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	temple_n	7,031	5	7.9574	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A13295	A reply to a pretended Christian plea for the anti-Chistian [sic] Church of Rome: published by Mr. Francis Iohnson a⁰. 1617 Wherin the weakness of the sayd plea is manifested, and arguments alleaged for the Church of Rome, and baptisme therein, are refuted; by Henry Ainsworth. Anno 1618.	Ainsworth, Henry, 1571-1622?	1620 (1620)	STC 236; ESTC S122155	171,683	191

example more fitly if a Iew had been forced by Antiochus violently to kyss or bow the knee to Iupiters image when he resisted and testified against it none could justly call him an idolater or one of Iupiters people But if an other Iew had revolted to Antiochus religion and beleeved in his Iupiter and honoured him with hart profession and action he now might justly be called the servant of Iupiter or one of his people as the Moabites are called the people of Chemosh Numb 21. 29. So the church of Rome now fallen from true Christianity and beleeving worshiping obeying Antichrist the Popes holynes are and may justly be called his church or else Antichrist hath no temple church or people in the world Object Observe here and throughout his treatise how still he calleth that the Temple church and bodie of Antichrist which Paul expressly and purposely calleth the Temple of God And so therin note stil his sh●f●s and his errours c. Answ. Loe still an urging of the bare letter as doe the Papists This is my body to prove their transubstantiation that there is no bread left but Christs very body really and properly I have I trust without shifting or errour proved the present church of Rome to be Antichrists temple church and bodie if the Pope be Antichrist And seing his mysterie of iniquitie is contrary to Christs mysterie of godlynes and Christ hath a mystical temple which is his church and bodie Eph. 2. 21. 5. 23. I would gladly know what temple church and body Antichrist hath if the church of Rome be not the same Againe he speaketh too largely that J stil so call it throughout my treatise for I have other weise written though it liked him not thus Gods true temple and tabernacle is in mount Sion in heaven Rev. 14. 1. 17. where God sitteth on a throne Rev. 16. 17. 7. 15. and dwelleth among his people where is the Ark of his covenant Rev. 11. 19. and from thence lightnings voices thondrings earthquake and h●yle come forth against th● Antichristians his enemies and vials of his wrath powred out upon the throne of the beast Rev. 16. 1. 2. 10. and on men that have his mark On the contrary the Beast which is the kingdome of Antichrist ascendeth from beneath out of the bottomless pit Rev. 17. 8. and blasphemeth this heavenly tabernacle Rev. 13. 6. and sitteth in Babylon Rev. 16. 19. upon the Dragons throne Rev. 13. 2. and fighteth against the Lamb and against the saincts Rev. 19. 19. treading under foot the holy citie Rev. 11. 2. and casting downe the place of Christs sanctuarie Dan. 8. 11. When th' Apostle therfore telleth us that Antichrist sitteth as God in the Temple of God it is to be understood of their invading and destroying of Gods church and people as the heathens of old deal● with Jerusalem and dwellers therin Psal. 79. Dan. 8 11. 13. 11. 36. Ier. 22. 12. 13. Law 2. 7. 9. Secondly of their own vaine ostentation whiles they wil have it called the Christian catholik church and the Pope the head of the same Ezek. 28. 2. 6. Esa. 14. 13. 14. 2 Thes. 2. 9 10 Rev. 13. 11. 14. 17. 4. 2 Cor. 11. 13. 14. 15. Thus I grant that the Temple which Antichrist invadeth destroyeth is Gods true Temple but that wherin the Beast sitteth as God which he trimmeth upholdeth and boasteth of as he doeth the church of Rome at this day is the synagogue of Satan But he procedeth Object As for the ancient Doctor whom here he citeth let us hear himself speak His words are these That which is the Temple of any idolor Divil the Apostle would not call the Temple of God Wherupon some will have in this place not the Prince himself but after a manner his whole bodie th●● is the multitude of men perteyning unto him togither with himself under the Prince understood to be Antichrist And more rightly also they think it to be sayd in Latine 〈◊〉 in the Greek that he sitteth not in the Temple of God but for the Temple of God which is the church As we say he sitteth for a friend that is as a friend Augustine de Civic D●● l. 20. c. 19. Where note how farr differing Augustine is from this man that citeth him c. Answ. There is not so great difference as mine opposite would pretend First I cited not Augustine for his own judgment but for others whom he speaketh of touching the translation of the Text in the Temple of God or for the Temple Secondly he setteth down Augustines words maymed both at head and foot For Augustine beginneth thus But in what temple of God he shal sit as God is uncertaine whether in that ruine of the Temple which was built by King Solomon or in the church For that which is the temple of any idol or divil the Apostle would not call the temple of God c. Now the ruine of Solomons temple cannot at this day be called Gods temple otherweise then because it was the Temple of God of old hath now no more holynes in deed trueth thē any other place in the world And thus I have granted that the church of Rome may be called the church of God in respect that there was a church there in Pauls time wheras now it hath no more true holynes then the synagogue of Satan So we see how for advantage mine opposite baulked Augustines first words In the end he breaketh off in the midst of a period for Augustine sayth sitteth for a friend that is as a friend or if any other thing is wont to be understood by this kind of speech So he defineth not certainly of this place but leaves it doubtfull and presently after confesseth his ignorance For what is this sayth Augustine For the mysterie of iniquitie doth already work onely he who now holdeth let him hold till he be taken out of the way J confess my self to be utterly ignorant what he meaneth Thus we need not strive about Augustines words here and I grant that the Apostle would not have called it the Temple of God unless eyther it were so in deed and trueth or had been so in times past or did pretend to be so still And I think all wil likewise grant that the holy Ghost would not have called the witches spirit at endor Samuel unless eyther it had been Samuel in deed as the Papists doe contend or some thing in pretence and shew like Samuel Neyther would the prophet have sayd to the King of Tyrus Thou hast been in Eden the garden of God a proselyte in the church of Israel unless eyther himself or some of his predecessors had been there in times past Neyther would Amos have called the Israelites idol temple the house of their God unless eyther it were so in deed or in pretense which phrase when the Greek translateth according to the letter the house of

