Selected quad for the lemma: love_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
love_n	friend_n	great_a	love_v	6,235	5	6.3276	4	true

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

are Grace so an evil principle is sin I Answer there is a Principle of Grace in the Souls of Bad men which is Grace in it self and Truth and Righteousness yet it is not their Righteousness nor Grace because they joyn not with it and even so an evil Principle in a good man though evil and sin is not his sin when he doth not joyn with it 5. He Argueth That which inclineth men to sin must be sin But if this Argument hold then the Devil must be sin still because he inclines men to sin Again as to what he alledges that Paul said Sin did dwell in him from Rom. 7. I Answer I. A. hath not proved that Paul was at that time in that condition whereof he makes mention and although he speaks of the dwelling of sin in him viz. in respect of his former condition yet he telleth that not his mind but his flesh was the Subject where it did indwell And therefore when I. A. so insultingly inquireth at me What is the Subject of that evil thing or motion for seeing it is an accident it must have some subject without which it cannot exist I Answer him from the Apostle the Subject of it in good men is not the mind or more noble part which is immortal but the flesh And seeing it is not lodged in the mind of any righteous man it cannot defile it when it is not in any wise consented unto Nor doth it follow that because an evil motion may be in the flesh or mortal part the Devil is also lodged there too this is nothing but a foolish inference of I. A. his making and therefore let him take home his silly Jest to himself where he saith It is better to lodge s●n alone than it and the Devil too for two such Devi●s are worse together than any of them it self I say nothing of this can be inferred from our Principle but let I. A. take heed lest sin and the Devil too have not too great place in him which so leads him forth to foolish Jesting and reproaching the Blessed Spirit of Truth in its Holy Inspirations in the Hearts of Gods People But why is I. A. so offended with the Inquirer for asking if Sin be the Devil seeing he calleth sin Devil saying Sin and the Devil are two worse Devils than one alone To conclude this matter I. A. doth plainly acknowledge That by Christ his destroying the Devil is meant the destroying his Power and Kingdom in the World pag. 137. And not the Annihilating the Devils entity and being Is it not then clear that I. A. his own Confession the Devils Power and Kingdom is called Devil in Scripture and what is that but sin and thus we see h●w at last he is forced at least indirectly to acknowledge what he hath so earnestly opposed CHAP. XIV IN the pretended Survey of the thirteenth Query I. A. accuseth the Spirit in the Inquirer As being either an ignerant Blockhead or else a Captious Sophister and withal alledging That the Question as it is propounded cannot be Answered and that therefore it must be purged from a plurality of Interrogations But all this Accusation proceeds upon a wrong Supposition viz. That Christ hath not died for all men And therefore although I. A. cannot Answer the Question according to his own false Principle yet according to Scripture it can be well Answered viz. That Christ hath died for all the ungodly and sinners that they should live unto him In the next place he offereth to give some clear demonstrations from the Scriptures That Christ did not die for all men But in his whole Survey of this Question consisting of above 13 Pages he bringeth not one place of Scripture which saith expresly That Christ died not for all men And for my part I have Read the Scriptures all over several times but to this day I could never find any such place But on th● contrary I have found divers places of Scripture expresly affirming That Christ hath died for all as Isaiah 53. 6. 2 Cor. 5. 14 15. Heb. 2. 9. and 1 Tim. 2. 6. and 1 Ioh. 2. 2. And therefore his clear demonstrations are but his own consequences gathered not from Scripture but from his own mistakes and his absurd Interpretations of Scripture the which we are not bound to receive seeing he has renounced all claim to the Inspiration of that Spirit that gave forth the Scripture And because it would be too tedious and to little purpose to Answer particularly to every frivolous Objection he maketh against the Doctrine of the Scripture Concerning Christs dying for all men I shall lay down some general Heads or Propositions according to Scripture by which all his Objections shall be sufficiently Answered PROP. I. ALthough Christ died for all men and thereby gave a Testimony of Gods great Love and also of his own to all mankind according to 1 Ioh. 4. 9 10. and 1 Ioh. 3. 16. and Rom. 5. 