Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	witness_v	word_n	write_v	148	3	4.8813	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A28899	A defence of the Scriptures, and the Holy Spirit speaking in them, as the chiefe iudge of controversies of faith ... with a vindication of that honour due to magistrates, ministers, and others ... in a relation of a disputation at Chesterfield in the county of Darby, between some ministers of the Gospell and James Naylor, an erring Quaker ... : with some animadversions upon a lying relation of that disputation, published by Iames Nayler / by Immanuel Bourne ...	Bourne, Immanuel, 1590-1672.	1656 (1656)	Wing B3852; ESTC R23281	45,977	64

resurrection After which it was demanded what Kingdome Christ did speake of Acts 1. Reply of another to Nayler But some one neer Nayler Replied Acts 9.5 17. 1 Cor. 9.1 1 Cor. 15.7 8. that Christ was seen after his Ascension For he was seen of Paul as Paul himselfe doth testifie Am not I an Apostle have I not seen the Lord And last of all he was seen of me as one born out of due time c. Iames Naylers Answer Nayler answered Christ was seene but he was seen invisibly Reply To which one Replyed that was a Bull or a sencelesse Answer for whatsoever is seen must be seen visibly in what manner soever it is seene whether by the eie of the body or by faith the eie of the soule If we see him that is invisible as Moses did yet he is visibly seen with those eies Heb. 11.27 by which we doe see him either in Grace or Glory Nayler Yet Nayler still persisted in his confidence that some thing might be seen invisibly and continued his railing and reviling phrases liars liars or to that effect 4 Question Disputed The time was farre spent and Mr Bourn called to another Question and that was taken which was the last that was proposed and the last that was disputed This was whether it bee lawfull to call any man Master or Father upon earth The sense and meaning of the Question was whether it be lawfull to give any honour or titles of honour to men to Father or Master to Magistrate or Minister to Lords or Ladies or the like The occasion was in part the Qakers crying out against the Ministers of Christ because they are called of men Masters and in part the proud uncivill unchristian behaviour of some Quakers towards their naturall parents and ordinary masters some towards civill Magistrates honourable Judges and Justices of peace before whom being called they have some of them in my sight kept on their hats in a contemptuous manner and denied any outward honour or civill respect to be given unto them Iames Nayler in his answer to this Question in his false Relation yea Nayler himselfe in his written Answer calleth us the Ministers of Christ Antichrist because we are called of men Masters And Richard Farnworth another rayling Quaker R. Farnworths discovery of Faith and divers papers page 2.3 and their common practice of refusing to give any outward respect to Magistrates not only Fox and Nayler but their seduced proselytes witnesse daily But Mr Bourne brought an Argument to prove it lawful to call or be called Master or Father and to give civill honour and titles of honour and respect to men according to their place and dignity to this effect Mr Bournes Argument Whatsoever titles of honour or respect the holy Patriarchs or Prophets or Apostles or other faithfull men have given unto or received from each other which are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God those are lawfull for Christians now to give unto or to receive from each other But these titles of honour or respect as Father and Master and Lord and Lady and the like they have been given and received by the Patriarchs and Prophets Apostles and other holy faithfull men and are no where forbidden in the Scripture or written word of God Therefore the same titles or names of Father and Master Lord and Lady and the like may lawfully be given and received by Christians in these daies or in this age of the world First proposition I conceive will not be denyed except by such as will not be tried by the holy Scriptures And for the minor or second proposition we shall make that evident by an induction from singular or particular examples of godly men recorded in holy writ First if you read Gen. 23.6 You may finde Example 1 that when Abraham came to the children of Heth to ge● a burying place for Sarah his wife shee being then dead hee spake to the children of Heth and bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land to give unto them not any divine religious worship which is due to God but civill honour due to men and three times is Abraham there called Lord by that people and faithfull Abraham taketh that title to himselfe without any reproofe of them for giving that title to him or any refusing of that title given him which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to have received any such honour nor would he have bowed downe himselfe to the people of the land if it had been sinne to have done so For Abraham was a knowing faithfull man believing in Christ the Messiah to come and rejoicing to see Christs day witnesse our Saviour John 8. Iohn 8.56 〈◊〉 Againe read Gen. 24. When Abraham sent his religious servant to provide a wife for his sonne Isaac Gen. 24.27 his servant putteth up his prayer to God O Lord God of my Master Abraham send me good speed this day and shew