Selected quad for the lemma: ground_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
ground_n	divine_a	faith_n	reason_n	1,608	5	5.7687	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

any bond or tye of Christian fellowship for if such consequential Doctrine be false it is most unreasonable to impose it and therefore in that Case a Dissenter should have his liberty to differ in judgment without any breach of Brotherly Unity and Society and if it be true yet not being opened or revealed to another it cannot be in justice pressed or urged upon him where God has not given him the true freedom and clearness of mind to receive it and to do otherwise is to transgress that Golden Rule delivered by Paul viz. To walk by the same Rule according to what we have attained and if any be otherwise minded said he God will reveal it unto him And if this Advice could find place it would bring the differences among those called Christians in point of judgment into a very small and narrow compass and they would understand one another far better than now they do But again seeing I. A. is so absolute and peremptory that the Presbyterian Confession of Faith and Catechism and wh● not the Presbyterian Directory also materially considered is infallible and yet is but a Book of their making and the consequential part of it the alone Fruit and product of their humane Spirit since they deny all pretence to an inward Dictate or Direction of Gods Spirit in the Case why should the said I. A. so oft Taunt and upbraid us with an Infallible Spirit and Infallible Speaking and Writing and Inspiration for now it seems a meer humane Spirit hath inspired those that gave forth the Westminster Confession of Faith and Catechism to write every Article and Sentence of it Infallibly according to I. A. his high estimation of them But whereas I. A. dareth us To give any instances of any Articles and Definitions contained in the said Confession and Catechism that are not Scripture Sentence materially or formally considered This hath been done many times over and over again by our Friends in England and by some of us here in Scotland particularly by R. B. in his Catechism and Apology and by me in my Book of Immediate Revelation And there was in the year 1651. an intire examination of that Confession of Faith published in Print by one W. Parker who was not called a Quaker and whose words in all things we do not own and to the said Examination I. A. or any of his Fraternity is referred where I am abundantly perswaded he hath said more against it and many Articles contained therein viz. in the said Confession then ever I. A. or any of his Presbyterian half Brethren shall be able to Answer which whole Book lyeth at their door to this day so far as I can understand unanswered Another gross mistake or rather abuse of I. A. is that he alledgeth The Quakers are against all Confessions of Faith and Cat●chisms whatsoever and yet they have Confessions and Catechisms of their own I say this is a gross abuse for we do own that there may and ought to be Confessions of Faith given by True Christians and also we own that there may be Catechisms and that they are useful in the Church and accordingly we have such And though the Writers of those Confessions and Catechisms be not absolutely or universally Infallible yet we hold that none should publish any Confession of Faith or Catec●ism but in such things whereof they are Infallibly perswaded by the Spirit of the Lord and as to other things that may be uncerta●n or unclear unto them they should forbear and so every one should Speak or Write as they have received the ●pirit of Faith as the Apostle Paul said We ha●ing re●e●ved the same ●pirit of Faith we believe and therefore we have spoken bu● I. A. thinks he may Speak and Confess his Faith without the same Spirit of Faith which David and Paul had And as for our Catechisms and Confessions of Faith if we cannot prove them and all the Articles and Sentences in them to be according to express Scripture words then let them not be received For we profess to urge nothing nor to press any thing to be received as a common Article of Faith but what is expresly delivered and Recorded in the Scriptures And if any should be so unbelieving and obstinate as not to believe the express Scripture words we may not urge them or press them thereunto by any Humane or Carnal Force and Compulsion but only to labour to perswade them according to that evidence and demonstration of the Spirit and Power as God shall be pleased to furnish us withal Another great mistake or abuse of I. A. is that he alledgeth the Tenth Query is void of Sense as if it did import That their Iustification and Sanctification Faith and Grace were the Gifts of their Directory Catechism and Confession of Faith and thus because the Query saith The Gifts of these whereas it is plain to any Sober and Rational Person that by the Gifts of these the Inquirer meaneth the Gifts of Justification