Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	body_n	part_n	soul_n	20,019	5	5.7069	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A38614	Shibboleth, or, Observations of severall errors in the last translations of the English & French Bibles together with many other received opinions in the Protestant churches, which being weighed in the ballance are found too light / written by John Despagne ... ; and translated into English by Robert Codrington ...; Shibboleth. English	Espagne, Jean d', 1591-1659.; Codrington, Robert, 1601-1665.	1656 (1656)	Wing E3271; ESTC R20162	51,713	172

two Commandements of the Law or two Petitions of the Lords Prayer in one Section onely when every Commandement and every Petition do demand one entire action it mingles sometimes in one section divers Articles of Faith every one of which doth require a Section by its self There are also some transpositions and articles not so commodious as could be desired It would be convenient to change the form in divers respects for we ought not be so superstitious towards those who have drawn up this Ca●echism as to take it for a perfect Draught We may retain it still but in some places reform it I do rather wish that our Churches had an Historicall Ca●echism which by Questions and Answers might re-Present all the History of the Bible at least the generalities of it and the most illustrious particulars Some English men have travailed in it And if the work had been compleat it would produce a great benefit to the Common people But amongst so many Ca●echisms that are written it were to be desired that we had one where the Doctrine of the Sacraments were better grounded than it hath accustomed to have been For although a Ca●echism ought to be popular yet we should not omit that which gives intelligence of the true ground of the matter Of this I shall speak more largely in a particular treatise if GOD permit Of the Common opinion that in the death of a man the soul comes out of the mouth WHen a man dyeth It is said that he hath his soul already on the brink of his lips So speak the Divines and so Antiquity hath spoken This language proceeds from a popular opinion that when the soul dislodgeth from the body it goes out at the mouth I will not undertake to answer the curious Questions which may be moved touching the coming forth of the soul I onely affirm that this prejudging of the vulgar is not solid If the soul be universally dilated in every part of the body as many Philosophers do affirm wherefore is it locked up in a particular place at the departure If it lodgeth properly and particularly in the heart or in the Brain what need hath it to come out at an open passage seeing it is a Spirit which can pass away at the traverse of the Skull or any other Bone Now who hath told us that it comes forth rather at the mouth than at the ear or eyes which are as the windows of the soul If I were at leisure to affirm something in a point the decision whereof is neither certain nor necessary I should say that it is rather to be beleived that as the soul of the first man did enter into him by the Nostri●ls so it goes forth that way Gen. 2. 7. And certainly when the Scripture would express that man is alwaies neer unto Death it saith that the Spirit or the breath of him is in his nostrill as being ready there to come out Esay 2. 22. To this the words of Job have reference Job 27. 3. So long as the breath of the mighty God shall be in his nostrills which is to say when this soul it self which God hath breathed into me shall be upon the point of its departure having no more hold of it but in my nostrills onely Of the testimony which Josephus the Historian of the Jews did render of Jesus Christ THis testimony is found in the eighteenth Book of the Jewish antiquities This Author making mention there of Jesus doth doubt if it be lawfull to call him a man seeing the great miracles which he wrought He also saith that this Jesus is the Christ That at the third day after his death he shewed himself to be alive That such things and other miracles were forespoken of him by the Prophets It is a long time since the Christians employed this testimony of Josephus to convince the Jews But not to displease so many learned men antient and modern I cannot perswade my self that this Jew which gives not the least apparence to be inclined to Christianism hath written so much to the advantage of our Religion Would he so highly have published in his Book a belief of which he never made profession And he is so far from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ to whom the Prophets did attribute the Segniory of the whole world that on the contrary he gives it to Vespasian a Pagan Prince and applyes to him the Oracle which belongs onely to the Son of God This is far off from acknowledging Jesus to be the Christ It may be objected that if these words above mentioned were not the words of Josephus it would follow that this Author made no mention of Jesus Christ in any place of his History for he speaks not of him but in this place onely which is in