Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	woman_n	world_n	yield_v	12	3	6.3902	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54154	The invalidity of John Faldo's vindication of his book, called Quakerism no Christianity being a rejoynder in defence of the answer, intituled, Quakerism a new nick-name for old Christianity : wherein many weighty Gospel-truths are handled, and the disingenuous carriage of by W.P.	Penn, William, 1644-1718.	1673 (1673)	Wing P1305; ESTC R24454	254,441	450

unworthiest Reflections however unprovoked without any Reproof is to merit their sharpest Retorts in the most vilifying Terms I know not what to infer from such an humorsome Carriage but that it is expected from the Quakers Religion it should bear that which J. Faldo's Vindication tells us his cannot a great Credit to our Cause against his Will Thus far of Christianity and Quakerism as they are contra-distinguished by our Adversary CHAP. III. Of the Scriptures MY Adversary begun his first Chapter in his former Discourse upon this general Charge The Quakers deny the Scriptures The Proof he offered was this The Quakers deny the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be the Word of God and therefore they deny the Scriptures Upon this account I thus delivered my self He entitules his Chapter That the Quakers deny the Scriptures I was almost astonished at it because he pretended to prove all out of our own Books and none such had ever come to my Hand but upon Perusal I found this to be the Upshot That the Quakers deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God My Adversary's Reply is Rep. This is not the first Cordial you have made of a wilful Vntruth nor yet the last by a great many And you who summed up nine Arguments of mine more which were the Contents of the nine Chapters next following should have been ashamed of calling this one which was the first of ten the Vpshot and then insult But I shall try how you break this single Cord this one of ten Rejoyn I will not say he has Wilfully wronged me but Wronged me he has I did not say that it was the Upshot of his whole Discourse concerning the Scriptures but of that single Chapter For had I reputed his nine following Arguments undeserving of any notice I might have called this single one the Upshot but having singlely refuted his subsequent Arguments I could not in good sense call the First the Vpshot 'T was not therefore the Vpshot of the Whole but of that Chapter in which the Word is used I had good Reason so to term it since the Proof was too particular for the Charge It was not my wilful Untruth but his Mistake His suggesting as if I only encountered that single Cord is very Disingenuous for I throughly considered Nine following Chapters Hear him further Rep. That you deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God you grant But you say pag. 25. I declare to the World that we own them to be a Declaration of the Mind and Will of God with many other things which I have shewed to be short of the main Ends of the Scriptures Rejoyn Whether those other things left out are short of the main Ends of the Scripture or no will best be seen by considering what those Things are I do declare to the whole World that we believe the Scriptures to contain a declaration of the Mind and Will of God in and to those Ages in which they were written being given forth by the holy Ghost moving in the Hearts of holy Men of God That they ought also to be Read Believed and Fulfilled in our Day being Useful for Reproof and Instruction that the Man of God may be perfect Now if this belongs not to the main Ends of Scriptures either there are none or they are unknown However it was 〈◊〉 much the End as name of Scripture that was then controverted Again he goes on thus Rep. I shall easily grant that one Word may stand representative of many An odd Phrase that represents him not able to express himself congruously I have heard of Persons as Parliament-men but never of a representative Word before Rejoyn He might have pardoned me an Incongruous Phrase if such it had been for I have twenty times over been so kind to him But I must tell him it is not less proper though less used in Words then in Persons He shews Ignorance in that Philosophy he pretends to be a Master of where there are many single words or Terms that are significative of entire Sentences but argumentum ad hominem granting to the Scriptures that they are the Word of God does not our Adversary repute that Title Representative as well as Expressive of those many thousand Words contained therein if so then there is a Representative Word If not it can never be called so in our Adversary's sense Again he brings me in thus I think it is as good sense to call a King's Letters King as the Scriptures the Word of God Rep. But by your favour Mr. Penn It is neither non-sense nor bad sense to call a King's Letter the Word of a King Rejoyn This is nothing to the purpose the Stress lies here The Word of God being a Title given to Christ as the Title King is to a supreme Magistrate whether it be Reverent or Significant to call the Declaration Christ the Word of God any more then to call the Declaration of a King by the Title of King For we therefore decline to give that Title to any thing below Christ himself to whom the Scriptures most emphatically ascribe it Because I said that it might be the Word of Advice Reproof Instruction which Christ the Great Word of God livingly sows in the Hearts of Men and Women that Christ spoke of when he said The Cares of the World choak the Word and it becomes Unfruitful He replyes Rep. Here you have yielded the Cause to save Christ from being the choaked and unfruitful Word Rejoyn I need not have done so for any such Reason since Christ may in a sense as well be Choaked as by Sin afresh Crucified and the Spirit Quenched Nor could unfruitful obliege me to give away the Cause since the Word is alwayes Vnfruitful where rebelled against But is there no Difference J. Faldo between a Word of Advice spiritually livingly and powerfully sown in the Heart by Christ the great Word of God and that Advice Reproof or Instruction declared by Writing This brings to the Point Whether the Scriptures or Christ may most deservedly be stiled the Word of God Christ is God's living Oracle and rightly called the Word of God because that which livingly speaks forth the Will of God to the Souls of Men The Scriptures are but that Revelation declared and recorded consequently they can have no right to that Title which is so suitably ascribed to the Author of that Revelation To be sure J Faldo acknowledges that they are not the Living Powerful Self-sufficient Word of God Nor does he pretend to dispute for them to be such a Word of God as the Quakers deny them to be Though it seems very strange to me that there should be Two Words of God the one quite differing from the other or that any Word of God if two there were should be of it self Impotent or Insufficient as he seems to allow in his first Book pag 20 27. Vind. pag. 14 16. That the Word of God