Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	word_n	world_n	worldly_a	366	4	8.0107	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
B04263	A second part of Observations, censures, and confutations of divers errours in Mr. Hobbs his Leviathan beginning at the seventeenth chapter of that book. / By William Lucy, Bishop of S. David's.; Observations, censures, and confutations of notorious errours in Mr. Hobbes his Leviathan. Part 2	Lucy, William, 1594-1677.	1673 (1673)	Wing L3454A; ESTC R220049	191,568	301

true but I do not approve what follows It is therefore in vain to grant Soveraignty by precedent Covenant to grant a Covenant in the Institution of Soveraignty is most right to wit that he will Govern his People Legally and Justly or the like without doing of which no person is fit to be Soveraign but to Covenant to lose his Soveraignty if he do otherwise which he seems to understand generally by this word Covenant is absolutely naught and unfit because it must needs produce Confusions and Distractions in the Government for the People upon any hardship they suffer though never so just will repine against their Superiours and blame them and upon any surmise of faultiness in them would be ready upon such pretence to desire and endeavour a Change of Government be it Monarchical or Aristocratical SECT II. The Impiety of Mr. Hobbs his assertion that Covenants have no force but from the Vindicative Power of the Sword Discovered THen what follows is wicked in my Judgment The opinion that any Monarch receiveth his Power by Covenant that is upon Condition proceedeth from want of understanding this easie truth That Covenants being but words and breath have no force to oblige contain or protect any man but what it hath from the Publick Sword that is from the united hands of that man or assembly of men that hath the Soveraignty and whose actions are avowed by them all and performed by the strength of them all in him united This speech hath some semblance of truth with it if he had confuted the World into Atheisme who think there is no God noe reward or punishment hereafter and perhaps it might find some entertainment amongst men given over to base sensuality fordid worldly people who have no sense of honour or vertue because such men value no contract which consists not with their unhappy Condition but with men which believe there is a God who governs heaven and earth and will judge all one day which sure the generality of men do with men that have felt any sting of Conscience and have felt the happiness of nil conscire tibi this breath of theirs hath such power with God that in things of such high nature as this is what they covenant on earth is confirmed in heaven and is so esteemed by them and because it is so esteemed millions of men do and have thought it better for them to forsake all worldly felicity then to violate such Covenants and by preserving them Kings and their Kingdoms have lived in peace and prosperity but by the breach of them came to ruine and destruction so that this which he calls but breath at the same instant that it comes out of the mouth of man it is engraved in their hearts and recorded in Gods Eternal Registry in heaven CHAP. VI. SECT III. The Sword hath no power but from the Covenant according to Mr. Hobbs his Doctrine it may compel but is not properly the obliging cause of obedience VVHat is added That the breath of the Covenant is an ill foundation of Monarchy and hath no power of obliging but from the publick Sword I did wonder why he did use such various and such emphatical expressions against the Authority which is derived from a Covenant for this united force of the publick Sword according to his Doctrine must be derived from that Covenant which by him is made the sole foundation of Government And if a Covenant which by him is but breath hath no obliging power neither can the publick Sword which is derived from that Covenant have any if he instead of other Verbs which he used there had interpreted this one of Compel that this Covenant without the publick Sword had no power to compel any man to obedience it might have received some credit because when we lose these vertues of fidelity and obedience it is only the publick Sword which by force can make them submit but yet that which the Sword can justly compel any unto must be by the obliging vertue of the Covenant But whereas he placeth the obliging power in the Sword he gives all right of interest to it then which nothing can be more destructive to Monarchy Let Kings know that their Swords may rust or loose their edge and then he who hath the keenest Sword may plead the best right This encouraged the late Rebels who having got a longer Sword then the King upon that Title preserved their Usurpation to the utmost they could And the wickedness is very apparent for by his Doctrine whosoever can force his Superiority may justifie his exercise in it which is the greatest encouragement Rebellion can desire But perhaps that phrase The Publick Sword may bear him out in it for by this he understands the National Power in that Man or Assembly of men which hath the Soveraignty all whose actions are acknowledged by them all What a foolery is this Was there ever any Rebellion in which the Rebels did not deny to approve the actions of the Supreme they rebel against And suppose that impossible Fiction of the universal meeting