kindnesse to my Master Abraham And hee calleth Abraham Master sixteen or seventeen times in that Chapter which certainly he would not have done if it had not been lawfull to call Master Thirdly Gen. 32.18 read Gen. 32. And you may finde that Jacob calleth his brother Esau Lord in that direction of his to his servants whom he sent before with a gift to his brother When you meet my brother Esau saith he and he shall aske you whose are these Cattell you shall answer it is a present sent to my Lord Esau and he cals Esau Lord foure times in that Chapter Fourthly 1 Kin 18.7 8. read 1 Kin. 18. When religious Obadiah who did feare the Lord from his youth met Elijah the Prophet he calleth Elijah Lord. Art not thou my Lord Elijah And verse the 8. The Prophet calleth wicked Ahab Obadiahs Lord For thus speaketh hee to Obadiah Go tell thy Lord behold Elijah is here Thus doth that good Prophet not only suffer himselfe to bee called Lord but calleth wicked King Ahab Obadiahs Lord which he would not have done if it had not been lawfull and if it were lawfull to call prophane Esau Lord and wicked Ahab Lord wherefore is it not lawfull to call Master or Father or to give honourable titles to men now unto whom they doe belong both by naturall and civill respects witnessed by the practice of the Saints holy men in several ages of the world For fifthly if you read 2 Kin. 2. Did not the children of the Prophets at Bethel call Elijah Elishas Master Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And againe another company of the Prophets at Jericho verse 5. Knowest thou not that the Lord will take away thy Master from thy head to day And in the same Chapter verse 12. When Elijah was taken up into heaven in a fiery Chariot Elisha cryeth out my Father my Father the Chariot of Israel and the

if ever I preached any such doctrine or did ever countenance any such thing neither was I at home at Chesterfield when the Bul-baiting was nor did I know any thing of it but am altogether innocent And for the second proposition That thou James Nayler diddest falsely accuse me John Billingsley it is evident by thy owne hand writing in this paper which thou diddest send to me subscribed with thy name in which are these words viz. This day is the fruits of thy Ministry manifest in the open streets a multitude gathered together to sport themselves in setting one of the Creatures of God against another to torment thy people thou teachest whooting yelling Mr Billingsley did then read these words written by Iames Nayler to him c. swearing cursing and blaspheming the dreadfull name of God Is this thy Ministry c. Thus diddest thou falsly accuse me and my Ministry therefore thy Spirit is a lying and false accusing Spirit and so not fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Naylers Answer To which Nayler said he did owne that paper and shuffled to excuse himselfe and said he did not say so but that the people to whom he did preach were so doing viz. swearing cursing c. Mr Billingsley's Reply But Mr Billingsley read the paper to all the congregation wherein it did appeare that Nayler had writ that Bul-baiting swearing and cursing were the fruits of Mr Billingsley's Ministry Naylers Answer At which Nayler knew not what to say for himselfe but still persisted with an audacious face to justifie himselfe and called Mr Billingsley liar liar and bad him hold his tongue Mr Billingsley's Reply Upon which Mr Billingsley said what a desperate fellow art thou so shamelessely to deny that which thou hast writ with thy owne hand and dost now againe prove thy selfe to be a lyar and a false accuser and wilt not confesse thy Errour or to that purpose Naylers Answer But Nayler vapoured and called Mr Billingsley lyar and said he had accused him to be a lyar and a persecutor of the Ministers of Christ Mr Billingsley's Reply But Mr Billingsley did justifie that Nayler was a lyar and a persecutor and that his false accusation was a persecution or to that effect And I might now add well so he might For may not all men see that the Quakers and James Nayler himselfe are as malicious persecutors of the Ministers of Christ in England as ever they had And would they not be as bloody as ever any if it lay in their power witnesse their cruell threatnings both in their printed Pamphlets and by word of mouth against us witnesse their labouring by all meanes to pull downe the very Calling and Ministeriall Office witnesse their endeavour to hinder the people to pay us any maintenance though due unto us both by the Law of God and the Nation Ierem 18.18 Do they not smite us with the tongue as Jeremies enemies did him and disswade our people from giving heed to any of our words And what are these but persecutions Rev. 12.10 or what is persecution if this be not and who are lyars if these be none and who is a diabolicall false accuser Iohn B●nting en Elder of the Church in Ashover if James Nayler is not John Bunting an honest Yeoman of more true spirituall understanding then many Quakers sitting by Nayler at this disputation writing in short hand what Nayler said Nayler seeing him write said to him thou writest lyes there To whom John Bunting Replyed Nayler thou art the father of them then for I write what thou speakest Whereupon I may observe and argue what may be argued from what St Paul did affirme of the Cretians and of the vain talkers and deceivers amongst them That one