8. Yet it doth not follow that Christ or God hath equally conferred upon all the Spiritual Blessings procured by his Death for the Love of God being free he might extend it in different measures or degrees to men as it pleased him according to his own infinite Counsel which we cannot comprehend And whereas Ioh. 15. 13. it is said Greater Love hath no man than this that a man lay down his Life for his Friends This doth not import as I. A. doth alledge That Christ died only for his Friends but it expresseth the superabundant Love of Christ above the Love of all other men in that whereas it is the greatest Testimony of the love among men a man to die for his Friend yet Christ hath given a far greater in that he died for his Enemies Rom. 5. 10. PROP. II. CHrist died in so far even for these who perish that by vertue of his Death all such have a day of Visitation wherein it is possible for them to be saved during which day Christ Jesus doth Enlighten them with his true Light to shew them their way unto God and also he breaths upon them in some measure sufficient unto their Conversion with his Spirit of Grace to draw and gather them whereby it is possible for them within the day of their Visitation to believe and so to be saved And this Grace of Illumination which hath a Sanctifying and renewing vertue in it comes upon them as the real effect and consequence of what Christ hath done and suffered for them God having so ordered it in his infinite Love and Wisdom that this Grace whereby he converteth Souls should flow and run forth unto us in that way and as it were through the Conduit of Christ his Blood so that the Sufferings of Christ were as the opening of a great Fountain out of which the abundant Grace of God that formerly as it were but droped on mankind is in the Latter days poured forth upon them as it was promised so to be for which

willingly and sincerely acknowledge that the Righteousness of Christ in what he did and suffered for us outwardly in his own person is imputed unto us for Justification and so much I did acknowledge in my Book already mentioned But we further say that all to whom that is imputed which Christ did and suffered for us outwardly must witness a real and true Conformity both to the Death of Christ and also to his Holy Life and walk without which all mens imputing it unto themselves is but an airy Dream and Imagination There is yet another gross perversion used by I. A. in his pretended Survey or Answer of the sixteenth Question as if the Quakers so called Seem to deny that there was any Spiritual Worship in the time of the Old Testament And thus because it is said in the Query that Christ set up the True Worship in Spirit and in Truth above 1600 years ago but nothing but great Ignorance or prejudice can from this inferr that there was not any degree of it in the World in former times And I. A. might as well argue against the Scriptures that because God saith in the last days He would make a New Covenant with the House of Israel and Write his Law in their Hearts That therefore nothing of this sort was formerly in the World And thus I have done with I. A. his long and tedious pretended Survey of this Question having omitted nothing that seemed unto me Material and having found in his whole Discourse consisting of about 19 pages scarce any thing but gross mistakes and perversions CHAP. XVIII HEre again I. A. in his pretended Survey to the 17th and last Question beginneth with a most gross perversion As if the Quakers because they would have men to cease from all their own works meerly acted in the strength of mans Will and natural Power without the supernatural and Spiritual aid and assistance of the Spirit of God would have men to be as senseless Trunks doing nothing the bare Rehearsal of which is sufficient Refutation Another charge little less gross is That the Quakers hold only Babylon to be within in mens hearts for which he citeth the aforesaid Book called The Principles of Truth in several pages To which I Answer Although the said Book saith That Babylon c. is ●ithin yet it doth not say it is only within but on the contrary it plainly affirmeth that all who are in outward Worships without the leading and enabling of the Spirit of God painted over with glorious Words but inwardly full of Abominations belong to the Kingdom of Babylon And well may that unclean and deceitful Spirit that acteth all such persons who are levened and governed therewith and thereby be called Babylon by a Figurative Speech even as the Soul of a man is commonly called the man which hinders not that the people in whatsoever Profession they may be who are acted by that evil and Antichristian Spirit are Babylon And as for the Pope and Popish Church as we do cordially joyn with the best and most sincere Proantests against them as being the great and principal Members of that Scarlet Whore Mystery Babylon in whom Antichrist or that Antichristian Spirit hath its chiefest or most principal residence and therefore in no respect can be said to favour the Pope or Popish Church on that