Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	godhead_n	person_n	property_n	2,378	5	9.5846	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A37046	The law unsealed: or, A practical exposition of the Ten Commandments With a resolution of several momentous questions and cases of conscience. By the learned, laborious, faithful servant of Jesus Christ, Mr. James Durham, late minister of the Gospel at Glasgow.; Practical exposition of the X. Commandments.	Durham, James, 1622-1658.; Owen, John, 1616-1683.; Jenkyn, William, 1613-1685.	1676 (1676)	Wing D2817; ESTC R215306	402,791	322

be immediately and directly against God himself or any of the persons of the blessed Godhead or mediately and indirectly against him when it is against his Ordinances of the Word Prayer Sacraments c. by vilifying them in expressions or against his people or the work of his spirit in them he is indirectly blasphemed in them when they or it are mocked as when Pauls much learning in the Gospel is called madness or when real and serious Religion Repentance or Holiness are called Conceitedness Pride Preciseness Fancy c. 3. Blasphemy may be considered either as it is deliberate and purposed as in the Pharisees or 2. As it is out of infirmity rashness and unwatch●ulness over expressions or 3. Out of ignorance as Paul was a Blasphemer before his Conversion 1 Tim. 1. 15. 4 It may be considered 1. As against the Father 2. As against the Son 3. As against the Holy Ghost all are spoken of Matth. 12. and Mark 3. 1. Blasphemy against the Father is that which striketh either against the Godhead simply or any of the Attributes which are due to God and so it s against all the persons in common or against the Trinity of persons when it is denyed and so that relation of Father in the Godhead is blasphemed 2. Blasphemy against the Son is when either his Godhead in the Eternity of it is denyed as it was by the Phetini●●s and A●ians or when the distinction of his Natures in their respective true properties retained by each nature is denyed or when he is denyed in his Offices as if he did not satisfie Divine Justice for the sins of the Elect as a Priest which is done by the Socinians or as if he had not a Kingdom or Authority or when other Mediators or other satisfactions to Justice are set up and put in his room or when another Head and Husband to the Church Prince or Pope or another Word then what is written are made and obtruded upon her and the like whereof there are many in Popery in which respect Antichrist is said to have many names of blasphemy Rev. 13. 3. Blasphemy against the Spirit may be considered either as it is against the third Person of the Godhead and so it is against the Trinity and was that errour peculiar to Mac●do●ius or the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or pugnantes contr● Spiritual that is fighters against the Spirit or it may be considered as it looketh especially to the operation or work of that Spirit in a mans self and so it is that peculiar Blasphemy spoken of Matth. 12. 32. Which when all other Blasphemies are declared to be pardonable is said never to be pardoned ●his is the highest degree of Blasphemy which may be so 1. In that it is not at any time fallen into by a Believer or an Elect. 2. That it is not often fallen into even by others that are Reprobates 3. That it is hardly known to the person himself that is guilty of it but much less to others 4. That it is never repented of and we think doth never affect because it is never pardoned all other sins are pardonable and many are actually pardoned 1. This sin then is not every sin though all sins grieve the Spirit Ephes 4. 27. Nor 2. is it any sin of infirmity or of ignorance even such as Pauls was Nor 3. Is it any sin even though against knowledge committed against the second Table of the Law such as David fell into and may be pardoned Nor 4. Is it every sin that is against Christ and clear light for Peter denyed him but it was of infirmity Matth. 26. ●0 But this sin is 1. in the main of the Gospel and as to its saving work 2. It is not only against light but against the Spirits present testifying of it or bearing witness to it and after fore-going convictions yielded unto in some measure and sticking or lying on as weighty and making the Conscience to challenge as may be gathered from Hebr. 6. 3. It is not in one particular sin or act but in a total and resolute opposing of the Truth whereof men are convinced seeking to bear it down in others and to extirpate it out of the World as the Pharisees did Matth. 12. Who not onely rejected Christ as to themselves but opposed him in all others and sought utterly to undo the Truth This is the Heir come let us kill him say they 4. This opposition flows from malice against the Truth hatred of it and from accounting it a thing unworthy to be in the World not out of fear or infirmity or from mistake but out of envy and despight at it for it self On this account the Lord objecteth it to the Pharisees John 15. 24. But now they have both seen and hated me and my Father and Matth. 21. 5. It is universal against every thing of the Spirit and obstinately constant without any relenting grief or fear except onely left it attain not its end the fear of that tormenteth it but its malice and hatred groweth as it is marred or obstructed being deliberately begun and prosecuted 6. It has in it a special contempt of and disdain at those special means and works of the Spirit whereby a sinner is reclaimed as Convictions Repentance Renewing again to it c. Thus Hebr. 10. 