and assent to that Covenant yet when the same persons renounce who made that Covenant how can the Sword authorize his actions which pretend his power from the breath of this Covenant which yet being but a Breath as Mr. Hobbs terms it is long since gone and perished and a new Breach started up in its place The right of the Sword is given by the breath of the Covenant with promise to own his actions that Breath is gone they breath contrarily and revoke it if any man can get the Sword he will make them blow such an other Breath upon his Sword as they did upon the first Supreme The truth is Mr. Hobbs makes the power of Government to consist immediately in the Sword but that founded upon a Breath which is blown away with any little cross wind and certainly this makes a most unhappy institution and settlement of any right That which follows in the top of the ninetieth page I let pass as not material to any thing preceding or following after and I pass to his third Inference which begins thus CHAP. VII SECT I. Mr. Hobbs his third Inference examined No man to be destroyed for his dissent to the unjust actions of others Mr. Hobbs his Political Inquisition more severe then that for Religion THirdly because the major part hath by consenting voices declared a Soveraign he that dissented must now consent with the rest that is be contented to own all the actions he shall do or else justly be destroyed by the rest This is a very sad condition either he must own all the actions his Soveraign doth or justly be destroyed I believe never Murder was so justified upon such terms before own all his actions No Christian no honest man will do it his Soveraign may be Antichristian a Hobbist whose actions no Christian man can avouch he may act foolishly which no wise man can authorize he may

do think that no man living can shew me faith where that faith was not wrought by God in his ordinary way of working and therefore one part of his distinction which he used before either by Gods operation ordinary or extraordinary might have been spared if applyed to the immediate operation I know the conversion of St. Paul may be objected and the like where God wrought his faith by a miraculous manifestation of himself to him yet consider that the conversion of St. Paul was produced immediatly by that miracle which was in a most setled course of Gods working b● hearing and seeing for hearing the word or reading it seeing some vision or miracle are most ordinate means by which God bestoweth that blessing upon his servants by preaching by visions by miracles And I do not believe that any man in the world can perswade me that he hath a right and religious faith who never heard or saw any thing which did perswade him to it Again consider that there are three things which make a gift profitable besides the giving the receiving and the right use of it the first only concerns God the two latter men Now suppose that the Sun which alone can do it should shine if men will remain in their prison keeping the doors and windows shut they shall not be able to see by that gift of light yea if he open the windows of his house and shut those of his body he shall not see Out of these ariseth the faultiness of infidelity that men shut out that means which God gives them to believe they will not hear or read the word of God they scorn his miracles and all those glorious revelations which have been made to his servants When the hands of God are open to give and the hands of men not so to receive and when he sows his seed of righteousness and the pleasures and the cares of the World choak it then the duty of faith is subject to a command although given by God CHAP. XXII SECT XVI Vnbelief the greatest breach of Gods Law St. John 3.18 and 19. explained The justice of God in the condemnation of men for want of faith The case of Abraham Genesis 17.10 elucidated The power of Parents asserted HE proceeds As also unbelief is not a breach of any of his Laws but a rejection of them all This was witty and a good way of arguing contrariorum eadem est ratio contraries do illustrate one the other But consider Reader is not the rejection of a Law a breach of a Law Suppose a man should think as some have that no supreme hath power to make Laws for life and death he steals and by the Law concerning Thievery is to be executed doth his rejection of that Law make his felony no breach of that law which is against it Certainly it is the greatest breach it tears the Law in pieces and is the greatest violation of it that may be To this purpose our Saviour most clearly John 3.18 He who believeth not is condemned already because he hath not believed in the Name of the only begotten Son of God So that according to Mr. Hobbs his Tenent here is a condemnation but no just one because not for the breach of some Law There must be therefore some divine Law exacting faith which this infidelity doth break But then Mr. Hobbs would reply to our Saviour that faith is a gift and why dost thou punish me for the want of that which is only a gift Read the 19 verse and our Saviour doth answer him And this is the condemnation that light is come into the World and men love darkness rather than light the light is the light of faith and Gods graces which he gives to men by which they may apprehend divine truths which yet they do not because they love darkness rather than light love not this