Sanctification Faith and Grace and this is a form of Speech allowed by the Grammar it self and practised by Learned Authors I suppose far beyond I. A. who say not only the Town London or Rome or Edinburgh but also the Town or City of London the City of Rome the City of Edinburgh and therefore why may it not be as well said the Gift of Faith of Justification of Sanctification and speaking of these in general why may it not be said the Gifts of these which is equivalent to these Gifts And beside perhaps all this Quible is only raised upon a mistake of the Transcriber wri●ing the Gifts of these for these Gifts but it seems I. A. is barren of matter when he maketh a mountain of so small a matter if so be it were an impropriety of Speech But to deal in earnest with I. A. seeing he is so declared an Enemy to Divine Inspiration in our days we cannot think that he indeed oweth his pretended Justification Sanctification and Faith unto God but rather unto those Confessions and Catechisms for what Evidence or probable ground can he give us that he hath any Divine Faith or that which is more than barely Historical and Traditional Another gross abuse of his is That because we call the Gospel the Power of God as we are warranted by the express words of Paul Rom. 1. 16. therefore he alledgeth That we fain to our selves a sort of dumb Gospel without any Words or Doctrine But to remove this abuse let the Reader know that by the Gospel we mean not the Power of God abstractly considered without the Doctrine and suitable words inwardly or outwardly Preached nor yet the Doctrine and Wor●● without the Power and Life and 〈◊〉 God but both conjunctly And although we do readily acknowledge that the Doctrine when it is outwardly Preached by the Spirit of God and so hath the Power of God accompanying it is and may be called Gospel yet we cannot simply or absolutely

appearing and do still at this day load them with such kind of Charges and to none is it more familiar to blame others for Heresie than those who are greatest Hereticks themselves 4. He saith In Doctrine we trample generally upon the whole Moral Law but more especially upon the first Table And here very falsly he Charges our Doctrine to be contrary to the first second fourth fifth sixth and ninth Commandments but let us see how he maketh good his Charge in each of them He alledgeth our Doctrine transgresseth the first Commandment because we say All Prayer and Worship that is performed without the Spirit of God is Will-worship and Superstition and consequently no wicked or unregenerate persons are bound to Worship God or indeed in any respect to obey God And from thence he concludes They are not under any Law of God and therefore lastly let them do what they will they cannot sin against God such men in the Quakers Principles as he saith may deny disown reject hate and contemn God worship the Devil and debauch at their pleasure they may lawfully dishonour and defame all men Murder commit Adultery Steal bear false Witness and yet they cannot sin because they are under no Law Hence also he infers That Reprobates are most unjustly condemned for their sinning against God seeing they not having received the Spirit are not under Law to God and so cannot be guilty of sinning against him Now what Sober Impartial and indifferent person that is not byassed with deep prejudice against us seeth not that these absurd consequences have not the least shadow of any Rational inference For although we say indeed that there is no true Worship but that which is in Spirit according to the express words of Christ and that none are true Worshippers of God but such as Worship him n the Spirit and that God requireth no Lifeless or Spiritless Worship yet we still affirm that all mankind ought to Worship God and Call upon him even all the wicked and unrenewed persons as well as the renewed so that in the thing of Worship it self we have no Controversy whether it be due unto God by all mankind but the state of the Question lyeth here betwixt us and those that dissent from us what the Worship of God is and what kind or sort of Worship it is that God requires of all men And in Answer thereunto we say the true Worship of God is a Spiritual Worship requiring the sincerity of the heart not as a circumstance or accidental thing but as the essential part thereof which cannot be done without the Spirit of God How much therefore more True and Rational consequence is it to argue thus God commands all men to Worship him therefore he hath given some measure more or less of the help of his Spirit unto all men whereby they may so do which doth continue with them so long as it pleaseth God who taketh away this help from none but such as mightily provoke him and sin out the day of their Visitation And even those whom the Lord in his Justice hath withdrawn that help or grace of his Spirit are still bound by the Law of God to Worship him as much as ever even when they neither do or can Worship him truly