Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
religion_n	scripture_n	sense_n	true_a	4,624	5	5.7921	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A46640	Verus Patroclus, or, The weapons of Quakerism, the weakness of Quakerism being a discourse, wherein the choicest arguments for their chief tenets are enervat, and their best defences annihilat : several abominations, not heretofore so directly discovered, unmasked : with a digression explicative of the doctrine anent the necessity of the spirits operation, and an appendix, vindicating, Rom. 9. from the depravations of an Arminian / by William Jamison.	Jameson, William, fl. 1689-1720.	1689 (1689)	Wing J445; ESTC R2476	154,054	299

Spirit which they make the chief and principal Rule of Faith and manners to which Spirit God himself speaking in the Holy Scripture must do obeisance Which Doctrine although we have already everted in the former chapter we shal notwithstanding here propose and vindicate a few Arguments for the further overthrow thereof and detection of the grosse abomination and horrid delusion attending their principles And first I will propose and vindicate an Argument proposed by Mr. Brown Quakerism the plain way to Paganism pag. 46. Which Argument Robert Barclay attempteth to solve Vind pag. 17. which is this If since the Apostles fell asleep and the Canon of the Scriptures was closed all that have pretended to immediate Revelation as a primary Rule have been led by a Spirit of error then it is not the way of Christ But the former is true Ergo. c. To this he answers 1. that Mr. Brown begs the Question in his presupposing that there are no Apostles now and that the Canon of the Scriptures is closed against which exception I reassume the Argument thus If since the Apostles whose Names are mentioned in Scripture fell asleep and Iohn wrote the Revelation all that pretended to this kind of Revelation have been led by a Spirit of error then this is not the way of Christ But the former is true Ergo c. There can now no exception be made against the M●j●r for none will deny that the Apostles whose names are mentioned in Scripture are dead and that Iohn hath written the Revelation and well enough he knew that Mr. Brown understood no other thing than what we have now said and yet so covetous hath he been of shifting that he behoved to have one though he could not but know that it would serve no longer than it met with an impugner I now come to his answer to the Minor which Mr. Brown makes evident by an induction of many Sects and Hereticks pretending to immediate Revelation all which are known and not denyed by Quakers to have been led by a Spirit of error to which we may add many of the Quakers themselves such as I● Nailor Susanna Parsons who as P●get relateth being moved by this lying Spirit fruitlesly attempted to raise from the dead another of the Quakers one William Pool by name who had murdered himself and Gilpins of whose lying Spirit see at large in Clerks Examples also Iohn Toldervy of whom see a little Book called foot out of snare Robert Church-man and many others of whom you may read at large in Mr. Increase Maithers Book And he requireth an instance of the contrary which is the only way to answer an Induction In stead of which he sayeth that he is bound to prove that there was never one pretending to immediate Revelation but he was also led of the Spirit of error which he hath done unt●l he give an instance to the contrary or else shew another way of answering an induction which will be new logick which perhaps he may do for he and his Brethren are very displeased with the old 2 ly That he may not be alone in this sore stresse he saith that Mr Menzies doth thus answer Dempster the Jesuite which is an impudent falshood for neither the Jesuits medium nor probation of his Minor is in the least like the Argument which we now vindicate for the Jesuits Argument was this That Religion cannot be true Religion which hath no peculiar ground or principle to prove that it is a Religion and conform to the true sense and letter of the Scripture or Word of God and he subsumes But the Protestant Religion hath no peculiar ground c. Ergo it cannot be a true Religion Hence it is evident that these two Argumentations have nothing of consanguinity For if these two Argumentations had stricken alike at the two parties against which they were framed then the Jesuits Argument should have run thus Whosoever since the Apostles fell asleep have pretended to or pleaded for the Scriptures as their principal Rule have fallen into palpable errors and open blasphemy so that they became marks of Gods heavy judgment Now where should the Jesuite have found such a long Catalogue of these as Mr. Brown hath found of deluded Enthusiasts But which is the main thing and quite refutes the most falsly and impiously alledged coincidence of these Arguments how easy should it have been to have adduced not only one instance to the contrary but whole volums thereof ye● not only the whole primitive Church for diverse Centuries after Christ and all the Reformed Churches both these whom men are pleased to call Calvinists and Lutherans together with the Greek and Abassine Churches