Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
doctrine_n	concern_v	faith_n	justification_n	2,843	5	9.2516	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A54126	The counterfeit Christian detected; and the real Quaker justified Of God and Scripture, reason & antiquity. against the vile forgeries, gross perversions, black slanders, plain contradictions & scurrilous language of T. Hicks an Anabaptist preacher, in his third dialogue between a Christian and a Quaker, call'd, The Quaker condemned, &c. By way of an appeal to all sober people, especially those called Anabaptists in and about the City of London. By a lover of truth and peace W. P.	Penn, William, 1644-1718.	1674 (1674)	Wing P1271; ESTC R220484	73,223	125

he lo●● Suffering thou froward he was good to his Enemi●● thou base to thy Neighbours Surely thou hast forg●● that if thou walkest as he walked thou must have do with that dangerous Doctrine of Perfection as thou else where reputest it But at thy Rate of quoting this Scripture and following of Christ thou mayst as well bring in Circumcision and the Passover as Baptism and the Supper Christ told his Disciples The Spirit should lead them into all Truth after his Ascension and his beloved Disciple John referred the Churches to the Anointing C. You tell us these Ordinances were used as Figures and Shadows no longer to endure then till the Substance comes viz. The Baptism of the holy Ghost The Reason can be no other then the vain Conceit of a deluded mind for they are no Figures of the Baptism of the Spirit therefore this can be no Reason for the abolishing of them Christ commands his Apostles to teach and baptize promising to be with them to the End of the World Q. Who ever said that Breaking of Bread was a Figure of the Spirit 's Baptism It 's a meer Fiction of thy making as p. 107. of Reas against Rail will shew But if Water-Baptism and Breaking of Bread are no Figures nor Shadows they must be Substances and what Difference then there is between thee and Popery in this Point let the Reader judge And for Christ's bidding his Disciples Go teach baptizing Matth. 28. I told thee That no Water was mentioned and that Luke in the first of the Acts sayes before the Commission mentioned by Matthew could be given at least executed John baptized with Water but ye shall be baptized with the holy Ghost not many Dayes hence And then comes the Commission in Force Go teach baptizing how with the holy Ghost turning People from Darkness t● Light from the Power of Satan unto God C. If the Baptism of the holy Ghost do put this Commission in Force as thou saist then the Obligation to those Duties signified in the Commssion cannot be taken off If so thy Argument falls Q. A poor Shuffle indeed Does my Argument fall because thou beggest the Question which is Whether their Baptism be with Water or the holy Ghost C. If Baptism of Water be not intended then none not the Baptism of Afflictions for the Apostles were not to persecute Not the Baptism of the holy Ghost for that was a Promise not a Commission p. 63. Q. Thou dost but triffle with us still Though to be baptized was a Promise yet to baptize was a Commission To be baptized not many Dayes hence was the Promise of Christ but go and baptize all Nations which followeth was a Commission and that it was with no other Baptism Christ's Distinction sufficiently proves viz. John indeed baptized with Water but ye shall be baptized with the holy Ghost not many Dayes hence stay till then and go and teach baptizing all Nations c. C. To baptize with the holy Ghost was none of their Duty it being properly Christ's Work p. 63. Q. It was both their Work and Duty witness that Simon Magus would have bought that Gift of Peter And that Paul baptized with the holy Ghost Acts 19. Did he not therein do his Duty C. Is it proper to say I baptize you with the Spirit into the Name of the Spirit Q. Yes if thou hast the Spirit unless thou wouldst make a counterfeit Christiaen of him whom thou without the Spirit baptizest into the Name of the Spirit wouldst thou have a Man baptized into the Name and not into the Nature of the Spirit Can a Man baptize into Spirit and into Life without Spirit and Life God did convert reconcile baptize beget and build up Thousands to himself by them unto whom the VVord of Reconciliation was committed and who were Embassadors in Christ's stead Now as for Water-Baptism what Paul sayes of himself I may say of his Commission It was not behind any of the rest yet he denies Water-Baptism to be any Part of it and is as plainly rejected of him in Point of Institution as any Thing in Scripture So that either Water-Baptism is none of Christ's Institutions or else Paul had no Commission to perform Christ's Institutions which were strange T. Collier determines this The Baptism of Christ is the Baptism of the Spirit But if any of you can shew a larger Commission then Paul had let him produce it if not I must conclude they Run and are not Sent. §. VII Of the Doctrine of Justification I Perceive ●y what thou hast writ of Justification thou inten●st to end at the rate thou hast manag'd the