Selected quad for the lemma: woman_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
woman_n	adam_n	deceive_v	eve_n	1,484	5	11.7697	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63003	An explication of the Decalogue or Ten Commandments, with reference to the catechism of the Church of England to which are premised by way of introduction several general discourses concerning God's both natural and positive laws / by Gabriel Towerson ...	Towerson, Gabriel, 1635?-1697.; Towerson, Gabriel, 1635?-1697. Introduction to the explication of the following commandments.	1676 (1676)	Wing T1970; ESTC R21684	636,461	560

this I say 1. That this Law being given to Adam not only in his personal capacity but as he was the representative of all mankind as appears from the Scriptures charging the guilt of it upon all that descended from his loins this Law must be consequently supposed to have been obligatory to us as well as to him to whom it was immediately given 2. Again being it is a dictate of Natures Law not only that we should yield obedience to his commands but also where we fail repent of the breach of them the Law of abstaining from the Tree of Knowledge as being a Law of Gods to us must consequently so far concern us as to oblige us to repent of the breach of it II. From such Law or Laws as were given to man in the state of innocency pass we to those which were given to him after his fall Where 1. The first that presents it self is that command of God concerning the Womans being subject to her Husband Gen. 3.16 Vnto the Woman he said I will greatly multiply thy sorrows and conception In sorrow shalt thou bring forth children and thy desire shall be to thy Husband and he shall rule over thee For though it be true that this was spoken more particularly to Eve upon occasion of her transgressing Gods Command yet as the Curse wherewith this Command is accompanied was manifestly intended for all of the Female Sex so it is no less evident as for that reason so for the capacity the Woman was in that the Command was likewise intended For being Eve was the representative of all Woman-kind as well as the Wife of Adam whatsoever Command was given to her must be supposed to belong to all of her Sex and condition And accordingly S. Paul doth not only urge this obedience upon the Corinthian Women in reference to the Law 1 Cor. 14.34 but yet more particularly 1 Tim. 1.14 upon the account of this Command that was given to Eve for having before said that he suffered not a Woman to teach nor to usurp authority over the man but to be in silence he adds as a reason of it because Adam was not deceived but the Woman being deceived was in the transgression Which being the very reason why God gave the forementioned Command to Eve of being subject to her Husband it is evident that when in the Epistle to the Corinthians he saith that they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the Law his meaning was of that Law which was given to Eve and consequently that that Law is obligatory to all The same is to be said of the other positive Law 2. The second is that which was given to Adam upon the account of his disobedience Gen. 3.19 In the sweat of thy brow shalt thou eat bread until thou return unto the ground for that that was a Command as well as a Curse is evident from the 23. verse where we find God sending forth the man from the Garden of Eden to till the ground from whence he was taken Now forasmuch as Adam was the representative of mankind as of whose blood all Nations were made forasmuch as he is here considered not under the relation of a Husband but a man nor is there any thing in the Precept to determine it to him whatsoever is given in command to him must be supposed to be intended to all persons according to their capacities and degrees And indeed as in the Laws of men such are presumed to oblige the Generations following which have nothing in them to restrain them to the present so there is the same reason to believe that Law of God which was given to him from whom we are descended to oblige us also if there be nothing in it to determine it to him alone for it being neither suitable to the majesty nor agreeable to the custom of Law-givers to renew their Laws as often as the persons change that are under them that which is directed to one Generation must be presumed to concern the next and so on to succeeding Ages Lastly for there is something particular to the former Laws which is not common to all others the subjection of the Woman and the laboriousness of the Man being founded upon the transgression of our first Parents which the Scripture affirms to be imputed unto us those duties themselves must consequently appertain to us as well as those transgressions do 3. From these Precepts given to our first Parents pass we to those which were given to Noah and his Sons who after the Flood were under the same capacity that is to say the Representatives of all mankind because all mankind was then in them Now there are two positive or revealed Laws which the Scripture informs us to have been given to Noah a prohibition of murther with a command to put him to death that should be guilty of it and a like prohibition of eating flesh with the life or blood Gen. 9.4 and so on Of the former of these being obligatory to us there can be no doubt as because they to whom it was given were the Representatives of mankind so because the substance of that Law is natural the Precepts of the Law of Nature both forbidding murther and setling a Magistracy to punish it The greatest question will be concerning the latter even that of not eating blood For though the Precept be ceremonial yet it doth not follow because the ceremonial Law of Moses is abrogated that therefore that also must be for as S. Paul speaks concerning Circumcision this being not of Moses but of the Fathers yea of those Fathers which were the Representatives of all mankind the abolishing of that doth not necessarily draw with it the abolishing of the other Again it is manifest that as many Nations of the posterity of Noah did carefully abstain from blood so the Jews admitted none even to the priviledge of being Proselytes of the Gates which was the lowest form of their Religion without an obligation from them to observe it Which is no more than what we find prescribed by God himself Lev. 17.10 It is evident 3. That though the Apostles and Elders of Jerusalem eased the Gentile Christians of Circumcision yet they laid this Precept upon them of abstaining from blood Acts 15.20 And accordingly the Latine Church for above a thousand years and the Greek Church unto this day do religiously abstain from it To return now an answer to this difficulty Where first I shall readily confess that this being a Law given to Noah and his Sons the then Representatives of mankind it was consequently to oblige all mankind till it should be repealed I shall make no difficulty 2. To grant that the abolition of the Ceremonial Law of Moses doth not necessarily draw with it the abolishing of the other because in time before it But then 3. I say that it is manifest enough that the Precept was repealed by Christ and I alledge for my saying to that of S.

