Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	according_a	believe_v	holy_a	2,473	5	4.6085	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A39305	A further discovery of that spirit of contention & division which hath appeared of late in George Keith, &c. being a reply to two late printed pieces of his, the one entituled A loving epistle, &c. the other, A seasonable information, &c. : wherein his cavils are answered, his falshood is laid open, and the guilt and blame of the breach and separation in America, and the reproach he hath brought upon truth and Friends by his late printed books, are fixed faster on him / written by way of epistle ... by Thomas Ellwood.	Ellwood, Thomas, 1639-1713.	1694 (1694)	Wing E623; ESTC R224514	71,867	130

one of many Instances that might be given of his picking words from their Discourses to Charge them with which in his last Head he Charged me with Forgery for but mentioning But if W. Southbe did account that a doubtful Question is that any more than he himself does What means he when enumerating many Doctrines which he says we hold in common with other Professions Causeless Ground p. 4. he says The deceased Saints have not yet generally received the Resurrection of the Body c. Why generally if he did not either think some had or doubt whether they had or no Must W. Southbe be Unchristianed rendred guilty of holding gross and vile Errors Damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devils for only calling it a doubtful Question whether the Patriarchs have received the Resurrection and that by him who seems himself to doubt it either of them or some other deceased Saints For his saying the deceased Saints have not yet generally received the Resurrection implies he thinks some have But that W. Southbe does believe a general Day of Judgment and the Resurrection of the Dead at that Day I shewed before from his own Letter where having set forth G. K's Charge against him that he denied any general Day of Judgment and the Resurrection of the Dead but only what every one Witnesseth within here he Solemnly denies the Charge calls that Doctrine Damnable and Athiestical declares that he believes the Resurrection according to the Scriptures and the Antient Doctrine of Friends concerning it which was enough one would think to satisfy a wise Man one especially that pretended to be of the same Communion and Paul himself could not satisfy the Fool about the Resurrection G. K. says T. E.'s Fallacy is the more manifest that in W. Southbe's Confession of Faith recited by him there is not one word concerning the resurrection of the Dead nor of Christ's coming without us to Iudge the Quick and the Dead c. As to the Resurrection he had spoken largely of it in the same Letter before which I suppose to be the reason why he did not repeat it expresly by that Name after Yet in that Declaration of his Faith having mentioned Christ's Ascension into Heaven and his Sitting at the Right hand of the Majesty on High he adds And that every one must appear before his Iudgment-Seat to receive their Reward according to their Deeds done in this Mortal Body even at that great and dreadful Day of a general Account c. G. K. quarrels further with W. Southbe for saying he doth not own the day of Judgment now in or after the same manner as he did when he was a Papist for then he owned it very Carnally and outward viz. That the great Iudgment should be in an outward valley called the valley of Iehosaphat in the Land of Israel and and that we should see with these outward Eyes But says he I believe now it will be more Spiritual This doth not please G. K. who catching hold of his words that when a Papist he owned it very carnally and outward he would slily suggest from thence as if his Belief of it was worse now than when he was a Papist Perhaps indeed his Belief of it when a Papist might best fit G. K's notion of it who I have heard did jump in with the Papists in pitching upon the Valley of Jehosaphat for the Place till a Traveller telling him that Place was too Streight he took wing from the Valley into the Air. But I see no cause G. K. hath to condemn W. Southbe for beliveing it will be more Spiritual than the Papist hold nor to infer from thence that it will not be outward since doubtless it may be more Spiritual than the Papists hold and yet be outward also But I had best have a care how I meddle too far in this matter lest G. K. put me into Inquisition also and bring me upon Examination again which if he should I am like enough to answer him that I believe in this as in other Divine things according to the holy Scriptures and that I doubt would anger him afresh For he makes it the Ground of his Twentieth Perversion that I clear T. L. A. C. S. I. and I. D. by Printing part of a Paper Subscribed by them on behalf of themselves and many others and directed to him and others wherein they say As to Unity in Doctrine so much seemingly profest by you to the amusing of many unwary People we hereby sincerely Declare that we are herein one with our Antient and Faithful Brethren firmly believing what is upon Record in the Holy Scriptures concerning God concerning our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ both with Respect to his appearance in the Flesh and to his appearance in the Spirit concerning the Holy Ghost the Resurrection-State and Eternal Judgment which though offered unto you to the same purpose and that several times yet was rejected as insufficient by you And so it seems it is now too For he objects against it First that it is two short as being but about Eleven Lines So that it seems a multitude of words would have pleased him better But I thought in things of this Nature Especially he would have regarded weight rather than Number of words And as few Lines as this is contained in I know not whether that called The Apostles Creed be much longer He thinks much to be put off with Eleven Lines of a Confession of Faith And I do not think Eleven Volumes would satisfy him unless they were of his own writing But he that shall heedfully read these Eleven Lines shall find they comprehend the Principal Doctrines about which he pretended to be dissatisfied But it is not the Brevity only that troubles him He is offended that they say they Firmly believe what is upon Record in the Holy Scriptures At this he huffs saying so will every Papist say every Socinian say and every Mugletonian for it is a common Fallacy that the Vilest of Hereticks use whereby to deceive People to tell them they Firmly believe all that is Recorded in the Holy Scriptures concerning God Christ c. I know not whether Tertullus who accused Paul to Felix Acts 24. were a greater Orator than G. K. but I am perswaded he was not so great a Sophister nor so void of common Charity Neither would the Apostle have gon off as he did had G. K. been then and in Tertullus his place when Paul said He believed all things that were written in the Law and the Prophets ver 14. G. K. asks why have the People called Quakers Separated from the several Professions of Christianity upon the account of Errors in Doctrine which they did charge them with seeing all these Professions in general terms say as much as we that they Firmly believe what is upon Record in the Holy Scriptures I answer First That the People called Quakers did Separate from other Professions not only because of the Errors in

