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	son_n	spirit_n	92,207	5	6.2343	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30904	Truth cleared of calumnies wherein a book intituled, A dialogue betwixt a Quaker and a stable Christian (printed at Aberdeen, and upon good ground judged to be writ by William Mitchell ...) is examined, and the disingenuity of the author, in his representing the Quakers is discovered : here is also their case truly stated, cleared, demonstrated, and the objections of their opposers answered according to truth, Scripture, and right reason / by Robert Barclay.	Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.	1670 (1670)	Wing B738; ESTC R22049	63,242	72

doe so are wee disingenuous and deceitful becaus wee deny them in your acceptation vvhich only comprehends the shadow that passeth away If Baptisme which is really and truly the Baptisme of Christ wee owne and participation of the Body and Blood of Christ which is really so I say if these things be really owned by us as they are indeed can wee be said to deny them becaus wee use not the shadow as yee doe while yee are ignorant of and strangers to the substance Nay it may be retorted much more properly and without deceipt upon your selves that yee do but pretendedly in VVords owne these things while indeed yee deny them so that herein yee are found to be the Equivocators who are contending for the husk and will needs have it accounted the kernell and there can be no errour more dangerous then to place the shadow for the substance for suchas so doe are those that trample upon the precious ordinances of Iesus Christ in which the work of grace is begun and increased Pag. 32. To prove thy assertions particularly thou beginnest saying that singing of Psalms is an ordinance of Iesus Christ vvhereby if thou understandest that singing of Psalmes was used by the Saints that it is a part of Gods VVorship vvhen performed in his will and by his Spirit and that yet it may be and is vvarrantably performed among the Saints it is a thing denied by no Quaker so called and it is not unusuall among them wherof I have my selfe beene a witnesse and have felt of the sweetnes and quickning vertue of the Spirit therein and at such occasions ministred And that at times Davids VVords may also be used as the Spirit leads thereunto and as they sute the condition of the party is acknowledged without dispute but that without the Spirit in selfe-will not regarding how the thing sutes their condition for a mixt multitude to use and sing the expressions of blessed David wee deny For that was not the method the Apostle spoke of 1. Cor. 14. 15. when hee said I will sing with the Spirit and I will sing with the understanding also therfore though singing of Psalms in the true use of them be allowable yet as used by you it is abominable and is a mock worship becaus yee cannot deny but that the persons using it are a mixed multitude knowne to be Drunkards Swearers VVhoremongers c. Now such cannot praise God for they are dead in their sins and it is the living that praise him and not the dead Next all lying is abomination but many times it falls out that by singing of Psalmes the people come to lye in the presence of God in stead of worshiping him by saying I am not pu●t up in mind I have no deceitfull heart I water my couch with teares and much more of this nature which were the particular experiences of David and may be safely said by those that vvitnesse the same thing but as to you that use them are false untrue I say as thou doest that though every Psalme does not sute our condition yet in every Psalm there may be meditaion for edification but this no wayes meets the case for there is a great difference betwixt meditating upon a Psalme singing one vvhereby vvee apply ourselves to the Lord in the vvords of David vvhich unless they sute our condition cannot be done without a lye Pag. 33 and 34. Thou comest to prove that Baptisme with water is an ordinance of Iesus Christ for which thou givest as a reason First because John baptised with water and was really sent of God Which thing is not denyed because Iohns baptisme vvas a Baptisme vvith VVater But that that vvas the Baptisme vvhich vvas to continue is the matter in question to prove vvhich thou bringest in thy Second reason that the baptisme of Christ and the baptisme of Iohn differed only in circumstance and not in substance because they agree in the Author in the Matter and in the End To which I answer that though they agreed in the Author that will not conclude them to be one because by the same reason it might be said that the Old Testament and the New are one or that Circumcision Baptism are one for that God was the Author of both As to the matter they are not one neither for the one was a Baptisme with VVater and the other a Baptisme with the Spirit and with fire as Iohn himselfe distinguisheth them Mark 1. 