Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	scripture_n	spirit_n	word_n	6,083	5	4.6960	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76702	Twelve arguments drawn out of the Scripture, wherein the commonly received opinion touching the deity of the Holy Spirit, is clearly and fully refuted. To which is prefixed a letter tending to the same purpose, written to a Member of the Honourable House of Commons. And to which is subjoyned an exposition of five principall passages of the Scripture, alleadged by the adversaries to prove the deity of the Holy Spirit; together with an answer to their grand objection touching the supposed omnipresence of the Holy Spirit. / By Iohn Bidle, Master of Arts.	Biddle, John, 1615-1662.; I. H.	1647 (1647)	Wing B2879; Thomason E406_1; ESTC R201902	17,962	25

emplyeth a contradiction that the same understanding should at the same time be both knowing and unknowing of the same thing Besides that the Holy Spirit hath an understanding distinct from that of God is easily deducible from the words of the Apostle 1 Cor. 2.10 where he affirmeth that the Spirit searcheth the depths of God as Rom. 8.27 he intimateth that God searcheth the heart of the Spirit but to search the depths of any one necessarily supposeth one understanding in him that searcheth and another understanding in him whose depths are searched as is evident not only by collation of other places of the Scripture as 1 Pet. 1.11 Rev. 2.13 but even by common sense dictating to every man so much that none can without absurdity be said to search the depths of his own understanding Whence the Apostle going about to illustrate what he had spoken of the Spirit of God by a similitude drawn from the spirit of a man doth not say that the spirit of a man doth search but know the things of a man though his former words did seem to lead him thereunto ARG. 12. He that hath a will distinct in number from that of God is not God The Holy Spirit hath a will distinct in number from that of God Ergo. The major is irrefragable The minor is asserted thus He that willeth conformably to the will of God hath a will distinct in number from that of God The Holy Spirit so w●lleth Ergo The major is plaine for conformity must be between two at least else it will not be conformity but identity The minor is confirmed by Rom. 8.26.27 Likewise the Spirit also helpeth our infirmities for we know not what to pray for as we ought but the Spirit himselfe maketh intercession for us with groanes unutterable But he that searcheth the heart knoweth what is the minde or will of the Spirit for he maketh intercession for the Saints according to or conformably to the will of God Which words of the Apostle afford us another impregnable Argument of the Holy Spirit 's being inferiour to God inasmuch as he is said to make intercession unto God as wee before urged his praying to Christ Arg. 9. and that with groanes unutterable which is not so to be understood as if the Holy Spirit were here said to help our infirmities only by suggesting petitions and groans unto us and making us to pray as is commonly but falsely affirmed for the very words of the context sufficiently refute such a glosse since they say that the Spirit himself not we by the Spirit as we have it in verse 15. of the same chap. 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 apparant both from the thing it selfe since none can intercede for himselfe all intercession requiring the enterm se of a third person and by the collation of verse 34. of the same chapter and by the 30. ver of the 15. chap. and by 2 Cor. 1.11 Heb. 7.25 1 Tim. 2.1 Col. 4.12 Eph. 6.18 Neither let any man think to bafflle off this Argument which is written with a beame of the Sun by saying that this is improperly spoken of the Hol● Spirit for besides that he hath no other ground to say so but his own preconceived opinion touching the Diety of the of Holy Spirit he ought to know that the Scripture though it speaketh many things after the manner of men yet doth it no where speak any thing that argueth his inferiority to and dependence on another But this passage of the Apostle plainly intimateth the Holy Spirit to be inferiour to God and dependent on him otherwise what need had he to intercede with God and that with groanes unutterable on the behalfe of the Saints An Exposition of Matth. 28.19 Goe ye therefore and make Disciples so it is in the Originall of all Nations baptising them into the name so is it also in the Originall of the Father and of the Sonne and of the Holy Spirit In the name of the Holy Spirit that is into the Holy Spirit by a circumlocution usuall in the Scripture vid. Acts 19.5 compared with Rom. 6.3 And into the Holy Spirit that is into the guidance of the Holy Spirit Thus the Iewes are said to have been all baptized into Moses 1 Cor. 10.2 So that our Saviour's words amount to thus much initiating them into the confession and obedience of God the Father and of the Lord Iesu Christ the Son of the Father and of the Holy Spirit the Advocate and guide of all truth Now the Holy Spirit is mentioned together with God and Christ because he is the chiefe Instrument