Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	ghost_n	holy_a	mind_n	7,027	5	5.7568	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A45835	Vindiciæ veritatis, or, An impartial account of two several disputations the one being on the 12th. and the other on the 26th of February, 1671. between Mr. Danson a non-conformist minister, and Mr. Ives, upon this question, (viz) whether the doctrine of the possibility of some true believers final apostacy, be true, or no? Published to prevent false reports. Together with an appendix; in which the said question is more fully resolved in the affirmative, and the absurd[i]t[i]es of the negative opinion detected from the pens of divers of the patrons of it. By a lover of truth and peace.; Contention for truth	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1672 (1672)	Wing I1106A; ESTC R218068	84,282	219

Acts chap. 1. and chap 19. and He said unto them have ye received the Holy-Ghost since ye believed and they said unto him we have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy-Ghost And when Paul had laid his hands on them the Holy-Ghost came on them and they spake with tongues and prophesied And therefore the Holy-Ghost given there in those extraordinary gifts is nothing to you for they that partake of the holy Ghost do not therefore necessarily partake of the divine Nature Mr. Ives I say if the partaking and receiving of the holy Ghost be a receiving nothing else but the divine Nature then my former Argument is true But it is a partaking and receiving nothing else and you have assigned nothing wherein they differ Ergo then my former Argument is true Mr. Danson I deny your minor Mr. Ives If it be any thing else give an instance where the extraordinary gifts is called a partaking of the holy Ghost by extraordina-gifts I mean the gift of Tongue and Prophecying in a differing sense from a participating of the divine Nature Mr. Danson I am speaking of extraordinary Gifts Mr. Ives So am I too such extraordinary Gifts as are not at all bestowed upon Hypocrites and Unbeleivers Mr. Danson That the giving and receiving of the holy Ghost is the giving and receiving of the divine Nature that I deny Mr. Ives If the participation of the divine Nature and receiving of the divine Nature and the receiving of the holy Ghost be interpreted no other where in Scripture but for one and the same thing then the former consequence is true But the participation and receiving of the divine Nature and the receiving of the holy Ghost is interpreted no where in Scripture but for one and the same thing Ergo my former consequence is true Mr. Danson I deny your minor Mr. Ives I have proved the question for Mr. Danson's answer is that to partake of the divine Nature is to partake of the graces of the Spirit of God I say that they that partake of the holy Ghost partake of the graces of the Spirit of God He saith not Mr. Danson I do not deny but the receiving of the holy Ghost as to its gifts and graces may be found in the same subject but I say they are not Terms of the same Import Mr. Ives What that is we shall hear by and by Mr. Danson saith that by partaking of the divine Nature he supposed the graces and operations of the Spirit of God upon the Souls of Men but by partaking of the gifts of the holy Ghost may be understood of those extraordinory gifts of Tongues healing c. Now give me leave to mind you that Mr. Danson grants what I would have and somewhat more because no Man had those extraordinary gifts but what had those in the lesser degree that he calls Graces for no man had those extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost but he that was really and truly a Believer Mr. Danson Prove it if you can Mr. Ives Give me an instance because this is a universal negative Mr. Danson This will not prove what you would have for if I should grant you that no person had the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost but what had also the special graces of the holy Ghost yet that will not prove what you are to prove for it will not prove that therefore the participation of extraordinary gifts and the participation of special grace are one and the same thing Mr. Ives I will shew you what it will prove it will prove that which I brought it for and that was this I was to prove that if those that partake of the holy Ghost may fall away totally and finally then they that partake of the divine Nature may Mr. Danson Prove your minor Mr. Ives That 's my minor Mr. Danson Your minor was this that the giving and receiving of the Holy Ghost and the giving and receiving the divine Nature are one and the same thing prove that you must conclude with the proposition I deny'd Mr. Ives I am to prove this that he that participates of the gifts of the holy Ghost and of the graces of the holy Ghost participates of the same holy Ghost though in different degrees Mr. Danson You go about to prove that they are always found in the same Subject that is special grace and extraordinary gifts but that is not to the question but you are