Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	holy_a	nature_n	person_n	13,597	5	5.6259	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47191	Truths defence, or, The pretended examination by John Alexander of Leith of the principles of those (called Quakers) falsly termed by him Jesuitico-Quakerism, re-examined and confuted : together with some animadversions on the dedication of his book to Sir Robert Clayton, then Mayor of London / by G.K.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1682 (1682)	Wing K225; ESTC R22871	109,893	242

living Creatures or Animals to love and cherish their Off-spring which is a shadow or figure of that more Divine Law in God's people is not any complex Proposition of words but an innate principle of love and affection which he hath planted in them Moreover the said I. A. digresseth here from his matter to seek an occasion against us and to load us with down-right Blasphemy because we do not say that there are three Persons in the God-head But to this Charge I have answered already to one of I. A. his Champions in my book called The Way Cast Vp the which hath given content to divers-sober people and I hope may give content to all who reads it in that particular where I show that it is only the unscriptural terms of a Trinity of Persons or of three Persons in the Godhead that we deny and not the mysterie or thing it self of Father Son and Holy Ghost being three that bear Record in Heaven which according to the Scripture we both believe and confess And indeed Augustine in his Fifth and Seventh Books of the Trinity not only saith the words three Persons are improper but disputeth against them and I suppose I. A. for all his School-Logick and Philosophy shall hardly be able to Answer his Argument the substance of which to my best remembrance is this The word Person either it signifieth somewhat absolute and simple or somewhat relative to say the first is absurd otherwise there should be three 〈◊〉 Beings or Essences in God which is absurd if somewhat relative which is the second then seeing every relative is referred or is relative to another as Father is relative to Son and therefore Father is the Father of another and no man is his own Father in this sense to say the Father is a Person is to say the Father is the Person of some other and so of the rest which is absurd The which Argument not as mine but really Augustines I leave I. A. to Answer and Ierome another ancient Doctor and Father so called doth find fault with the words Three Hypostasis saying expresly in the words Three Hyposta●is Latet aliquid veneni There lieth hid some poyson And La●rentius Valla a man well esteemed among the learned findeth fault with the words Three Persons why then should we be so uncharitably charged by I. A. or such hot-headed men with Blasphemy only for keeping close to Scripture words in so great a Mysterie while the thing it self so far as the Scripture declareth it is owned by us And whereas he urgeth us to tell what Three are they to be called if neither Three Gods nor Three Persons I Answer It sufficeth us to call them what the Spirit of God in Christ and the Apostles hath called them and to enquire no further nor to be curiously wise above what they have d●●lared Hath not I. A. heard That there is a Docta Ignorantia or Learned Ignorance which is more safe and to be preferred to an uncertain Knowledge or Science falsly so called And if I. A. his definition of Person be received viz. That it is an intelligent Being subsisting incommunicably or distinctly one from another I see not for my part but that Three Persons at this rate shall infer three intelligent Beings subsisting incommunicably and consequently Three Gods Lastly That he saith Some Quakers have called them three Manifes●ations viz. of Moses of Christ and of the Spirit he ought to have produced their names or then we are not bound to believe him that any have said so for at this rate Moses should be the Father of Christ which I do not believe any called a Quaker ever thought perhaps some have said there have been three Dispensations or Manifestations of God one through Moses and one through Christ in the Flesh and one through the Spirit or Christ in Spirit and that these may after some sort have such a reference as that the first may be called relative to the Father yet not excluding the Son and the second may be relative to the Son not excluding the Father c. which yet doth not argue that we understand the Dispensation or Administration of the Father to be the Father himself far less Moses to be the Father as I. A. I believe very rashly and unwarrantably doth alledge Now that there are or have been diversity of Administrations the Scripture is plain and Protestants as well as Papists do acknowledge it Yea what saith I. A. to the common Catechism that saith The Father hath Created us the Son hath Redeemed us and the Holy Ghost hath Sanctified us which is to be understood not exclusively nor yet without some order in the manner of working But who will be so foollish or ignorant for all this to say That the