Selected quad for the lemma: saint_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
saint_n according_a spirit_n will_n 1,637 5 6.6585 4 true
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A84130 Pneumatologia: or, A treatise of the Holy Ghost. In which, the God-head of the third person of the Trinitie is strongly asserted by Scripture-arguments. And defended against the sophisticall subtleties of John Bidle. / By Mr. Nicolas Estwick, B.D. somtime fellow of Christ-Colledg in Cambridg, and now pastor of Warkton in the countie of Northampton. Estwick, Nicolas.; Cranford, James, d. 1657. 1648 (1648) Wing E3361; Thomason E446_14; ESTC R201957 88,825 111

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

and this shape is moved from place to place which clearly overthroweth your Argument Advers Exod. 20. compared with Act. 7. 53. Galat. 3. 19. Hebr. 2. 2. an Angel spoke and yet God is said to speak Ergò the Angel spoke in the Person of God Answ First I answer by concession admit that your exposition touching the speaking of the Law by Angels bee sound by those texts in the New Testament yet there will bee enough remaining in the text to enervate your Argument for did not God com down then was there not a manifestation of Gods glorie and severitie Did not Moses speak with the Lord face to face insomuch that his face did glister and was glorious Did not God himself write the Law in the two Tables and give them to Moses Did not hee see the back parts of God a glimps of his glorie Sith these things cannot bee denied the Argument will remain strong against you albeit the holy Angels were Gods instruments of pronouncing the Law And why should it bee a thing incredible for any man to beleeve that God may visibly manifest his presence either in wrath or mercie for can an Angel appear in a visible form and frame a voice and shall this with any color of reason bee denied to God Almightie Nor is it clearly proved by those cited Scriptures that Angels spoke the words of the Law in the Person of God For first was it ever heard that any Embassador when hee hath audience of a forain Prince deliver's his embassage otherwise then in the third person hee saith not I say so but my Prince saith thus and thus And have not wee an evident testimonie hereof in the holy Prophets which deliver not their message to Gods people in their own names but thus saith the Lord. Yea and the holy Angels themselvs in their visions declare that they are sent Dan. 9. And they likewise by som circumstance or other make it appear that they speak in the Name of the Lord. And S. Paul saith to this purpose pertinently and expresly that when the Law was delivered it was the voice not of a creäted Angel but of Christ that did shake the earth and men on earth Hebr. 12. 26. Besides there is mention made of Angels in the promulgation of the Law the Word was spoken by Angels hee saith not by an Angel how this can bee verified in them sith there were not many speeches not many voices but one distinct audible voice is hard to bee conceived Particularly in the two first places it is not said that the Law was spoken by Angels but ordained by Angels and so it might bee because holy Angels were attendants on the great God and instruments to shake the earth to raise thunder and lightning c. because they were witnesses and approvers of the deliverie thereof in which sense it is said that the Saints shall judg the world not by pronouncing but by approving the sentence of Christ 1 Cor. 6. And for that place in the Hebrews might it not relate to the words of the Law uttered at some other time Or it may bee Gods voice in the deliverie of the Law was uttered and pronounced by the ministerie of Angels and they by an extraordinarie way thundred out the words which God spoke to them to speak to the people as a Scrivener may write and speak the words which are dictated to him by another in the person of that author the principal author as in marriage the persons to bee married speak the very words from the Ministers mouth but I had rather hear the judgment of another then peremptorily in this perplexed case set down mine own opinion ARGUMENT 9. 9 Argum. of M. Bidle Hee that prayeth unto Christ to com to judgment is not God The holy Spirit doth so Ergo. The Major is granted The Minor is evident from Rev. 22. 17. compared with ver 12. Neither let any man think to elude this proof by saying that the Spirit is here said to pray onely because hee maketh the Bride to pray For when the Scripture would signifie the assistance of the holy Spirit in causing men to speak it is wont to affirm either that the holy Spirit speaketh in them as Matth. 10. 20. or that they speak by the holy Spirit as Rom. 8. 15. Wee have received the Spirit of adoption by whom wee crie Abba Father But there it is expresly said that the Spirit and the Bride say Com not the Spirit in the Bride nor the Bride by the Spirit I add what is pertinent to this head out of his 12th Reason Rom. 8. 27. The Spirit maketh intercession for us with groans unutterable and hee make's intercession for the Saints according to the will of God which prove's the holy Ghost to bee inferior to God inasmuch as hee is said to make intercession unto God with groans which is not so to bee understood as if the holy Spirit was here said to help our infirmities onely by suggesting petitions and groans unto us and making us to pray as is commonly but falsly affirmed for the very words of the context sufficiently refute such a gloss since they say that the Spirit himself not wee by the Spirit as wee have it in ver 15. of the same Chapter maketh intercession for us but to help others infirmities by making intercession for them is not to instill petitions into them but to pour out petitions apart in their behalf as is apparent both from the thing it self since none can intercede for himself all intercession requiring the intervening of a third Person and by the collation of ver 34. of the same Chapter and by the 30. verse of the 15. Chapter and by 2 Corinth 1. 11. Hebr. 7. 25. 1 Tim. 2. 1. Col. 4. 12. Ephes 6. 18. Neither let any man think to baffle off this Argument which is written with a beam of the Sun by saying that this is improperly spoken of the holy Spirit for besides that hee hath no other ground to say so but his own pre-conceived opinion touching the Deitie of the holy Spirit hee ought to know that the Scripture though it speak many things after the manner of men yet doth it no where speak any thing that argueth his inferioritie to and dependance on another But this passage of the Apostle plainly intimateth the holy Spirit to bee inferior to God and dependent on him otherwise what need had hee to intercede with God and that with groans unutterable on the behalf of the Saints ANSWER Answ The Major Proposition is undeniably true for religious invocation is an humble obsequiousness and an enjoyned dutie to bee performed to the great God and doth necessarily suppose in him that praie's first inferioritie of the nature of the partie that praie's to the object of invocation Secondly indigencie or want of that good thing which is praied for either in whole or in degree a defectibilitie or possibilitie not to have the good thing praied for