Controversie all along I mean with the same shuffles and injustice I will set down thy Charge the Answer thou makest me give and thy Reply C. Thou hast holdly affirm'd that Justification by that Righteousness Christ fulfilled for us wholely without us to be a Doctrine of Devils Apol. pag. 148. What sayst thou is this Q. This Apology cited was written against a malitious Priest in Ireland Reas ag Rail p. 68. If thy Position cannot be prov'd it will be no Excuse to say It was given to a malitious Priest yea thy Folly and Rashness is the more aggravated c. p. 96. Q. As if I had given that Answer not to inform Persons against whom the Book was writ and the Occasion of the Passage but as one unable to say any thing in my Defence to extenuate the Fact and Excuse my writing it I perceive rather then want Occasions to Abuse me thou wilt make them But what sayst thou concerning Justification C. Thou supposest the Doctrine of Justification by that Righteousness which Christ fulfilled wholely without us to be a Sin-pleasing and dangerous Notion What Reason hast thou so to esteem it p. 67. Q. I do so taking my Words in my Sense and my Reasons are 1st Because wholely wit●out us is an unscriptural phrase 2 dly It takes away the necessity of all Inward Work 3 dly No man is justified without Faith No man hath Faith without Sanctification and Works therefore the Works of Righteousness by the Spirit are necessary to compleat Justification C. Whether a sincere Faith is necessary to our Justification is one thing But whether such a Faith be our sole Righteousness by which we are Justified is another p. 67. Q. And whether T. H. be not a● idle Shifter is another thing Was it the Question Whether our Faith were the sole Righteousness to Justification or whether Justification were by a Righteousness wholy without us and our Faith too If a sncere Faith be necessary then because Faith is not Faith without Work Justification is not wrought wholely without I told thee before that this Doctrine of thine speaks Peace to the Wicked whilst wicked But there is no Peace to the Wicked saith my God C. It is horrible wicked to conclude that what Christ hath done and suffered without us is to speak Peace to the Wicked whilest such

Q. R●g●t but who is the Man Not W. P. for opposing a Doctrine which leaves men as wicked as it found them yea encourages them in it I appeal to the sober Reader if it be all one to say that Justification by the Righteousness of Christ wholely without which leaves the Conscience as polluted as ever is to speak Peace to the Wicked whilest Wicked and to affirm that what Christ hath done and suffered without us is to speak Peace to the Wicked whilest wicked Thy indirect Consequences T. H. are to obvious and numerous to deceive any ordinary Reader But what sayst thou to my Distinction about Justification Christ's VVork was two-fold 1st to remit forgive or justifie from the imputation of sins past such as truly repent and believe 2dly By his Power and Spirit working in the hearts of such to destroy and remove the very Nature of Sin to make an end of it to finish Transgression present and to come The first removes the Guilt the second tne Cause of it Me thinks this should a little allay thy Clamours C. This Distinction of the Work of Christ proves not what thou hast asserted viz. That Justification is not by imputation of anothers Righteousness much less that such a Justification is a Doctrine of Devils p. 72. Q. This shews thee weary of the VVork or else ●hou wouldst not so soon after my Distinction continue in thy mis-construction of my VVords for the clearing of which my Distinction was made I grant that such as Repent and Believe receive Remission or a justifying from former Sins through the Righteousness of God declared in and by Jesus Christ But is this Compleat Justification it is a making Inwardly Just through a Purging out of Iniquity and Mortifying of Corruption and bringing in Christ's Everlasting Righteousness If not then to exclude this and yet conclude men compleatly justified by what Christ hath done wholely without is a Doctrine of Devils for it leaves men in an impure state and allows the Devils Kingdom to continue in being In short it is as much as to say that W. Pen calls what Christ hath done for Men without a Doctrine of Devils because W. P. asserts that to be a Doctrine of Devils which maketh all that is necessary for Mans compleat Justification before God to have been wrought by Christ wholely without thereby excluding the necessity of the Just-working or Just-making Power of Christ from Man to that VVork Well but I also told thee of the necessity of Faith and Repentance even to the first part of Justification consequently that men cannot be justified in any sense without regard had to any inward VVork viz. Of Sanctification without which there can be no true Believing C. Though this be more close to the point then any thing thou hast spoken yet it is not close as to prove thy Position For if Repentance be but a Condition then it is not the sole Righteousness for which we are justified p 73. Q. Produce me but one Passage of