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	transgression_n	2,011	5	10.9498	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47744	Five discourses by the author of The snake in the grass viz. On water baptism, episcopacy, primitive heresie of the Quakers, reflections on the Quakers, a brief account of the Socinian trinity ; to which is added a preface to the whole.; Selections. 1700	Leslie, Charles, 1650-1722.	1700 (1700)	Wing L1133; ESTC R1214	55,897	120

but the Woman being deccived was in the Transgression Adam was deceived and fell as well as the Woman but the meaning is he was not first or principally deceived Again As for you who stick so close to the Letter when it seemeth to serve your turn Go ye and learn what that meaneth I WILL HAVE MERCY AND NOT SACRIFICE Math. ix 13. By which it cannot be understood that God did not require Sacrifice for he commanded it upon Pain of Death Yet he says Jer. vii 22. I spake not unto your Fathers nor commanded them concerning Burnt-Offerings or Sacrifices But this thing Commanded I them saying Obey my Voice c. according as it is written 1 Sam. xv 22. To obey is better than Sacrifice By all which cannot be meant that God did not Command the Jews concerning Burnt-Offerings and Sacrifices for we know how particularly they were commanded but that the outward Sacrifice was not the chief and principal part of the Command which respected chiefly the inward Sacrifice and Circumcision of the Heart Which when they neglected and lean'd wholly to the Outward then God detests their Oblations Isa i. 14. Your new Moons and your appointed Feasts my Soul hateth I am weary to bear them And he says V. 12. Who hath required this at your Hand It was certainly God who had requir'd all these things at their hands but these outward Performances tho' the Neglect or Abuse of them was punished with Death yet they were not the chief and principal part of the Command being intended chiefly for the sake of the Inward and Spiritual Part From which when they were separated they were like the Body when the Soul is gone a dead and a loathsome CARCASS of Religion And which God is therefore said not to have commanded because he did not Command them without the other As he made not the Body without the Soul yet he made the Body as well as the Soul VIII And as there is Soul and Body in Man so while Man is in the Body there must be a Soul and Body of Religion that is an outward and an inward WORSHIP with our Bodies as well as our Souls And as the Separation of Soul and Body in Man is called Death so is the Separation of the outward and the inward Part of Religion the Death and Destruction of Religion The outward is the Cask and the inward is the Wine The Cask is no Part of the Wine but if you break the Cask you lose the Wine And as certainly whoever destroys the outward Institutions of Religion lose the inward Parts of it too As is sadly experienc'd in the Quakers who having thrown off the outward Baptism and the other Sacrament of Christ's Death have thereby lost the inward thing signify'd which is the PERSONAL Christ as Existing without all other Men and having so Suffer'd Rose Ascended and now and for ever Sitteth in Heaven in his true proper Human Nature WITHOUT all other Men. This the Quakers will not own except some of the New Separation and this they have lost by their Neglect of those outward Sacraments which Christ appointed for this very End among others that is as Remembrances of his Death For it had been morally impossible for Men who had constantly and with due Reverence attended these holy Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper ever to have forgot his Death so lively represented before their Eyes and into which they were baptized or to have turn'd all into a meer Allegory perform'd within every Man's Breast as these Quakers have done But the Enemy has perswaded them to break the Cask and destroy the Body of Religion whereby the Wine is spilt and the Soul of Religion is fled from them And by neglecting the outward Part they have lost the whole Inward and Truth of Religion which is a true Faith in the OUTWARD Christ and in the Satisfaction made for our Sins by his Blood OUTWARDLY shed and in his Intercession in our Nature as our High-Priest at his Father's Right Hand now in Heaven into which Holy of Holies He has carry'd his own Blood of Expiation once offer'd upon the Cross and presents it for ever as the Atonement and full Satisfaction for the Sins of the whole World but apply'd only by true Faith and Repentance thereby becomes fully Effectual to the Salvation of every Faithful Penitent This is the only true Christian Faith And from this the Quakers have totally fallen and that chiefly by their Mad throwing off the OUTWARD Guards Preservatives Fences Sacraments and Pledges of Religion And those OUTWARD Means of Grace which Christ has commanded and given us as the only OUTWARD GROUNDS for our Hope of Glory For how can that Man get to Heaven who will not go the way that Christ has appointed who came down from Heaven on purpose to shew and lead us the way thither yet we will be wiser than he find fault with his Institutions as being too much upon the Outward and think that we can and may Spiritualize them finer and make the way shorter than he has done IX But to return if the Quakers cou'd find such Texts concerning Baptism as I have shewn above concerning Sacrifices as if it were said That God did not command Baptism that he hated it and was weary to bear it that he would not have it c. If such Texts cou'd be found How wou'd the Quakers triumph Who wou'd be able to stand before them And yet if such were found they wou'd prove no more against the outward BAPTISM than they did against the outward SACRIFICES i. e. That if any regarded nothing else in Baptism than the outward Washing it wou'd be as hateful to God as the Jewish Sacrifices when they regarded nothing more in them but the Outward And it may be truly said That God did not Command either such Sacrifices or such a Baptism because he commanded not the Outward alone but with respect unto and chiefly for the sake of the Inward And therefore as all these and other the like Expressions in the Old Testament did not at all tend to the Abolition only to the Rectification of the Legal Sacrifices So much less can that single Expression 1 Cor. i. 17. of Paul's saying upon the occasion and in the sense abovemention'd that he was not sent to Baptize but to Preach much less can this infer the Abolition of Baptism being as positively commanded as Sacrifices were under the Law and as certainly practis'd by the Apostles as the Sacrifices were by the Levitical Priests X. Now suppose that I should deny that OUTWARD Sacrifices were ever commanded or that the Jews did ever practise them And shou'd Interpret all that is said of Sacrifices only of the Inward as the Quakers do of Baptism and I shou'd produce the Texts above-quoted to prove that God did not command Sacrifices which are much more positive than that single one which is strain'd against Baptism I say suppose that I shou'd be so