of their owne Prophets said The Cretians are alwaies lyars evill beasts slow bellies Tit. 1. Tit. 1.10 11 12. And if the Cretians were lyars then that Prophet was a lyar that said so because he was a Cretian and if the Cretians were not lyars then he was a lyar for saying they were lyars when they were not In like manner if Iohn Bunting did write lies then Nayler was and is a lyar because Iohn Bunting did write that which Nayler spake and if Iohn Bunting did not write lies then Iames Nayler is the lyar because he falsely accused Iohn Bunting for writing lies when he did not so that Iames Nayler is proved the lyar out of his owne mouth and pen and having a spirit of lying he is not fit to be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith Thus I have done with the Disputation upon this Question Whether the private Spirit in the Pope or in any Quaker be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith I shall only add one Argument more and passe forwards Mr Bournes additionall Argument No Spirit that is a Spirit of Errour and Blasphemy is fit to be or can be the chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith But the Spirit in Iames Nayler and other Quakers is a Spirit of Errour and Blasphemy Therefore the Spirit in Iames Nayler and other Quakers is not fit nor can be a chiefe Judge of Controversies of Faith For the first proposition certainly the Quakers themselves will not deny it and if they doe deny it no honest Christian will deny it and for the second it may be witnessed by these instances 1. Blasphemy against God whilest they doe affirme they are equall with God See Saules Errand to Damascus p. 5 6 7 8. This was witnessed against George Fox as is confessed by Fox and Nayler one or both If that Booke they call Sauls Errand to Damascus be theirs as their proselytes boast it is and seek after it to learn their wicked doctrines It was objected say they That George Fox professed and owned that he was equall with God S●● the Perfect Pharis●● p. 3. And in the Perfect Pharisee it is witnessed That George Fax being asked by Dr. Marshall in the presence of two Justices of Peace in Lancashire namely Mr Thomson and Mr Lawry whether he did believe himselfe to be equall with God the said Fox in answer thereunto positively affirmed thus I am saith he equall with God and this was deposed by Dr Marshall and Mr Altham School-Master of Lancaster at the generall Sessions in Westmerland and was deposed againe before the honourable Judge Puleston at Lancaster the next Assises after witness that booke called the Perfect Pharisee Perfect Pharisee by Mr T●●mas W●ld Mr R●chard Prid●a●● Mr Samuel Hammond Mr William 〈◊〉 Mr Will. D●rant The Perfect Phar●see p 3. c. made by those five Reverend Divines nere New Castle p. 3 which declares part of the Quakers blasphemies in the page before recited And in the same book it is witnessed against Iames Nayler that he being asked by William Baldwinson of Underbarrow in Westmorland whether he believed that any could be as holy Just and good as God himselfe

horsemen thereof Thus you see titles of honour Lord Master Father are both given and received by holy men and this without any reproofe or check of the Spirit of God recorded in the Scriptures concerning any of these examples therefore sure it was and is lawfull to give and receive titles of respect and honour to call or be called Lord or Master or Father according to every ones place and dignity All these places of Scripture were not then alledged Naylers Answer And James Nayler by his loud clamour hindred the pressing and application of those places that were alledged as much as he could and cried out that was in the Law but now in the Gospell Christ forbids to call any man Master or to be called of men Masters or Father and alledged that of our Saviour Mat. 23. But be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren and call no man your Father upon earth for one is your Father which is in heaven And hence Nayler would infer That now in time of the Gospell it was not lawfull tocall any man Master or to be called of men Master or Father upon earth Mr Bournes Reply Then I replied and bad Nayler read the context in the verses before and if his eies were open he might see the mind of Christ that it was not absolutely to forbid his hearers to call any man Master or Father but to forbid the ambitious seeking of honor and the ambitious love of honour which was in the Scribes and Pharisees This you may finde is that that he reproveth in them in the 6 and 7 verfes They love saith Christ the uppermost rooms at Feasts and the chiefe seats in the Synagogues and greetings in the Markets and to be called of men Rabbi Rabbi And this ambitious pride and love of honour from men Christ reproveth in the Pharisees and this he forbiddeth his disciples but be not ye called Rabbi for one is your Master even Christ and all ye are brethren he would not have his Apostles to seeke superiority and power one over another in a proud ambitious manner Diotrephes-like to love to have the preheminence as 3 John 9. the Evangelist doth witnesle Diotrephes did Yet our Saviour Christ here doth not simply and absolutely forbid all giving or receiving of honour or of calling or being called of men Master or Father or Lord or Lady or the like Yet it is certaine our Saviour Christ doth forbid so to call Master or Father as to make any man the