10. It doth despight to the Spirit and to Jesus Christ as to any application it contemptuously rejecteth him and his satisfaction and any glance of the Spirit that beareth that in simple contempt through ignorance and infirmity is against the Son but this which is thus qualified is against the Spirit and is never to be pardoned the first is against the object Christ but the second is against him who is or him as born in on sinners by the Spirit and as contemned by them after their being under these convictions and acknowledging of them this irremissibleness is not simply that the sin shall not be pardoned for so many sins are to the Reprobates nor yet simply because it endeth in final impenitency though that be with it too since many sins are followed by that also but we conceive it to be in these 1. That seeing this sin which can be said of no other sin doth willfully and out of despight reject Christ there can be no other Sacrifice gotten to expiate it Hebr. 10. ●6 There remaineth no more ●●crifice for it and though the person after the first Commission of it may be keeped a while in the Land of the living yet the nature of that sin being to grow in malice and to reject that remedy there being no other and this being still willfully and maliciously rejected availeth them not so their sin is never pardoned 2. That the Person guilty of this sin cannot be renued by Repentance the heart of him suppressing that work maliciously this impossibility is not from the inefficacy of Grace but from the order which God hath laid down in the working of Repentance and in

what is forbidden in this Commandment and how we break it in our ordinary practise Then 3. Open the Reasons that are annexed Concerning Images two things are to be enquired 1 If no Image be lawful and if any be lawful what these be 2. If any use especially religious of Images be lawful and if adoration of any kind ●e to be given to them We say for Answer 1. That making of Pictures of Creatures which are visible or may be comprehended or historical phansies to speak so such as the senses and elements use to be holden forth by which are rather Hieroglyphicks then real Pictures these I say are not simply unlawful but are so when they are abused so Solomon made Images of Lions for his use and thus the gift of engraving and painting as well as others which God hath given to men may be made use of when as hath been said it is not abused As 1. When such Pictures are obscene and filthy and against Christian modesty to behold such break this Commandment but more especially the seventh because as filthy communication doth pollute the ears so do they the eyes 2. When men become prodigal in their bestowing either too much time or too much expence on them 3. When they dote too much on them by curiosity and many other wayes they may be abused but especially in the fourth place if they be abused to any religious use then they become unlawful as afterward shall be cleared 2. Though making of Images simply be not unlawful and discharged by this Commandment yet thereby every representation of God who is the Object to be worshipped and every Image religiously made use of in worship is condemned though civil and political Images and Statues which are used as ornaments or badges of honour or remembrance●s of some fact c. be not condemned 1. Because such Images cannot but beget carnal thoughts of God as Acts 6 29. contrary to this Commandment 2. Because God discovered himself Deut. 4 15 16 c. by no likeness but only by his Word that they might have no ground of likening him to any thing 3. Because it is impossible to get a bodily likeness to set him out by who is a Spirit and an infinite Spirit so then every such image must be derogatory to God as turning the Glory of the invisible God to the Shape of some visible and corruptible Creature which is condemned Rom. 1. 22 23. for every Image supposeth some likeness Now there can be no conceivable or imaginable likeness betwixt God and any thing that we can invent therefore it is said by the Lord Isai 40. 8. To whom will ye liken God or what likeness will ye compare unto him where it seemeth it was no Idol but God they aimed to represent by their Images which was the fault condemned vers 25. As also when we cannot conceive of God and of the Mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation as we ought what presumption must it be to paint them Therefore upon these Grounds 1. We simply condemn any delineating of God or the Godhead or Trinity such as some have upon their buildings or books like ● Sun shining with beams and the Lords Name Jehova in it or any other way this is most abominable to see and a hainous wronging of Gods Majesty 2. All representing of the Persons as distinct as to set out the Father personally considered by the Image of an old man as if he were a creature the Son under the Image of a Lamb or young man the Holy Ghost under the Image of a Dove all which wrongeth the God head exceedingly and although the Son was and is Man having taken on him that nature and united it to his God head yet he is not a meer m●n therefore that image which only