ours that ever spoke that Langu●ge and I will yet say thou hast not wronged us Besides this Answer is wide from thy purpose though it comes very close to mine For from contending for Justification by a Righteousness wholely without the Question thou art come now to contend against a Justification by a Righteousness wholely within which was not the Question C. But thou sayst Abraham 's personal Obedience was the Ground of his being accounted Righteous If so Then we are not made Just by a Righteousness perform'd without us but by a Righteousness perform'd by our selves But then What wilt thou say to this Text If Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to glory but not before God Rom. 4.2 p. 77 78. Q. The Apostle James beares me out in what I said for if Abraham were justified by works as said James then his Obedience to God's Spirit which makes up those VVorks gave him acceptance in God's sight and let T. H. say if he dare that Abraham was not justified in God's sight in his resigning up Isaac for a Sacrifice and if he were how do I err But that I might not be thought to oppose one Apostle to another know Reader that the Apostle James speaks of such Works as were not performed in Abraham's own strength but through Faith and his Obedience to God's Spirit and therefore Evangelical And the Justification they lead to was a daily Acceptance with God The Works the Apostle Paul speaks of were meerly Abraham 's in his own power as those of the Jews from the Law therefore not justifying before God in any sense least of all could they merit Remission or purchase Abraham those great Blessings and peculiar Favours that it pleased Almighty God to bestow upon him above others Works and Justification thus distinguish'd and allow'd prevent Mens setting one in opp●sition to the other and here Paul may come in without contradiction to James If Abraham were justified by Works he hath whereof to glory but not before God The whole Chapter concerns a justifying by the Remission of Sins that are past as the following Verses evid●n●e Even as David also describeth the Blessedness of the Man unto whom God imputeth Righteousness without Works saying Blessed are they whose Vnrighteousness are forgiven and whose Sins are covered Blessed is the Man to whom the Lord will not impute Sin Rom. 4.6 7 8. So that the Righteousness not obtainable by the Works of the Law ver 16. and the Justification which Abraham's own works could not procure which is obtain'd by Faith in the Love of God is here explain'd to be the Forgiving of Iniquity and the covering of Sin But this is far from maintaining th● Compleatness of Justification from a Righteousness wholely without Testimonies concerning Justification Erasmus We grant to be justified by Faith that is Hearts to be purged See Fascul rerum expetend p. 129. De amabili Eccles concord The Fathers were just by the Righteousness of the Law in them Iren. l. 4. c. 30. Noah Abraham c. were just by the Law natural that is eternal Tertullian Adv. Jud. p. 184. Clem. Alex. saith That Abraham was justified by Faith but that Faith he calls 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a per●ect purgation lib. 1. praed Justin Martyr Defens ad Anton. saith Socrates ●ved with the Word and that he knew Christ in part Defens ad Senat. That was by the Light within How could he know him otherwise Scultetus p. 38. of his Medulla saith There are some at this day of his Opinion and that do reckon Melchizedek Abimelech Ruth Rachab the Queen of Saba Hiram Naaman c. among Christians H. Bullinger D●cad 1. serm 6. de Justif To justifie signifieth to ●●m●t offences to clense to sanctifie and to give utterance of Life Everlasting Again Justification is taken for Remission of Sins for Sanctification and Adoption into the number of the Sons of God §. VIII Of Personal Reflections T. H's Scurrulous Language The

all this wre●●ing Is it to conclude therefore the Light within is insufficient which may as well be inferred against God Christ and the Holy Spirit for he makes me to exclude all other Wayes of Di●covery the● what is made by Scripture If an Account be wanting the Light of Christ is as sufficient now as it was in the Time of Moses and the Prophets who wrot both of Things past and to come But a Relation being with us the Light of Christ doth n●thing unnecessarily But 't is like T. H. degenerates not from his Ancestors he can cry Come down and save thy self c. 4. From our asserting the Works of the Spirit in us necessary to our compleat Justification or Acceptance with God he insinuates Our making those Works the meritorious Cause of our Salvation Dial. 3. p. 69. which is manifestly denyed and rejected by me in my Answer p. 72 73 82 83 86. whi●h he no more regards then if it never were The Trick of an unfair and shuffling Adversary 5. From my asserting the Necessity of an inward Work of Righteousnes● by the Power of Christ in these Words of the Apostles to the Galatians Let every Man prove his own Work then shall he have Rejoycing in himself and not in another He to make his Ends upon me infers That the Doctrine of Christ dying for