Selected quad for the lemma: sin_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A28139
|
XII 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 Parliament ... / by John Biddle.
|
Biddle, John, 1615-1662.
|
1647
(1647)
|
Wing B2880; ESTC R208727
|
25,901
|
51
|
the Father maketh no discovery of himself to the world immediately and Christ to prove his Authority and Mission from God appealeth to the works which he did by the finger of God the Holy Spirit see Luke 11. 20. compared with Mat. 12. 28. Wherefore I report this Argument against the Adversaries as quite subverting their opinion touching the Godhead of the Holy Spirit For if the Holy Spirit were God you would commit no sin but what would be against the holy Spirit in that all sins are committed against God as being the transgressions of his Law Again when we sinned against the Father we must of necessity also sin against the holy Spirit if he be the same God with the Father For as the Adversaries hold that the works of the Trinity ad extra that is to without are common to all three so must they by the same reason confess that whatsoever is done to any one of them ab extra that is from without is also common to all three An exposition of Isai. 6. 9 10. And he said Go and tel this people Hear ye indeed but understand not and see ye indeed but perceive not Make the heart of this people fat and make their ears heavy and shut their eyes lest they see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and convert and be healed compared with Acts 28. 25 26 27. Well spake the holy Spirit by Isaias the Prophet unto our Fathers saying Go unto this people and say Hearing ye shall hear and shall not understand c. Because that which in Isaiah is attributed to the Lord is in the Acts ascribed to the holy Spirit the Adversaries hence conclude that the holy Spirit is the Lord Which kinde of arguing though it be very frequent with them is yet very frivolous for at this rate I may also conclude that because what is attributed to the Lord Exod. 32. 11. Lord why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt is in the seventh verse of the same chapter ascribed to Moses And the Lord said unto Moses Go get thee down for thy people which thow broughtest out of the land of Egypt c. therefore Moses is the Lord And because what is attributed to the Lord Isa. 65. 1. I am sought of them that asked not for me I am found of them that sought me not I said Behold me behold me unto a nation that was not called by my name is in the 10 of the Romanes vers. 20. ascribed to Isaiah But Isaias is very bold and saith I was found of them that sought me not I was made manifest unto them that asked not after me therefore Isaiah is the Lord And because what is attributed to God 2 Tim. 1. 8 9. According to the power of God who hath saved us and called us c. is by Paul attributed to himself 1 Cor. 9. 22. I am made all things to all men that I might by all means save some and to Timothy 1 Tim. 4. 16. In doing this thou shalt both save thy self and them that hear thee therefore Paul yen Timothy is God If the Adversaries say that these things are otherwise ascribed to the Lord then to the men aforesaid I answer This is more then is held forth in the texts themselves which neither express nor intimate any such thing If they further contend that though such a thing be neither expressed nor intimated in the said texts yet other texts and the nature of the thing it self doth sufficiently teach it I reply that I can make the same answer touching the Lord and the holy Spirit But it is well that there is such an intimation in the texts themselves for in the one the Lord speaketh those things to Isaiah in a vision in the other it is said that the holy Spirit spake them by Isaiah to the Fathers Which twain every one may easily perceive to be different since Isaiah onely heard those words in the vision for had the Fathers the people of Israel been also there why should God bid Isaiah go and tell them to the people wherefore Paul ascribeth these words to the Holy Spirit onely to intimate that whatsoever is spoken in the Scripture was recorded by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and so spoken by him An Exposition of 2 Cor. 3. 17. Now the Lord is that Spirit By that Spirit is not here meant the third Person of the HOLY TRINITY otherwise the Lord that is Christ for the Apostle Paul by {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} the Lord doth always unless he cite some place out of the Old Covenant understand Christ will be the Holy Spirit which is repugnant to the Scripture wherein there is a plain distinction everywhere made between Christ and the holy Spirit Understand therefore what the expression it self implyeth the same Spirit that was before in the sixth verse opposed to the Letter and consequently the mystery or hidden sence of the Law denoted by the Letter for thus the word Spirit is also taken Rom. 2. 29. Circumcision is that of the heart in the Spirit and not in the Letter And Rom. 7. 6. But now we are delivered from the Law that being dead wherein we are held so that we serve in the newness of the Spirit and not in the oldness of the Letter And Rev. 11. 8. Their dead bodies shall lye in the streets of the great City which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt where also our Lord was crucified Jerusalem is here spiritually that is mystically called Sodom and Egypt because of the abominable filthiness thereof and cruelty towards the people of God Wherefore the sence of the words of Paul is this namely that the Lord Christ is the Mystery Life Scope and Kernel of the Law as being both foretold therein and prefigured by the Ceremonies thereof An Answer to the grand Objection of the Adversaries touching the supposed Omnipresence of the HOLY SPIRIT AFter I had thorowly sifted this Controversie I found that the Adversaries who so much cry down Reason saying that we must renounce it when we speak of Divine Mysteries and simply rest in the words of the Scripture do notwithstanding in the upshot wave the Scripture as giving a very uncertain testimony to their doctrine in this point and ground themselves on the meer conjectures of their own Reason For thus they argue The holy Spirit if he were not omnipresent and consequently God could not inspire and dwell in so many men at one time For answer hereunto I will onely ask them one Question which if they resolve I will then tell them how the holy Spirit though he be not omnipresent may inspire all the faithful in the world at one time Our Saviour in the fourth of Mark explaining the Parable of the sower saith in vers. 15. And these are they by the way side where the word is sown but when they have