Father is our Creation the Son our Redemption strictly or literally and without a Figure so understood and the Holy Ghost our Sanctification Nor doth it follow that because Christ bringeth in his Father and himself as two Witnesses to prove that he was the true Messiah that therefore there are either two or three Persons in the Godhead for Christ speaketh these words not simply as God but as man Now as Man we acknowledge that Christ is a distinct Nature or Being from God although not divided or separated therefrom And lastly that he argueth That Christ is called the express Image of the Fathers Hypostasis and that Hypostasis should be and is truly Translated Person and not Substance and otherwise it would infer Arianism I Answer That Hypostasis should be Translated Person he doth meerly affirm without any proof from approved Authors and sure I am the Etymologie of the word hath no affinity to person but properly signifieth Substance being compounded of the Preposition and Substantive Verb which as near as possible is in Latin substantia and in English substance and is so Translated Heb. 11. 1. Now that to Translate it substance would infer Arrianism I. A. doth but meerly say it without any proof and so is not to be believed And beside Christ in Scripture is called The Image of the Invisible God and certainly God is a substance and yet this I hope will not infer Arrianism and may we not well understand how Christ as man is the Character or Image of God's substance without Arrianism seeing Christ said viz. in respect of his Manhood My Father is greater than I and it is clear that the aforesaid place Heb. 1. 2 3. is to be understood of Christ not simply as God but as man who certainly as man is the most bright and glorious Image of God and above all Angels or Men or whatever can be named besides the Godhead it self CHAP. VI. HAving thus traced I. A. in his unnecessary and impertinent digression I shall now reply unto his Arguments whereby he laboureth to prove that the Scriptures are the principal rule of Faith and manners And to the first that in Isaiah 8. 10. they were sent

TRUTHS DEFENCE Or the Pretended EXAMINATION BY Iohn Alexander of Leith Of the Principles of those called QUAKERS Falsly termed by him Jesuitico-Quakerism Re-Examined AND Confuted Together with Some Animadversions on the Dedication of his Book to Sir Robert Clayton then Major of London By G. K. LONDON Printed for Benjamin Clark in George-Yard in Lombard-street Bookseller 1682. The pretended Examination of the Principles of those called Quakers Falsly called Jesuitico-Quakerism by John Alexander in Leith Re-examined and Confuted by G. K. CHAP. I. IN my Answer to this pretended Examination of I. A. I intend to observe on his Answer to every Question wherein he misrepresents or perverts the state of the Question and wherein he hath missed to Answer ●it Also to Answer briefly but I hope sufficiently and distinctly what is necessary to the Vindication of Truth not to every Word or Sentence nor to every frivolous and weak or impertinent Argument where the solution thereof lyeth obvious to any ordinary understanding but to any thing alledged by him that seemeth Material or to require an Answer referring the Enquiring and Truth-loving Reader to divers Treatises already published not to mention our Friends books in England by some here in Scotland to wit R. B. his Apology also to his Answer in Vindication thereof to I. B. al●o his book called Truth cleared of Calumnies in Answer to W. M. in Aberden And the Answer given by the said R. B. and me to the Students of Aberden as also to divers Treatises published by me such as my book of Immediate Revelation my book of Vniversal Grace my book called The Way cast up my book called The Rector Corrected in Answer to T. W. who calls himself Rector of Arrow and lastly to my book called Quakerism no Popery And though to this last book I. A. hath replyed in some few particulars which I purpose so far as may seem requisite to Answer yet he hath quite passed by the most material passages and especially all the Authorities and Testimonies of Ancient Writers and also of the Protestants brought by me as concurring with the Scriptures Testimony to clear us of that imputation of Popery falsly charged upon us by I. M. To none of which weighty Testimonies hath the said I. A. replyed one word Now because there is little or nothing that seems Material of I. A. his Objections that is not already fully answered in these Books and Treatises above mentioned therefore I Judge it not needful to Write a large or particular Answer to every thing yet lest he should seem too wise in his own Eyes or lest he and others that favour him should think he is stronger than really he is and especially to prevent the stumbling of the weak into whose hands his book may come I purpose through the Lords Assistance to reply some things which may suffice on every Head or Section What hath induced I. A. to Dedicate his book against us to the Mayor of London may seem no impertinent Query Had he none in all his Native Country whom he had