Selected quad for the lemma: world_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
world_n	deny_v	live_v	ungodliness_n	2,303	5	11.2667	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46354	Several sermons preach'd on the whole eighth chapter of the Epistle to the Romans eighteen of which preach'd on the first, second, third, fourth verses are here published : wherein the saints exemption from condemnation, the mystical union, the spiritual life, the dominion of sin and the spirits agency in freeing from it, the law's inability to justifie and save, Christ's mission, eternal sonship, incarnation, his being an expiatory sacrifice, fulfilling the laws righteousness (which is imputed to believers) are opened, confirmed, vindicated, and applied / by Tho. Jacomb.	Jacombe, Thomas, 1622-1687.	1672 (1672)	Wing J119; ESTC R26816	712,556	668

and who is in Christ Jesus He doth not say There is no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus (b) Non dicit quia non secundum carnem ambulamus sed qui non secundum c. ne faciat in hâc justificationis causâ primum esse quod secundarium est c. Muscul in Rom. Cap. 8. V. 4. p. 124. because they walk not after the Flesh c. but to them who walk not after the Flesh c. so that this is meerly descriptive of the person The heavenly and spiritual life is not the (c) Non propter novam aliquam qualitatem quam in nobis operata est gratia Spiritus Sancti extra condemnationem sumus sed propter solam gratiam Dei quam fide Christi apprehendimus Muscul Non causa justificationis sed conditio nota justificatorum Pareus See more Dub. 2. p. 773. Cause of Justification only 't is the note or evidence of justified persons And as to the union with Christ the fruits of the Spirit and the effects of grace and sanctification begun in us these do not unite us unto Christ onely they (a) Fructus Spiritus sive sanctificationis in nobis inchoatae effecta nos non inserunt Christo sed nos ei insitos esse declarant Beza declare us to be so united they are Evidences not Causes Wherever there is justification and the mystical union there is sanctification and holiness yet the latter is not the ground of the former as wherever life is there is sense and motion yet these are not the cause but onely the sign evidence and consequent of life There 's a vast (b) Sunt cohaerentes quidem sed diversae questiones quâ re eximamur omni condemnationi c. quinam in Christo eximuntur condemnationi ii videlicet qui se in Christo esse ex regenerationis fructibus ostendunt Beza difference betwixt who is justified and why or upon what grounds he is justified The holy walker is the justified person but he is not justified because of the holiness of his walking No this causal influence upon justification is wholly founded upon the merits of Christ applied by Faith This is the Protestant-Doctrine to which I shall have occasion from these two first Verses to speak more than once 4. The description is laid down not in the Negative only but in the Affirmative also 't is not only who walk not after the Flesh but 't is also who walk after the Spirit In order to the participation and evidence of the grace of the Gospel 't is not enough (c) Non sat est non ambulare secundum Carnem abstineré á malis non peccare sed oportet secundum Spiritum ambulare benè ●agere Qui enim non benè agit hoc saltem malum committit quod bonum omittit Corn. Mussus Ut intelligamus non sufficere ad evitandam omnem damnationem abstinere á Carnalibus sed oportere proficere in Spiritualibus Cajet not to be evil or not to do evil but there must be being good and doing good Meer Negatives will never justifie or save for a man may go so far upon bare restraing grace and besides God requires a great deal more As when the repentance is right there is not only a ceasing to do evil but there is also a learning to do well Isa 1.16 Psal 34.14 Depart from evil and do good So when the walking is right and evidential of Gospel-mercy there is in it both the absence of Sin and also the presence of Vertue and Grace A Religion made up of Nots is but an half-religion To be magis extra vitia quam cum virtutibus as the (d) Tacit. Hist Lib. 1. p. 323. ex Edit Lips Historian describes Galba rather free from vice than vertuous in the positive fruits and effects of vertue this is not sufficient 't is to be as a cake that is bak'd but on one side as the Metaphor is Hos 7.8 The first is well but the last is (e) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist Eth. l. 4. c. 1. better as the Philosopher tells us The Gospel doth not only teach us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts but also to live soberly righteously godly in this present world T it 2.12 And it threatens not only those who bring forth evil fruit but also those who do not bring forth good fruit Matth. 