or any consideration although we with the Salvation of the worst so we most freely declare that wherever we find any degree or measure of the same Spirit of Antichrist and Babylon as too much of it is to be found in I. A. and too many of his Brethren we cannot acquit them from being Members of the same Antichristian body although in this our upright and honest Testimony we expect neither the kindness of the Pope nor yet of I. A. far less the Popes Wages or reward for being so kind to him as I. A. doth most falsly and grosly alledge And divers of our Friends have suffered deeply under the Popish Power for bearing a Testimony against him and them which neither I. A. nor his Brethren have ever done but sit warmly at home without exposing themselves to any suffering on that account Having thus as briefly as I could given an Answer to I. A. his Book against us omitting nothing that seemed to be material I shall neither trouble the Readers nor my self with his two Postscripts to Answer them in particular The substance of the first Postscript against me being already Answered in the foregoing Sheets as to what is any wise material Or if he suppose any thing is omitted let him mind me of it in his next and withall Write an intire and thorough Answer to what is already said both here and in the Treatise called Quakerism no Popery which he hath only but here and there nibled at And I may possibly if God give me freedom and convenience return him a ●urther Answer 〈◊〉 at present I suppose he hath work enough to lye on his hand and needs no more As for his Postscript against or for Doctor Everards Ghost as he calleth it I find not my self concerned to Answer him therein nor defend every word or Opinion of his seeing he never went under that Name or Designation with us Albeit I must needs acknowledge both my Friends and I such of them I mean as have read his Book have a great love and respect to his memory which all I. A. his bitter Revilings against him shall never be able to defame And we believe the said Everard hath indeed had rare and singular gifts of Understanding and Openings of Scripture from God and withal a good measure of Integrity and zeal for the Truth according to the time and Dispensation he was in and in that respect doth truly deserve to be accounted among the Witnesses of Truth in his day whatever imperfections attended him otherwise or suppose some mistakes of Judgment in some things or not so warily cautioning some of his words as could have been wished Although I judge that I. A. doth seek to fix or fasten upon him divers errors of Judgment of which he is not guilty by reason of deep prejudice against him Partly whiles he takes the said Iohn Evrard's words too Literally and Superficially which are to be understood more Mystically and Figuratively and partly while he takes that as spoken absolutely which is but spoken comparative and by way of some Similitude and but in some respect But before I make a full close I shall only take notice of two gross and absurd Assertions waving others to another opportunity in his Postscript to me The one is that the Pope and his Clergy had the true Power and Authority of Ordination and calling Ministers before the Reformation neither as Christian nor as Antichristian Not as Christian or else all Christians would have it nor as Antichristian seeing these two terms are not contradictory but contrary for many things and persons too are neither Christian nor Antichristian To which

Rule and like Proteus turning my self into all shapes sometimes I design Christ himself oftner the Spirit himself but oftnest the Dictate of the Spirit within to be that Rule But he might at that ra●e have no less blamed the Apostle Paul that he turned himself into all shapes while he affirmeth sometimes That Christ spoke in him and sometimes that the Spirit spoke in him and certainly what Christ or the Spirit spoke in him was by a certain Word or dictate But to Answer directly when I say Christ is the Rule And again when I say the Spirit is the Rule there is no absurdness therein for if we mean by the Spirit the Holy Ghost Christ and the Holy Ghost are never separated or divided in what they Speak or Witness in the souls of men but their speech and Testimony is one and the same alwaies and also Christ himself in Scripture is called the second Adam the quickening Spirit and the Lord that Spirit and said Christ I am the way the Truth and the Life and certainly that Life is Spirit and also the Words or dictate of it is Spirit and Life as Christ said The words that I speak unto you are Spirit and Life So the Reader may see that my words are sound and according to Scripture and therefore whether I say Christ or the Spirit or the internal dictate and Word of the Spirit is the Rule it is to the same purpose And to say the dictate of the Spirit is the Rule is no other than to say the Spirit dictating or speaking is that Rule and do not some of