A89915:2598
An exposition upon the Epistle to the Colossians Wherein, not only the text is…An exposition vpon the Epistle to the Colossians Wherein, not onely the text is…
An exposition upon the Epistle to the Colossians Wherein, not only the text is methodically analysed, and the sense of the words, by the help of writers, both ancient and modern is explained: but also, by doctrine and use, the intent of the holy Ghost is in every place more fully unfolded and urged. ... Being, the substance of near seven years week-days sermons, of N. Byfield, late one of the preachers for the city of Chester.An exposition vpon the Epistle to the Colossians Wherein, not onely the text is methodically analysed, and the sence of the words, by the help of writers, both ancient and moderne is explayned: but also, by doctrine and vse, the intent of the holy Ghost is in euery place more fully vnfolded and vrged. ... Being, the substance of neare seuen yeeres weeke-dayes sermons, of N. Byfield, late one of the preachers for the citie of Chester.
London: printed by Edward for Nathaniel Butter, 1617
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.
Howsoever the perfect understanding of Gods Image, belongs to God himself and to the vision of heaven, yet in some measure we may conceive of it, as it is revealed in the word, and imprinted in the nature and obedience of man. Two things I principally propound to he here considered more distinctly, 1. Wherein man is the Image of God. 2. The differences of the Image of God in man, either from that which is in Christ, and the Angels, or as it is to be considered in the several estates of man, and then I come to the use of all.
Howsoeuer the perfit vnderstanding of Gods Image, belongs to God himselfe and to the vision of heauen, yet in some measure we may conceiue of it, as it is reuealed in the word, and imprinted in the nature and obedience of man. Two things I principally propound to he here considered more distinctly, 1. Wherein man is the Image of God. 2. The differences of the Image of God in man, either from that which is in Christ, and the Angels, or as it is to be considered in the seuerall estates of man, and then I come to the vse of all.
For the first, man is said to bear the similitude of God, or to have in or ⟨p. 69⟩upon him the Image of God in 5. respects. First, in that in conceiving of God man begets a kind of Image in his mind. For whatsoever we think of, there ariseth in the mind some likeness of it, now if we conceive of God amiss, then we commit horrible Idolatry, and whatsoever service is done to the likeness we so conceive off is done to an Idol. But now when Christians taught out of the word, conceive of God according to the descriptions of the word, that is not after the likeness of any creature, but in a way of apprehending of God in the humane nature of Christ, or otherwise according to his nature or properties, in some true measure, this Idea or form of God, as I may so call it, in the mind of the faithful is a kind of the Image of God. For to conceive a likeness of God is not unlawful, but to conceive him to be like any creature in heaven and earth that is prohibited and unlawful. Secondly Man is after the Image of God in his substance, and therefore we are well enough said to be Gods offspring