Sinners hath nothing in it as the Ground of our Rejoycing For our Rejoycing must be in our selves not in another Dial. 3. p. 69 70. That Reader which aggravates this wretched Consequence by him charged upon me is first that he sayes it is plainly deducible which is so plain a Wrest And next that they are the Apostle's Words and not mine of which he makes so ill an Use Is this to make the Scripture his Rule that is so unruly in his Abuse of them I am sure a lying and an abusive Spirit has been his Rule throughout his three Dialogues which God rebuke 6. The sixth Perversion is as follows Being formerly assaulted by T. Hicks Cont. p. 50. for having said in a Book entituled The Serious Apology c. p. 148. That Justification by a Righteousness wholy without us is a Doctrine of Divels I undertook my Defence and performed it in my Answer to his other Dialogues from p. 68. to p. 98. I distinguished upon the Word Justification first as it might be taken barely for the Remission of Si●s or the acquitting Men of the Guilt and Punishment due to Sin which was the free Love and Mercy of God upon Repentance d●clared in Christ's Death as a Prop●tiation for the Sins of the whole World and therefore not to be merited by the best Works we can perform 2dly As it imported a being made inwardly just by the bringing in of Christ's Everlasting Righteousness to the Soul To leave out this latter and make the former only sufficient whereby Men are left in an unjust and unrighteous State I affirmed to be a Doctrine of Devils But notwithstanding this plain and scriptural Distinction to satisfie T. Hicks would he but be satisfied what I meant by Justification He is so unjust to me as to infer in my Name That I account the Doctrine of Christ's Death in the Nature of a Sacrifice to declare the Righteousness of God for the Remission of Sins that are past because transacted without us a Doctrine of Devils Dial. 3. p. 72 73 74. Canst thou Reader in earnest think this Man makes Conscience of his Endeavours against us who commits these frequent Abuses against our Books Persons and Principles As if because I acknowledged Christ's Death to be in the Nature of a Sacrifice to declare God's Righteousness in the Remission of Sins that are past unto them that believe c. to be one Part of Justification that this Transaction was confessedly without us even while we were Sinners c. that therefore I should call this the Doctrine of Devils because without us though the Word wholy be not there upon which lay the Stress and which was only said by me of a Justification that wholy excludes Christ's Righteousness revealed within to the making Man Just unworthily applying that Reflection to the begin●ing of Justification that I have so expresly owned which was made against a Doctrine no wayes concern'd in this true and gospel-Gospel-Justification In short If Justification by Christ's Righteousness without us be the same with being justified by Christ's Righteousness wholy without us then T. H. is not so bad a man as I have represented him But if there be any Difference as undeniably there is a●d a material One too then T. H's Inference and Con●lu●ion in my Name make a foul Perversion 7. The last Perve●sion I at this time think fit to mention is his last both in his Epistle and Book to wit from my saying upon a sad Conside●ation of his many Miscarriages towards us That his Head sh●uld not go down into the Grave in P●ace he thus interprets my Words I must take them either as a Prediction or as a Menace of some Mischief he himself or s●me influenced by him intend to perpetrate upon me The former I fear not the latter is most Probable as if Reader his not fearing a Prediction implies my not meaning a Prediction But why is the former not feared the latt●● more probabl● because he would render me a Murder●r as his following Words sufficiently evidence Wherefore sayes he I desire all to whom this Book may come that if at any time they hear of any Violence offered me or that I be ASSASSINATED they would remember these Words of W. Penn. that my Head shall not go down to the Grave in Peace Epist Book End Now though this miserable Construction be ridiculous with wise Men and rejected of several of his own Way and so unlikely a Thing in it self that I should proclaim that to be my Design that leads to t●e Gibbit viz. Murder yet I was unwilling to pass it by since first it rather renders him to be the M●n he suggests me to be And secondly It aggravates the Sin of his false Constru●tion because to insinuate it the better he has left out all these Words going before an● afte● that had they been mentione● wo●ld have detected his Malice viz. Though thou hast best●w●d much Time to abuse our Friends in general a●d my self in particular a Stranger to thee yet I can forgive thee Oh that these heavy Things might not be laid to thy Charge God will visit for these Vnrighteous Dealings if thou desist not Now Reader if I forgive how can I Assassinate and if it be God's visiting Hand how can it be mine or any influenced by me Again these following Words were the next to those by him cited viz. Yea the Light within will bear Witness to the Truth of these Things on thy DYING-BED and then remember me How comes this T. H. to be omitted Dying-Beds do not use to be unnatural Deaths Nor will the Light within