Master or Father of our Faith instead of Christ or that any man should be called Master or Father so as to take the honour of chiefe Master or Father or Teacher to himselfe which is due to Christ This is that which Christ forbiddeth and this is that which the Apostle Paul forbiddeth the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. Now this I say saith the Apostle that every one of you saith I am of Paul and I of Apollo and I of Cephas and I of Christ One said he was Pauls Disciple another he was Apollos another he was Christs But what saith the Apostle is Christ divided was Paul crucified for you Thus they made Paul the Master or Father of their faith And this the Apostle Paul reproveth here And this Christ our Saviour reproveth and forbiddeth Mat. 23. And Christ doth forbid to give that divine honour which is due to God and Christ that God-man our Saviour to any man in the world but hee doth not forbid to give or receive civill honour and respect one to another according to each mans place and dignity or so to be called of men Master or Father or the like To this effect was the Answer given but more close and briefe then now I give it But Nayler instead of any better Answer cried out lyar lyar hold thy peace for shame doth not Christ plainly forbid to call Father or Master and made a great clamorous noise and bid si● downe for shame for shame Mr Bourns Reply Then Mr Bourn called to Nayler and bid him leave his loud shamelesse out cries and hearken to an Argument to prove the Exposition to be truth and according to the mind of Christ which was to this effect Argument 2 Whatsoever Christ himselfe or the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles of Christ doth approve of elsewhere in thenew Testament as lawfull to be done that Christ himselfe doth not forbid in that place Mat. 23. But Christ himselfe and the Spirit of Christ in the Apostles doth elsewhere approve of the calling of men Masters and Fathers and of giving other titles of respect and honour to men Therefore Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not forbid to call any man Master or Father as James Nayler pretendeth The first proposition is witnessed to be clear because Christ is truth yea the way the truth and the life and he is no way contrary to himselfe For Jesus Christ is yesterday and to day and the same for ever Heb. 13. Therefore Christ doth not forbid that here Mat. 23. which he alloweth elsewhere And for the second proposition that Christ and his spirit in the Apostles doth approve and allow fit titles of honour to bee given to men as is agreeable to their conditions in their severall places This will bee evident if you read rightly consider that of the Evangelist Marke 7. Where Christ is witnessed to repeat the Commandement Honour thy Father and thy Mother and in the next verse Christ himselfe giveth the name of Father and Mother to the parents of the man of whom he spake to the Pharisees And saith Christ ye suffer him no more to do ought for his Father and Mother Now Christ certainly would not have named Father and Mother nor have approved of those titles and that relation if it had not been lawfull And the same also doth the Spirit of Christ in the Apostle Paul in divers places read Eph. 6. Col. 3. Col. 4. and you may finde he giveth the titles of Father and Master Honour thy father and mother and fathers provoke not your children and masters give unto your servants that which is just and equall knowing that ye also have a master in heaven And the Apostle Peter to the same effect 1 Pet 2. Honour all men love the brother-hood feare God honour the King the supreme magistrate by whatsoever title he be called And servants be subject to your masters with all feare not only to the good and gentle but also to the froward so that here are earthly fathers and masters as well as God and Christ is our father and master in heaven And therefore it is evident that our Saviour Christ in that place Mat. 23. did not simply and absolutely forbid to call or to bee called master or father for if he had he would not have approved it himselfe nor would the Apostles of Christ who had the Spirit of Christ have done it as we have proved they did to

rightly executed it exalteth a a Nation Prov. 14 34. but sinne is a shame to a people The want of magistracy and government prepareth a people for destruction Iudges 18.7 My Text the 2d time I preached before the honourable Iudges at Darby Assises in which I proved the necessity of and honour due to Magistrates at full witnesse that City Laish who perished suddenly And this is one reason given There was no Magistrate in the Land which might punish or put them to shame in any thing And this shall suffice to witnesse against all adversaries whatsoever and cleare up and resolve the Question into this conclusion That it is lawfull to call Master or Father and to give honour to every one even to the highest powers and to inferiour Magistrates to the honourable Judges and Justices and to all others according to their severall places and dignities whatsoever yet so as the honour and glory of God is to be exalted above all And thus I have ended these foure Questions disputed There were three more Questions but for these and Naylers answers and his crosse interrogatories I have given my sufficient answer before and my reason wherefore I print no more namely because they are so fully answered