to prove they are one and the same thing for instance a godly Man may have his understanding enlightened to understand several sciences as Logick and Mathematicks c. And all these may be found in the same subject but it doth not therefore follow that they are the same thing Mr. Ives To partake of the holy Ghost in its extraordinary gifts and in the graces of it which you say are the ordinary gifts is but all one and the same partaking of the holy Ghost it is true as you say that a Man may understand several sciences but if these different sciences be taught him by one Master then it follows that they are one and the same participation of the skill of the same master Mr. Danson It doth not follow that they are one and the same thing for the Scripture doth ascribe the skill of Bezaleel and Aholiah in all manner of workmanship to the holy Ghost it doth not therefore follow that the receiving the skill of workmanship and the graces of of the Spirit of God are all one and the same thing Mr. Ives They are one by way of participation for I am to prove to you that the participation of the holy Ghost either in an extraordinary or ordinary manner is a participation of the same holy Ghost not that these are the same thing in themselves but that they partake of the same operation for he that hath the gift of tongues and he that hath the gift of healing they have two several gifts and I never said that healing and the gift of tongues were one gift but that both these are partakers of the holy Ghost and I do not say that they are one and the same thing but that they are one and the same participation of the holy Ghost that is they do participate of the same holy Ghost or of the same divine Nature but they are not the same in respect to the quantity or measure of them c This is not more then St. Paul avoucheth there are saith he diver sities of gifts but the same spirit 1 Cor. 12.4 and again v. 8 9 10. He tells us that by the same spirit that Wisdom and Knowledge and Faith is given working of miracles and speaking with tongues is given Mr. Danson I deny that those participations of the divine Nature as they stand in opposition unto the partaking of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost it doth not denote one and the same the Scripture phrase doth not own them to be one and the same

thing Mr. Ives I do not say it is I say one and the same divine Nature and holy Ghost Mr. Danson You prove nothing for you were to prove that those that partake of the holy Ghost partake of the divine Nature now this you proved thus that to partake of the holy Ghost in its extraordinary gifts and to partake of the divine Nature in respect of grace they are one and the same thing Mr. Ives I did not I said it is a participation of one and the same holy Ghost but not a participation of one and the same degree Mr. Danson Otherwise it will not follow that they may not be separable one from another A person may partake of the divine Nature if you will call it by that phrase he may have some resemblance of the divine Wisdom in natural ability and extraordinary gifts yet notwithstanding not partake of the divine Nature in that extraordinary sense of the holiness of God for there are two sort of perfections in the divine Nature which go under the name of the divine Image some are natural perfections such as understanding and will and immortality and there are also some which we call moral perfections some things in God which we cannot conceive but under the notion of virtue or grace as truth justice mercy and the like now we understand the participation of the divine Nature in the latter not the former sence Mr. Ives I expounded it of the same partaking of the holy Ghost you brought an instance in the 17 acts about extraordinary gifts I answered thus that instance doth not exclude but include the ordinary as you call'd it and therefore I leave this to consideration whether he that partakes of the holy Ghost doth not partake of the divine Nature for indeed that is the sum of my argument then it will follow that if he that partakes of the holy Ghost may fall away he that partakes of the divine Nature may Mr. Danson I grant it you Mr. Ives This is that which you deny'd that those that partake of the divine Nature can sall away which I proved thus that if those that partake of the holy Ghost may fall away then those that partake of the divine Nature may fall away Mr. Danson 〈…〉 it I said that phrase of the divine Nature as there it is used concerning the Saints is to be taken in a special sense there is no perfection to be found in Men but is a participation of the divine Nature after a fort that is some resemblance of it but yet notwithstanding that the participation of the moral and natural perfections are not one and the same thing Mr. Ives You say that to partake of the divine Nature in a moral sense is doubtless the sense of the text referred too though not in a natural sense now if that be the ture sense of divine Nature in that place viz. a moral sence wherein God is thus gracious