3.10 'T is an expression of Theophylact upon the Words (f) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Theop. Meer abstinence from Vice doth not crown but there must be also the participation of Virtue and of that which is Spiritual And (g) 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost in Vers 4. hujus Capitis Chrysostome upon the fourth Verse speaks to the same purpose You have in the description of the Text therefore the negative and the positive part of holiness and these two must go together for holiness is made up of both 1 Pet. 1.14 15. As obedient children not fashioning your selves according to the former lusts in your ignorance there 's the negative part But as he which hath called you is holy so be ye holy in all manner of conversation there 's the positive part As some read the Words this head cannot be grounded upon them for they onely put in the Negative not walking after the Flesh leaving out the Affirmative but after the Spirit So the Syriack so the Vulgar and the Expositors who follow it But generally the Greek Copies have it and the Syriack too brings it in v. 4 and why not here as well as there 'T is not put in onely as a (h) Non est dubium rectissimè tanquam interpretationem addi secundum Spiritum Qui enim non ambulat secundum Carnem necesse est ut ambulet secundum Spiritum medium enim in vitâ humanâ nullum est Contz in cap. 8. ad Rom. Qu●● true interpretation but 't is a part of the Text it self 5. The Apostle here brings in two Walkings and he supposes them to be contrary for he sets them in opposition one to the other who walk not after the Flesh but after the Spirit implying a contrariety betwixt these two walkings And so indeed there is the Flesh and Spirit are two contrary principles and therefore the Walkings which proceed from these contrary principles must needs be contrary too They are so contrary that they are incompatible and inconsistent in the same subject there may be Flesh and Spirit in the same person but there cannot be walking after both in the same person Therefore saith the Apostle Gal. 5.16 Walk in the spirit and ye shall not fulfil the lusts of the flesh as if he had said he that doth the one cannot do the other too He goes on v. 17. The flesh lusteth against the spirit and the spirit against the flesh and these two are contrary Contrary as to their Natures their Originals and which suits best with the scope of

Matth. 22.45 Lord of David and the Son of David the branch of David and the root of David both ‖ Revel 22.16 root and off-spring how could such different things be affirm'd of him but upon the distinction of his two Natures that therefore is not in the least impeach'd by the Hypostatical Vnion True upon this Union there is the communication of properties betwixt them so as that that which is proper to one Nature is applyed to the other as you see Joh. 3.13 1 Cor. 2.8 Act. 20.48 and so as that that which is predicated of the one may be also predicated of the other I mean in the concrete for in the abstract this will not hold as I cannot say the Deity is the Humanity or the Humanity is the Deity yet I may truly say God is Man and Man is God a communication of properties thus far or in this sense we deny not it follows upon the Vnion but that that which is essential to one Nature should really Physically be convey'd and made over to the other Nature as Omnipresence Vbiquity Omniscience c. from the Godhead to the Manhood which is the Popish and Lutheran Communication this as implying a Contradiction and carrying in it a perfect repugnancy to the nature of the thing we cannot assent unto The Humane Nature in the first moment of its formation was united to the Divine 4. No sooner was the Humane Nature framed or formed but in that very instant of time it was united to the Divine Nature this also I put down as another branch of the main Proposition 'T was * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Damasc Orth. Fid. l. 3. cap. 2. v. Luommbard L. 3. Dist 2. taken as soon as it was made its first existence and its union were contemporary We distinguish betwixt the formation sanctification and assumption of the Humane Nature and we conceive of these as done successively in such an order first