8. Now in respect baptisme with water can be administred where the other to wit with the Spirit is not therefore they are not one in Substance They also agree not in the end for the end of the one to wit Baptisme with VVater is but to point or shew forth the other So that as the shadow and the Substance differ in their ends in like manner doe these two for the end of the shadow is but to point to the substance the end of the Substance in this thing being to cleansc and purifie the heart produceing that effect to such as it is truly administred unto but the shadow is frequently administred and the heart not cleansed therfor they differ in their ends Now to shew that they differ in substance it is written Acts. 19. Vers. 2. 3. 4. 5. that there were of the baptisme of Iohn who had not so much as heard of the holy Ghost far lesse received it Now had the Baptisme of Iohn and the Baptisme of Christ beene one they could not have had the one and beene altogether ignorant of the other For a Third Reason thou sayest that Iesus Christ commanded and enjoined the Disciples to baptise and that baptising they used water But wher hee commands them to Baptise Math. 28. there is no command to baptise them with VVater or into vvater but into the name of the Father Son and holy Spirit So here is the baptisme into the Spirit but not into outward water and the Apostles vvere Ministers of the Spirit and ministred the Spirit unto those vvho beleived And though they used the water baptisme at tymes yet it rests to be proved that they did it in obedience to that generall command Math. 28. and not in condescendence to the people vvho had received a great esteeme of Iohn and vvere so nursed up vvith outward Ceremonyes that it vvas hard suddenly to vveane them from such as they did the like in other cases vvhich also servs for ansvver to thy Fourth Reason vvher thou instancest Peter his baptising Cornelius after he received the Spirit for Peters vvords imply no command but only that at that occasion the thing might be done Can any man said he forbid water that they may not be baptised Acts. 10. 47. And though it be said Vers. 48. that hee commanded them to be baptised in the name of Christ yet it holds forth no command from Christ only the thing being agreed upon that it might be done he bid doe it but that the Apostles received

For notwithstanding the words of the Quaker are of thy owne framing and that they lye patent before thee yet thou hast not had so much honesty in thy answer as to subsume them aright The Quaker sayes I use not flattering titles and give thee not heathenish salutations and bowings least I should sin and be found an Idolater in answer to which thou beginnest with a false subsumption saying thou wonderest that he should call salutations and bowings heathenish and Idolatrous Indeed it is no strange thing that thou and others misrepresent us and belye us in repeating our words at a distance when in this manner of writing thou canst not truly repeat those words which thou placest for ours when they be just written before thee Is it not one thing to say that Salutations that are heathenish or heathenish salutations cannot be used without sin and idolatrie and another thing to say that salutations and bowings are heathenish and idolatrous Who is so blind as not to see here a vast difference As to the first who dares deny it to be a truth that vvill offer to call himselfe a Christian to vvit that salutations and bovvings that are heathenish cannot be used vvithout idolatrie and sin But as to the other that Salutations and bovvings are heathenish and idolatrous being taken in generall vvas never said nor judged by the Quakers and therefore to charge them vvith it is utterly false and a lye for such salutations as Christ commands and the Apostles practised the Quakers dearly ovvne and frequently use and find in them great refreshment becaus there through the life flovves and is communicated from one vessell to another but such salutations thou art ignorant of and of the life that is there through communicated vvhich bears testimonie against all that is heathenish and idolatrous and leads out of it and therefore in thy dark mind vvouldst from thence plead for the customary salutations of the heathen as appears by the proofs thou bringest vvherein thy folly is very much manifested Christ sayest thou commanded his disciples vvhen they entred into a house to salute it hee did so and what more And if the house be vvorthy their peace shall be upon it to vvit the peace through the salutation intimated or offered becaus they brought to that house the tender of the Gospell and glad tydings vvhich vvas a good salutation but vvhat vvouldst thou inferr from that that vve ought to doe of our hats one to another a thing vvhich they never did by vvhose example thou vvouldst presse us to doe it and it is knowne that it is a thing unusuall in that part of the world to this day That other proof alledged from Paul saluting the Churches makes as litle if not far lesse to the purpose Paul in his Epistles who was at a great distance vvisheth grace and peace to the Churches from God the Father and the Lord Iesus Christ Ergo wee ought to take of our hats Can there be any thing more ridiculous is this the great esteeme yee put upon the scriptures to take the salutations of the blessed Apostle Paul signified