confidence in to Patronize his undertakings Or being Conscious of his small esteem at home did he despair to find any Liberal Mecenas in Scotland and therefore he must go so far as London to find out one and that no less then the Mayor himself to whom it may be supposed I. A. his greatest commendation was his being a stranger And that he saith in his Epistle to the said Eminent person His Treatise presums not to add any lustre to his Name whereof it is uncapable That may well be believed that his Book is indeed uncapable of adding any lustre thereunto But why was he not afraid that it would detract from his lustre It were good that those Eminent persons in the World who suffer men to Superscribe their Names as Patrons to their Books did first examine them diligently if they did deserve any such Patronage lest Error masking it self under the name of Truth seek the Protection as is too common now in the World And for my part I have no small conjecture that if the said Eminent person to whom this disingenuous and impertinent piece by I. A. is Dedicated had but taken the leisure or pains to review but one sixth part of it he had never suffered his Name to be superscribed to it And I am very hopeful that the Mayor of London who hath divers thousands of that people within his Precinct in that Famous City many of whom I judge are better known to him than I. A. ever was hath more charity towards the people called in scorn Quakers than to believe I. A. his description of them in his said Epistle were he expresly alledgeth on them That they renounce all true Principles of Religion and stifle their very faculties of Reason charging them also with Absurdity And in his Preface to the Reader he calleth them Vncircumcised Philistins and reproachful Adversaries having in their Queries and other Papers disgorged as many Lies against God and his Truth and as many Slanders against the Church of God in Brittain as if they had exchanged both Persons and Offices with●the Father of Lies and Accuser of the Brethren But if that Eminent person whose Name and Favour this I. A. hath abused shall please to look into this small Treatise in Answer to that of I. A. I hope he shall find that they are falsly charged with those Crimes It seemeth no new or strange thing to us to be so falsly accused knowing that not only our Fellow Servants and Brethren in former Generations have been so used but also the Head him●elf and Captain of our Salvation the Lord Jesus Christ was not only numbred among transgressors but called a Blasphemer and said to have a Devil And the Lord forewarned his Disciples and Followers that they should be so lied upon and all manner of evil things said against them falsly for his Name sake But rejoyce said he and be glad for great is your reward in Heaven Now whereas I. A. calleth his Book A Vindication of the Church of God in Brittain he ought to have told what Church he meant seeing there are divers sorts of people in Brittain who call themselves the Church of God and yet in divers things Dissent from I. A. And upon review of his Book I find the said I. A. his Principles to be almost wholly Calvinistical and particularly 1. That he denyeth the Vniversal Grace of God or that Christ hath died for all men 2. That he denyeth that God hath any regard to the new Creature or work of Conversion or Repentance to be so much as a condition requisite in order to our Iustification 3. That he denyeth that any can be free from actual sining in this Life by any Grace of God given them or to be given These and other principles alledged by him which are wholly Calvinistical are as much disliked by many and some of those the most considerable of the Episcopal Church

is it said they did the things contained in the Law by the corrupt Nature of man as it is corrupted in the Fall and no wise healed or restored And certainly corrupted Nature could not do the things contained in the Law for the Law of God in the Hearts of the Gentiles did require not only the outward action but the inward purity of the heart and if this was wanting they did not the things contained in the Law But that there was an uprightness of heart in some of the Gentiles is clear from divers examples of Scripture as from Rom. 2. 14. They show the work of the Law Writ in their Hearts and in the Case of Cornelius and also of Abimelech Gen. 20. 6. so that God said unto him I know that thou didst this in the Integrity of thy heart And therefore that Nature mentioned by Paul Rom. 2. 