because they have brought this unpotency or inability upon themselves by their own unfaithfulness Even as a Servant or Steward that hath received a sum of Money to pay his Master and the said Servant spendeth the Money upon his Lusts and hath not one Penny wherewith to pay the debt yet he is still lyable for the whole sum Hence what I. A. saith in page 11. of his Preface is true that the inability of unrenewed men to perform acceptable Worship neither does nor can take away their Obligation to perform it But we differ from I. A. in the cause or reason why those who want that ability are still under the said Obligation which reason he will have only and alone mens losing it in Adam in whom they all once had it and the losing of it is their fault citing Rom. 5. 12 19. But to this I Answer First Whatever loss or inability is come upon Adam's posterity by the primitive disobedience yet now by vertue of the second Adam his obedience a new ability is conferred upon all men So that as broad as the Sore did spread by the first sin even as broad is the Plaister that God hath provided to the Lame and Diseased Souls of all mankind And this is most clear and plain from Rom. 5. 18. as also from Ioh. 3. 19. And this is the condemnation said Christ that Light is come into the world and men loved darkness rather than Light because their deeds were evil So we see that Christ layeth not the ground of wicked mens condemnation upon Adams sin but upon their hating the Light that did come unto them as a new and fresh discovery and visitation of Gods love But secondly Whether this Inability is come upon the wicked by reason of Adam's sin or by their own actual disobedience since that time yet we affirm no less than I. A. that the most wicked and ungodly are still under the obligation to the whole Law of God and their inability can be no ground of excuse unto them But the true state of the Queston is this Whether wicked men not simply as men or creatures but as wicked and remaining still in their wickedness should or are required to offer up unto God hypocritical and lifeless performances of that which men commonly call Prayer and Worship but is no more so in the sight of God than a dead Picture of Stone or Clay is a true living man and so whether God did ever require any to draw near to him with their Mouths and remove their Hearts far away as the manner of all wicked persons while so remaining always is Now we say God never required such sort of Prayers but refused and forbad them to be offered unto him even under the Law see Isaiah 1. 13. Bring no more vain Oblations and v. 12. When ye come to appear before me who hath required this at your hand to tread my Courts Again Psal. 50. 16 17. But unto the wicked God saith what hast thou to do to declare my Statutes or that thou shouldest take my Covenant in thy mouth seeing thou hatest instruction c. And whereas I. A. citeth some words of our Friends That wicked men should not Pray let the Impartial and Indifferent Reader understand these words in the Sense of those Scriptures just now mentioned which are as positive and full as any that can be cited out of our Friends Books and all occasion of mistake shall be removed For neither the Sense of the Scripture nor of our Friends is That wicked men are b●und in no respect to Wor●ip God for the contrary is manifest from the words cited by I. A. out of the Book called The Principles of Truth●

accusing us as being against all external Ordinances because the Query insinuates That such who are come into Death with Christ need not Bread and Wine to put them into remembrance of his Death from whence he most unjustly inferreth his consequence that we reject all outward helps and means whatsoever But doth not I. A. know that his own brethren acknowledge there is no absolute necessity of using that called the Supper so as none can be saved but such as pa●take of it and the like may be said of any outward helps when people cannot have them But yet we say still whatever outward thing God hath Commanded us to use be it never so small or mean is in that respect both necessary and profitable unto us for there is none of God's Commands but they bring along with them a real advantage to mens Souls but I. A. hath not as yet proved it that using Bread and Wine as aforesaid is any Gospel Command Another abuse of his is that he alledgeth We reject the said practise of taking the Bread and Wine from a conceited perfection which is false for as we do not boast of our perfections so we do not reject that custom● because of any perfection that some of us may become unto beyond others but because we cannot find it to be any Gospel Precept and therefore we cannot acknowledge it either to be necessary or profitable to the weakest Another thing he quarrelleth in the Query is That it makes to dye with Christ and to come to the Death with him all one And here he insults not a little in his knowledge of Philosophy above the Quakers for a meer