by the motions of the Holy Spirit vvhich vvas the very blessing of Paul to the Churches or rather of the Spirit through him for to prove your doing off hats one of the corrupt customs of this vvorld Is not this to make a mock of the Scripturs and a stretching them to plead for that against vvhich is the naturall tendencie of their testimonie Next thou givest us Abrahams practise but every practise of Abraham is not a rule to us nor to you either the like may be said of that of Moses Though Moses did obeisance to his father in law that makes nothing against us far lesse his kissing of him and asking him of his vvelfare both vvhich things the Quakers deny not Thou acknovv ledgest that religious vvorship given to the Creature is idolatrie What is Religious Worship but that vvhich is given to God and is not the bovving of the body and uncovering of the head the signification of your Worship to God And if yee give the same to the Creature also where is the difference for in the external signification it is not distinguished unles it be said to be the intention which if it be wee shall have the Papists pleading the same for their adoration of images and the relicts of the saints And truly your being found in these things gives them advantage in that matter That courtesie and Christianity are not repugnant vvee deny not and therefore for Christians to be Courteous one to another is very fit vvhich indeed that the Apostle commands wee acknowledge But that Courtesie consists in taking off hats and bovving to one another that rests for thee to prove In the next place to prove the indifference of using the plurall number instead of the singular to one person thou sayest thou art very confident the Kingdome of God consists not in vvords so am I too yet I strange thou shouldst say so considering thy principles for vvhat is all your preaching but words yea vvhat is the Scripture it selfe I meane that vvhich yee have of it to vvit the letter but words And seing the very Gospell according to you is but a company of words being a declaration of vvhat past many hundred years agoe hovv has thy zeale here to oppose the Quakers made thee forget thy selfe in this matter Thou sayest that to vvhich the singular number is agreeable the plurall may be applyed to without making a lye The proofs alleged for that be Matth. 23. 37. Luk. 22. 31. 3 Epistle of Iohn vers 13 evince nothing in this matter for the Contexts being rightly considered vvill clearly make out that the vvords are not applyed to one single person only exclusively of others and that of Luke is to a flock comprehending the disciples to vvhom hee vvas speaking just before but there is no confounding of the number vvhere one single person is only spoken to and that vvithout understanding of any more And though indeed it vvere good that the difference vvere not greater yet the differences in these things evidence that there be differences in greater matters And in respect that yee are estranged from the principle that leads out of corruption in all things therefor yee cannot see the vveight that is in these things vvhich is more then yee are avvare of Pag. 3. Thou seem●t to take great advantage of these words Heretofore I walked according to my light and the same I doe still and while in the integritie of my heart I walked in the way thou art now in I dare not say but God countenanced me in it Here thou makest a great stirr as if thou hadst brought the Quaker to a great Dilemma But to passe by thy examining of the weak objection which thou makest in the Quakers behalfe which I beleive was never alledged by any of them unto thee as that wherwith they either only or cheifly defend

not so much as once bowed a knee to call upon God in their families What ground hast thou for this thy beliefe May they not bow their knees in their families though it be hid from the observation of malicious eyes who may so asperse them May they not pray in secret and be seene of the Father to pray according to Matth. 6. 6. Though they cannot be seene by the eyes of malicious Spyes And where a publick testimony in words is required it is also given nor doe wee know any friends of truth who have any whom they can joine with in Prayer in the family but doe meet together in the family and wait together breath together and pray together and that much oftener then thou insinuats sometimes without and sometimes with the outward signification of words so that wee returne this thy charge as false and malicious Thou sayest If this impulse be denyed for Years men all that while according to us must not pray But here thou speakest as one wholly unacquainted with the wayes and motions of the Spirit to suppose such a case which cannot be for the breathings and motions of the Spirit and especially unto Prayer are very frequent unto those who wait for them and are as necessary unto the Children of God as their dayly bread yea and more which the Father withholdeth not but giveth in due season But many times the Spirit of Prayer is felt to move and is answered when there is no liberty given to speake words in the hearing of others nor is thy other supposition lesse vaine and foolish that if aman were at the gates of death and in danger of present drowning yet without an impulse as thou callest it hee must not adventure to cry to God for mercy and help for suppose he did cry vvithout all help of the Spirit vvhat vvould it avail him vvould it have any acceptance vvith God Shew us vvherever a spiritlesse prayer vvas accepted of God or required Nay it is a vaine oblation vvhich is expresly forbidden and it is expresly commanded that praying be alvvayes in the spirit Eph. 6. 