14. is either Nature healed and restored in some measure by the Grace of God as Augustine did partly expound it or the innate word mentioned by Iames to wit The Word of Life immediatly grafted or planted in the Souls of men which is a Divine Nature for the Greek word used by Iames in that place doth most properly signifie that which is immediately planted in mens Nature as distinguished from that which they receive by Education or Industry as when we say innate wisdom or understanding and innate goodness we mean that which a man hath immediately received from God from his Birth or Creation to distinguish it from what he hath acquired by his own pains or labour in which sense I find both the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be used by Greek Authors Now that the Gentiles had a measure of Gods Grace bestowed upon them which for most part they did not improve is clear as from many other passages of Scripture so in particular from the Parable of the Prodigal who received of his Fathers Goods and Substance as well as the Elder Brother but he spent it in Riotous living so that he was left destitute Now I ask what was that which the Prodigal spent which his Fathers gave him and was a Portion of his Fathers Goods and Substance surely this was not mans own corrupted Nature nor any faculty or power thereof for that remained still with him And therefore it behoved to be the Grace of God PROP. 8. Whereas I. A. expoundeth All men to whom the Grace of God hath appeared Tit. 2. 11. To be all Ranks Stations and Qualities of men c. This his Exposition contradicteth his own Doctrine who so fiercely doth oppose the appearing of Gods Grace not only unto all particulars but also to many or most of the Nations of the Earth who belong to some of the Ranks Stations and Qualities of men such as these numerous and great Nations in the East and West-Indies and other remote places to whom the Doctrine of the Gospel was not in Paul's time nor perhaps since outwardly Preached at least to most of them Nor can I. A. shew where all men signifie any definit number and that the smallest part also of mankind And when Paul spoke of his warning and teaching every man his sense is clear that he excepted none but still as he had occasion he Preached the Gospel freely unto all telling them That they should repent and believe that they might receive the remission of their sins through Iesus Christ who had died for them and was risen again But I. A. saith There are many Nations as well as persons for whom Christ died not and these for whom Christ died not are not exhorted to believe that Christ died for them except they shall first make choice of and embrace him for their Lord and Saviour as the Gospel offers him But this is a strange inconsistency and contradiction How can they or ought they to embrace him as their Lord and Saviour if they are not to believe that he has died for them even when the account of Christ his dying for mankind is Preached unto them It God require men to believe in Christ it is certainly upon reasonable and equal terms some foundation or ground for such a belief is to be made known unto them As that God is Merciful and ready to pardon their by past sins which yet cannot be if Christ hath not died for them PROP. 9. Lastly whereas I. A. doth argue That the Doctrine of Vniversal Grace destroyes the Efficacy of Grace and makes the Effectualness thereof depend upon mans will to chuse or refuse as he pleaseth and so the Grace of God shall be subordinate to mans will which is absurd To this it is easily Answered that the Grace of God is still effectual in its Nature even when it doth not actually work the Salvation of all for as much as it is sufficiently able to work it where it is not resisted even as the Fire is effectual to Melt the hardest Mettal if the Mettal be duely applyed to it but if the Mettal be removed from the Fire that the said Mettal is not Melted is not because of the Fire it s not having efficacy enough but because the Mettal is removed from it so the Fire still retaineth its efficacy as it had before Again the efficacy of Gods Grace dependeth not on mans will seeing the will of man doth not influence or excite the Grace of God to make it operate but on the contrary it is the Grace of God that doth influence or excite the heart and will of man without which it cannot do any thing towards mans Salvation and therefore the Grace of God is never subordinate to the will of man as I. A. doth falsly inferr And whereas I. A. upon this head Calls the Grace of God that can be resisted so as the Souls Conversion may be hindred by mans resisting it ill natured and false Grace and moreover addeth that he will have nothing to do with such Grace that can be resisted he speaketh here too rashly and presumptuously for do we not read of some in Scripture that resisted the Truth and also the Holy Ghost As Stephen charged the Iews that they did always resist the Holy Ghost as did their Fathers and yet according to I. A. his Principle he might as well say He would have nothing to do with the Holy Chest that can be resisted and charge it as ill natured and false which were Blasphemous to affirm Notwithstanding the same I. A. forgetting himself a few Lines after saith We may indeed resist both the means and motions of Grace and not improve Grace as we should and might too But saith he God makes it still eff●ctual to the growth by him designed This is a contradiction not only to his former Assertion but to it self as implying that men may improve Grace further than God designed they should Another very absurd Assertion I find alledged by him as if Grace did not incline men to perfection and so there