whereby they guide govern sanctifie and endow the Church and to intimate that whereas men before they gave their names to Christ lived according to the Prince of this world the uncleane Spirit that worketh in the children of disobedience they ought henceforth being sequestred from the world and admitted into the Church to resign up themselves to the guidance of the Holy Spirit whom God and Christ have appointed to order and direct the Church For that the Holy Spirit is not ranked with the Father and the Son as being equall to them is evident by other punctuall places of the Scripture as 1 Cor. 12.3 4 5 6. Ephes 4.4 5 6. where when the mention of him is joyned with that of the Father and the Son he is expresly and emphatically excluded from being either God or Lord by being contra-distinguished from both But if he be neither God nor Lord as the Apostle not only in these places but elsewhere clearly testifies vid. 1 Cor. 8.5.6 he cannot be equall to the Father and the Son but is only the chiefe Minister of Both peculiarly sent our to Minister on their behalfe that shall inherit salvation An Exposition of 1 Iohn 5.7 For there are three that beare record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Spirit and these three are one It would have been hard if not impossible had not men bin precorrupted that it should ever come into any ones head to imagine that this phrase are one did signifie have one Essence since such an Exposition is not only contrary to common sence but also to other places of the Scripture wherein this kind of speaking prepetually signifyeth an union in consent and agreement or the like but never an union in Essence To omit other Sacred Writers this very Apostle in his Gospel chap. 17. ver 11.21 22 23. useth the same expression six times intimating no other but an union of agreement yea in vers 8. of this very chapter in his Epistle he useth it in the same sence For though the expression varieth somewhat in the ordinary Greek Testaments in that the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is prefixed although the Complutensian Bible readeth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in both verses yet

Philosophers doe suppositum intelligens that is an intellectual substance compleat and not a moode or subsistence which are fantasticall and senselesse terms brought in to couzen the simple Person and signifieth him that ruleth over others and when it is put for the most high God it denoteth him who with soveraign and absolute authority ruleth over all but none but a person can rule over others all actions being proper to persons wherefore to take God otherwise then personally is to take him otherwise then he is and indeed to mistake him ARGVMENT 2. If he that gave the Holy Spirit to the Israelites to instruct them be Iehovah alone then the Holy Spirit is not Iehovah or God But he that gave the Holy Spirit to the Israelites to instruct them is Iehovah alone Ergo. The sequele of the major is plaine for if he that gave the Holy Spirit be Iehovah alone and yet the Holy Spirit that was given be Iehovah too the same will be Iehovah alone and not Jehovah alone which implyeth a contradiction The minor is evidenced by Neh. 9.6.20 ARGVMENT 3. He that speaketh not of himselfe is not God The Holy Spirit speaketh not of himselfe Ergo. The minor is cleare from Ioh 16.13 The major is proved thus God speaketh of himselfe therefore if there be any one that speaketh not of himselfe he is not God The antecedent is of it selfe apparant for God is the primary authour of whatsoever he doth but should hee not speake of himselfe he must speake from another and so not be the primary but secundary authour of his speech which is absurd if at least that may be called absurd which is impossible The consequence is undeniable For further confirmation of this Argument it is to be observed that to speake or do any thing not of himselfe according to the ordinary phrase of Scripture is to speake or do by the shewing teaching commanding authorising or enabling of another and consequently incompatible with the supreame and selfe-sufficient Majesty of God Vid. Iohn 5.19.20.30 7.15.16.17.18.28 8.28.42 11.50 51. 12.49.50 14.10.24 15.4 18.34 Luke 12.56.57 21.30 2 Cor. 3.5 ARGVMENT 4. He that heareth from another what he shall speake is not God The Holy spirit doth so Ergo. The Minor is plain from the for●●ited place Iohn 16.13 The major is proved thus he that is taught is not God he that heareth from another what he shall speake is taught Ergo. The major is clear by Esay 40.13.14 compared with Rom. 11.34 1. Cor. 2.16 The Minor is evidenced by Iohn 8. where our Saviour having said in the 26. verse whatsoever I have heard from him the Father these things I speake in the 28. verse he expresseth the same sence thus According as the Father hath taught me these things I speake Neither let any man goe about to elude so pregnant an Argument by saying that this is spoken of the Holy Spirit improperly For let him turne himselfe every way and scrue the words as he please yet shall he never be able to make it out to a wise and considering man how it can possibly be said