Selected quad for the lemma: sense_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
sense_n	work_n	world_n	worship_v	39	3	8.3969	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A93868	Vindiciæ fundamenti: or A threefold defence of the doctrine of original sin: together with some other fundamentals of salvation the first against the exceptions of Mr. Robert Everard in his book entituled, The creation and the fall of man. The second against the examiners of the late assemblies confession of faith. The third against the allegations of Dr. Jeremy Taylor, in his Unum necessarium, and two letter treatises of his. By Nathaniel Stephens minister of Fenny-Drayton in Leicestershire.	Stephens, Nathaniel, 1606?-1678.	1658 (1658)	Wing S5452; Thomason E940_1; ESTC R207546	207,183	256

a sense as he understands it the old Pelagians may make good that position of theirs that original sinne is by imitation they that come after do onely imitate the ensample of him that went before Of the entrance of death by sin he speaketh as followeth Death by sinne that is death which at the first was the condition of nature became a punishment upon that account just as it was with the Scrpent to creep upon his belly and the woman to be subject to her husband Answ In these words of his he doth distinguish between death as a meere condition of nature and death as a punishment The former he will have to be in the state of innocency latter only to be introduced by the fall But against this I have many things to alledge First if Adam should have dyed in innocency and that meerely by the condition of his nature what can we possibly make of the sense of that commination in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt dye the death what propable interpretation can we give of those Scriptures by one man sinne entred into the world and death by sinne The wages of sinne is death Rom. 6. Vlt Surely all this plainly sheweth that death came into the world meerely by the sinne of man and if he had not sinned he had not dyed Further the Apostle said the last enemy that shall be destroyed is death 1 Cor. 15.16 The question is when did death begin to be an enemy and from what time are we to fetch the date thereof If Adam should have dyed in innocency than the enmity of death must begin in Paradise we must fetch the date of it from the creation and not from the fall And so consequently death will be rather the work of God than the fruit of sinne But let it be supposed in this low and dimunitive sense that death came into the world as a punishment and began to be penal at the fall onely If we take the matter in this sense it will not serve his turn neither nor will other passages of his doctrine abide the rigour of this interpretation For how often doth he plead after this manner In other cases saith he Lawes be not given to Ideots infants and persons uncapable why should they be given here In all cases of the world it is unjust to lay the sinne of the father upon the children and is it otherwise in this case onely And if the answer may be admitted any man may suffer for the sinne of any father because it may be said here as well as there that although the innocent must not perish for anothers fault yet the son is not innocent as being in the fathers loynes when the fault was committed and the Law calls him and makes him guilty Many such Aphorismes he hath where he sheweth or at least endeavours to shew how contrary it is to the justice and mercy of God any way to burthen the posterity of Adam with the guilt of his sinne And yet here he confesses plainly and openly that death quatenus a punishment in the penalty of it came into the world by the disobedience of the first man How he can make one part of his doctrine to agree with the other it passeth all understanding of mine to discerne In his answer to the Bishops letter he seemeth to me to let fall a strange contradiction I have saith he the plain words of Saint Paul death passed upon all men forasmuch as all have sinned all men that is the generality of mankind all that lived till they could sinne Others that dyed before dyed in their nature not in their sinne neither Adams nor their own save onely that Adam brought it upon them or rather left it to them himself being disrob'd of all that could hinder it Answ let page 49. Here in the former part of his words he saith that infants dye in their nature not in their sinne neither Adams nor their own and yet he tells us again that Adam brought in death upon them and through his disobedience they were disrobed of all that could hinder it If he did bring in death upon them then they did not dye purely in their own nature they must some way die in or by his sinne Again if they dyed purely in their own nature and not at all in his sin how can he be said to bring in death Can he bring in death and can he not bring in death and all this upon one sort of people at one and the same time Neither can I see how he will acquit himself if it should be put upon him to shew the true reason why infants are lyable to burning feavours convulsion fitts and passe through the pangs of death at last Are these the infelicities of nature Then God hath made them in this state and their misery will be purely the work of his own hands Are these the punishment of Adams sinne then the innocent child will bear the burden of his fathers iniquity in such a case where it is not possible for the son to follow the fathers ensample which is plainly to give up the cause Now let us consider what he saith of the quality of the persons upon whom there hath been such a passage of death Death saith he passed upon all men that is upon all the old world who were drowned in the flood of divine vengeance and who did sinne after the similitude of Adam and therefore the Apostle St. Paul addes that for a reason inasmuch as all men have sinned Ans Though the word all in it self hath an ambiguity in it yet the scope of the text the condition of the subject doth plainly demonstrate that the passage of death from Adam as a common root must be absolutely upon all men as men so farre forth as they are his sonnes and not upon all to the flood only But concerning this matter we have his meaning more fully in the next passage If all men saith he have sinned upon their own account as it is certaine they have then these words can very well mean that Adam first sinned and all his sonnes and daughters sinned after him and so dyed in their own sinne by a death which at the first and in the whole constitution of affaires is natural and a death which their own sinne deserved but yet was hastned and ascertained upon them for the sin of their Progenitor Answ In these words of his as plausibly as he seems to speak of the cause of death he puts that for the cause which is not the cause and where he speaks of the true cause it doth not answer the sense of the text First he puts that for the cause that is not the cause For from what Scripture or from what consequence of Scripture doth he prove it that Adam and his sonnes in the whole constitution of affiaires should have dyed a death that is natural The Scripture doth every where make death to be the fruit of sinne

