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	union_n	3,927	5	9.3251	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A43720	Speculem Sherlockianum, or, A looking-glass in which the admirers of Mr. Sherlock may behold the man, as to his accuracy, judgement, orthodoxy by an obedient son of the Church of England.	Hickman, Henry, d. 1692.	1674 (1674)	Wing H1916; ESTC R10759	37,301	72

it verily Col. 2.3 Our English Translation runs thus In whom or wherein are hid all the treasures of Wisdome and Knowledge He saith this is contrary to the sence of the place for it should be In whom are all hidden treasures of Wisdome and Knowledge Many had before him suggested that the words are rather to be rendred this way but he is I hope the first Beneficed English Protestant that said our English Translation is contrary to the sence of the place It is one thing not to hit the sence of a place another thing to give a translation contrary to the sence of a place I would faign know what contrariety here is in our Translation to the sence of the place for I doubt Mr. Sh. doth not well understrnd what contrariety is His Proposition and the Proposition of our Translators may be both true so cannot two contrary Propositions Besides if a man should be so rigid as to demand of him an argument why our Translation is not to be followed I doubt he would be at a loss Sure I am the English Translation is not singular But here I must acquaint Mr. Sherlock's hearers with a mysterie He will read Col. 2. as he is appointed by the Kalendar and will at the 3 v. read in whom are hid all the Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge but they must remember that he readeth quite contrary to the sense of the place And they may do well to get from him a Catalogue of all other places of Scripture that must be understood in a sence contrary to what the words he reads imports Else he and they must necessarily be of contrary minds And perhaps if they would not differ from him they must get them not only a new Translation but a new Bible But I am gone too far and must come back to pag. 166. where he shews himself a Latitudinarian for these are his words When nothing is made the condition of our communion which is expressely forbid by the Laws of our Supreme Lord we acknowledge his Authority in our subjection to our spiritual Guides and we disown his Authority in disowning and affronting theirs This should have been proved and not dictated for I am apt to think that if any thing be made an Article of Communion which is forbidden by a clear and immediate consequence I am under no obligation to maintain any communion So am I also if the omission of any duty which Christ hath enjoyned be made an Article of my communion I will never have Communion with that Church which will allow me no communion with her unless I promise not to baptize my Son till he come to years of discretion yet I do not believe that Christ hath any where expressely enjoyned Infant Baptism Mr. Sh. it seems hath more liberty I envy it not unto him but rather wonder how he came by it Pag. 201. He blames some men for having found out a person for Christ distinct from his God-head and Manhood But I should think they had rather been to blame if they had found out a person not distinct from the God-head and Manhood Godhead and Manhood betoken the two Natures of Christ and if the Natures and Person be not distinct we must amend our Creeds and expunge divers persons out of the black Role of Hereticks Let Mr. Sh. try whether he can find out a person for Christ not distinct from his Godhead and Manhood I might now fall upon that noble and much agitated controversie concerning the Imputation of Christ's Righteousness of which Mr. Sh. saith a great deal but he manageth it only against one Dr. whose words and meaning he also seems to me horribly to pervert and wrest and that person is about as I hear to vindicate himself so that I cannot count my self at all concerned to meddle in that affair as to the merits of the cause But there is one thing that this Author suggests about the controversie which I cannot but take notice of pag. 239 c. he saith It is very observable that our Saviour in none of his Sermons Parables as they are recorded makes any mention of the imputation of his Righteousness but exacts from men a Righteousness of their own never warns them to beware of trusting to their own Righteousness or of expecting Salvation from their own works but instead of this severely enjoyns them the practice of an universal Righteousness as the only thing that pleaseth God I easily grant and hope none will deny that our blessed Lord doth enjoyn the practice of an universal Righteousness And an universal Righteousness I do not say a perfect Righteousness is necessary to our first Justification That Adult person who hath not an heart purposed and resolved to give to God and Men as far as he is able their due is for that present unjustifiable unpardonable the continuance of an upright heart and the expressing of it as opportunity serves is necessary to the not losing of Justification and to eternal life But if Mr. Sh. can shew me any one place in which our Saviour instead of warning his hearers to beware of trusting to their own Righteousnesses or of expecting Salvation by their own works severely enjoyns them the practice of an Vniversal Righteousness as the only thing that pleases God I will not only burn all my Systems but also confess that I have read the four Gospels very negligently and carelessely Doth this Gentleman in good earnest think that nothing pleaseth God but our own universal Righteousness yea doth he not think and believe that our own personal Righteousness all our life long is so sinfully imperfect that God would not be so far well pleased with it as to reward it with eternal life were there not something else in the which he is well pleased Ob. Doth Christ any where in all his Sermons make mention of the Imputation of his Righteousness An. In so many terms he doth not but when he blesseth those who hunger and thirst after righteousness Dr. Hamond thinks that hungring may refer to inherent righteousness signifie an eager desire of Grace of Sanctity of Soul that thirsting is apportioned to imputed righteousness which he described to be Christ's righteousness accepted as ours or in plainer terms the pardon of our sins and acceptation of our persons in Christ It may be the learned Dr. is a little too Critical in this descant on our Saviours Metaphors but he took it for granted that our Saviour taught his Disciples of a twofold righteousness else he had extreamly forgot himself in making such a Paraphrase Imputation of Christ's righteousness in the sence in which some of our Bishops and Episcopal Divines pleaded for it is not founded either on the Gospels or Epistles but take it in the sence in which those old Non-conformists Mr. Anthony Wotton and Mr. W. Bradshaw explained it and I will undertake against Mr. Sh. and all others to prove it out of the Sermons and Parables of our