that any one heareth from another what he will speake who is the prime Author of his speech and into whom it is not at a certaine time insinuated by another For this expression plainly intimateth that whatsoever the Holy Spirit speaketh to the Disciples is first discovered and committed to him by Christ whose Embassadour he is it being proper to an Embassadour to be the Interpreter not of his own but of anothers will But it is contradictions to imagine that the most high God can have any thing discovered and committed to him by another ARGVMENT 5. He that receiveth of another is not God The Holy Spirit doth so Ergo. The Minor is witnessed by the aforesaid place Iohn 16.14 The Major is proved thus God is he that giveth all things to all wherefore if there be any one that receiveth of anothers he cannot be God The antecedent is plaine by Acts 17.25 Rom. 11.35.36 The consequence is undeniable for if God should give all things to all and yet receive of anothers he would both give all things and not give all things which implyeth a contradiction The Major of the Prosyllogisme is otherwise urged thus He that is dependent is not God he that receiveih of anothers is dependent Ergo. The Major is unquestionable for to say that one is dependent and yet God is in effect to say he is God and not God which implyeth a contradiction The Minor also is evident for to receive of anothers is the very notion of dependency ARGVMENT 6. He that is sent by another is not God the Holy Spirit is sent by another Ergo. The Minor is plaine from the forequoted place Iohn 16.7 The Major is evinced thus he that ministreth is not God he that is sent ministreth Ergo. The Major is undubitable it being dissonant to the supreame Majesty of God to minister and serve another for that were to be God and not God to exercise soveraign dominion over all and not to exercise it The Minor is confirmed by Heb. 1. ult where the divine Author sheweth that the Angels are all Ministring Spirits in that they are sent forth as he before intimated Christ to be Lord because he sitteth at the right hand of God Thus David Psal 2. declareth the Soveraignty of God in saying that he sitteth in Heaven The Minor is further proved thus He that receiveth a command for the performance of something doth Minister He that is sent forth receiveth a command for the performance of something Ergo. The Major is evident to common sence since it suiteth with none but ministers and inferiours to receive commands The Minor is manifest by Iohn 12.49 The Father that hath sent me he gave me a Command what I shall speake Neither let any man here reply that this very thing is spoken also of Christ unlesse having first proved that Christ is supreame God he will grant that whatsoever is spoken of him is spoken of him as God or can make good that to be sent at least may agree to him as God The contrary whereof I suppose I have clearely proved in this Argument shewing that it is unsutable to the divine Majesty ARGVMENT 7. He that is the gist of God is not God The Holy Spirit is the gift of God Ergo. The minor is plain by Acts 11.17 For as much then as God gave them the like gift meaning the Spirit as he did unto us who have believed on the Lord Iesus Christ was I one that could withstand God The Major though of it selfe sufficiently cleare is yet further evidenced thus he that is not the giver of all things is not God he that is the gift of God is not the giver of all things Ergo. the major is apparent from Acts 17.25 God giveth to all life breath and all things The Minor is proved thus he that is himselfe given is not the giver of all things

here that the Apostle being about to set down who is the only God and only Lord of Christians maketh no mention of the Holy Spirit which could not have been done by so faithfull an Apostle had the Holy Spirit bin either God or Lord. Of these places thus recited no man though never so subtile and though he turn and winde his wit every way shall ever be able to make sence unlesse he take the Holy Spirit to be what I say Behold now the cause for which I have lyen under persecution raised against me by my adversaries who being unable to justifie by Argument their practice of giving glory to the Holy Spirit as God in the end of their prayers since there is neither precept nor example for it in all the Scripture and being taxed by me for giving the glory of God to another and worshipping what he hath not commanded nor ever came into his heart have in a cruell and unchristian manner resorted to the arme of flesh and instigated the Magistrate against me hoping by his sword not that of the Spirit to uphold their Will-worship but in vaine since every Plant that the Heavenly Father hath not set shall be rooted up and that this practice of Worshipping the Holy Spirit as God is such a Plant as God never set in his word would soone appeare to the Honourable House could they be but so farr prevailed with as laying aside all prejudice seriously to weigh the many and solid proofes that I produce for my opinion out of the Scripture together with the sleight or rather no proofes of the adverse party for their opinion which