holdeth forth one nature and looketh like any man in the World cannot be the representation of that Person which i● God and man And if it ●e said m●ns soul cannot be painted but his body may and yet that picture representeth a man I answer it doth so because he has but one Nature and what representeth that representeth the person but it is not so with Christ his Godhead is not a distinct part of the humane Nature as the soul of man is which 〈◊〉 necessarily supposed in every living man but a distinct nature only united with the manhood in that one person Christ who has no fellow therefore what representet● him must not represent a man only but must represent Christ Immanuel God man otherwise it is not his Image beside there is no warrant for representing him in hi● Manhood nor any colourable possibility of it but as men fancy and shall that be called Christs portraiture would that be called any other mans portraiture whic● were drawn at mens pleasure without regard to the pa●ern again there is no use o● it for either that Image behoved to have but common estimation with other Images and that would wrong Christ or a peculiar respect and reverence and so it sinneth against this Commandment that forbiddeth all religious reverence to Images but he being God and so the object of Worship we must either divide his Natures or say that Image or picture representeth not Christ Again as to what may be objected from the Lords appearing sometimes in the likeness of a man or the Spirits descending as a Dove or as cloven tongues of fire It i● answered 1. There is a great difference betwixt a sign of the Spirits presence and a representation of the Spirit 2. Betwixt what representeth the Spirit as he is one of the Persons of the blessed Trinity and what resembleth some gift of his The similitude o● a Dove descending upon Christ was to show his taking up his residence in him an● furnishing him with gifts and graces and particularly holy simplicity and meeknes● without measure and so his appearing in cloven tongues was to shew his communicating the gift of Tongues to the Apostles 3. Neither is there any warrant for drawing him in these shapes more then to look on every living Dove as representing him and the like may be said of Gods appearing sometimes in humane likeness it was but that men might have some visible help to discern something of Gods presence but not to give any representation of him and these bodies were but for a time assumed as a praeludie and fore-running evidence of the Sons being to become man From this ground also it would seem that painting of Angels might be condemned as a thing impossible they being Spirits which no corporal thing can represent besid● that the representing of them has some hazard with it and for those cherubims that were made by Gods direction under the Old Testament they were rather some Embleme of the nature and service of Angels as being full of zeal and alwayes as it were upon wing ready to obey Gods will then any likeness of themselves and it s hardly possible to fancy representations

his worship for we can swear by none whom we cannot invocate therefore Idols Creatures Graces c. a●e excluded here for none of these are God 3. It s rise must be Edification that is Gods glory our own vindication or 〈◊〉 Neighbours good or the call of a Magistrate putting us to it and it should be use● for deciding of Cont oversies when no other mean of clearing or deciding such a thing is remaining hence we say j●ratus fuit he was sworn passively and the Hebrews have no active wo d for expressing it to let us see men ought not to swear b● to be sworn or by necessity pr●ssed to it 4. As to the expressions in which it is conceived or the thing sworn its required not only that it be truth to and in the mans meaning that sweareth but that the expressions be plain and intell gible to his meaning and understanding to whom the Oath is given otherwise it dcludeth but doth not clear Hence these two rules are to be observed 1. That the meaning be so clear as may be and is most ordina ily and obviously gathered from such words and expressions as are used 2. That the expressions be according as they are supposed to be understood by others especially him that exacteth the Oath for if he mean one thing and we another Gods Name is prophaned and the end of an Oath frustrate much more equivocations in expressions and mental reservations are to be condemned here the first whereof taketh in Ambiguity in words the second a different sense in our thoughts from what seemeth to be meaned in our words 5. As to the right manner of Swearing these things ought to be noticed 1. That it be in judgment that we understand the thing we Swear and the nature of our Oath and him we swear by Jer. 4. 2. 2 Fear and Reverence in going about it as being in an especial way in God's own sight thus to fear an Oath is a good property and the heart would be filled with the apprehension of a present God 3. Singleness in the end that it be not to deceive any but to express the truth truly and faithfully called Righteousness Jer. 4. 2. And for the most part these properties or qualifications may agree to Oaths Asseverations and Imprecations For the further clearing of this matter we would speak to some questions And the 1. Question is How then differ Oaths from Asseverations Answ They should both be in Truth and Judgment with fear and when called unto but in this they differ that in Oaths we are only to make mention of the true God and swear by him but Asseverations may be thus expressed As thy Soul liv●th 2 King 2. v. 2. 