wer baptized Nay they were all baptized as many as believed as before is prov'd And in this very place St. Paul taking it for granted that all who believed were baptized which I have already observ'd from his Question to certain Disciples Acts xix 3. not whether they were baptized but unto what i. e. In what Name they had been baptized So here 1 Cor. i. 13. He does not make the Question whether they had been baptized That he takes for granted But in what Name were ye baptized Which supposes not only that all were baptized but likewise that all who were baptized were baptized in some outward Name and therefore that it was the Outward i. e. Water-baptism VII But the second Text objected V. 17. is yet to be accounted for where St. Paul says Christ sent me not to Baptize but to Preach the Gospel This he said in justification of himself for having baptiz'd so few in that place for which he blesses God because as it happened it prov'd a great justification of his not baptizing in his own Name But then on the other hand here wou'd seem to be a Neglect in him of his Duty For if it was his Duty to have baptized them all and he baptized but a few here was a great Neglect In Answer to this we find that there was no Neglect in not baptizing them for that not a few but many of the Corinthians were baptized Acts xviii 8. that is as many as believed as before is shewn But then who was it that baptized those many For St. Paul baptized but a few I Answer The Apostle employ'd others under him to Baptize And he vindicates this by saying That he was not sent to Baptize i. e. principally and chiefly that was not the chief part of his Commission But the greater and more difficult part was that of Preaching to Dispute with Perswade and Convert the Heathen World To this great Parts and Courage and Miraculous Gifts were necessary But to Administer the outward Form of Baptism to those who were Converted had no Difficulty in it requir'd no great Parts or Endowments only a lawful Commission to Execute it And it wou'd have taken up too much of the Apostles time it was impossible for them to have baptized with their own Hands those vast Multitudes whom they Converted Christianity had reach'd to all Quarters of the then known World as far almost as at this Day before the Apostles left the World And cou'd Twelve Men Baptize the whole World Their Progress was not the least of their Miracles The Bread of Life multiply'd faster in their Distribution of it than the Loaves by our SAVIOUR's Breaking of them St. Peter Converted about Three Thousand at one Sermon Acts ii 41. And at another time about Five Thousand Ch. iv 4. Multitudes both of Men and Women Ch. v. 14. Many more than the Apostles cou'd have counted much more than they cou'd have baptized for which if they had stay'd they had made slender Progress No. The Apostles were sent as loud Heraulds to Proclaim to all the Earth to run swiftly and gather much People and not to stay they cou'd not stay for the baptizing with their own Hands all that they Converted They left that to others whom they had ordain'd to Administer it Yet not so as to exclude themselves but they themselves did Baptize where they saw occasion as St. Paul here did BAPTIZE Crispus and Gaius and the House of Stephanas some of the Principal of the Corinthians Not that he was oblig'd to have done it himself having others to whom he might have left it For he was not sent that is put under the Necessity to Baptize with his own Hands but to Preach to Convert others that was his principal Province and which he was not to neglect upon the account of baptizing which others could do as well as he But if you will so understand the Words of his not being sent i. e. that it was not within his Commission that he was not Impower'd by Christ to Baptize then it wou'd have been a Sin and great Presumption in him to have baptized any body Nay more This Text thus understood is flatly contradictory to Matth. xxviii 19. which says Go Baptize And this says I am not sent to Baptize These are contradictory if by I am not sent be understood I have not Power or Commission to Baptize But by I am not sent no more is meant in this Text than that baptizing is not the chief or principal part of my Commission As if a General were accused for Mustering and Listing Men in his own Name and not in the King 's and he shou'd say in Vindication of himself that he had never listed any except such and such Officers for that he was not sent to Muster or Drill Men or to Exercise Troops or Regiments but to Command the Army Wou'd it follow from hence that he had not Power to Exercise a Troop or a Regiment or that it was not within his Commission Or if a Doctor of Physick shou'd say that it was not his Part to compound Medicines and make up Drugs that was the Apothecary's Business but to give Prescriptions wou'd any Man infer from this that he might not Compound his own Medicines if he pleas'd Or if to come nearer a Professor of Divinity or a Bishop shou'd say That he was not sent to Teach School this wou'd not imply that he might not Keep School nay he ought if there were no others to do it So the Apostle of the Gentiles was not sent to spend his Time in Baptizing Visiting the Sick or other Parts of his Duty which others might perform so as to hinder his great Work in Converting of the Gentiles All of whom he cou'd not Baptize nor Visit all their Sick Yet both these were within his Commission and he might and did Execute them where he saw occasion As if all the Sick in London shou'd expect to be Visited by the Bishop of London and all the Children shou'd be brought to be baptized by him he might well say That he was not sent to Baptize or to Visit their Sick but to look after his Episcopal Function And send them for these Offices to others under him and yet this wou'd no ways imply that these Offices were not within the Episcopal Commission or that he was not sent both to Baptize and to Visit the Sick But only that he was not sent principally and chiefly to Baptize or to Visit the Sick And as to that Phrase of being sent we find it us'd in this same sense to mean only being chiefly and principally sent Thus Gen. xlv 8. Joseph said to his Brethren It was not you that sent me hither but God It was certainly his Brethren who sent him for they sold him into Egypt But it was not They principally and chiefly but God who had other and extraordinary Ends in it Adam was not deceived says the Apostle 1 Tim. ii 14.