Grammaticism of saying to for into which perhaps was only a fault in the Transcriber and yet we find commonly that to and into are indifferently used to signifie one thing as to come to Town is all one as to come into it and to come to Christ is all one as to come into him and when Christ said Come unto me he did certainly mean that they were to come into him Hence we read of the Saints being in Christ. And if this be I. A. his Philosophy so to quarrel at words proper enough and according to Scripture let the judicious and sober Reader judge whether some of our Friends that called his Philosophy Foolosophy had not ground so to do And whether he has not discovered more folly than true Philosophy from first to last in his Book against us In his Answer to the reason hinted in the Query from Paul's words to seek the things that are above and the things that are seen are temporal he still beggeth the Question That the outward observation of Bread and Wine is a mean which God hath appointed for the attaining the things above And in Opposition to his Assertion let him read what Paul saith Col. 2. 17. where he putteth mea● and drink in together with the new Moons and other legal Observations which he calleth A shadow of things to come but the body is of Christ. And seeing I. A. acknowledgeth that the Bread and Wine are but external signs and not the real body of Christ I ask him wherein then differ they from Shadows And if they be Shadows they are no part of the Gospel Dispensation according to Paul's Doctrine In the close of his pretended Survey to this Sixth Query he chargeth us most rashly and uncharitably as being related to the accuser of the Brethren as if the writer of the Queries had positively charged all the Ministers of Scotland that they never intended their Hearers should come any nearer to Christs Death than a bare Historical remembrance thereof But doth not I. A. know that to Query a thing is one and positively to conclude it far another And the Enquirer had ground so to Query because he understands that if it were the care of Preachers to bring people into the Death with Christ so as to be Crucified with him they would not plead so much for upholding a Figure or Shadow of Christ's Death to put them in remembrance of it when to suffer and die with Christ is much more effectual to remember them Nor Secondly would they plead so much for carrying a body of sin about with them while they live and that all must be under a necessity of sinning daily in Thought Word and Deed yea in whatever thay think speak or do for such a state is not consistent with a being Dead and Crucified with Christ. And Thirdly If it were their work to bring people to dye with Christ they would turn them to the Light of Christ in their Hearts and Preach it to be unto them of a saving Nature and an effectual mean to obtain the said Death with Christ which yet they do not but on the contrary deny it as meerly natural insufficient And is it not too apparent that the far greatest number of your Church Members know nothing more of Christ's Death than the History of it And whether the fault of this lye not in a very great part upon the Preachers is no small nor impertinent Question And seeing I. A. pretends so much to Scripture Rule I shall ask him a few Queries more upon the former Head First What Scripture hath he and his Brethren to call that eating of Bread and drinking of Wine once or twice in a year in the Pub●●ck Assembly the Sacrament 2. What Scripture have they to instruct them how oft they should use it as once twice or four times in every year And if they have none was it not then left to people according to the Query at least as to the time 3. What Scripture have they for consecrating it or when did Christ say Before ye eat it consecrate it 4. When did Christ give only the power to a Priest or Presbyter or Ordamed Minister to Consecrate it so as without the said Consecration by some Priest or Ordained Minister it is no Sacrament And seeing every Christian may eat it as well as the Minister why may he not also consecrate it as well as he seeing every true Chris●ian is a Priest 5. Where did Christ appoint that these words Take Eat this is my body should be the words of consecration and have ye not received all this from the Papists and not from Christ 6. Seeing ye commonly say that this Sacra●●●● of the Supper is come in the room of the Passo●er and under the Law every Family had power without a Priest to celebrate the Passover why hath not also every Family under the Gospel 〈◊〉 much power without any Ordained Priest or Minister to celebrate that called the Supper 7. Seeing every true Christian feeds daily by Faith upon the body of Christ according to the Protestant Doctrine and ought daily to remember the Death of Christ in all their eating and drinking which is also sanctified unto them by the Word of God and Prayer what peculiar vertue or efficacy hath your sacramental eating more than ordinary eating