4. 6. and yet we do not swear by the Soul of any A2d. Question is What may we Judge of such Oathes as are By Angels Saints Mary Paul and By other Creatures as Heaven Light the World by Soul Conscience c. Or by Graces as by Faith Answ We need not use much Curiosity in Distinctions For we conceive them all to be simply unlawful 1. Because none of these are God and swearing is a Peculiar piece of his Worship Deut. 6. 13. And swearing by any thing what ever it be which is not God is condemned Jer. 5 7. They have sworn by those who are not Gods 2. Because we cannot invocate any of these and therefore cannot swear by them seeing an Oath carryeth along with it an Invocation of him we swear by 3. Because they want these Properties due to such to whom this Worship belongeth As 1. Omniscience to try whether we mean as we have sworn or not 2. Omnipotency And 3. Justice to avenge if it be not so as we have sworn 4. Soveraignty to call the Swearers to a Reckoning 4. Because it would derogate from the Scope of this Command which giveth this to God alone as his due and implyeth that he alone hath all these Properties in him 5. Because such Oathes are expresly Prohibited by Christ Matth 3. 34. Swear not at all neither by Heaven nor Earth For they stand in an Inferiour Relation to God and are his Servants 6. Because as none of these things are God to take Order with us if we swear falsly so none of them are so ours as we can lay them in Pledge for the least Change to be made upon them in Case our Oath be not true none of them can be added unto or diminished from by us We cannot make one of our Haires Black or White and therefore ought not to swear by ●ur Head much less can we quiet our Conscience or increase our Faith that we should so freely swear by these That place Mat. 5. ●6 cleareth this For that of Mat. 23. 16 17. c. speaketh of the Obligation of an Oath sinfully made as to that manner of swearing which yet still bindeth but it warranteth not the making of such Oaths A 3d. Quest. is What is to be judged concerning Asseverations such as In Conscience good Faith as I shall answer c. as I am a Christian as I have a S●u● to be saved and such like Answer 1. We think there is no Question but if these were rightily and in the due manner made use of they might be lawfully used as Scripture cleareth 2. Yea we think If any Oaths be made use of these would first be used and a man may be called to use one of these when he is not directly to swear 3. Therefore we think they cannot be used but in necessity when less will not serve and should be used with Fear Reverence Understanding and the other Qualifications And that therefore they sin who in Common Discourse rashly and vainly use them which we conceive to be forbidden here and when they are not Conscientiously used they lead men to a greater Degree of the sin here discharged as we see some begin with Asseverations then idle Oaths and then Imprecations as Peter sinfully did Mat. 26. Reason 1. All these Asseverations are reductively Oaths and imply the contrary imprecations in them Thus Let me not be esteemed a Christian nor have a Soul to be saved which must relate to God for executing these therefore being indirect Oaths they ought to be used as Oaths and belong to this Command 2. Because the very end of any vehement Asseveration is to confirm what is said further then an ordinary Assertion can Now in so far it is an Oath it being proper to an Oath to confirm what is spoken and seeing it agreeth with an Oath in the Essentialls they must be materially one though Asseverations be pronounced in another Form 3. Vain Asseverations are against that Rule Mat. 5 37. Jam. 5. 12. Let your Communication be Yea Yea and Nay Nay and what-ever is more i● ordinary Communication is Evil And it cannot be denyed but this is more and therefore needless and sinful 4. We do not find Asseverations such as My Conscience beareth me witnesse to

and unbeseeming Christians these spoken of drinkings and tipplings are which are of that nature that we can neither in faith pray for nor promise our selves a blessing upon them from God they being neither in season nor for a right end And no doubt when the Lord cometh such as have been given to these sins will wish they had been other wayes exercised Thus much for this Seventh Command The Eighth Command Exodus 20. 