sayd a litle before that the church of Rome is fallen into most sinfull and deep defection and apostasie and so is a notorious harlot and idolatr●ss Wherefore his distinction here between the apostasie the church of Rome making the one Antichrist the other Gods temple under his covenant of grace neyther accordeth with the scriptures nor with his own assertion Next this where he sayth that by the Temple of God in Israel was figured the church of God among Christians it is graunted But withall let it be noted that himself can not deney but the Temple and tabernacle in Israel was not the church and congregation of Gods people properly but a sacramental signe of Gods dwelling with them which I before confirmed by these scriptures Exod 25. 8. 2. Chron. 6. 2. Ezek. 37. 26. 27. Rev. 21. 3. Secondly he himself affirmeth that the temple at Ierusalem did primarily figure out Christ and secondarily the church both the catholik or universal and particular churches likeweise particular Christians and in several respects both their bodies and their soules and consciences Vpon which graunts of his it foloweth that there is no necessarie consequence of this his proposition Jf the Pope of Rome with his hierarchie be the man of syn spoken of in 2. Thes. 2. then is the church of Rome the Temple of God there spoken of for he understanding by the church the people as in 1. Cor. 3. 16. 17. 2. Cor. 6. 16. Eph. 2 21. and yet granting that the Temple in Israel was not the people all may see the weaknes and insufficiencie of this inference that because the Pope of Rome sitteth as God in the Temple of God therfore the people of the church of Rome are that Temple of God there spoken of consequently Gods true church For why now may we not as well if not much better say that by the Temple of God is understood the doctrine and profession of Christ the true Temple or as in my former † book I shewed thus As the Temple was an outward signe of Gods presence with his people and of his inward dwelling in their harts * by saith and by his spirit unto their salvation so Antichrists temple is an outward shew of his presence with that seduced people in whose harts † he dwelleth by Popish faith and by his spirit of errour carying them to damnation But as Antichrist shal not professedly deny the true God or Christ though in deed he falsly * sheweth himself that he is God so shal h● not professedly deny the Temple or church of God but falsly vaunt his adulterous synagogue to be the same Vnto this exposition mine opposite hath given no answer and it being according to the scriptures trueth of the thing in controversie I leave it to the prudent reader whether the outward shew and profession of Christ and Christian religion be not the first thing here intended of th'Apostle by the Temple of God And this is further confirmed by Rev. 11. 1. Where the Temple Altar and Worshipers are three distinct things and the people are the worshipers there spoken of neyther the Temple nor the Altar of which place we shal treat anone Then wheras he granteth that the Temple in Ierusalem did primarily figure out Christ how is it that he wholly neglecteth the primarie thing figured and insisteth upon the secondary the church or people of Rome Seing it is knowen how the Pope pretendeth him self to be Christs vicar and deputie on earth and to be the servant and worshiper of Christ in heaven and may we think that th'Apostle in warning them of the mysterie of iniquitie would not imply the chief point of the mysterie that Antichrist should in pretence sit for Christ and in his sted as his vicar generall on earth Thus to sit in the Temple or for the Temple of God may well be understood that Antichrist should sit for Christ a pretended friend but in deed an adverse foe Now for that which the Temple secondarily figured namely the church catholik and also particular and so mens consciences he wavereth in his application He sayth this terme the church of Rome is taken eyther particularly which he applieth to the Laterane church in Rome the Popes parish church or more generally for all other such Christian churches as are come under the Popes jurisdiction c. This later I hold to be most proper here for what needed there such warning to the Thessalonians other christian churches through the world if a Bishop of the Lateran parish a corner in Rome had exalted himself above God therin onely and had not usurped also a pretended Christian power over all And the complement of the prophesie is an evident exposition of it for who knoweth not that the Pope scorneth to be Bishop of the Lateran parish onely it is a jurisdiction over the catholik church throughout the earth which he chalengeth And now what proof bringeth mine opposite that the church of Rome as God constituted it is taken generally for other Christian churches under the Popes jurisdiction None at all neyther can he bring any jote of Gods word for the same Againe what proof maketh he that the catholik Romane church wherin the Pope sitteth is the true church of God None but this J suppose these men themselves being better advised wil not deny them to be the churches and Temple of God But he should have shewed if it had been possible for him that the Romane church is by divine institution the catholik or universal church which because I assure my self it can never be doen I conclude that this Romane catholik church is a fiction of the Popes braine and a meere idol like himself and is no otherweise the Temple of God then the Pope is Christs universal vicar namely in lying words and vaine ostentation And so the maine ground for the Temple of God wherin Antichrist sitteth to be the true church of Christ is overthrowne As for the Popes Laterane parish I both deny it to be Christs true church and that it onely is the Temple of God wherin Antichrist should sit His proof of the former is this Jf we understand it of a particular church as the Apostle wrote his epistle to the church of the Romans how shall we soundly deny it eyther to be the Temple of God or Antichrist to be set therin Thus have we suppositions and questions in sted of proofes To his demand I answer it is the Temple of God in pretence not in trueth even as the Pope is a bishop of Christ in pretence but in deed is Antichrist the man of syn as mine opposite granteth The church that was in Rome in Pauls time wil no more justifie the Popes synagogue there now then the Christian ministers which were then in that church Rom. 12. wil justifie the Antichristian prelates that there reigne at this day Secondly the Laterane parish at Rome is of the