your selves use a variety of Speech when ye speak of the Rule one time saying The Scripture is the Rule another time The Word of God contained in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament is the only Rule c. as the Westminster Confession of Faith expresly hath it Another time The Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures c. Now according to I. A. I may blame him and his Brethren in this case that Proteus like he and his Brethren turn themselves into all shapes when they speak of the Rule And whether these phrases used by them be not more unscriptural I leave unto sober men for to judge In the next place he argueth That Christ cannot be the Rule nor the Spirit because the Rule of Faith must be some complex Proposition Direction or Precept and the like To this I Answer First That the Rule of Faith must be a complex Proposition Direction or Precept formally understood in words formally conceived I altogether deny and I. A. hath not offered to prove it And although the Sp●rit of Christ may and often doth speak express words in the souls of his people yet he doth not alwaies so do when yet he clearly enough signifieth his mind and will unto them for if among men a King may signifie his mind to his Subjects or a Master to his servants without any formal Proposition or direction of words but only by some motion of his hand or face How much more may the Lord God who is the King of Kings signifie his mind unto his servants by the motion of his Spirit without any formal or express words Again I ask I. A. if he hath not learned in the Schools that the reasonable nature of God is the first rule of Manners And certainly the reasonable Nature of God is not a complex Proposition consisting of many words And hath he not read in Boetius that excellent saying Quis legem det amantibus major lex amor est ipse sibi which the Author of a late Book called The Life of God in the soul of man doth use to prove that somewhat more than words is a Law or Rule to Christians and Englisheth thus For who shall give a Law to them that Love Love 's a more powerful Law that doth such persons move And I further Query I. A. seeing the Scripture saith God is Love he that knoweth God to be Love and hath the Love of God shed abroad in his Heart by the holy Spirit which in Scripture is called The Spirit of Love shall not this man be tyed to love God and his Brethren yea and all mankind even his very enemies Suppose it be not said to him in formal express words do so and so Again whether he that only readeth or heareth these outwardly Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart c. and thy Neighbour as thy self but his Heart is utterly void of the love of God or he that hath the love of God in his heart and feelleth the powerful constraint of it is under the most powerful Law Whether the words without or the Spirit and Nature of Divine Love within is the most powerful Law and Rule There may therefore be a Law or Rule which is not a complex Proposition of words either inward or outward to wit the Divine Love it self which hath a Voice and Language to the souls of men in the silence of all words many times and can be understood as well without words as with them And therefore when I say the dictate of the Spirit is the Rule I mean not that there is alwaies a dictate of express words but that which is either such a formal express dictate or equivalent thereunto which those who are acquainted with the experiences of the Saints do well understand although it may seem to I. A. a strange Riddle or Paradox And thus by what I have said in this particular the intelligent Reader I hope shall perceive that in saying The Spirit is the Rule I am not beside my self as I. A. doth alledge but speak the words of Truth and soberness And I further ask Whether I. A. thinks that Ignatius the Martyr was beside himself when he writ in one of his Epistles to the People 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Vsing the Holy Ghost for a Rule or Whether Paul was beside himself when he said The Law of the Spirit of Life in Christ Iesus had made him free from the law of Sin and Death And whether that Law was not the Spirit of Life even as the Law of sin was sin and the Law of death was death And whether the Law of the Mind mentioned by Paul was not a Divine Principle of Grace in his mind even as the Law of his Members was a principle of sin and corruption that sometime had place in him and not any complex Proposition of words And whether the Law that God writeth in the hearts of his people in the new Covenant be simply a form of words consisting of so many letters syllables and sentences or rather to speak properly is not that Law a new and Divine Nature or substantial Life of Holiness and Righteousness and Wisdom by which the Children of God are led and taught under the new Covenant naturally as it were to love God and all men even as the Law that God hath put in all