question Now it is not believed that having undertaken to write of the memorable things of those times he should in silence pass by the miracles performed by Jesus Christ which were known to all the world But this is not the onely Omission that is to be noted in Josephus The Massacre of the Infants at Bethlehem of which Herod was the Author was so famous that the Heathens themselves did write of it and nevertheless Josephus who hath recorded many other cruelties of this Herod doth make no mention of it And he is no● the onely Historian who by contrivement or otherwise hath surpassed some part of that which was most memorable in his time And shall we wonder that a Jew who never adhered to Christianism should purposely omit the miracles of Jesus Christ Was not his Resurrection contradicted by the Priests although they were convinced of the truth thereof Nevertheless I do beleive that this passage was Josephus his own but withall that some have changed some words therein and this is not the onely writing to which by the irregular zeal of some such a thing hath happened But for this in this place Saint Jerom who translated this Author into Latine and who forgot not ●o value the testimonies which the Jews and the Pagans rendred to the Christian Religion doth make Josephus to speak otherwise For he ●akes him not to say that Jesus was the Christ but that it was beleived he was the Christ Josephus then onely reciteth that it was the belief of others to wit the Christians but not his own for he was not a Christian and being not one nor making profession of Christianity much less could he say that Jesus was the Christ Now if one word in this place be changed it is not incredible but the contexture also of other terms is altered in which this Author speaks of Jesus Christ Let us not think the Christian Religion to be less assured because a Jew doth not confess Jesus to be the Christ Truth needs not the suffrage of her adversaries Nevertheless this passage of Josephus is advantagious to us in one respect The Jews maintained that the Death of Christ was not under Pilate

that it doth inable him to say Thou art my Father But David did never directly call him so And those words which express this preheminence do properly concern Jesus Christ in the same manner as do those in the second Psalm Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee VVherefore then do we attribute to Elihu the language vvhich none ever spake but the Son of God onely or what need vve to seek a Parallel which is to be found in no other place of the Scripture It is not necessary here to make mention of the French rythm in the 27 Psalm which saith My GOD my Father teach me thy way c. For this word Father is not in the Originall Neither will I in this place examin that in the French Catechism Sect. 38. which saith that every believer can call GOD his Father in particular It is necessary as much as can be we should keep unto the stile of the Holy Ghost Otherwise the consequences are greater then they appear to be Of a superfluous word yea a dangerous one in many places of the English Bible expressing the form of the Oaths recited in the sacred History THe Hebrews did ordinarily swear in these terms The Eternall is living such a thing is c. The Examples thereof are frequent in the old Testament The sense is The Eternal who is living is witness of that which I speak And this Epithete which they gave to God was to distinguish him from false Gods whom the Scripture calleth dead Psal. 126. 28. Now in all those places which are many in number in which these words are contained The Eternall or the Lord is living The English Translation doth prevent this oath with a word in the beginning of it saying AS the Lord is living c. The Bible of Tremelius hath also the same addition to render the Hebrew Phrase more intelligible which otherwise seemeth not to be compleat But this addition is not necessary and if it were yet a better may be found The popular ignorance or liberty when it will affirm the truth of any thing will be so hardy as to say That it is as true as there is a God Or As true as God is living A word full of exccess For there is nothing that can be so true as that GOD is All other truths are but the shadow of it It will be replyed that the difference is great between these two expressions As true as GOD is living And As GOD is living For this last doth signify nothing but a resemblance and a conformity to the truth and not an equality But First This comparison is not in the Originall and it is not necessary to say that these words God is living do signify that any thing is as true as GOD is living The sense is more full That GOD who is living doth know that such a thing is true Secondly Although in the Original these words GOD is living are not joyned with any particle to the words following and therefore did render the sense more obscure yet I had rather in this manner to content my self with them then introduce into the text an addition vvhich is disputable And so the French Translation at least that vvhich is most exact in such