Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	body_n	death_n	soul_n	7,226	5	5.8870	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67388	An explication and vindication of the Athanasian Creed in a third letter, pursuant of two former, concerning the Sacred Trinity : together with a postscript, in answer to another letter / by John Wallis ...	Wallis, John, 1616-1703.	1691 (1691)	Wing W581; ESTC R38415	30,910	70

doth thence repute it impossible for an Immaterial Being to move a Body But we who believe the Soul to be a a Spirit know it to be possible Much more is it possible for God though a Being infinitely Act. 17 25 27 28. more pure who giveth to all Life and Breath and All things and in whom we Live and Move and have our Being and who is not far from every one of us It would be hard for us to give an intelligible account either how God moves all things or how our Soul moves the Body yet we are sure it is so That a Body may move a Body seems not so strange to apprehend for we see one Engine move another But by what Mechanism shall a Spirit give Motion to a Body when at rest or Stop it when in Motion or Direct its Motions this way or that way It would be thought strange that a Thought of ours should Move a stone And it is as hard to conceive did we not see it daily How a Thought should put our Body in Motion and another Thought stop it again Yet this we see done every day though we know not How And it is almost the same thing in other Animals And more yet when an Angel assumes a Body There are none of these things we know How and yet we know they are done I shall press this a little farther Our Soul we all believe doth after Death continue to exist in a separate condition from the Body And I think we have reason to believe also that it will continue to Act as an Intellectual Agent not to remain in a stupid sensless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Else I see not why Paul should desire to depart or to be dissolved and to be with Christ which is far better rather than to abide in Flesh. For while he abides in the Flesh he hath some enjoyment of Christ as well as an opportunity of doing some Service which is more desirable if when he is departed he have none at all And how can he then say That to Dye is gain Whether the Soul thus separated shall be said to have a Subsistence as well as an Existence Or whether it may be properly said then to be an intire Person as the Soul and Body are before Death and after the Resurrection I will not Dispute because that were to contend about Words and such Words so signify as we please to define them and bear such a Sence as we please to put upon them But it is as the Angels are an Intellectual Spiritual Agent and we use to say Actiones sunt Suppositorum and Suppositum Rationale is either a Person or so near a Person that it would be so if men please to call it so And the Spiritual Being which doth now separately Exist shall at the Resurrection resume a Body into the same Personality with it self and shall with it become one Person as before Death it had been Now if a Spiritual Immaterial Intellectual Being separately existent by it self and separately acting as an Intellectual Agent may at the Resurrection assume or reassume a Material Corporeal Being Heterogeneous to it self into the same Personality with it self or so as to become one Person with it while yet it self remains Spiritual as before What should hinder for it is but one step further but that a Divine Person may assume Humanity into the same personality with it self without ceasing to be a Divine Person as before it was If it be said That Person and Personality in the Sacred Trinity are not just the same as what we so call in other cases It is granted and by these words which are but Metaphorical we mean no more but somewhat analogous thereunto and which because of such analogy we so call as knowing no better words to use instead thereof According as we use the words Father Son generate beget and the like in a metaphorical sence when applied to God For no words borrowed from Created Beings can signifie just the same when applied to God as when they were applied to Men but somewhat analogous thereunto And if the Soul though we know not How may and do at the Resurrection assume a Body so as to become the same Person with it self though neither the Body be thereby made a Soul nor the Soul a Body but remain as before that a Body and this a Soul though now united into one Person Why may not a Divine Person assume Humanity so to be what is analogous to what we call a Person the Humanity remaining Humanity and the Divinity remaining Divinity though both united in One Christ though we do not particularly know How We should be at a great loss if to answer an Atheist or one who doth not believe the Scriptures we were put to it to tell him How God made the World Of what Matter With what Tools or Engines or How a Pure Spirit could produce Matter where none was He would tell us perhaps Ex nihilo nihil in nihilum nil posse reverti Where nothing is nothing can be made and what once is though it may be changed can never become Nothing And will never believe the World was made but rather was from all Eternity except we can tell him How it was made Now if in this case we may satisfie our selves though perhaps it will not satisfie him by saying God made it but we know not How The same must satisfie us here That Christ was Incarnate God and Man we are certain for so the Scripture doth assure us as well as That God made the World But How God made the World or How the Son of God assumed Humanity we cannot tell Nor indeed is it fit for us to enquire farther than God is pleased to make known to us All further than this are but the subtile Cob-webs of our Brain Fine but not Strong Witty Conjectures How it may be rather than a clear Resolution How it is Another Objection I have met with to which the Objecters must be contented with the same Answer We know it Is but we know not How It would be endless for us and too great a Curiosity to think our selves able fully to explicate all the Hidden things of God The Objection is this Since the Three Persons cannot be Divided How is it possible that One of them can Assume Humanity and not the other And why the Second Person and not the First or Third As to the Question Why I say It is so because so it pleased God And he giveth not account of his Matters He is not accountable to us why he so willeth As to the Question How is it Possible I see no difficulty in that at all The Persons are Distinguished though not Divided As in the Divine Attributes God's Justice and Mercy are Distinguishable though in God they cannot be Divided And accordingly some things are said to be Effects of his Justice others of his Mercy So the Power and Will of God