they themselves know not what to make of but that they endeavour to delude both themselves and others with Personalities Moods Subsistences and such like brainsick Notions that have neither sap nor sence in them and were first hatched by the subtilty of Satan in the heads of Platonists to pervert the Worship of the true God Neither could this controversy be set on foot in a fitter juncture of time then this wherein the Parliament and Kingdome have solemnly engaged themselves to resorme Religion both in Discipline and Doctrine For amongst all the corruptions in Doctrine which certainly are many there is none that more deserveth to be amended then this that so palpably thwarteth the whole tenour of the Scripture and trencheth to the very object of our worship and therefore ought not to be lightly passed over by any man that professeth himselfe a Christian much more a Reformer God is jealous of his honour and will not give it to another we therefore as beloved children should imitate our heavenly Father herein and not upon any pretence whatsoever depart from his expresse command and give the worship of the supreame Lord of Heaven and Earth to him whom the Scripture no where affirmeth to be God For my own particular after a long and impartiall enquiry of the truth in this controversy and after much and earnest calling upon God to give unto me the spirit of wisedom and revelation in the knowledg of him I findemy selfe obliged both by the principles of Scripture and of Reason to embrace the opinion I now hold forth and as much as in me lyeth to endeavour that the honour of Almighty God be not transferred to another not only to the offence of God himselfe but also of his Holy Spirit who cannot but be grieved to have that ignorantly ascribed to himselfe which is proper to God that sends him and which he no where challengeth to himselfe in the Scripture what shall befall me in pursuance of this worke I referre to the disposall of the all-wise God whose glory is dearer to me not only then my liberty but then my life It will be your part Honoured Sir into whose hands God hath put such an opportunity to examine the businesse impartially and to be an helper to the truth considering that this controversy is of the greatest importance in the world and that the divine truth suffers not her selfe to be despised scot-free Neither let the meanesse of my outward presence deterr you from stirring since it is the part of a wise man as in all things so especially in matters of Religion not to regard so much who it is that speaketh as what it is that is spoken remembring how our Saviour in the Gospell saith that God is wont to hide his secrets from the wise and prudent and to reveale them unto children In which number I willingly reckon my selfe being couscious of mine own personall weaknesse but well assured of the strength and evidence of the Scripture to beare me out in this cause and remain Aprill 1. 1647. Yours in the Lord I. Bidle Twelve Arguments drawn out of the Scripture wherein the commonly received Opinion touching the Deity of the Holy Spirit is clearly and fully refuted ARGVMENT 1. HE that is distinguished from God is not God the holy Spirit is distinguished from God Ergo. The major is evident for if he should both b● God be distinguished from God he would be distinguished from himselfe which implyeth a contradiction The minor is confirmed by the whole currant of the Scripture which calleth him the Spirit of God and saith that he is sent by God and searcheth the depths of God c. Neither let any man see think to fly to that ignorant refuge of making a distinction betweene the Essence and Person of God saying that the Holy Spirit is distinguished from God taken personally not Essentially For this wretched distinction to omit the mention of the Primitive Fathers is not only unheard of in the Scripture and so to be rejected it being presumption to affirme any thing of the unsearchable nature of God which he hath not first affirmed of himselfe in the Scripture but is also disclaimed by Reason For first it is impossible for any man if he would but endeavour to conceive the thing and not delude both himselfe and others with empty termes and words without understanding to distinguish the person from the Essence of God and not to frame two beings or things in his minde and consequently two Gods Secondly If the person be distinct from the Essence of God then it is either something or nothing if nothing how can it be distinguished since nothing hath no accidents If something then either some finite or infinite thing if finite then there will be something finite in God and consequently since by the confession of the adversaryes themselves every thing in God is God himselfe God will be finite which the adversaryes themselves will likewise confesse to be absurd If infinite then there will be two infinites in God to wit the Person and Essence of God and consequently two Gods which is more absurd then the former Thirdly to talk of God taken only Essentially is ridiculous not only because there is no example thereof in Scripture but because God is the name of a * By person I understand as