light of faith which discovers to them the obliquity of their sinful worldly desires So that it is apparent that although God gives this light his grace yet men preferring the world before it it is unprofitable This was the case of these Jews which our Saviour spoke to Iohn 5.44 How can ye believe which recieve honour from one another and seek not the honour which cometh from God So that mens preferring worldly things before the things of God causeth them not to receive or make use of Gods revelations But Mr. Hobbs hath Scripture for what he writes Gen. 17.10 This is the Covenant which thou shalt observe between me and thee and thy seed after thee Now saith he Abrahams seed had not this revelation nor were yet in being yet they are a party to the covenant and bound to obey what Abraham should declare to them for Gods Law It is true what he saith that Abrahams seed had not the revelation nor were yet in being yet they are a party in this Covenant But what can be deduced further from this than that which is the ordinary condition of contracts A man gives his estate to another and to his posterity for ever upon a condition that they shall pay such and such acknowledgments which if they perform that estate shall be theirs but if not the contract shall be void Yes saith Mr. Hobbs there is more they are bound to obey whatsoever Abraham should declare for Gods Law I see nothing in these words which enforce any such thing but only the observation of circumcision thi● God calls his Covenant being a sign thereof and this Covenant consisteth in this that God would be Abrahams God and his seeds after him and that he would give them the Land of Canaan for an everlasting possession The meaning of all which was that he would in near and dear respects favour and protect them as you may read in the 7 and 8 verses of that Chapter So that here in this is no more implyed but that if they observe circumcision God would bless them there is no mention of accepting for Gods Laws whatsoever Abraham should deliver and therefore he might have spared his following discourse which saith he they could not be but in virtue of the obedience they owed to their Parents who if they be subject to no other earthly power as here in the case of Abraham have soveraign power over their Children and servants This I say might have been spared for if the Covenant went no further than I have expressed as without doubt it did not there needs no soveraign power to be forced to it But I am of his mind that they who are Parents where is no other established soveraignty have that supreme power over their children and servants which one conclusion will confute the whole body of his Politiques as I intend to shew hereafter CHAP. XXII SECT XVII The obedience of Abrahams Family to Gods Laws depended upon that to him as Father of the Family Mr. Hobbs his consequences drawn from this proposition not rightly deduced His constant varying from the English

Philosophers concerning God his essence his attributes concerning the Creation we shall find that they laboured still to prove what they spoke and by reason to convince mans understanding Only I must confess Trismegistus in his Pomander makes his discourse which is most divine to be revelation and four ought I know it may be so much of it but otherwise they all go upon ratiocination and the reason is because such things ought not to be assented to which are not either proved or revealed by God which is the most invincible evidence that any truth can have But now Moses and those holy writers inspired by God in their compiling those holy Books only affirm this and this without arguing the reasons of it because they were divine not humane words likewise in all those moral duties which concern men they are writ with the majesty of the King of Kings and Lord of Lords Do this or this not disputing as Plato and Aristotle how it conduceth to the present happiness but exacting obedience It is true when the Prophets disputed with the Gentiles or Apostles with Jewes or Gentiles who believed not their report they confuted the one by reason or out of their own authors and the other out of the former Scriptures because all proofs must be made ex concessis and out of such premisses they would confirm these Conclusions God exacted a belief and this he doth with the greatest arguments and most forcing that are possible by Praemium and Poena reward and punishment but such as never King or Emperour either did or was able to propose by eternal happiness or misery which nothing can doe but God alone And this is done to those who will receive or not receive his word Well the words contained here are delivered with such an exaction as never man proposed the same truths in and required with such promises as never man did meet with nor could perform we must needs therefore be assured they are divine CHAP. XXII SECT V. The third Argument from the sanctity and integrity of the persons who delivered these truths The miraculous conduct of the Children of Israel by Moses The objection of his assertation of dominion answered The predictions of the Prophets not possible without a divine revelation The truth and certainty of their predictions objected ANd so I come to the persons who delivered these truths to us who will give us as full assurance as any thing else of the certainty The persons were of most eminent integrity and