and so they do in the Apostles Creed and are so also in the Articles of our Church Where it is only said because in the Creed it stands so That we are to believe That he descended into Hell without affixing any particular sence to it The words doubtless have respect to that of Acts 2. 27. where Thou wilt not leave my Soul in Hell or Hades nor suffer thine Holy One to see Corruption is applied to Christ cited out of Psal. 16. 10. where the same had before been spoken of David And his not being left in Hades seems to suppose his having been for some time in Hades whatever by Hades is there meant And Verse 31. his being not so left is expresly expounded of his Resurrection And so again in Acts 13. 35. Now as we have no reason to think that David's being in Hell or Sheol though not to be left there can signifie his being in Hell among the Devils and damned Spirits but rather in the Grave or the Condition of the Dead so neither that Christ's being in Hell or Hades which is the Greek word answering to the Hebrew Sheol should signifie any other than His being in the Grave or condition of the Dead from whence by his Resurrection he was delivered And to this purpose seems that whole Discourse of Peter Acts 2. 24 32. and of Paul Acts 13. 30 37. But without determining it to any particular sence the Creed leaves the word Hell indefinitely here to be understood in the same sence what ever it be in which it is to be understood Acts 2. 27 31. and Psal. 16. 10. And so far we are safe It follows H●●scended into Heaven He sitteth on the right hand of the Father God Almighty From whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead At whose coming all men shall rise again with their Bodies and shall give account for their own Works And they that have done Good shall go into Life everlasting and they that have done Evil into everlasting Fire Of all which there is no doubt but that it ought to be believed Ending with This is the Catholick Faith That is this is true and sound Doctrine and such as every true Christian ought to believe And as he had begun all with a general Preface so now he closeth all with a general Conclusion Which Catholick Faith except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved That is the Doctrine here delivered is true and so I think it is in all the parts of it and is part of the Catholick Faith The whole of which Faith is the whole Word of God That is part of that Faith which all true Christians do and ought to Believe Which Catholick Faith the whole of which is the whole Word of God except a man so qualified as I before expressed do believe faithfully that is except he truly believe it as to the Substantials of it though possibly he may be ignorant of many particulars therein he cannot without such Repentance as God shall accept of be saved Which so limitted as it ought to be I take to be sound Doctrine and agreeable to that of Iohn 3. 16. He that believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed on the Name of the only begotten Son of God And Ver. 36. He that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him That is according to the words of this Creed he that believeth not aright of God and Christ cannot be saved Which words of Christ we may safely interpret both with an aspect on the Doctrine of the Trinity because of those words the only Begotten Son of God and to that of the Incarnation of Christ and the Consequents thereof because of those words in the beginning of the Discourse Ver. 16 17 God so loved the World that he Gave his only Begotten Son c. and God sent his Son into the world that the world through him might be saved Which are the two main Points insisted on in the Athanasian Creed And he who doth not Believe on the Name of this only Begotton Son of God and thus sent into the world the Text tells us shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him Which fully agrees with what is here said Except a man believe the Catholick Faith of which the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Incarnation are there intimated and are here expressed to be considerable Branches he cannot be saved And what Limitations or Mitigations are to be understood in the one place are reasonably to be allowed as understood in the other And consequently those Damnatory Clauses as they are called in the Athanasian Creed rightly understood are not so formidable as some would pretend as if because of them the whole Creed ought to be laid aside For in brief it is but thus The Preface and the Epilogue tell us That whoso would be saved it is necessary or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he ought to hold the Catholick Faith Which Faith except he keep whole and undefiled or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 safe and inviolate he shall perish everlastingly or which except he believe faithfully he cannot be saved Which is no more severe than that of our Saviour Mark 16. 16. He that believeth not shall be damned He then inserts a large Declaration of the Catholick Faith especially as to two main Points of it that of the Trinity and that of the Incarnation And if all he there declares be true as I think it is we have then no reason to quarrel with it upon that account But he doth not say That a man cannot be saved who doth not Know or Understand every particular thereof Of the First he says but this He that would be saved ought thus to think or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let him thus think of the Trinity namely That the Unity in Trinity and Trinity in Unity ought to be Worshipped Of the Second what he says is this Furthermore it is necessary to Eternal Salvation That he believe aright the Incarnation of our Lord Iesus Christ Which is no more severe than that of our Saviour He that believeth not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him because he hath not believed on the Name of the only begotten Son of God whom God hath sent into the world that the world through him might be saved John 3. 17 18 36. Beside these there are no Damnatory Clauses in the whole All the rest are but Declaratory And if what he declares be true we have no reason to find fault with such Declaration Now as to those two Points that of the Trinity and that of the Incarnation which are the only Points in question there is a double Inquiry as I have elsewhere shewed Whether the things be Possible and whether they be True The Possibility may be argued from Principles of Reason The Truth of them from Revelation only And it is not