not absurd yea blasphemous to talk of God's redeeming the Seed Ibid. Q. No more Blasphemy then is in the Scripture which sayes Out of Egypt have I called my Son a Place of Burdens But I the less wonder at thy Ignorance in these Heavenly Things who never yet drunk of his Cup nor was baptized with his Baptism nor knew the true Fellowship of his Death and Sufferings but art now adding to them by as provoaking Impieties as any man of this Age hath committed against him Give me thy Judgment of these Scriptures and my Consequence from them And God saw that there was no man and wondred that there was no Intercessor therefore his Arm brought Salvation to him and Righteousness it susteined him Isaiah 59.16 Again The Year of my Redeemed is come and I looked and there was none to help and I wondred that there was none to uphold therefore mine own Arm brought Salvation unto me and my Fury it uph●ld me Chap. 53.4 5. Whence it is no Contradiction to say That God did rid himself of the Enemies of his own precious Life or that he brought Salvation to himself C. I infer from your Words this horrid Absurdity that God redeems himself p. 37. This is thy Truth against Fiction Q. It is not from our Words but the Words of Scripture and but that thou art become shameless I should wonder that any Man pretending the Scriptures to be his Rule should charge plain Scripture with Absurdity and Blasphemy C. Thus Christ is at one and the same time at Liberty and in Bondage redeeming and redeemed conquering and yet pressed down And though this kind of Language be Folly and Madness yet thou tellest us thou art content to use it p. 38. Q. And it were well if thou wouldst be contented not to abuse it Is this thy Religion to vilifie the Language of other Peoples Religion nay of holy Scripture it self But how dark art thou T Hicks to make b●th a Wonder and a Scoff at Christ's conquering and yet being pressed down at the same Time when the Scripture so plainly holds forth that he is crucified by such counterfeit Christians as thou art at what Time he reigns in the Hearts of his Children And is not the Spirit said to be quenched by some at what Time it lives in others And is he not grieved by the Rebellions of some whilst he is delighted in others Was not God at Liberty at what Time he said They made him s●rve with their Sins And was he not whole at what Time he said He was broken Ezek. 6.9 Canst thou reasonably infer because of these Expressions us'd after the manner of men that it is Absurdity and Blasphemy that God heals himself delivers himself and eases himself of his Enemies Words of equal Import Methinks thy unsavory Carriage should reflect Shame upon W. Kiffin with his Elders c. to suffer such irreverent Trash to come out of their Congregation if they value their Credit they will not suffer thee any longer thus upon the Ramble But before I leave thee in this Section I have one thing more to charge thee with and that is not only the Abuse of our words by concluding from Man's being turned to seek after a lost God and Christ that God and Christ are in a lost Condition but that they only want Redemption and that Men and Women are not the Objects of Redemption as in 3 Dial. p. 37. Then which nothing can be more false and consequently injurious to a People But I have left wondering that thou shouldst be base §. IV. Concerning our Belief in Christ Quaker ANother Instance by which thou undertakest to prove the Quaker no Christian is his Denyal of Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without him Is this true or no Counterfeit I accuse you for denying Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without you p. 25. Q. I say that thou hast varied thy Charge and given thy self an Answer to it out of my Book which was never an Answer to any such Matter viz. Herein thou hast shewn thy Ignorance and Malice nor is it so in my Book but Ignorance or Malice Thou also omitteth the Ground of my so speaking which is not fair viz The Quakers say that Christ is in them Christ is God-man is God-man in them Again there is but one Christ born of ● Virgin that suffered at Jerusalem Can that Christ be in Man In Defence of which strange Construction of our Belief thou hast offered nothing to what I opposed Howbeit I desire my Reader to take notice that since thou pretendest to own but one Christ and sayst that it is impossible that Christ should be in Man that thou both denyest the Scripture and contradictest thy self there is not any Doctrine clearer in holy Record then that of Christs indwelling with his Saints Joh. 14.20 23. Chap. 15.4 5. Chap. 17.23 Rom. 8.10 2 Cor. 13.5 Cal. 1.16 Col. 1.27 Revel 3.20 The same Objection thou makest against us holds good against them as thus Christ is God-man can God-man be in the Corin●hians What might not a T. Hicks have cavilled against Christ and his Disciples ●s well as against us Is this the Way to prove the Quaker no Christian that