is not yet would it not presently follow because Ananias by lying to men endued with the Holy Spirit for even Piscator in the words acknowledgeth and the words themselves according to this Interpretation imply a Metonymie of the adjunct the Holy Spirit being put for men endued with the Holy Spirit lyed not to men but to God that there fore the Holy Spirit is God because in lying to them that are endued with the Spirit of God one may lye to God and yet neither they nor the Spirit in them be God but onely the messengers of God for what is done to the messengers redoundeth to him that sends them see 1 Thes. 4. 8. John 13. 20. Luke 10. 16. But if any man look more narrowly into the words he shall finde that the verb {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} is construed in a different manner namely with an accusative verse 3â— and with a dative verse 4. with an accusative it signifieth in Greek Authors to bely pretend or counterfeit thus Lucian in his Pseudomantis {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} nomen quoddam mentitus counterfeiting a certain name This being so the words are to be rendred thus Why hath Satan filled thy heart to bely the Holy Spirit and keep back part of the price that is Why hast thou skffered the unclean Spirit so to prevail with thee as that thou shouldest sell thy Farm and lay down this money at his suggestion as appeareth in that thou hast purloined part of the price and not laid down all and yet to bear us in hand that thou didst it at the motion of the Holy Spirit thou hast not lyed to men but to God that is assure thy self that this dissimulation of thine is not so much to us as to God himself whose Servants we are This Exposition is not onely agreeable to the Greek context and scope of the place but is also seconded by Erasmus Calvin and Aretius But if any man will contend that though {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} be not here rendred to lye unto as I have not yet met with an instance where it is so rendred when an Accusative is put after it yet the other signification set in the Margin of our English Bible is altogether to be admitted and I confess I have in good Greek Authors found the word so used and the place to be rendred Why hath Satan filled thy heart to deceive the Holy Spirit This will overthrow the opinion touching the Godhead of the Holy Spirit For if the Holy Spirit be God then will it be all one as if it had been said Why hath Satan filled thy heart to deceive God Which seemeth to be blasphemy for it importeth either that God may be deceived or else that Satan or at least Ananias thought so otherwise he would not have purposed in his heart to do it But what force or use if this Interpretation of {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} {non-Roman} be admitted will those words have And to keep back part of the price and also those While it remained remained it not to thee and being sold was it not in thy power For these expressions argue that Ananias pretended to have received a command from the Holy Spirit to sell his Farm and lay downe the price thereof at the Apostles feet and so did not deceive or lye to but bely the Holy Spirit and consequently was guilty not onely of coverousness in keeping some of the money back but also of Blasphemy against the Holy Spirit in fathering upon the Holy Spirit that which was injected into his heart by the unclean Spirit For he alike Blasphemeth the Holy Spirit who doth with Ananias wilfully father the works of the Devil upon the Holy Spirit as he who with the Pharisees Mat. 12. 24. wilfully ascribeth the works of the Holy Spirit to the Devil An Exposition of 1 Cor. 6. 19 20. What know ye not that your body is the Temple of the holy Spirit that is or dwelleth in you whom ye have from God and ye are not your own for ye have been bought with a price Wherefore glorifie God both with your body and your spirit which are God's Whereas it is objected by some out of this place that the holy Spirit is God in that our body is said to be his Temple I answer that it would follow could it be proved that our body is so the temple of the holy Spirit as to be his by the highest interest and primarily dedicated to his honour for every one will confess our body to be God's in such a manner But these things are so far from being intimated in this passage yea that our body is at all his by interest or dedicated to his honour both which are here affirmed of God contradistinctly from the Spirit as that the contrary may from thence not obscurely be evinced For after the Apostle had hinted in what respect our body is the Temple of the holy Spirit to wit by inhabitation for so much is implied by those words that is or dwelleth in you since descriptions in sacred Writers are not idle and impertinent he addeth that we have the Spirit from God thereby implying that he is disposed of and given by God to us and consequently he is ours by interest not we his and accordingly concludeth from thence that we ought with our body to glorifie not the Spirit but God who is openly distinguished from the Spirit and declared to be the Proprietor of our body An Exposition of Matth. 12. 31. All sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto men but the blasphemy against the holy Spirit shall not be forgiven For the Objection drawn from hence that the sin against the holy Spirit is unpardonable I answer that the sin against the holy Spirit is not therefore unpardonable because he is God for this the Scripture nowhere acknowledgeth and besides by the same reason every sin against God would be unpardonable but because he that sinneth against the holy Spirit doth in the same act sin against God for every sin against whomsoever committed is terminated in God with an high hand to wit either by slandering and opposing such works whereof a man is convinced in conscience that God hath wrought them by the holy Spirit as the Pharisees did or by renouncing and opposing such Truths whereof a man is convinced in conscience that God hath revealed them by his holy Spirit as the Renegadoes did who are mentioned by the Author to the Hebrews Chap. 10. 25 26 c. which things are the greatest affronts that can be offered to God who useth the ministery of the Spirit in none but things of the highest importance and maketh the clearest discovery of himself as to his Power and Majestie by him Hence it cometh to pass that a sin against the Father or the Son may be forgiven but not a sin against the holy Spirit inasmuch as it is also against the greatest light For God