already by many learned divines that it were but to cast water into the sea as I have expressed in the one and twentieth page of this my Defence of the Scriptures c. to which I refer the Reader I shall only give some briefe Animadversions upon Naylers most false relation of that Dispute at Chesterfield and passe to a conclusion 1. It is an approved observation Rectum est index sui obliqui that a true and right rule will discover it selfe and that which is false and so will a true relation therefore I need doe no more here but refer the Reader to what I have before expressed yet to draw the curtaine a little that you may see Naylers picture the better I shall number up a number of his untruths in that most false relation of that Dispute Naylers untruths 1. In the very title Nayler calleth it a dispute between James Nayler and the parish-Teachers of Chesterfield This is an untruth for there was but one of the Parish-Teachers of Chesterfield who had any hand in that Dispute 2. In the next line he addeth By a challenge against him This is a second falshood for the challenge was on his side not only by John Prith boasting of Nayler but by other of his fellow Quakers 3. He saith the simple may see the bloody minds of these men This is a third untruth for there were no bloody minds nor thought of any persecution against him but of a Christian Conference 4. He saith when we speake faire war is in our hearts This is a fourth untruth we had not war in our hearts nor any desires but of peace and that peace and rruth might dwell together 5. He saith swearing and cursing and blaspheming the dreadfull name of God are the fruits of John Billingsley's Ministry This is a fifth untruth for Mr Bilingsley never preached any such doctrine nor approved of any such practice nor did know of the Bul-baiting Nayler spake against There was a poore man of Wingerworth neer Chesterfield his name as I was informed was William Frost who having heard Naylers desperate doctrine and read some of his books despaired and went and drowned himselfe Was this the fruits of thy Ministry Nayler thou wilt not confesse it was 6. Nayler cryeth out and calleth Mr Billingsley man-pleaser O thou man-pleaser saith he This is a sixt lie for it is evident Mr Billingsley is not a man-pleaser for he refuseth to baptize children except the parent will come unto him and be examined of the knowledge of his Faith And doth not give the Lords Supper but to such as he examineth and approveth by which too many are displeased which they would not if they did know what was good for their owne soules 7. For I let passe divers he saith God is risen to cut us off and it had been good we had never been borne And I hope this is a seventh untruth and a false prophecie But Nayler manifesteth his bloody mind he would cut off all the faithful Ministers of Christ if it were in his power The Lord rebuke him 8. Hee saith there was another plot against him Which is an eighth untruth there was not any plot as he pretended as God and our conscience can witnesse for us 9. For I omit againe divers abominable untruths observed by Mr Billingsley in that part of Naylers false relation Nayler againe saith he was shewed the many plots laid to have cast him in prison and to prosecute our bloody intents This is a 9th untruth from the father of lies if any shewed thee any such thing they were inventers and thou art a publisher of an abominable untruth 10. Nayler at the Disputation did most falsely accuse me that I did sweare by Mary when I did not so much as name Mary as all that could heare me can witnesse at full nor did I sweare at all as in my letter I writ to him the next day I justified sully and wished him to repent his lying accusation which letter he hath most falsely printed heaping up one lye after another in a most shamelesse manner as if the Spirit of lying and slander had taken ful possession of him which I leave off to rehearse as being unwilling to blot my paper with so many of his odious stinking untruths yet I shall mention one more most abominable Nayler saith page 10. That these Priests set themselves with all their strength to prove swearing lawfull c. which is a most hellish lie This was the truth when Nayler wrangling denied it to be lawfull to take any oath before a lawfull Magistrate upon any occasion Mr Billingsley proved it lawfull by divers places of Scripture both out of the Old and New Testament which Nayler basely perverteth and according to his custome raiseth that most wicked slander and here he fully maketh good that which is justified against him and his fellowes in that briefe Relation of the irreligion of the Northerne Quakers noted before page 20. basely to manifest themselves notorious lyars as in that Pamphlet called Sauls errand to Damascus in which there are a hundred untruths as may bee proved saith that Author by a hundred witnesses and many of them saith he will be as ready to say and unsay any thing as if lying were a vertue and that they make no conscience of raising false reports against any that oppose them And this I now finde to be most true in lying Nayler by this experience But if the adversaries of Christ called the Master of the house Belzeebub no marvell if these Quaking adversaries like the devil that grand Quaker do belye and scandalize the ministers of Christ The Lord forgive them if it be his will if they have not sinned that sinne