Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	blasphemy_n	hear_v	reality_n	48	3	16.2950	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A90680	Autokatakrisis, or, Self-condemnation, exemplified in Mr. Whitfield, Mr. Barlee, and Mr. Hickman. With occasional reflexions on Mr Calvin, Mr Beza, Mr Zuinglius, Mr Piscator, Mr Rivet, and Mr Rollock: but more especially on Doctor Twisse, and Master Hobbs; against whom, God's purity and his præscience ... with the sincere intention and the general extent of the death of Christ, are finally cleared and made good; and the adversaries absurdities ... are proved against them undeniably, out of their own hand-writings. With an additional advertisement of Mr Baxter's late book entituled The Groatian religion discovered, &c. By Thomas Pierce rector of Brington in Northampon-shire.	Pierce, Thomas, 1622-1691.	1658 (1658)	Wing P2164; Thomason E950_2; ESTC R210640	233,287	279

betwixt these two and to discern it so clearly as not to be able to dissent however able to conceal it by a dissimulation 7. Before I shew the Case in God I will provide some light for the weaker-eyed Reader to see it by 7. A manifestation of the wide difference between a necessity of consequence from the antecedent to the sequel and a necessity of the consequent imposed by the cause upon the effect This is conspicuous to All that if I hear a man blaspheme against his Maker it doth necessarily follow that he blasphemeth for if he doth not I do not hear him it being impossible to hear what is not to be heard but this being granted that I do really hear the man blaspheme his blasphemy is inferred by a most necessary sequel Yet this is onely a Necessity of Consequence arising from the Truth of a Proposition wherein the reality of my hearing his blasphemy being supposed the reality of the blasphemy doth unavoidably follow But my hearing him blaspheme doth not necessitate his blaspheming for it would be what it is if I did not hear it And though I hear him blaspheming whilest he blasphemes yet in order of nature his blaspheming hath the priority for he must be to be heard before I can hear him From whence it is manifest that here is not any absolute or antecedent necessity or a necessity of the thing as of the consequent or effect But his blasphemy is a voluntary and contingent Action Now by this it will be easie for the thickest capacity to discern that if God foreknew from eternity this blasphemy of the man then by a necessary consequence the man doth really blaspheme For if he doth not God could not possibly foreknow he doth But this is only a necessity arising from the truth of that Proposition That God's foreknowledge is infallible or not capable of erring and that what he foreknows is very really foreknown It is not a necessity of the existence of the thing imprinted in the blasphemer by Gods foreknowledge but still the blasphemy is a voluntary and contingent action which it could not be if the man did commit it by an antecedent Necessitation And if he did such antecedent Necessitation must have flown from God's Omnipotence and not at all from his foreknowledge It being the nature of knowledge not to produce its object but to suppose it God doth contemplate by his knowledge what he effecteth by his power But it is not in his power to be effective of sin much less in his foreknowledge to be necessitative of blasphemy which whosoever shall affirm will be a very unskilful and dull blasphemer For 8. As Gods Decree is Actio ad extra so is his foreknowledge also 8. Foreknowledge therefore doth not necessitate yet by the * Mr. Wh. p. 37. Where note that M. W. doth call Gods decree Actus Dei ad Intra which in another man had been a strange mistake Note also that Gods knowledge of himselfe is actio ad intra though his foreknowledge of us is actio ad extra confession of the Adversary it doth not ponere quicquam in ob●ecto being an action within himself saith Mr. W. it works not any thing upon the Creature and therefore doth not necessitate for whosoever necessitates does make necessary not infer it onely He makes a necessity in the thing which he necessitates not onely infers it in a proposition which another makes of things contingent If the Adversaries expound the word Necessitative not by effective but illative then first they speak non-sense before they expound it and after the Exposition they give up their Cause First they speak non-sense in saying that Gods foreknowledge doth antecedently necessitate the being of sin when it infers onely that it will be and next they give up their Cause in confessing that there is not an antecedent necessity of all events but a suppositive necessity of some or a necessity of consequence arising onely from the truth of a proposition whose Antecedent doth of necessity infer the Sequel 9. Having snewed the difference betwixt an absolute causal and a conditional consequential Necessity and freed the praescience of God from the vulgar and senseless imputation 9. It is vain for the Adversaries to quit the first error unless they quit the second also how will the men of that way be ever able to free themselves For admit they quit the first great error of making