Doctrine which they charged them with but also because those Professions in general were departed from the Power and Life of Godliness and withstood and denied the Inward Appearance of Christ in his People And Secondly As far as they did separate on the Account of Doctrines it was because they found those Doctrines even as those Professions themselves had stated them to be not according but contrary to what was upon record in the Holy Scriptures He says VVe have often told T. L. c. Let them condemn those gross and vile Errors which we have proved some of them guilty of and others cloak and excuse them c. and that shall satisfie us in this point But have not T. L. and Friends often if not as often told him that he has not proved them guilty of those gross and vile Eerrors he talks of nor others of cloaking and excusing them And yet he will not be satisfied of which more in his next Perversion He says Many hold to my certain knowledge That the Resurrection is the New Birth and nothing else Others say Immediately after Death we get the Resurrection fully If by many that hold thus he means many of the People called Quakers I neither own nor know any that hold such Doctrines So also his other saying viz. This gross and vile Error That Christ is not to come without us in his glorified Body to judge all mankind I find too many in England guilty of I esteem as a vile slander if by many he intend many of the People called Quakers And his suggesting that too probably they have drunk it in from some unsound Expressions in some of the printed Books too generally owned by them discovers in him an unsound and evil mind And speaks his inclination to quarrel with Friends in England as well as he has already done in America His Twenty First Charge against me is Of Perversion and Fallacy in covering these Men because of their saying in their Papers If any of us or any countenanced by us have given you any Offence either by any unsound Expressions or by any ungospel-like Conversation and the same be made to appear by credible Testimonies We promise unto you that if the Parties concerned do not condemn the same they shall be disowned therein To this fair offer he says What more credible VVitnesses could be desired than the several Manuscripts signed with their own hands whom they have owned c But I ask him Did he upon this Offer complain to those Friends who made it of any of them or countenanced by them that had used unsound Expressions Did he produce the Manuscripts he mentions as Witnesses against those that Writ them Did the Monthly Meeting to which the Parties belonged refuse to hear his Complaint Did they reject his Manuscript Evidences If he did upon this offer make such Complaint if he did produce his Manuscripts in Evidence let him make appear when where at what Monthly Meeting he did this But if he did not this what he says now of it is but Fallacy and Deceit Nor do I think it proper to take notice of what he now mentions out of his Manuscripts because I do not think it safe to take it upon his Report His Twenty Second He calls my Perversion of his words which were That after the Separation was actually begun and he and his Party met apart from Friends he went to the Friends Meeting and did there declare that He and his Friends had Unity with the most there as to the main From whence I inferr'd If there had been such gross vile and unchristian Errors against the Fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith such damnable Heresies and Doctrines of Devlls held amongst them as he suggests and cloaked or covered and tolerated by them How could he say that he and his Friends had Unity with the most there as to the Main This he would shift off by alledging That more than two thirds of that Meeting were Country Friends who were come to that Meeting upon notice that J. Dickinson was to be there and that there had not been any Breach between those Country Friends and him at that time But this is a meer Fallacy For it was not with respect to those Country Friends that he said he had Unity with the most there but with respect to the Friends of that Meeting For he says he also signified his desire to be United to that Meeting not to the Friends of other Meetings in the Country for with them he says he had had no Breach but to that Meeting And his connecting his Desire to be united to that Meeting with his Declaration that he and his Friends had Unity with the most there restrains his declared Unity to the Friends of that Meeting and that Unity being declared to be as to the main that is in the main and fundamental Doctrines of Christianity his separating from that whole Society or Meeting of Friends with the most of whom he declared he had Unity in the Main even after he had separated from them is a Fault he can never justifie nor excuse by all the Fallacies he can invent 23. What I said in the 45 and 46. pages of my Epistle concerning the sending over his scandalous Books from America to one in London who is not a Quaker for him to expose to Sale as he would and G. K's blaming them that reprinted his Books here not for reprinting them but only for altering their Titles he passes over in silence and Cavils at my shewing his Deceit in the use of the word many in his Causeless Ground p. ●…2 where he said It is my charitable sincere Perswasion that the worthy name of Christian doth truly belong to very many of that People as well as unto me From hence I inferr'd He will not allow it it seems to the People called Quakers or to the Body of Friends as a People no not so much as from a charitable Perswasion And how insincere he was in pretending to allow it to very many of that People I shewed by his following words which were Having an experimental Proof through intimate Conversation and frequent verbal Communication with many of them that they are sincere in the Christian Faith c. From whence I shew'd To what a narrow scantling he had reduced his application of the name Christian among the Quakers and how few he meant by very many even just so many as he hath an experimental Proof of through intimate Conversation and frequent verbal Communication with them which how many they may be judge ye said I considering how short a time he had then been in England and in that time scarce or little out of London nor very conversant with Friends there This he calls as he doth most things a gross Forgery and Perversion and says I did really mean not them only but all them whom I have at any time formerly had Experience of their Christianity by intimate Conversation and