is the head The whole Church is in Christ and shall we say that the Church being in Christ is the Churches being in it self A particular Church may be said to be in God the Father as well as in God the Son so is the Church of the Thessalonians said to be 1 Thess 1.1 Would it be handsome thus to Paraphrase the Apostles words unto the Church of the Thessalonians which is in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ that is which is in the Church It may be this Gentleman means that for a particular believer to be in Christ is no more than to be in the Church and that in order of Nature a man is first united to the Church then to Christ and if this be his meaning then he must hold that the first believer whoever he was was not in Christ until he had a certain number of fellow-believers enough to make a Church and then all together were united unto Christ and had his first fellow-believers fallen off from Christ then had he again been not united unto Christ and must have waited till there had been other members making a Church and by joyning himself unto them then and not till then had he been again united to Christ If this be that which he aims at he will not sure expect we should forthwith receive his Doctrine and he shall do well not to make the receiving of this an Article of Church-Communion lest he should find it unpossible upon these terms ever to gather a Church doubtless every one that is sanctified doth first submit himself to Christ and by submitting unto Christ he is in Christ and Christ in him but such is his submission unto Christ that it inclines him to submit himself to the Ministers of Christ and to walk in all ordinances with those that have submitted to the Laws and Government of Christ as well as himself Indeed the Church of Christ can receive no Member till there be presumption that Christ hath first received that Member and that Member received Christ And a man's union to Christ doth in order of Nature precede his union to the Church and would continue though a man should suppose which perhaps is impossible that there should be no Church for him to be united to And if this Gentleman thinks it unintelligible How a Believer should be in Christ and Christ in a Believer he may be pleased to know that it is unintelligible to none but himself Pag. 22. He hath told us there in the Gospel whatever he intends to do for us and hath charged us to expect no more from him If the meaning be that Christ hath in his Gospel told us on what terms we must expect Justification Adoption Glorification and charged us not to expect these on lower or easier terms than are expressed in the Gospel I must needs say your Author is not mistaken but if that be his only meaning he is not the happiest man in the world in expressing himself for his words sound as if he were of the mind of the wildest Fanaticks who are of Opinion That Christ in his Gospel hath told us all the remarkable particularities of his Providence towards the Church even till time shall be no more Christ hath told us in the Gospel whatever he intends to do for us What can this import less than that Christ hath told us in the Gospel that at such a time Kingly and Episcopal Government should be restored here in England Pag. 26. He raised up some great examples and Preachers of Righteousness such as Enoch and Noah and Abraham and gave such plain and undenyable proofs of his acceptance of these men as might reasonably encourage others to imitate their examples He translated Enoch immediately to Heaven and preserved Noah and his Family in the Ark when he destroyed the rest of the World by a deluge of Waters he sent Lot out of the ruines of Sodom and made Abraham the Father of a great Nation which was a convincing Argument how dear these good men were to God and what others might expect from him who would worship and fear him as they did Something in these words is questionable something false 1. It is questionable whether God immediately translated Enoch to Heaven and therefore it would have become this young Divine not barely to affirm but strongly to prove Enoch's Translation to Heaven and when he hath proved that it will be another work to prove that he was immediately translated to Heaven 2. It is false that the Favours of God to Enoch Noah Lot Abraham are convincing Arguments what others may expect from him who will worship and fear him as they did Hundreds and thousands have worshipped and feared God as they did who never expected from him such extraordinary Favours and Rarities of Grace as those Elders had vouchsafed to them nor indeed had they any ground to build such an Expection on Pag. 27. When God chose the Posterity of Abraham to be his peculiar People he did not design to exclude the rest of the World from his Care and Providence and all possible Means of Salvation as the Apostle argues in Rom. 3.29 Is be the God of the Jews onely is he not also of the Gentiles yes of the Gentiles also which Argument if it have any force in it must prove Gods respect to the Gentiles before the Preaching of the Gospel as well as since because it is founded on that natural Relation God owns to all Mankind as their merciful Creator and Governour which gives the Gentiles as well as the Jewes an interest in his Care and Providence True it is that Gods choosing the seed of Abraham did not exclude all the rest of the World from his Care and Providence nor make salvation impossible to the rest of Mankind But when God chose Israel he did for many years reject the rest of the World from his special care and Providence and from all ordinary wayes and means of Salvation If God saved any but the Jews it was by bringing them among the Jews or the Jews among them or by acquainting them in some extraordinary way with the substance of that Doctrine concerning the promised seed that was ordinarily preached among the Jews Pag. 29 He God committed his Laws and Oracles to them the People of Israel from whence the rest of the world when they pleased might fetch the best Rules of Life and the most certain notices of the Divine Will This is very strange and next to impossible the rest of the world could not fetch the Laws from the People of Israel unless they knew that there were such a People as the people of Israel and that they had the Oracles of God among them and which was the way to travel to this people And did the one half of the world know this But let us suppose that all the world knew of the Israelites and of their Laws and how they might come to the Israelites suppose we also