Gods praescience to necessitate sin yet still they live in the misery of the second which is their absolute decree and praedetermination of all events For this can never be freed from laying absolute necessity having that influence on the effect which praescience cannot be thought to have As if I decree that my servant shall rob my Neighbour I do contribute more towards it then if I onely foresee that he will voluntarily do it and supposing my decree to be irresistible as 't is supposed to be in God it must produce a Causal Necessity The common * Note here that Mr. W. holding the doctrine of Free-will which he try's to reconcile with his absolute decree of all things was betrayed poor man into this sad speech God having decreed the Fall of Adam it was necessary that this should come to passe but it was also necessary that it should come to passe freely Ext. of Div. Prov. c. 9. p. 42. and again he saith It was necessary that the first man should sin upon supposition of Gods Decree and that he should sin freely Ibid. p. 40. See the Divine Purity Defended c. 8. p. 80 81 82. shift is too shameful to serve in stead of an excuse For if God did absolutely decree that man should voluntarily sin which they are often * Treatise of the Passions c. ch 42. p. 544 545. fain to say though it implies a Contradiction then he might possibly have forborne the commission of it because he did voluntarily commit it which yet was absolutely impossible if God had absolutely decreed it I think it fit in this place to insert a passage of Doctor Reynolds Dr. Reyn. his concurrence with T. P. in this point both because he doth condemn and severely censure the very same error which I at this instant do write against and also because he is a person whom Mr. W. and Mr. B. conclude to be of their party * Note that he means an Hypothetical Necessity or of the consequence as appears by his last words His words are these Others there have been yet more impious which seek to fasten all the corruptions of their wills on something above the Heavens even the eternal foreknowledge and the providence of God As if my foreknowledge that on the morrow the Sun will rise or that such men as these shall one day be brought to a most severe doom were the cause working a necessity of the next day or the last Judgement It is true indeed Gods praescience

upon some weak Readers his book hath made some strong impressions So that men of no skill who are of narrow capacity and very slow of apprehension are not long to be trusted with that temptation Again I find that Mr. B. doth rely on Mr. W. as upon one of his * Corr. Corr. Ep. Ded. p. 8. Majorites to whose Protection and Patronage he chose to dedicate his former Book to wit his first-born the excellency of his strength and whose gracious † Ibid. assistance he then implored Mr. W. answers to the call ownes himself for a Majorite comes in to the rescue of Mr. B. as Milo ran to set his shoulders as an equal prop to the falling house which crushed him into Quiddini for his presumption and 't is but fit he should first be heeded whom common Fame hath set uppermost in the thoughts of men Next I proceed to Mr. B. his second part as he calls it because I was bound to it by promise which I was loath not to perform Then I antidote Mr. Hickman because he invenomed Mr. Barlee and intermeddled in his affaires to such a desperate degree that if he preacheth as he hath printed his Disciples of all others have the greatest need of a preservative I have often to do with Dr. Twisse because they often translate his words and once most solemnly they bring him to me with a defiance Not to mention all particulars with whom I have to do as occasion serves I have many reflexions on Mr. Hobbs because he jumps so often with my Assailants as if he had borrowed from their writings or they from his What I have more to premise I will dispatch in few words If I seem too much inlarged in explaining some things It is partly because I have to deal with such disputants as cannot be confuted but by being first taught and partly because it often happens that their Master's confutatian doth stand in theirs I do many times refer to what I have published already as well to avoid prolixity and vain repetitions as to exempt my Reader from paying often for the very same matter in several volumes I have reckoned with my Aggressers both separately and jointly My two first Chapters and Introduction are chiefly addressed to Mr. W. My third to Mr. B. and Mr. H. My fourth to Dr. Twisse Mr. W. and Mr. B. I have so disposed of the whole as that all their concernments may be seen distinctly and apart But yet so many were my occasions to shew their differences and agreements and their mutual collisions more especially the running of their heads against each other to the great indangering of their brains which I verily believe will hardly ever leave akeing untill they accept my way of cure ch 3. sect 9. that Mr. B. is eminently concerned in all I say to Mr. W. and Mr. W. equally concerned in all I say to Mr. B. and Mr. Hickman commonly concerned in what I say to both the former and their greatest Masters are concerned in what I say to all three If I seem