places doth speak word for word according to the Hebrew The vulgar opinion touching the sin against the Holy Ghost The Contents of the twelfth Chapter of St. Mathew in the French Bible IT is a common saying that the sin against the Holy Ghost is unpardonable So speak the Divines in their Sermons and their Books But this assertion expressed in such words is either defective or erroneous Defective If we presuppose that there is but one kind of sin against the Holy Ghost Erroneus if we understand that all sorts of sins against the Holy Ghost are unpardonable Both are but one Now this doth proceed from a gross misadvertisement which doth yet continue For if precisely we regard the terms of the Gospel in which our Saviour speaketh of the sin which is unpardonable we shall never find that he pronounced this vvord That a sin against the Holy Ghost shall be never pardoned But he hath said that Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost shall be never pardoned Or that he vvho shall speak against the Holy Ghost shall have no remission The crime then which he hath declared shall never be forgiven is not universally every sin against the Holy Ghost but onely Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Certainly we sin divers vvays against the holy Ghost vvhether it be in resisting or whether it be in grieving the Spirit or by what kind of offence so ever it be Is there any one of us who can boast to have never committed any thing against the illumination which the Spirit of GOD hath infused into his conscience Have we never acted against the motions of the Spirit To lust against the Spirit is that also to sin unpardonably against the Spirit But where is that Christian in whom the flesh doth not lust against the Spirit Woe be unto us All if every sin committed against the Holy Ghost were excluded from pardon Is it not a sin against the Holy Spirit to make sad and to grieve the Holy Spirit Now the Israelites in the Desart did grieve him oftentimes Esay 63. 10. Shall we dare affirm that all those souls who sinned thus against the Holy Ghost are for ever shut out from obtaining mercy both in this world and the world to come To prove the contrary we shal find in the same place that the compassions of GOD were even then upon them seeing that his Spirit which they had so much provoked was still their Conductor There are then many kinds of sin against the Holy Ghost and amongst others one which shall not be pardoned that is Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost But it is either forgetfulness or too confused a speech to say without distinction or exception that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be forgiven The French Bible in the Argument on the twelfth of Saint Mathew saith that the Blasphemy of those who speak evill of the miracles of the Son of GOD is a sin against the Holy Ghost But these terms are ambiguous and do not express the sense of the text For Christ doth not say generally or indefinitly that the sin against the Holy Ghost shall never be remitted but it specifies and marks out that sort of sin which shall never be forgiven not any sin against the Holy Ghost but onely the sin of Blasphemy against the Holy Ghost Of the Name which many give to the mountain on which Jesus Christ was transfigured IT is said that this wonder vvas wrought on Mount Thabor And this saying is as antient as it is common The opinion indeed is not without great appearance of truth For the situation of the Mount Thabor the form the beauty and the height thereof do all seem to speak that it was the place where this

largely handled by divers learned and judicious Men I will speak but one word by the way The affairs of State and all other humane affairs publick or particular are considered First Or in themselves within their circuit every one according to the rules of its Art Or Secondly within that Dependence which subjects them to the Law of GOD which is the Rule of Conscience In the first the Divine meddles not at all He is a stranger in that Element In navigation the Pilot is more to be beleived then Saint Paul if this Apostle had not some extraordinary revelation But the irregularities which we may here meet with to the prejudice of GOD are under the cognizances of the Divine It belongeth to him to prevent them by his Counsels yea and to reprove them if they are broke forth into action Indeed It belongs not to him to handle the weights and the measures in a shop but if they are notoriously false ought he to hold his peace under the pretence that he ought not to meddle with another mans trade The Balance The Beams and the weights are of the Jurisdiction of GOD Proverbs 16. In this Island we complain of divers Divines of the Court who wink at certain innovations introduced under the pretence of the reason of State and authorized by the Soveraign power which then was But because these novelties passed for matter of State it would be a wrong to have blamed the silence of the Divines when they should be taxed for omitting that which they owe to GOD to their charges to the Church and to the Stat● i● self Of the Angell of Satan who buffeted Saint Paul 2 Cor. 12. 