15. Thou shalt not Steal VVE come now to consider this Eight Command Thou shalt not steal In the former the Lord restrained the lust of the flesh and mens abusing of their bodies In this he regulateth them in the use of their riches and estates and setteth bounds to the lust of the eye and the covetousness of the heart The scope of the Command in general is to regulate us in reference to the outward estate of our selves and others that we fail not either in wronging or in ordinate and excessive profiting them or our selves And miscarriages of this nature are comprehended under this of stealing to make them the more odious From the general scope of the Command we may see 1. That the Lord alloweth property amongest his people otherwayes there could be no stealing 2. That men have not liberty to manage these things of the world according to their meer pleasur and arbitrement but there are rules set to them by which they are to be governed in reference to them and there is religion in buying and selling and such like as well as there is in praying and hearing the word though the things be of a different nature For opening the Command Consider 1. the sin forbidden stealing with the positive duty comprehended under it 2. Consider its extent as to the kinds of theft Consider how theft may be said to be committed 4. You may consider more particularly some particular sins prohibited and duties commanded and Questions that may be moved concerning them as about Charity or giving Al●● Usuray making of bargains or contracts pursuing of iches c. The sume of this Command we may gather from Ephes 4. 28. Let him that stole steal no more but rather let him labour working with his bands the thing which is good that be may have to give to him that needeth 1 Thess 4. 6. That no man go beyond and defraud his brother in any matter because that the Lord is the avenger of all such as we also have forewarned you and testified Lev. 19 11. 13. 35. 36. Ye shall not steal neither deal falsly neither lie one to another Thou shalt not defraud thy neighbour neither rob him the wages of him that is hired shalt not abide with the● all night ●ntill the morning Ye shall do no unright●o●s●●s● in Judgment in 〈…〉 in weight or in measure just ballances just weights a just ep●a● and ● just ●ine shall ye have I am the Lord your God which brought you out of the land of Egypt Theft is most strictly defined to be the taking away of that which i● anothers ●e not knowing it and that to his ●urt but more generally we take it to be any inordinatnese in referance to riches either by wronging our neighbour or profiting our selves and that whether it be in the attaining retaining or using of them this thought in few words yet comprehendeth m●ch 1. Then we call that inordinateness when men mistaking the right end for which and the golden mediocrity according to which riches are to be employed they do fail either in the excess by transgressing the just bounds or in the defect or making use of wrong midesses for attaining the end Hence the love of mo●ey or of riches being the root of all evil becometh Idolatry when riches are made the ●ltimate end and pursued and made use of only to satisfie the lust of the eye or when this love of money is made subservient to some other lust as to the pride of life thus the love of money is inordinate as to its end when it is for an end without and beyond that which is convenient for us 2. We may be inordinate by our being too vehement in our desires after riches so that we will be rich as it is 1 Tim. 6. 9. we resolve it and must be so by any means as it were which is most dangerous and by being desirous of too much keeping no proportionable measure but being sometimes in the excess spending ou● time in seeking more then is convenient sometimes in the defect trifling away much time in the lazy careless and negligent pursuit of what is convenient 3. There may be inordinateness in the mide●●e● made use of for attaining or retaining riches either by an unlawful way of conquest simply or by that which is such in some respects as by unlawful callings and such like All which unlawful wayes may be reduced to these three ●apina furtu●● and turpe ●●cru● rapin● theft and fi●thy Iuer● of which more afterward Again this inordinateness we say is when either our Neighbours estate or our own is wronged his may be wronged when ours is not advantaged as by destro●ing firing and the like out of hatred and ma●i●● yea it may be wronged by our negligence when possibly he and our selves are both wronged yet this is condemned in Scripture and Exod. 22. 5. sequent the Lord provideth Laws annent it It may be also in reference to the profiting our selves or our neighbour or bettering of our own estate or his there is no doubt inordinateness in getting keeping and using that which belongs to us or to our neighbour as when we get it without right or its due price by anothers folly or negligence c. To proceed a little we shall consider the sin forbidden in this Command as drawn to these three forementioned heads r●pin● furturn turpe lu●ru● R●pine incl●deth violence of all sorts both by land and that either by more petty parties as robbers plunderers c. or such as are more strong and able to carry their point as Conquer●rs General● of Armi●s c. medling with that which is not theirs which is robbery in the Lords account Hab. 1. 6. And by Sea this is called paracy It was a true and sharp answer which a Pirate did give to Alexander as is recorded who being taken by him and asked How he could or durst live that way replyed He did only what he himself did save that Alexander ●ereft ●en of kingdoms ●e but of a little of their means be with more strength on the land followed his point be with les● upon the sea Of which Piracy whether caping or robbing poor innocent Sea faring mens goods as it is now used by many I wish all Capers and their Confederates in all Christian Kingdoms and Common-wealths would seriously consider and would to this purpose take notice of what the eminently learned Gro●ius saith in his Book de jure belli pacit lib. 3. cap. 18. s●ct 2. but more especially