to have been pungent in laying open some sorer parts I desire my Reader to look well upon the Case to consider the duty of a Chirurgion and then to imagine if he is able how such Phagedaenous and eating sores can be taken away without being touched and that with either the Launce or Caustick When an inveterate Ulcer hath been long skin'd over there is no way to cure it without searching it to the bottom which though painful to the Patient yet being in order to his ease and which is more his safety too he ought to be thankful to that diligent and impartial hand which for some short time doth seem to hurt him The ratio curandi cannot alwayes be such as I can alwayes desire and w●sh it might be It must be such as the malady requires and calls for But when my present Methods shall be found to have taken a good effect so as the obstinate Tumour shall relent and suppurate and finally cast forth its Core together with the dreggs of the peccant hu●●or I shall gladly prepare another kind of composition whose every line shall be a lentive May the persons the most concerned consider well what is said in the following sheets and The Lord give them understanding in all things 2 Tim. 2.7 The general Contents of the Introduction shewing the manifold Absurdities and Contradictions which issue out from the Denial of Gods eternall respective or conditional Decrees Sect. 1 2. THe nearest way to end a Controversie is to strike altogether at the Root of error Sect. 3. The grand error touching Gods Decrees and its numerous off-spring is rooted in the mistake of two things The false conceits of Praescience and Praedetermination Sect. 4 5. The speedy way to Conviction made plain and open by a manifestation of three things Sect. 6. The three things undertaken solemnly to be proved Sect. 7. The same men affirm it to be both blasphemy and truth to say that God is the Author or Cause of sin that he wills and works sin c. Sect. 8. Nothing but their Principles of Gods Decrees can lead them to blasphemies of such a Nature Instances briefly set down from Calvin Zuinglius Zanchy Piscator P. Martyr Beza Borrhaus Triglandius Dr. Twisse Mr. Hobbs Mr. Whitfield and Mr. Barlee and Mr. Hick Sect. 9. How the violent streams of blasphemy may be quickly dried up in their several channels Sect. 10. Mr. Whitfields whole Fabrick plucked up by the Foundation His explication of what he means by conditional Decrees His provision for a Flight from his whole undertaking He is equally unfortunate whether he intended sense or non-sense He is equally unhappy whatever he means by the word Condition Sect. 11. His first Argument compared with his Exposition of Conditional Decrees as he professeth to understand them He is as unhappy in his best as in his worst meaning His way of arguing in his best sense against Conditional Decrees is as much against the Trinity of persons in the Godhead He argues against his own Masters and Brethren Beza Wollebius Dr. Reynolds Directly against Saint Paul and against the Eternity of Gods foreknowledge And in a flat contradiction to himself also against Dr. Twisse and even against the Tenet for which he argues He is fain to make Gods decrees to be Actus D●i ad iutra against his own party who teach them to be ad extra He makes Gods Actions to be God himself and so infers many Gods even against his own Masters Gomarus and Wollebius Five blasphemous Absurdities which that absurdity doth infer He makes God himself to be Reprobation it self Sect. 12. An easie way to Mr. W's Reformation concisely opened and pointed at To his pretended Arguments against Conditional Decrees are confronted two Arguments for conditional Decrees The first is grounded on the Confession of all the contrary party and according to the tenour of the seventeenth Article

publickly chosen to display his whole strength as if by this he were desirous that eve●y part of the controversie should be decided I ●ccept his challenge and heartily thank him for the ●ontrivance He having given me an occasion of taking much a neerer way to my journeys end then I first intended Sect. 4. The speedy way to conviction For if I prove out of his mouth and out of the mouths of his predecessors that what they publickly acknowledge to be blasphemously false doth unavoidably follow from their espoused notion of God's Decrees then can he not chuse but acknowledge that such a notion of God's Decrees must needs be dangerously false He must confess that his book is an insufferable Libel against his Maker and such as against which he must publickly enter his protestation Now that it is false and blasphemous to say that God is the Author or cause of sin both in those very terms and in others as bad and in many others much worse is ever acknowledged by themselves in some parts of their Writings wherein forgetful of their Doctrines they consider nothing but duty who yet in other parts of their own writings wherein forgetful of duty they reason onely from their Doctrines do most dogmatically deliver it for very great truth Sect. 5. Made plain and open by a manifestation of three things In great affection to the most vulgar and less intelligent Readers whose deliverance and liberty from the