But likewise the most grave wise and learned of the Romanists themselves By this time I hope this arch-falshood of the Quaker whereby he would hide the shame of his desperat cause already appeareth again I answer directly to the Jesuit and the Quaker his patron that if we may believe the ablest and fiercest of our Adversaries such as Bellarmin Contaren Salmeron the chief of the Doctrines which we hold in opposition to pope●y are most agreeable to the true Sense of Scripture His third answer is that some of the primitive Protestants such as George Wishart and Iohn Huss had immediat Revelation But nequisquam Ajacem possit super are nisi Ajax that he might be sure no other should refute him he refuteth himself and rendereth his instance altogether unserviceable by granting they did not pretend to it as the ground of their Faith and obedience in all matters of doctrine and worship Lastly to the instance of Ia Naylor they answer that he repented again which answer is an evident confirmation of what we plead for viz· that the Quakers Spirit is ready to give them the cheat and deceive them for I believe Ia Naylor acted but according to his light when he received Divine Worship From this argument we may observe these things first if it hold as cogent this is a serious Truth which he sayeth Vindic. page 25. is absurdly affirmed by Iames Durham as he speaks viz. that Christ spake his last words to the Church that is put a close to these writings which were to be a Rule to the whole Church for if all that pretend the like commission or such immediate Revelation of the rule of their Faith about which the question is were led by a Spirit of error then the Revelation was the last Scripture written and sure for any thing he knoweth ought to be written there is no reason to believe that there is any more to be written 2 ly Observe that this Argument is demonstrative for such are all inductions which have no instance to the contrary 3 ly It destroyes wholly the Quakers cause for this kind of Revelation being disproved the very proprium quarti mod● of the Quakers is destroyed 2dly Moses and the Prophets Christ and the Apostles and all the holy men that were inspired by

without which other Tests or Rules we might be deceived and misled then the Scriptures could not in truth be called able to make the Man of God wise through Faith unto Salvation But we need not insist for how clear soever the matter be little Justice Truth or fair dealing is to be expected at the hands of those who call Scriptures compared Scriptures perverted and deny that as false the Truth of which themselves cannot but see for I query what difference can be imagined between these two phrases able to make Timothy which was a man of God wise unto Salvation and able to make the Man of God perfect To abuse the Scriptures at this rate I think is gross and impious enough and yet no better all along doth this Author treat them Of which a pregnant Example followeth for Vind. pag. 41. in opposition to Mr. Brown proving the sufficiency and perfection of the Scriptures from Ioh. 20.31 2 Cor. 3 14. Psal. 119.70 He saith that from this Doctrine it would follow that all Bo●ks written after such a time were superfluous If this answer be sufficient many a superfluity there shal be in Scripture for if the writing of a Book after there are so many written as contain all things necessary for Faith and practise if we say the writing of another Book which may be either explicative of the Books before written or contain many things for the bene esse of a Christian be superfluous how much more then shall the repetition of the same things in the same words and the same method be superfluous but according to him the former is true well then the Quakers Conclusions are that the scriptures are Battologies Lastly for we love rather to plead by the weight than by the multitude of Arguments we evince that the Scriptures are a compleat adequate and primary Rule of Faith and manners by the Testimony of our Adversaries themselves And first that they are an adequat and compleat Rule is granted by R. B. who Vind. pag. 36. speaketh thus next he carps at my saying the chief Doctrines of Christianity are contained in the Scriptures asking where we may find the whole Doctrine of the Christian Faith I answer freely In the Scripture And again R. B and George Keith with joint suffrages grant that the Scriptures are a full enough Declaration of all Doctrines and principles both essential and integral of the Christian Religion Quak. confirm or rather self confuted pag. 38. Behold Reader thou hast our Adversaries granting to their own Contradiction all we plead for The other Branch viz. that they are the Primary Rule our Adversaries themselves also at unawares grant for Rob Barclay in his second These sayeth that the Spirit is not to be subiected to the outward Testimony of the Scriptures as a more noble Rule where it is clear that according to him the Spirit may be subjected to the Scriptures tho not as to a more noble and certain Rule Now this being granted the Cause is yielded for it is certain that a primary rule is in no case to be subjected unto its secondary or the Rule which is ruled by it