to assist and cooperate upon the minds and consciences of believers Why then is there not the same exposition to be given of being partakers of the holy Ghost by his cooperating upon the minds and consciences of believers Mr. Danson Prove your proposition that you are to prove that to partake of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost and special grace are one and the same thing in Scripture usage Mr. Ives Still you are under a mistake I never undertook to prove it I undertook to prove this that it is a partaking of the same divine Nature and not that to receive the holy Ghost in an extraordinary and miraculous manner and the receiving of it in an ordinary measure are the same thing for as you said well a Man may be a Logician and yet possibly another Artist but that I say in this that no man can partake of the holy Ghost as you interpret the holy Ghost for an extraordinary measure of gifts but that man that partakes of the graces of it which you call partaking of the divine Nature Mr. Danson Prove it Mr. Ives If the holy Ghost in the extraordinary gifts be promised to none but those that have the ordinary gifts and graces of it then no man can partake of the holy Ghost in the greater that doth not partake of the divine Nature in the less But the holy Ghost is promised to none but such Therefore none can partake of it but such Mr. Danson I deny your minor Mr. Ives It is a general negation therefore give me an instance it you can where God hath made a promise of the gifts of the holy Ghost to any but true believers Mr. Danson He hath made a promise to none at all Mr. Ives You should have said so before therefore give me an instance where the promise of the holy Ghost is made to any that are not true believers Mr. Danson In the 2 of Joel there is a promise of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost Mr. Ives a The last thing Mr. Danson said before was that the promise mas made to none at all what sence this is the reader may judge But whetker it be sense or no I am sure it is a a Contradiction to what he saith now viz. that there is a promise of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost in Joel the 2. and immediately before saith the promise was made to none at all Besides what is that promise in Joel 2. made to some that are not true believers It is indeed that promise which is expounded and fulfilled in the 2. of the Acts only to true believers for the Apostles were all true believers and the holy Ghost fell upon them Now Mr. Danson brings this as an instance against the universality of my minor proposition that the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit are promised to some that are not true believers Mr. Danson Hold there I did not say so you said only to true believers now I give you this place to prove that there is a promise of the extraordinary gifts of the holy Ghost made to the visible Church Mr. Ives Prove that any here were not true believers to whom this promise is made Mr. Danson Here is a promise made to the visible Church it s to believers in general Mr. Ives Pray hear me if it be to belivers in general it is nothing to me for my argument was this that this promise was made to none but True believers and you must give me an instance for if I say to none but True believers you must shew where it was made to some that were not True believers Mr. Danson It is a promise made to the visible believers Mr. Ives The question is whether this will serve what it is brought for that this promise is made to any that are not true believers Mr. Danson You are to prove that it is here limited Mr. Ives My Argument is this if I say the promise of the holy Ghost is made to none but true believers and you deny

renewed again by Repentance Whence I argue Those that were once renewed by Repentance were True believers But these persons here were once renewed by Repentance Ergo they were True believers Mr. Danson I deny the major that those that were once renewed by Repentance were True believers Mr. Ives If none have been renewed by Repentance but True believers then the major is true but none have been renewed by Repentance but True believers Ergo Mr. Danson I deny your minor Mr. Ives Shew me one man that is said to be renewed by Repentance that was not a True believer Mr. Danson I will shew you an Instance of a man that was renewed by Repentance that is to say as we do understand it of a renewing by Repentance of a common work of the Spirit of God which hath the same name because of some similitude It is said that Judas repented himself and brought back again the price Mr. Ives You are to prove that Judas was renewed by Repentance a hundred men may so repent and yet not be renewed by Repentance in that sense which the Scripture calls renewing renovation or regeneration he was not renovated Mr. Danson The Scripture uses that phrase in a different sence Mr. Ives No not in Repentance Mr. Danson Yes in Repentance Do you suppose that Repentance is not separable from renewsng in the Scripture Mr. Ives Shew me if