worst kind of thraldom I do especially aim at in what I publish I will use the greatest plainness and perspicuity of speech which by study and meditation I am able to contrive Our whole Dispute will be concluded by a most cogent demonstration of these three things First that it is granted by the Adversaries themselves to be both false and blasphemous to say that God is the Author or Cause of Sin Secondly 't is affirmed by the very same Party to be neither false nor blasphemous but a most necessary truth to say that God is the Author or Cause of Sin Thirdly it cannot be denied by the aforesaid Party that what they sometimes confess to be both false and blasphemous they would not at other times affirm to be neither false nor blasphemous but that they find it to be the natural and unavoidable issue flowing out from their Principles of Gods Decrees Sect. 6. The three things I do solemnly take upon me after mature deliberation undertaken solemnly to be proved and in a full comprehension of the several evidences and proofs to make a cogent demonstration of those three things A demonstration so cogent that the most stomachful adversaries shall not be able to gainsay it unless they will say that they never say what they say and that they have not printed what they have printed or that the world lieth in darkness so as we cannot read either their Latine or their English but onely dream that we read what indeed we do not Either they will or they will not proceed to those later degrees of madness If they will they will prove the liberty of their wills to speak against their own light and against their own speakings and against their testimonies of conscience and against the witness of other mens eyes as well as of their own and what is this but to sin as with a Cart-rope to turn Grace backward to bid righteousnesse stand afar off and to say we will be stubborn in spight of evidence and conviction Thus it is if they will proceed to the degrees of madnesse above specified And if they will not as sure they will not then in spight of themselves and their own perversnesse they must fly by way of Refuge to these following confessions First That they have published self-contradictions beyond compare affirming what they deny and denying what they affirm calling that by the name of blasphemy which they professe to think Orthodox and asserting that for true Divinity with one stroke of their pen which with another dash of the same pen they call the Doctrine of Devils Their Second Confession must be this that being proved to have printed such contradictions in several parts of their Writings as their occasions did require or their necessities enforce them they are obliged indispensably to declare their last thoughts and to name that part of their contradiction to which they will finally adhere and in adherence to which they will quit the contrary from this day forward whether the affirmative or the negative part of the contradiction whether that which is for God or that which is against him If the later they are declaredly Libertines and Ranters and I shall wish for nothing more then the publick'st trial in the World to prove them such there being nothing now wanting but a sufficient publication and notification of the thing to effect its solemn 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or total Banishment out of the World Thus it is if they adhere to the later part of their contradiction And if they adhere unto the former which God of his mercy and by his grace may be pleased to work in them both to will and to do I know not how they can escape an entire conversion unto the truth or how obstinacy it self can slip its neck out of the collar which the Soveraignty of Light hath sitted for it and in a willing submission unto which the ghostly freedom of the obstinate doth chiefly stand The same men affi●m it to be both blasphemy and truth to say that God is the Author or cause of sin Sect. 7. To prove the three things of which I spake in my last Paragraph but one and to prove them so largely as I desire is not the businesse of this place but of my following Chapters of the second and third more especially to which I now am but writing my Introduction I will therefore say no more here then what may serve to stay the appetite of any possible impatient and longing Reader First That the Adversaries do grant it to be both false and blasphemous to say that God is the Author or cause of sin Note the double concession of Mr. B. First that his Masters do call it an excerable blasphemy p. 129 c. and yet they teach in other places 1. That God is the Author of sin 2. Wills Sin 3. Impells to it 4. Forceth men to it p. 132 133. where he labours to make it good I have abundantly proved in my Defence of God's purity chap. 4. Sect. 6. p. 30 31. and shall farther do it in this following work in particular chap. 3. sect 13. 27. Nor can they possibly eat their words but at the peril of renouncing the whole stream of Church-Writers both ancient and modern of whom I have given a large specimen in my Divine Purity Def. ch 4. sect 5. p. 22 c. to p. 29. And yet Secondly That the same party do affirm it to be neither false nor blasphemous but