Writings considering the greatnesse of his learning the Elegancy of his stile and the favour he beares to the Episcopal cause are like to passe with those that are Friends of that way They whatsoever their interests their Principles do not go in that streame He in many cases is too much for that which is old and they contrarily are too much for that which is new What reasons did first move him to enterprise the businesse he himselfe doth relate in his owne words These things saith he have I chose to say and publish because I finde that the usual Doctrines about original sinne are not onely false and presumed without any competent proofe but because as they are commonly believed they are no friends to Piety but Patrons to idlenesse and dishonourable to the reputation of Gods goodnesse and justice and more to that purpose he hath further explicated page 502. Here I do willingly agree with him that great circumspection ought to be used in the right handling of these things But then on the otherside he hath special cause to beware that he do not turn to the more dangerous extreame Original sinne in that sense as we define it cannot be denyed but upon the denyal many desperate absurdities will ensue We had a conference with the Brethren of the separation at a Neighbour-Towne Anno 1654. February the 22. Because they occasioned the dispute by disturbing the Minister of the place and were so tenacious of the point We did put it upon them to answer the question as followeth If all infants be born free from original sinne when do they beginne to be sinners that we may call them so They told us when they did act sinne We replyed then in all that space of time from the conception in the wombe to their acting of sinne they are all free They answered they are all free we demanded why is it then the peculiar prerogative of Christ if infants in all the forementioned space do partake of the same priviledge To this they said that infants are as free from all sinne as Christ himselfe We told them that we did much admire at the boldnesse of such an assertion They answered set his Godhead aside they are as pure as Christ himselfe was pure We rejoynd why was the Lord Christ conceived of the Holy Ghost and borne of the Virgin Mary To this they made no great Answer And the standers by did seeme to looke upon such a position with a kinde of horrour But as strange as the Tenet is I finde that Doctor Jeremy Taylor the Authour above named doth not shun to say the same thing in effect at least he seemes to go very neare to that coast For in his answer to the Bishops letter he bringeth the Bishop speaking after this manner If there be no such thing as original sinne transmitted from Adam to his posterity then all that sixth Chapter is a strise about a shadow a Non ens Answ It is true my Lord saith he The question as it is usually handled is so For when the Franciscan and the Dominican do eternally dispute about the conception of the Blessed Virgin whether it was with or without original sinne meaning by way of grace and special exemption this de non ente for there was no need of any such exemption And they supposing that commonly it was otherwise troubled themselves about the exception of a rule which in that sense which they supposed was not true at all she was borne as innocent from any impurity and formal guilt as Adam was created and so was her Mother and so was all her family In which words of his if he had said that his owne answer to the Bishops letter was a meere non ens he had spoken more truly for where there is no such thing as the Bishop of Rochester at all what answer can be given to his letter But whereas he stands upon it that the impurity of the natural birth from Adam the root of corruption is a meere non ens what will you make of regeneration and of Baptisme the washing of regeneration Where there is no sinfulnesse in the natural generation what need of Baptisme or regeneration at all Besides the Scriptures do speak abundantly of the putting off of the Old man and of the mortification of the sinne of the nature if there be no such sinne of the nature from Adam the root of corruption this whole work will be de non ente for that which is not true in any sense cannot be mortified at all And whither will this conceipt go at last Further the Saints have been deeply humbled for their birth sinne I was borne in iniquity and in sinne did my Mother conceive me What is man that he should be cleane and he that is borne of a woman that he should be righteons c If there be no such sinne at all these confessions and humiliations will be de non ente The Saints shall be humbled for a sinne and yet no such sinne is to be found In former times there were Thanksgivings for victories over enemies which indeed and in truth were de non ente But here we have Confessions and Humiliations of the same kinde innumerable other absurdities will ensue upon the denyall of such a truth which as I may so say is one of the first magnitude among the principles of the Faith It were good that this learned man and others that are concerned in the point would timely think upon it and be better advised before they go to farie Againe on the otherside I do not deny that the points of original sinne and free-will have been so handled in some systems of Divinity Commentaries and Polemical Discourses that maintaines there hath been a want of consideration sometimes a want of truth What they bring out of the Scriptures truly understood to prove the substance of the Doctrine is sound and good but what is alledged out of the Schoole-men to confirme the same is not alwayes authenick Pauls words do binde the conscience alwayes and at all times but not alwayes as they are delivered in the notions in the tearms and in the method of Aquinus Suppose that Saint Paul was now alive upon the earth and it were laid as a task upon him to reade the whole body of the controversie as it now lyeth between the Dominicans and the Jesuits the Jansenists and the Molinists such a case being imagined we may easily conceive what his judgement would be As he would condemne one part for their dangerous setting up of free-will in derogation to the grace of God so he would not altogether approve the other part for the mingling of spiritual truthes with strange speculations of Philosophy and with Metaphysical quiddities notions and conceptions of their own commenting Doubtlesse he would finde many things in them that would not hold weight with the shekel of the Sanctuary Among our selves also there are some passages that might have been uttered with