affirmed that these writings were delivered them from God I will begin with the first Moses a man who approved his conversation with God and Gods approbation of him by most certain signs first by those mighty wonders which he wrought in Aegypt before Pharaoh upon him and his in their journey afterwards by his wonderful conduct of the Children of Israel through the wilderness the like of which was never known The bringing water out of the rock feeding that mighty Host with bread and flesh the miraculous stopping the mouths of Korah c. why should we imagine that this man should lye and say he received this law from God when he did not Yes to make himself King among them Indeed the rebells last spoke of did object that but God confuted it by a miraculous destroying them and we see although whilst he lived he went betwixt God and them delivering prayers to God for them and bringing Gods will to them yet we find not that he acquired any high matters for himself the Priesthood which was to be a perpetual dignity he put Aaron into the Politique government he bequeathed to Josuah and we do not find him contriving more than an ordinary proportion for his Children which shews that he had no self end in any thing he did Nay we may read in the 32. of Exodus 10. when Moses interceded with God for favour to the Children of Israel God made him answer let me alone that my wrath may wax hot against them and that I may consume them and I will make of thee a great Nation Nevertheless Moses was not bribed with this for his own interest to forsake Gods glory but presently after presseth God for his own honour to have pitty upon the Israelites as you may read vers 11. c. where methinks he did like Abraham offer his whole posterity to Gods glory and honour which sheweth that Moses had no sinister ends in his actions but only the glory of God which certainly could not rise out of such a proud lye as to take upon him divine revelations where there were none Next let us consider the Prophets they were men that adventured their lives and suffered miseries for those truths they foretold and taught yea they were sure of it and they who followed their counsels according to these revelations which God made to them it was well with them and mischief followed them who did otherwise Those things which they foretold did come to pass accordingly both concerning the Jewes and all other nations yea the whole world why should not we be assured that these things came from God which they say were revealed by him since we see them true in all those works which they forespoke of CHAP. XXII SECT VI. Of the doctrine of the Apostles the efficacy of their preaching The power of Tongues their sufferings and patience not possible but from divine inspiration A further assertion of the same argument à posteriori such effect not producible but from a divine law IF we descend to the Apostles we shall find they were a sort of men of mean extraction and education how could it be possible that they unless by revelation should attain to such an efficacy of preaching as to be able to convince the whole world and preach this divine Philosophy How came they by the power of Tongues to be able to travel through the world and preach to every man in his own language but by the supernatural assistance of the Holy Ghost Why would they undertake the work through such cruel persecutions foretold them that they should be as sheep amongst wolves but that it was a duty enjoyned them from the Holy Ghost and they were sure that he who promised it would make good their reward in heaven hereafter for here they were to have miseries Truly I know not what can be opposed against this but that both from the matters delivered rom the manner that they are delivered by and from the persons who delivered them we have as great an assurance that these truths were revealed to them by God as can be wrought by humane faith Yea but let us consider further and it is scientifical à posteriori from the effect to the cause for if it be not possible that these effects should come from any cause but God as indeed I think it not possible then it is demonstrated that these must be revelations and we have a mighty assurance of them CHAP. XXII SECT

which we just now treated of And then consider what fearful consequencies will follow out of his instances his first is Heb. 1.3 Our Saviour is called the Character of his person here saith he the word Hypostasis or person as we render it that is the substance to the Image of that substance And then observe by this Philosophy Christ is nothing being not the substance and he adds to make his conclusion more apparent he is in the same place called splendor the splendor of the Divine glory that is his Translation and therefore he adds five or which is the same lumen de Lucido light out of a lucid body so I render his words for Lucidum or the light body is the subject or substance and light is the accident or nothing rather which proceeds out of it so that by this Philosophy the Father should be a substance and the Son but an accident or nothing Let us go on with him Heb. 1.11 And the first faith is called the Hypostatis of things hoped for that is saith he for the Speech is Metaphorical Faith is the Fundament of hope Now Reader by his Philosophy Faith should be a substance a body for he allows no other substance but bodies which without doubt is a