that Nature was form'd then sanctify'd then assum'd But this is meerly founded upon our conception not that it was so indeed and really as to the things themselves for in truth there was no priority of time priority of Nature I deny not betwixt the one and the other but at the very same moment wherein by the Power of the Holy Ghost the Manhood of Christ was formed it was also sanctify'd and united to the Godhead A Question here is moved by Some whether Christ's Humane Nature was compleat and perfect at the first that is whether as soon as ever his Flesh was formed his Soul was infus'd and united to it or whether as it is with us there was not some space of time intervening betwixt the formation of the Flesh and the infusion of the Soul in the discussing of which there is a difference among them Some being for the * Sharp Cursus Theol. p. 362. Affirmative and Others for the † Lud. Capellus in Thes Salmur part 2. p. 12. thes 15. Dr. Jackson on the Creed 7th Book Sect. 3. ch 29. p. 324. Negative But which is to my purpose all agree in this that whether it was only Flesh for sometime or whether both Flesh and Soul were form'd together yet still the Vnion began at the first instant of the Incarnation There was a time before Christ's Manhood did exist but as soon as ever it did exist there was no time wherein it was under disunion and disjunction from his Godhead Thus I have endeavoured by these Four things to give you a little light concerning the Hypostatical Vnion of the two Natures in Christ's Person which this Sixth Proposition led me unto a point of such high importance and so proper to the subject in hand that I could not wholly pass it over and yet withal so sublime and mysterious that I can neither speak nor conceive of it according to what is in it 7. Prop. 'T is probable if Adam had not faln Christ had not been sent in Flesh 7. Let me add but one thing further 'T is probable had there been no sin that Christ had not been sent in Flesh or had not Adam fallen and thereby involv'd his whole Posterity in a state of sin and guilt 't is probable that Christ had not been incarnate I express it modestly going no higher than 't is probable because though the Scriptures make it certain to me yet 't is not so to others nay some are of a quite other opinion The question is not de possibili what God by his absolute Power and Will might and could have done but only de facto whither if man had not sin'd Christ should actually have assum'd our Nature about which the Schools with other Divines are divided some * Scotus in 3. part disput 7. Quest 3. Absque praejudicio concedi potest etiamsi humana natura non peccasset adhuc Christum carnem sumpturum fuisse Alex. Alons 3. p. Qu. 2. memb 13. Catharinus de praed Christ Pet. Galatinus de Arc. Cathol ver l. 7 c. 2. Osiander c. affirming it some * Aquinas p. 3. qui. 1. art 3. Vasquez in 3. part tom 1. disp 10. art 3. Becan Theol. Schol. p. 3. c. 1. qu. 7. Calvin Instit l. 2. c. 12. against Osiander Hoorneb Socin Confut. tom 2. l. ● c. 2. p. 253. Stegm Photin disp 15. p. 176. Alting Theol. Probl. Loc. 12. Probl. 5. p. 564. denying it The former affirm though sin had not been yet Christ would have come in Flesh not to have dy'd or suffer'd but only to have let the world see the glory and excellency of his Humane Nature that so great a work as his Incarnation might not have been lost or not done that God thereby might give out a singular demonstration of his Love to man the latter cannot lay so great a stress upon these things and therefore assert if man had not sin'd Christ had not been incarnate And indeed their Opinion seems to be more agreeable to the Word for that usually mentions saving from sin and the taking away of sin as the end and ground of Christ's taking Flesh My Text describes the state of the sinner to be desperate upon the terms of the Law and then upon that God sent his Son in Flesh it adds further he was thus sent to condemn sin in his Flesh so that had there been no sin to have been condemn'd he had not been sent in Fesh So Matth. 1.21 She shall bring forth a Son and thou shalt call his name Jesus for he shall save his people from their sins 1 Tim. 1.15 This is a faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners c. Joh. 1.29 Behold the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world Dan. 9.24 Seventy weeks are determined upon the people and upon thy holy city to finish the transgression and to make an end of sins and to make reconciliation for iniquity Tit. 2.14 Who gave