eternitie Iesus in the latter the Name of his eternall Mercie and of all the Chiefe because all other Names of God are poured forth in it See my Antiteich Tract 3. p. 21. He goes beyond his owne Reading take it how you will that will undertake to make the Bishop contradict himselfe 'T is wantonnesse in you to challenge him The Name of Jesus doth denominate his Person taken out of our sight and yet it doth not follow that then it denominates his Humanitie onely unlesse you can make the Humanitie his Person onely If you be as you shew a Nestorian or a Christolite you may I doubt you are a Gnostick a Cerinthian and can separate Iesus from Christ You were told and from Saint Augustine too that this Name is a Name of the whole Person and so made by Dispensation Will you then say that the Person of Christ is with us in within us You are b●side the Text in the cited places for his Spirit is in us not his Person and so you should have said unlesse you intend to rayse a new Sect of Egidians Christs Person not his Humanitie onely is out of our sight though his Spirit be in our hearts Secondly It is absurd to affirme that nothing we can doe can ●each to Christs Person because it is out of our sight by the same reason nothing that we doe can reach to God the Father or the Holy Ghost because they are invisible then farewell all Religion If nothing that we can doe can reach to Christs Person then the whole bowing can reach but to ●he Name none to the Person and to worship the Name without the Person is grosse Idolatry by their owne confession And how can these men affirme that they honour the Three Persons alike at the name Iesus when nothing they doe can reach to the Person of Christ Thirdly By the Bishops reason if we must bow at the Name of our Saviour because he is not present then we must not bow at the name Iesus which name saith he signifieth the Deitie which is alwayes present but at the name Christ which saith he though without ground is the name of the humanitie onely which is gone from us Answer Here is diversorum praedicamentorum confusio a fallacious applying the word reach to worship which the Reverend Bishop doth to the sight The full answer is Christ is out of the reach of our eyes not out of the reach of our Faith This was in Part 1. Sect. 8. The next consequence was reproved before in Part 1. Sect 8. We bowing at the Name in Christs absence bow not at it because he is absent but because it is his and we are commanded so to doe and by it reach the Deitie And though God be every where yet he is no where visible save in Christ Secondly If Iesus be the proper and chiefe name of God then should all those that were called ordinarily by that name besides Christ be called by the proper and chiefe name of God which without horrible blasphemy could not be yeelded unto It is Anti-christs impietie to call himselfe God 2 Thes 2.9 Yet worthy men