quality inhaerent in the Soul and by him the things hoped for or to give him what scope his words can bear the hope of future blessings which is founded upon faith is nothing or at the best but a Phancy He produceth another Text 2 Cor. 9.4 where I do not find the word Hypostasis nor any thing relating to his intent But now that the Reader may discern how these Texts are abused by him I will lend such assistance to him as my present conceipt administers to my self let him consider how in the first to the Hebrews the 3. it is said that the Son of God is the brightness of his glory here first is not any mention of Lumen de Lucido of Light proceeding out of a Lucid body as he expresseth it but the splendor or most Illustrious appearance of that unutterable Glory which was manifested by the Incarnation of the Son of God and his conversation amongst us in the flesh which indeed clouding and vailing the extremity of that infinite glory which was in the Deity with his humanity he made it more clearly and brightly appear to us then it could have been discerned by humane eyes without it and in that regard he may well be said to be the brightness of his Glory because it made that glory which was invisible in its self visible to us and those glorious Attributes with it which were not possible for Nature to reach or any way comprehend to be apprehended by Faith in him the Son And in all this we find neither substance nor substantiated which should be founded upon it But then to proceed to the second passage in that verse which he made the first and the express Image or Character of his person conceive Reader if you can how it is possible to make an Image of substance meerly substance not cloathed with any accident colour figure or any such thing which is subject to sense for these are the only things by which we can Caracterize any thing and these are not in God this Image or Character thereof must needs be some substantial thing and that must needs be some substantial thing and that must be represented to the understanding not the sense which only can apprehend substances especially abstracted from all accidents then consider whose Character it must be to wit Gods who is infinite immense unimmaginable unintelligible not to be represented by any thing less than himself it must needs therefore be another of the same another it must be because the Representors and the Represented must be Two the same it must be because nothing no Art or Conceipt or any thing can imagine any thing to Characterize God but God here then in clear termes are two Persons and one Nature and not his imagination of a substance and accident or indeed nothing Then we will explain his second place Heb. 11.1 faith is there the Hypostasis of things hoped for we read it substance there will be no difference about that he ingeniously confesseth it to be a Metaphor and surely so it is and the likeness consists in this that as a substance is it out of which accidents are produced which supports and maintains them so hope as he expounds it or the things hoped for that is the blessings of God either in this or the other world for Gods blessings in this world may be hoped for arise out of Faith in which God hath founded them and which is the sole and only thing by which God hath Covenanted to continue and preserve them to us thus taking it Metaphorically as he but then take it litterally as the Schools distinguish subjectum quo and subjectum quod a subject by which this subsists in another and a subject which supports really the inherent accident so may I speak of substance or fundamentum the foundation of hope without doubt is the reasonable soul of man out of which this act or habit is produced and to which it doth adhere or inhere this soul is the subjectum or fundamentum quod but faith the substance or fundamentum quo by the mediation of which hope is there fixed and setled for he that hopes for blessings from God without Gods revealed promises which are apprehended only by faith trusts in his own wit not in God thus this Text being explained there is no violation offer'd to any Term but each word hath its proper and genuine signification and it lays open a clear and manifest truth which cannot be denyed but contrary wish by his explanation every word is wrested out of its proper sense and meaning for faith which is an accident a habit must be a substance hope to exist in the Aire where is no foundation no substance to support it SECT III. Some other things Examined HE comes next in that 340 Page to enquire Quid est essentia which is answered it is not distinguished from substantiae the next quaere is what is substans the same with ens the same with a thing that is whatsoever is truly existing distinct from fancy and name Here the Reader may discern how violently he prosecutes the former conceipt that there is no real thing besides substance as if to inhere or adhere were not to exist but only subsistance were existance but I shall prosecute this no further now it being a conclusion to which I do not remember that I have objected any thing heretofore which are the only things I intended to vindicate in this paper next he enters upon a long discourse how the Greeks and Latines have distorted names as he termes it which I omit upon the same reason before although a most unhappy perswasion of his But in pag. 342. in his discourse of a person he