For I think the Acts of Parliament are not at all to be subjected to these of an inferiour Court. Now if the Quakers would hold by this and grant that a man swerveth not from his duty tho he subject all suggestions and motions to the Scriptures as a sure Tryal and Test thereof let them call it a more noble Rule or what they will they might the more easily be born with But it is evident by their pleading for the Spirit as their primarie Rule that they will in no Case subject their impulses and Motions to the Scriptures Our Adversaries grant also That the Scriptures have proceeded from God and therefore infallible Now I hope that which is infallible needs not be subjected unto and tryed by a more sure Rule for more sure than infallible is impossible I know nothing they can say except that which G. K. said on the stage at Aberdeen That we may beguile our selves with them viz. by interpretation thereof To which I answer That the effective illumination of the Spirit of God is sufficient to secure us from this hazard which is no more objective Revelation than the Eye-salve is the Sun. 6. But our Adversaries soon repenting of their Liberality endeavour to overthrow all their own Concessions and to prove that the Scriptures are neither an Adequate nor Primarie Rule some of their Objections we shall name that the Reader may Judge of the rest And first they Object out of Bellarmine de Certitudine Iust. That the Scriptures cannot shew unto a man that he hath true Faith for say they as the Jesuite did before them Such a mans Name is not in all the Word of God For altho the Scriptures contain the true marks of Faith who shall perswade me that I have these Marks that I believe that I obey Thus R. B. reasoned in his Apologie To which his Antagonist answereth ' That it is no less absurd to say that this is the work of a Rule than for R. B. Supposing that he had killed a man to deny that the Law could put him to death because no Law saith that R. B. hath killed a man or to deny that he is a Quaker because the Law sayeth no such thing of him in particular To which he replyeth Vind. pag. 45.46 That such examples are poor Arguments and miserably halt for R. B. saith he his Confessing himself to be a Quaker acknowledging every one of their Doctrines is enough to prove him one in the sense of the Law of the Land and the Judge is to condemn him as a Murderer if convict by witnesses that he really did the dead and both these relate to outward things which can be proven by outward Testimonies for without the certainty of the evidence the Judge cannot pronounce his Sentence But is a mans own confessing or affirming that he hath the true Ma●ks of Faith enough to prove he has them and what are the Witnesses to apply the examples of committing of Murder by which a man shall know he has these Marks and who shall examine the witnesses and judge of the certainty and clearness of their Evidence must it be the man that is accused who useth that method Ans. 1. Both Doctrine and proof he hath learned from his old friend Bellarmin who de Cert Iust. calleth the same Sophism a Theological demonstration contradicting not only the Scriptures but divers of the Papists themselves as Amesius sheweth Bellarmin also accounteth this Inspiration of the Quakers the only way whereby a man can be firmlie assured of his having Faith or that he shall have Salvation And therefore appropriateth it to St. Francis and St. Galla and the like which dottage is sufficiently refuted exploded and derided by Ames and others who have undertaken the Refutation of Bellarmin Hence we may see that if there be a

indulged unto them But his Answer still cutteth off Babes with the rest seing to them Christ is come in the Spirit already But it is needless at all to Impugn this distinction it s own groundlesness sufficiently doth it He cometh next to answer his 21 and 22 Num and there he asserteth That that which the Christians were enjoyned to Observe Act 15 29. was no part of the Ceremonial Law but an Apostolick Command and thinketh that whatever can plead for the abrogation of this Injunction will also plead for the abrogation of the Lords Supper But taketh no notice that his Antagonist shewed that there is no little Vanity and impiety in his adducing Rom. 14.17 Col. 2.16 To prove this and therefore he shamefully passeth over what he sayeth on these places and so giveth up this his Socinian Cause For he that is a Socinian in this point he doeth not deny he sayeth That this Command seing it was given after the out-pouring of the Spirit hath as much of a Gospel Institution as any thing commanded before by Christ can have Ans. Well then I see we will be no more troubled with quaking preachers seing this Command Act. 15. according to himself is repealed and yet hath as much of a Gospel Institution as preaching hath Matth. 