to be common to them with others and is either with a Power of Alienation as all plenary Dominions or Properties are or without it as the Possessions of Usufructuaries properly so called and other such like imperfect Properties The onely difficulty will be as to the Foundation it hath in Nature its Original and the Means of acquiring of it with other the things before propos'd 2. For the resolution of the first whereof we must distinguish of such things as are immediately instrumental to our Support and such as are onely mediately and by vertue of those things which they produce or maintain If the Question be concerning the former of which sort are Food and Raiment and the like so no doubt Reason and Nature do so far enforce a Propertyin them as the Necessities of Nature do require For the Life of Man being not to be supported without such an Application of them to our selves as makes them perfectly useless to others there will arise a necessity of appropriating such a Portion of them to every Person as may suffice to the support of him And though I will not affirm as much concerning those things by which the former are produc'd or maintain'd of which nature are Trees to the Fruit and the Earth to those and all other the Supports of Humane Nature yet I shall not stick to maintain that the same Nature dictates the expediency of a Property and perswades to the observation of it Partly because if Men had not distinct proportion in the Earth from whence all the Supports of Humane Lise receive either their Being or Subsistence they would not be over-forward to give it that Cultivation which it requires as fearing lest what they had so cultivated should be reap'd by others and partly because Mens Necessities and Desires being in general the same there would otherwise especially since the Peopling of the World have arisen among Men perpetual and irreconcileable Discords concerning the enjoying of those Benefits which it affords But other Foundations in Nature as it will be hard to find so I think it extremely vain to seek because as I shall by and by shew Property had its Orignal from Divine Institution and because those Principles which I have alledg'd from Nature may suffice to perswade those to whom the Divine Institution is unknown to introduce it where it is not already and to confirm and cherish it where it is 3. It being thus evident what Foundation Property hath in Nature proceed we to inquire how it was at first introduc'd For the resolution whereof though it be commonly alledg'd out of the Ancient * Justinus historicus li. 43. statim ab initio Italiae cultores primi Aborigines fuere quorum Rex Saturnus tantae justitiae fuisse traditur ut neque servierit sub illo quisquam neque quicquam privatae rei habuerit sed omnia communia indivisa omnibus fuerint veluti unum cunctis patrimonium esset Cicero de Officiis lib. 1. Sunt autem privata nulla naturâ sed aut veteri occupatione ut qui quondam in vacua venerunt aut ofctoriâ ut qui bello potiti sunt aut lege aut pactione conditione sorte Virgilius Georgicorum lib. 1. Ante Jovem nulli subigebant arva coloni Nec signare quidem aut partiri limite campum Fas erat in medium quaerebant De eodem saeculo Seneca in Octavia Act. 2. Pervium cunctis iter Communis usus omnium rerum fuit Heathen and particularly the Poets that all things at first were common unto all and continu'd so to be till either the Prevalence of some had appropriated what they pleas'd to themselves or the general Consent of Mankind led thereto by the former Considerations put them upon a distribution of them yet as † Instit Divin li. 5. c. 5 Quod Poetae dictum illud nempe prius citatum ex Virgilio sic accipi oportet non ut existimemus nihil omnino tum fuisse privati sed more Poetico figuratum ut intelligamus tam liberales fuisse homines ut natas sibi fruges non includerent nec soli absconditis incubarent sed pauperes ad communionem proprii laboris admitterent Lactantius hath well observ'd that possibly nothing else was meant by that ancient Community than that the Men of elder Times were so liberal as to admit the Poorer sort to a participation of their Possessions and Labours all Expressions of Poets being not strictly to be understood so that there was such a thing as Property from the beginning even by the Institution of the Divine Majesty I doubt not to make appear from that first Grant of Dominion from which it may seem more rational to infer a Community 'T is in Genesis 1.28 and the Words these And God blessed them and God said unto them Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the earth and subdue it and have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the air and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth as well as over the Earth it self For beside that Man and Woman are by the Institution of the Divine Majesty but as one Person and therefore that Dominion which God gave to Adam and Eve to be look'd upon rather as a Property than a Community whence it is that in the repetition of this Grant to Noah and his Sons there is not the least mention either of Noah's Wife or of theirs which in all probability there would have been if they had had an equal Interest in it with their Husbands or were to be look'd upon as distinct Persons from them beside this I say the Woman being by the condition of her Sex subjected to the Man makes her rather an Usufructuary than a Proprietary strictly so called or as an inferiour Proprietary under a Chief by means whereof there is not so much a Community as distinct but subordinate Properties Now as that Property wherewith our first Parents or rather the one of them was invested gave them Authority under God to dispose of it to their Children according as they themselves should judge expedient so that they did accordingly dispose of it and that too in distinct Properties the Story of Cain and Abel shews the former whereof as the Book of Genesis * Ch. 4.2 c. Seld. Mare Claus l. 1. c. 4. informs us had Cattel and Meadows for his Property the latter Tillage and Corn. For that these were not onely their Employments under their Father but their Properties appears by their bringing of each for an Offering and passing them away as well as having an inspection of them Now though what hath been said concerning Adam sufficiently shews what the Original of Property was and by whom and after what manner it was at first introduc'd yet because Humane Kind had as it were a second Beginning in Noah all but him and his Family being destroy'd by the Flood I think it not amiss to shew