18. And as for the Saints vvhen they are dying or in any difficulty wee know the Spirit of prayer will never be wanting to breath through them at such occasions and to give words as there is a service for them But further thou alledgest that this Principle of ours leadeth to woefull security for what need you be d●●quieted for refraining prayer before God thou sayest or any other piece of service seing you have salve at hand to heal this sore and that is the want of an impulse Answ. If any fall into security and refraine prayer it is not that our Principle leadeth into it for our Principle leadeth out of all security into continuall watching unto prayer and wating upon the motions of the Spirit of God now if any feel not these motions they are nothing the lesse guilty becaus by their neglect they provoke the Lord to withhold them and render themselves out of frame to feel or entertaine them and thus who neglect the worship of God are justly under condemnation and if they have peace it is but a false peace which will faile them and as for our peace wee have found it to be great peace but wee have not come by it after such a way as thou doest falsely and rashly judge as by neglecting the worship of God and stopping the mouth of conscience but by being turned to that living VVord and Law of God in our hearts by loving it and cleaving to it yea by receiving the reproofes chastisements of God through it and submitting to the judgement of it when it hath beene as a hammer and as a sword and as a fire in us breaking in pieces and destroying all that false unsound peace wee had created to our selves in the day of our alienation from the light of God in us And unto peace wee are come through great tribulation of soule even such as thou art a stranger unto being ignorant both of the one and the other and so hast therein shewed thy folly in judging what thou knowest not And as for woefull security wee know not where it more abounds then among hypocriticall professors who with the VVhore in the Proverbs offer up their sacrifices of morning and evening prayers and thereby create a peace to themselves though they let their hearts goe a whoring after their lusts all the day did not the Pharisees pray much outwardly and were much in orher outward practises of devotion and so created a false peace and esteeme unto themselves And can you deny but that there are many such among you who make up a false peace to themselves by leaning upon their outward performances Now what If I should charge this upon your Principle wouldst thou think it fair dealing Thirdly Pag. 52. Thou sayest Doth not that opinion tend to Atheisme which rendreth mortification of sin even in this life useless c. Answ. Here thou dealest disingenuously Is mortification of sin uselesse where the end of it is attained And is not perfection the end of mortification Againe thou sayest The opinion of a sinles perfection wounds the very vitals of Religion Answ. Who could have expected that one that pretends to Religion would have beene so brazen-faced as to put such an expression in print What is the end of true Religion but to lead out of sin Do the vitals of Religion consist in sinning or in not sinning If it consist in sinning then they that Sin most are most religious But if it consist in not sinning and keeping the commandements of God without sin then to plead for such a thing as attainable hurteth not the vitals of Religion What! Cannot the Saints live better without sin then with it Yea surely they can live well without that which is a burden and as Death unto their life they whose life is in sin cannot live but in sin but the Saints life is not in sin but in righteousnes And thy consequences are vaine and foolish as 1. That men need not pray for pardon of sin 2. That they need not the Blood of Christ to cleanse them from sin 3. That they need not repentance For wee grant that all have sinned and so need those things by which they may attaine unto perfection and who witnesse perf●ction are come to witnesse the true use of these things and as the Blood of Christ cleanseth from all the sin so is preserveth cleane and such have received the forgivenes of their sins being turned from them unto righteousnes which is the fulfilling of repentance And vvhereas thou sayest Bring me to the particular person that is sinlesse and I shall apply to him that of the Apostle 1. Ioh. 1. 8. Thou shevvest openly thy confusion for by thy applying to him that of the Apostle vvouldest thou inferre a sinlesse man to be a sinning man That is a contradiction but though vvee should bring a man to