Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	father_n	good_a	holy_a	7,427	5	4.6212	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A92408	A remedy for uncleanness. Or, Certain queries propounded to his Highness the Lord Protector. By a person of quality.	Person of quality.	1658 (1658)	Wing R957; Thomason E948_3; ESTC R207562	5,788	12

husband of one wife doth not strongly imply that other men that are at liberty from Ministeriall ingagements may have more if they themselves see cause Whether Paul's judgment in the case be binding to all ages and sorts of men in that principal place Let every man have his 1 Cor. 7.2 own wife being onely spoken by permission and not by commandment at his own acknowledgment Whether Paul's advice in the fore-mentioned place did not solely relate to the present state of Christs Church the exigency of things obliging them to think of marriage as little as may be The blessed Apostle knowing that in their present posture and future likely hood they were as Partridges upon the mountains hunted by their bloody persecutors and therefore for Christians to have as small a retinue as could be was their wisedom and so it would be in all persecuting times but when God shall please to give them peace round about and to permit them to sit under their own Vines and eat their own fruit that they should then continue in that strait condition or deny themselves of that lawfull liberty made use of by others their predecessors in godlinesse if they themselves see cause in the Querie Whether Paul in the New Testament when he speaks of a man having his wife in the singular number means any more then God in the Tenth Commandment Thou shalt not covet thy neighbours wife c. that is to maintain propriety onely that a man should not desire another mans but might have more of his own if he pleased otherwise it might be interpreted a sin to have more houses and oxen then one they being both in the singular number as well as the wife Whether that must not needs be lawfull and imitable for us which was practised by the Patriarches and Prophets of old and no where reproved or disanull'd by either Propher Apostle or Christ For amongst all the sins and provocations of the Jewish nation Polygamy is not so much as whispered now to think the Lord Christ who was faithfull in all things and did not spare that nation above all others whom he came to reclaim from all their sin and wickedness judged it a sin and yet not censure it in the least being so spreading and epidemical is to make him unfaithful in the great concernments of his office Whether Polygamy carry with it any repugnancy to the rites laws and priviledges of nature which God never gave to any the least imperative or permissive dispensation to infringe but in case of absolute and unparalell'd necessity or whether it be probable there should be any superadded law in grace against that which is no sin in nature Whether that which God himself signifies to be the fruit of his bounty and goodness ought not to be entertain'd and thankfully received by men the Querie is grounded upon that saying of God by Nathan to David 2 Sam. 12.8 and I gave thee thy masters house and thy masters wives and if that had been too little c. Where God speaks immediately by his Prophet of multiplicity of wives not only by way of connivence and toleration but as the issue of his goodness and the expresseness of his will this wrought up David's sin to the highest aggravation to have to do with another man's the Lord having allowed him so many wives of his own Whether a Concubine was a term of reproach in Israel or in plain English a Whore as some now no wiser then needs must phrase it First because then many of the Patriarchs and sons of other good men must needs prove illegitimate and their parents fall under the greatest imputation To passe this censure upon them what were it but to besmear the beautifull faces of the Fathers of the faithfull and the most excellent servants of God to take that Crown of glory from their heads which God hath set upon them and lay it in the dust Whether God hath not left the law of nature to it's own carving and to be supplied according to its own wants there being no particular rule appointed assigning unto every individual person his just dimension of meat drink or apparrel but every man is left to be a rule unto himself according to his want and indigency if hee exceeds in quantity or quality at his own peril hee shall bear his own burden so in the case in hand if he sees it convenient nay necessary also Who can forbid his desires in this kind or shal say unto nature thus far thou shalt go and no further or whether it be not hazardous that nature would break out in an unnaturall issue when the common and natural way is denied her and obstructed Whether that ordinary and common allegation that is so frequently made in defence of Monogamy that God suffered Polygamy onely for a season to replenish the world have any thing in it If it were malum in se to receive the least countenance from God for the least space or tract of time for ends how great soever were to tollerate evill that good might come of it besides the Land of Judea even then when Polygamy was most in use was as populous for the like quantity and proportion of ground as any part of the world is at this day witness that great sight 'twixt Abijah and Jeroboam 2 Chron. 13.17 where on Israel's side there fell down five hundred thousand chosen men Whether Luther the Father of reformation in his inveying against the Popish doctrine of forbidding marriage did not countenance Polygamy positively affirming that to have more wives then one was no where forbidden neither did he forbid it and that in case of the womans impotency or infirmity he might lawfully take his handmaid Whether the Laws made in Queen Elizabeths time and since touching adultery be just and rational because they make that adultery which God never made viz. If a married man have carnal knowledge of a single woman and not onely so but punish it with death justifying their penal statutes from the Law of Moses but refusing and rejecting the remedies propounded by the Law the Querie is made Whether it were not equitable before they inflict so severe punishment as is provided by our Laws in this case to afford men the same means of prevention as under the Legal dispensation was tollerated and allowed them Whether there be any thing material in that 19. of Matth. against Polygamy because the question is demanded of our Saviour out of design to ensnare him concerning divorce a thing of a far different nature whether then it can be supposed his answer concerning one thing should be binding and effectuall to another of a quite contrary subject the saying it self being framed and calculated by Christ to reprove that readiness and forwardnesse in the Jews to divorce upon every sleight occasion And as cutting as this his answer seems to be to the Pharisees upon the demand of the Disciples our Saviour seems to be more favourable For when they told him If it be so it is good not to marry he replies That all men cannot receive this saying but those to whom it is given so least they should stumble at marriage he removes it out of their way by his mild and gentle answer and in the next verse He that is able to receive it let him receive it Complying with that of Saint Paul that one man hath one gift and another another leaving them in this at liberty as he found them least he should seem to cross nature or infringe the Laws thereof which he himself had made Whether to forbid plurality of wives under the Gospel be not highly derogatory from the free and sweet tenour thereof and constructively and in effect to make the Legal and Mosaical dispensation which neither we nor our Fathers were able to bear more easie and tolerable then the Christian and Evangelical and to thwart that testimony given of it by our Saviour That his Yoak was easie and his burden light Whether it may not stand with a gracious Spirit and be every way consistent with the principles of a man fearing God and loving holinesse to have more women then one to his proper use and service because it hath been at good accord and agreement with the principles and practices of as godly holy righteous and just men as ever the earth bare any that were meerly men and subject to the like infirmities that we are or what is it that hath made the diversification that it should not every way suit and comport with the nature and essence of purity and holiness in the present Saints and people of God as wel as those that walked with God before and after the flood Whether Polygamy by the strictest rules of reason and equity can be judged any way obstructive unto humane society and communication Nay whether it be not the fairest accord and correspondency therewith tending so much to the defence and preservation of propriety He that takes another mans Ox or Asse is doubtlesse a transgressor but he that puts himself out of the occasion of that temptation by keeping of his own seems to be a right honest and well meaning man Whether that passage They two shall be one flesh have any thing in it considerable against Polygamy or whether in the sense of that Scripture one man may not be one flesh with two women As in the body of Christ there are many members yet but one body by our Saviours own Logick Why should many wives with one husband be denied to be one flesh any more then the other our Saviour himself alluding to marriage to make good his argument in that kind FINIS