natural say you were to have acted such actions as might have testified to the world that they had been lovers of God because those actions were wanting they are said to be unnatural So it may appear that nature was not improved to those ends to which God assigned it page 146. It is true that in these Scriptures the word nature is taken in the better sense yet not in such a sense as will furnish your intention First I do acknowledge that God hath left reliques or remainders of his Law in the hearts of the Gentiles This is commonly called the Law of nature and by this men know that God ought to be worshipped that parents ought to be honoured and that every man is to have his own c. Secondly I yield also that they who go against this Law may rightly be called unnatural because they go against the dictates or principles of of nature Thirdly they who do thus deviate from natural principles do not improve nature to those ends which God hath made it All these things I do allow so far I wil go along with you But how do you prove from hence the purity of nature and that a meer natural man as such is able to understand the things of the Spirit of God You do in the next page distinguish natural men into two kinds these are your words Who requireth no other way to be glorified but by those principles that he had furnished them withal And because they opposed their own nature resusing the counsel of God they are called unnatural because they imployed their nature wholly to satisfie their lusts Such natural men percieve not the things of God The same matter in substance is spoken by the Examiners in the Chapter of free will for the Synod having rightly determined according to the Scriptures that a natural man being altogether averse from that good and dead in sinne he is not able by his own strength to convert himself or prepare himself thereunto Against this passage the men take great offence and as their manner is accuse the Synod for their defects and falshoods For their defects they blame them because they do not distinguish the several kinds of natural men and for their falshoods they accuse them for saying that the fallen man hath lost all ability to spiritual good They distinguish also several kinds of will and tell us in the third place as the will of our first parents so of all men else doth stand in a kind of aequilibrium pag. 128.129 130. Now to take off these several Objections I would entreat both you and them to consider these two points First if you look to the better sort of natural men to those who are no Backbiters no Covenant-breakers c. Whether may not many of these in the most essential vital and spiritual parts of the Law be great enemies against God and be lovers of themselves more than lovers of God If the most refined natural men may be secret enemies why do you and they speak of pure nature and of the improvement of natural abilities when it is certain that men can do no good without the help of the Spirit Natural men may be distinguished into a thousand kinds according to the different circumstances of time and place yet all of them do agree in this that they are natural and without the help of the Spirit they are not able to judge of the things of God Secondly when the Apostle speaketh of the Gentiles who having no Law do by nature the things contained in the Law their thoughts in the mean while accusing or else excusing one another Romans 2.14 When the Gentiles do make use of the Law written in their heart as they do at certain seasons to judge themselves doth not this proceed from the general convictions and workings of the Spirit If the act of self-judging be from the conviction of the Spirit this is no praise to natural abilities but the glory belongs to the grace of God And the words of the Confession are very sound that a natural man cannot convert himself or prepare himself thereunto In which words they do distinguish between conversion it self and the antecedaneous works before conversion In neither of these they say that a natural man is able to do any thing of himself but all his ability is from the help of the Spirit I wonder then what reason the Examiners had given them to cavil at such an innocent expression But if you shall stand upon the letter of the text that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the Law Here you may observe that the Apostle doth onely oppose the natural Law to the Law written in tables of stone and communicated to the Church by revelation He never meant that any of the Gentiles meerly by their own strength were able to keep that Law which was made known to them Only at seasons the Spirit did excite and stirre up strong convictions in their consciences to apply those principles and dictates which they had by the light of nature The most common and universal maxime of all men in the world is this that there is a God Why then doth the consideration of the Godhead so forcibly and powerfully awake at some intervals of time more than at others We can give no other reason but this that the truth in the hearts of the Gentiles is like a cinder in the Smiths forge which by the operations and stirrings of the Spirit is enlivened and being once enlivened men have more power to judge themselves and to look after God in those seasons than at others And from hence also we might take occasion to answer that great difficulty in the Epistle to the Romans The Apostle in the first Chapter speaking of the knowledge of the Gentiles and how naturally they hold the truth in unrighteousnesse and that for this cause the Lord doth give them up to a reprobate sense yet in the next Chapter he doth shew that the Gentiles do by nature the things contained in the Law and do shew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the work of the Law written in their hearts when their thoughts do at sundry times accuse or excuse one another To the resolution of the difficulty we say that the Gentiles so farre forth as they are principled by the corruption of nature are prone to no other but to imprison the light but as they are under and do submit unto the convictions of the Spirit they are helped sometimes to go so farre as to judge themselves and to cry out in their misery O being of beings have mercy upon us The main drift of the Apostle is to shew that Jewes and Gentiles are both under sinne and how by the sight of the misery of nature such of them as are saved come to be saved onely by looking after the grace and the free-mercy of God If this be the meaning of the Spirit what shall we think of pure nature or