you can that a man that hath changed his mind by any contrition or remorse and was ever said to be renewed by it and not a new Creature the word is frequently used Be ye renewed in the spirit of your minds c. I say shew me but where any man was ever said to be renewed by Repentance or to be renewed by Faith or to be renewed by his Humiliation that was not a True believer if he was renewed by the operation of these Qualities I do tell you it is to be understood of a True believer Mr. Danson I have given you an Instance to the contrary where the Scripture applies Repentance to one that was not a True believer Mr. Ives Alas There may be a thousand such but that that I would ask you is whether Judas was renewed by Repentance in the sense of this Text therefore you do not or you cannot give me an instance for I am bound to believe the Text and it tells me they cannot be renewed again by Repentance which implies they were once renewed by Repentance Mr. Danson The Scripture uses this phrase Twice dead Pluckt up by the roots Mr. Ives All that you have to do is to shew me where the Scripture applies this phrase to any but True believers if you cannot then my Argument is proved Mr. Danson I have given an instance of Judas that repented and restored unjust gotten goods Mr. Ives You have given no Instance as yet for you cannot shew that Judas was renewed by Repentance and that it was an Act of the Spirit of God upon him in renovation I come now to a Third Instance Those that have tasted of the powers of the World to come give me an Instance where any but True believers have tasted of the powers of the World to come Mr. Danson I can in the 24th of Acts it is said there that as Paul reasoned concerning Righteousness Temperance and Judgment to come Foelix Tremb ed. Mr. Ives What doth that prove c The Text under consideration Heb. 6. Speaks of such a tasting as Implies a savouring of heavenly things so as to be affected and in Love with them and therefore it is said they tasted of the heavenly gift but it is otherwise said of Foelix that he trembled and if that might be called a tast it was a tast that his Soul was in the abhorrancy off which is a forreign interpretation and a forcable invading the sense of the text under consideration to suppose the persons spoken of there to have tasted of the World te come in the sense that Foelix Trembled at the Judgment to come indeed they might have such a tast if they should fall away but that they had had any such tast if they had not fallen away is denyed Mr. Danson This is one part of the powers of the World to come that is to say a dreadful sense and apprehension he had upon him of the future judgment and then in Luke 14.15 And when one of them that sat at meat with him heard these things he said unto him Blessed is he that shall eat Bread in the Kingdom of God he had here some affectionate transports at the narration that was made concerning the future state of happyness and Christ directs a Parable to him Mr. Ives Indeed I am much beholding to you and you have done me a kindness in bringing that to my mind that was out before Now the Scripture tells you in the Parable That a certain man made a Supper and this Supper was to set before him and to represent to him the Glory of the Kingdom of God and of the World to Come Now he doth not say as you say that he tasted of it but the quite contrary that not only he but none that was bidden should tast of the Supper v. 14. Mr. Danson You do not understand what you say Mr. Ives I do for at the latter end of the Parable Christ gives Instance that those that were bidden should not tast of the Supper and applies it to him and the general import of it is to shew that many persons are called that yet notwithstanding in Truth and Reality do not obey the call Mr. Danson How do you know this that the man did not Eat of it Mr. Ives Either he did or he did not tast of it but the text faith none that was bidden did tast and you say this man was bid and did tast Mr. Danson He tasted of it he had affection of joy wrought in him by the representation of the future state Mr. Ives I answer First that he did not tast but Secondly supposing this sense true that he did tast then tell me was this a Believer or an Unbeliever for the Instance must prove both viz. that he did tast and that he was not a True believer Mr. Danson He was an Unbeliever Mr. Ives This will not serve your turn Mr. Danson It will Because this Parable was directed particularly to him and Secondly Because it is said that he to whom his discourse was directed was of the Pharisees of whom the Scripture tells us a great number of them were open enemies to him and some of them though the Scripture saith they did believe on him yet would not confess him least he should put them out of the Synagogue because they loved the praise of men more then the praise of God Mr. Ives There is two thing in this Text yet in question as I have told you First Whether this man tasted of the powers of the World to come for the text doth not say so but implies