7. A now interpretation of that passage MAny as Beza doth think that Saint Paul in this place doth complain that Satan kindled in him some inordinate affections But this Exposition is contradicted by many forcible reasons which have been noted hereupon Others take these words at the foot of the Letter as if in effect some evill Spirit had given buffets to Saint Paul tormenting him in his Body as sometimes he had struck Job Lastly Some understand this of some wicked man who by the instigation of Satan persecuted Saint Paul And to speak the truth it is not necessary that this Name The Angel of Satan should alwaies signify a Spirit In the twelfth of the Revelation the Angels of the Dragon in the judgement of some knowing interpreters do signify those that serve the Dragon as his Ministers And so this Angell of Satan may be some man whom Satan imployed to torment the Apostle But this Exposition hath need of a prop to sustain it and this is it which hath obliged me to bring unto it this note that followeth The language of the new Testament is composed of an infiniteness of phrases which do reflect either on the matter of the old Testament or on divers other subjects Now the passages which contain such allusions ought to be interpreted by them otherwise we shall draw wide or if we ●it the mark it will be by accident I find then in the old Testament a History which is almost in all things the same with this which St. Paul speaks of himself in the 1. of Kings the 22. A Prophet saw GOD sitting in his Throne and all the Army of Heaven about him on the right hand and on the left He heard GOD proposing an affair And the Angels as in Councel diversly debating of it He heard a Commission which was given to Satan which he promised to put in execution by his Emissaries After so high a revelation and the hearing of words so sublime this Prophet is buffered by one of the Messengers of Satan by a false Prop●et who did strike him on the cheek That History doth so much resemble ●his which Saint Paul reciteth of himself that the allusion is most appa●ent Now if the Analogy be entire he who buffeted Saint Paul was some false Apostle who did persecute him And so this quality of Angell o● messenger of Satan doth not pertain to all sor●s of persecutors but to those onely 〈…〉 them who carryed unto others the Doctrine of Satan Of a great number of places in the new Testament which mention the curing of those who were possessed with Spirits In which our Translations change the word which is in the Original Text THe Names of Satan Divel Demon are the Epithets of evil Spirits nevertheless they are not Synonit●a● and the Scripture doth 〈◊〉 indifferently express them but dot● make use of one of them rather the another as they are more cond●●cing to the occurrences or matte● which are treated The Name 〈◊〉 Divel and that of Demon are 〈◊〉 in the old Testament but are very frequent in the new the language whereof is Greek nevertheless these two words do pass the one for the other When the Holy Spirit doth speak of these evill Spirits which the Son of GOD did cast out of the Bodies of Men or Women It doth not say that it cast forth Divels but that he cast forth Demons that he commanded Demons that he gave power to cast forth Demone c. From which word comes that also of Demoniack Now since in this thing the Holy Spirit doth express the word of Demon and never the word of Divill our Tranflations ought to answer the Originall in the place where we read that he cast forth Divels c. It is true that this change is more tolerable in those tongues to which the word Demon is unknown as in particular to the English Tongue but since the word is become French It would in those places do better in the translation then the Name of Divel I will make no stop at all to give satisfaction to the Question of the Ignorants who will demand If it be not all one to read Divels instead of reading Demons In one word I shall tell them that we ought to read it according to the Originall And without doubt there were reasons which obliged the Evangelists to make use of one of these words and to abstain from the other when they spoke of those Spirits which tormented humane Bodies Many as the Saduces did believe that these Spirits were not substances but onely motions or Impulsions which come by nature Now the word Divel which onely signifies a Slanderer and can be spoken of a man also doth not so well denote a spirituall substance and different from humane kind The word Demon is more significant in this regard for it is the Name which the Pagans gave unto their Gods who in effect were evill Spirits So the Apostle 1 Cor. 10. 20. 21. saith not according to our Translation that the Gentiles sacrificed to Devils but that they sacrificed to Demons I forbear many other observations which might be made on this subject Of Bulls crowned with Garlands which are read in the French Bible Acts 14. 13. THe Originall text saith that the Priest of Jupiter had brought with him Bulls and