A20756:103
The conflict between the flesh and the spirit. Or the last part of The…The conflict betvveene the flesh and the spirit. Or the last part of The…
The conflict between the flesh and the spirit. Or the last part of The Christian warfare wherein is described the nature of these combatants, the malice and power of the flesh and fleshly lusts, with the means whereby we may subdue and overcome them. By John Downame Bachelor in Divinity, and preacher of Gods Word.The conflict betvveene the flesh and the spirit. Or the last part of The Christian warfare wherein is described the nature of these combatants, the malice and power of the flesh and fleshly lusts, with the meanes whereby we may subdue and ouercome them. By Iohn Dovvname Batchelar in Diuinitie, and preacher of Gods Word.
London: printed by William Jones, 1618London: printed by William Iones, 1618
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
CHAP. VII. Objections of the Adversaries answered, whereby they endeavour to prove that the body and sensitive faculties are the flesh.
CHAP. VII. Obiections of the Aduersaries answered, whereby they indeauour to proue that the body and sensitiue faculties are the flesh.
1Now in the last place it remaineth that we answer some objections; whereby they endeavour to prove that by the flesh we are to understand our bodies and sensitive faculties only with their corruption; and not the soul and superior faculties. And first they reason that this spiritual enemy of our salvation is the body and inferior faculties of the soul, seeing it is usually called by the name of flesh and carnal concupiscence. To which I answer that this manner of speech is not proper but tropical and figurative, and to be understood by a metonymy of the subject for the adjunct or quality, flesh for the fleshly quality of corruption which hath defiled soul and body, the which is usual with the Hebrews who in their ordinary phrase, put the abstract for the concrete, and the subject for the quality that belongeth unto it; the which also the Greeks and Latins do sometimes imitate, as when they called a wicked fellow [Greek or Hebrew] Scelus. But it may further be demanded why this spiritual enemy should by this metonymy be called the flesh rather then sin and corruption, if it were not chiefly seated in the body. I answer that it is thus called to show how deeply our nature is tainted and infected with the poison of sin, in that it is, (as it ⟨p. 56⟩were) incorporated into our flesh, and one of our essential parts turned and (as it were) transformed into corruption, and i• into them; so as there is nothing naturally remaining but even a mass of corruption and lump of sin. And secondly to intimate unto us the dangerousness of this enemy, in that it is not only domesticall, dwelling in us, but (after a sort) essential and inherent, so as it is not possible to avoid it, but we must deny our selves, nor to kill it, unless we crucify our own flesh, nor to vanquish and subdue it, unless we overcome our selves. Yea but why is this corruption of nature called carnal and fleshly, rather then animal and spiritual, if it were not seated in the body, rather then in the soul? I answer that this corruption having defiled both the special parts of man the body, as well as the soul, it was indifferent by a synecdoche to understand the whole corruption of nature, by the name of either part. But if this answer will not satisfy: but that they will further object;