the minde or will of the Spirit for hee maketh intercession for the Saints according to or conformably to the will of God Your other Argument annexed to this whereby you would prove the holy Ghost to bee inferior to God hath been examined in its due place Argum. 9. ANSWER Answ The Major Hee that hath a will distinct from that of God is not God I grant the Proposition to bee true if it bee taken in your sense for a distinct and separate will for two such wills do necessarily require two distinct substances to which they do relate I denie your Minor The holy Ghost hath not a will distinct from that of God First I say this text doth not clearly hold forth to us any thing touching the will of God's Spirit The originall is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in our new translation is turned not the will but the minde of the Spirit Som render it the intention of the Spirit and others the spiritual sense and you know very well that the primarie signification of the word is thus to bee translated God know's the intention of the Spirit or act of the minde Secondly let us grant what you cannot prove that it is to bee translated what is the will or what is the desire of the Spirit To this I answer that the Spirit willeth and desireth as hee praieth it is a Metonymie hee is said to will and desire because hee inableth us to will and desire according to the will of God God know's the intention of the Spirit even as the Mother knoweth the crying and sobbing of her Infant and so our secret sighs which are infused into us are known of God our sighs indeed cannot bee expressed by us but the Spirit which work 's them in us direct's them unto God Apparent it is you were hard put to it to make up a ful dozen of Arguments out of an ambiguous text to prove a distinct will of the Spirit from the will of God the Father by a place where there is no convincing proof that there is any mention of the will of the Spirit at all Grant further that this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bee the will or what the Spirit of God desire 's by those groans yet will it not follow that there bee two distinct wills of God the Father and the Spirit What I have written touching the understanding of God and of the Spirit is by paritie of reason to bee applied to this Argument there is as I asserted but one will of God the Father and God the holy Ghost but yet this one will is otherwise in the Father otherwise in the holy Ghost in the Father of and from himself but in the holy Ghost by eternal communication of the Deitie to him Fourthly whereas you talk of conformitie and agreeableness which is alwaies betwixt two at the least I have answered the substance of this in the former Argument This agreeableness is not properly betwixt the will of the holy Ghost and of God the Father but betwixt the will of man acted to pray by the Spirit of God and the will of God and these must needs bee two To draw to a conclusion I denie not but agreeableness and equalitie are asscribed to the Persons of the Trinitie for the Jews collected and that justly too because the Son of God called God his Father hee made himself equal to God John 5. Nor did the Son of God think hee robbed God of his honor when hee made himself equal to his Father Phil 2. And what is spoken of the Son is true likewise of the holy Ghost and it is the general resolution of the Church that the holy Ghost is consubstantial co-equal co-omnipotent and co-eternal with God the Father and God the Son Now because equalitie is properly understood of quantitie and agreeableness in qualitie it will not bee amiss to explicate briefly in what sense similitude and equàlitie are asscribed to the sacred Persons It is to bee observed that in regard of substance things are said to bee the same or divers If the substance bee one things are said to bee one in substance but if not the same substance they are said to bee divers in substance In regard of qualitie things are said to bee like which do agree in qualitie and unlike when they have not one qualitie In regard of quantitie they are said to bee equal or unequal Now because in God to speak properly there is neither qualitie nor quantitie for how should a finite qualitie or quantitie reside in an infinite substance or how is it possible that these should bee many infinites therefore it follow 's undeniably that these three viz. identitie similitude and quantitie are all one in God and one God because there is the same essence and substance of the three Persons and yet there is similitude and identitie betwixt the Persons founded not on the relation betwixt them but on the essence and therefore because there is no dissimilitude betwixt the essence there is no dissimilitude absolutely in the Persons yet it is so founded on the essence that it doth insinuate to us the pluralitie of the Persons The Persons are said to bee like as touching qualities because they do agree in the same perfection of qualities as in wisdom power goodness and such like these are really distinguished in the creatures but relating to God they neither amongst themselvs nor from the divine essence do differ really The Persons in Trinitie are said to bee equal because they do so agree in the same perfection that one Person doth not in the least degree exceed another for there are no degrees in that which is infinite that is said to bee better in quantitie that is better and hath a higher degree of excellencie then another as in Logick the degree of qualitie is quantitie so that greatness in God is nothing else but the excellencie of God in every perfection If the first Person was more potent and wiser then the holy Ghost there would bee likeness betwixt them but not equalitie there must of necessitie bee a distinction betwixt things like and equal for nothing is equal or like to it self The Father is not the holy Ghost and therefore when the Father Son and holy Ghost are said to bee one in essence goodness wisdom there is not in such an attribution a distinction of Persons but when wee say the Persons are like or equal as touching every imaginable perfection as in goodness wisdom power c. such an attribution necessarily require's a distinction of the Persons amongst themselvs I have now as I conceive fully answered your twelve Arguments I have set down all and concealed nothing which in your Arguments carrieth with it any shew of strength there remaineth yet one Argument in your Epistle by which you would countenance your Heresie in these words ARGUMENT 13. 13 Argum. of M. Bidle I beleeve say you the holy Ghost to bee the chief all ministring Spirits and I