10. and certainly it will as well follow from Col. 2.20 that preaching of the Gospel is abrogat and not allowed now by Christ as from v 16 and Rom. 14 17. that the Lords Supper is now abrogat and not allowed by Christ. Now let both old and new Socinians I mean the Quakers try to infringe this if they can And I shall still infer the one upon as good ground as they can do the other Which Consideration and Parity of places destroyeth this Socinian Conceit say what they will in its defence AN APPENDIX IN which the Doctrine of the Reformed Churches and in special of the Reverend assembly at Westminster in their Confession of Faith Chap. 3. deduced from the Ninth chap to the Romans defended and the Text Vindicated from the Corrupt Glosses and Depravations of William Parker and his pretended examination of the Westminster Confession which Robert Barclay hath made his own by referring us thereunto as sufficient solutions of all our arguments for our Doctrine of Election and Reprobation deduced from that place AMongst the many and damnable Errors which the Quakers have raised out of their Graves that of their denying Eternal Election or at best making it whollie conditionall uncertain and depending upon the will of the Creature so that notwithstanding the Decree of God to the contrary it might so have fallen out that none should have been saved is not the least In which they conspire with the grossest of Pelagians but the downright and most palpable contrariety of this their Doctrine of the holy Scriptures which they sometimes would fain seem to follow hath made the more knowing among them to conceal so far as they are able their thoughts anent the Doctrine of Election Thus dealt Robert Barclay who in all his Theses and Apology tho in his account an entire System of Religion never delivereth his minde thereanent And Vindic. Sect. 6. In defence of this non-such Omission he sayeth only that all do at times Confess that it is not safe nor proper too curiously to inquire into the Decrees of God which he prooflesly alledgeth his adversary to have done and that it is only needful to say God calleth every Man every where to Repent and be saved through Faith in Jesus Christ Neither doth he any where directly Impugn our Doctrine of Election And yet he feircely falleth upon our Doctrine of Reprobation and thus declareth to the World his self-repugnancy seing none can be ignorant that our Doctrine of Reciprobation is Reprocally and inseparably linked to that of Election Moreover he thus publisheth his Mind concerning Election altho he by all Means endeavours to conceal it for whoever denyeth Reprobation by an Infallible Consequence downright denyeth Election And thus Nill he will he we have his mind positively anent Election and also Confession intimated that his Judgement about Election cannot abide to be tryed by the Scripture Bench. And yet I think few will say That his Doctrine of positive and dounright denyal of Reprobation is much better founded seing he with a Pythagorical silence passeth over all his Adversaries arguments proving all our Doctrine there anent chap. 7. num 10.11 These Arguments I say about twenty in Number he doth nor so much as mention and far less attempt a Solution thereof altho he knew well enough that except these be untyed the whole frame of Quakerism is entirely dissolved But in stead of Resolution of his adversaries arguments as he doth all along he giveth the World a meer Contract of his Apologie under the cheating Title of a Vindication But when his adversarie saith That the Quaker can no more Impugn our Doctrine than he can Impugn what the Apostle saith Rom. 9 19. The Quaker Sect. 6. pag 67. answereth two things 1. That this is all one as if a Quaker should say confute all the Scripture which contain our Doctrine and therefore dispute no more untill Thou first do that But the Man is good where there is little to do But if he had not intended to play the shifter he had condescended upon some particular place as his adversarie did otherwise he no less declareth his own fear than Darius did when he objected to his pursuing Enemie That he could not be subdued because of the ●pacious Countries thorow which it behoved Him to follow him 2. He referreth his Antagonist to the Examination of the Westminster Confession chap 3. Where saith he he may have his misapprehensions corrected But How cometh it to pass that the Quaker hath taken no notice of many Authors as Twiss Rutherford Dickson to whom his Adversarie in this very point did refer him 2. But his care is not very great of Commutative Justice Notwithstanding of which Ex abundanti we will make a particular and impartial enquirie into all that he bringeth against the meaning of the Reformed Churches upon that place The Author is an Enthusiastical Arminian called William Parker who is the Man I believe the Quaker understandeth for beside him I know no other particular examinator of this Confession Now because our Quaker placeth so firm confidence in this Author that he thought a simple reference unto him sufficiently doth his bussiness I had a great desire to know what he could say against our meaning of this place Which place appeared to me to hold forth our Doctrine as clearly as the sun-light Having therefore made diligent search at length I found the book in which Chap 3. He undertaketh a particular discussion of all the Arguments brought from this place for our Doctrine concerning Election and Reprobation which how he hath done comes now to be weighed And 1. From Vers. 6. He frameth to himself an Objection