makes that Thing Error which can only constitute Men right Christians For if Christ be not there no Anointing can be there which John sayes leads into all Truth Besides thou contradictest thy self as thou mayest see Dial. p. 22 23. But to thy present Charge C. This I object against you your denying Christ to be a distinct Person without you to which thou speakest nothing signifying thereby that y●u are pinched Ibid. p. 26. Q. I told thee under the Head of Perversions that this was not all thou madest us to deny for thou didst untruly infer Our Denyal of Christ's Bodily Appearance concerning which thou speakest nothing signifying thereby that thou art pinched unless it be to deny thou ever saidst so as p. 26 31. thereby adding a Lye to the Shuffile But why are we pinched because we say nothing to a Doctrine the Scripture sayes nothing of Give me one Place that mentions Christ to be a distinct Perso● without us art thou so destitute of common Sense as to think of proving the Quaker no Christian because he denies a Doctrine not expressed in Scripture and yet at that Instance to magnifie the Scripture as thy sole Rule Verely thou makest thy self a Derision to all wise Men. But go on make the best of thy Charge C. G. F. in his Great Mystery p. 16. writes thus Thou art deceived who sayest Christ is distinct from the Saints Can any Man eat the Flesh of Christ if his Flesh be not in them Q. This probably thou mayst have found in thy Brother Faldo 's Book and thou mightst have found it defended in mine Wh●re is Distinct among G. F's Words which are these But God and Christ is in his Saints and dwell 〈◊〉 them and walk in

hast designedly overlookt However let us hear what Defence thou hast made for thy self C. The Question respects the whole Scripture which you say is Dangerous and Killing The Ministers of the Scriptures are Ministers of Death and it is Dangerous for such to read them What a shameless Man art thou thus to confess what I accuse you of and yet condemn me as a Forger pag. 57. Q. These foul and confident Questions thou usest to ask me with which thou wouldst insinuate thy Innocency do but aggravate thy Forgery For first How do I confess what thou accusest us of when it is neither to be found in my words nor theirs upon whom thou chargest them viz. It is Dangerous for Ignorant People to read the Scriptures 2dly I told thee they meant by Ministers of the Letter Ministers of the Law and Death because of Transgression and thou makest it Dangerous for such to read the Scriptures whereas G. F. and R. H. said It was Dangerous for Hirelings and whi●e Walls to use them against the Saints with their carnal Exp●sitions opposing them Pharisee like to the Life of them wresting them to their own ●estruction It is Dangerous for such to read them to such Uses and Purposes not in any Sense as thou untruly sayest Of this thou takest no notice So that here the Reader may plainly see thy first Forgery since it was not the Man of no Letters but the Men of Letters such as the Scribes and Pharise●s who used them against the right Heirs of them of whom G.F. and R.H. ●poak And thy second is not less visible in that thou hast imposed upon the Reader my Confession of thy Accusation who never confessed any such thing These are some of thy wonted Tricks ever anon imploy'd to cover thy Nakedness with and to get off unsuspected from encountering the Difficulty of our Charge Proof or Argument I appeal to God's Witness in my Reader 's Conscience to right us against the many Injurious Practices against us And shall conclude with this Acknowledgment and Argument concerning the Scriptures We do receive and believe the Scriptures given forth by Holy Men of God as they were moved of the Holy Ghost and that they are profitable for Doctrine for Reproof and for Instruction in Righteousness yet since they are Writings relating to the things of God no man can understand them or have an assured Testimony of them but by the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 2. which alone reveals the deep things of God It was not the Scripture but the Father that revealed Christ to Peter Mat. 16.5 Further The New Covenant Times are Times of Fulfilling of the Scriptures by the pouring out of the Spirit therefore Peoples regard should be to the inward Drawings and Leadings of the Holy Spirit The Law outward was a Rule to the Jew though not eminently unto them for the Lord gave them also of his good Spirit what for if not to rule them But the Law of the Spirit of Life promised to be reveal'd within under the New Everlasting Covenant was certainly to be the Rule under that Covenant being a time for the more immediate Flowings forth of Spirit and Life We do not say that every one hath hereunto attained But we affirm that God hath given a measure of his Spirit unto Men Women that they might receive the pretious Promises unto w ch we direct them for that End I know that T. Hicks according to his wonted Baseness pag. 49. interprets our saying that we deny the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith and Practice in honour to the Divine Light to be our denying rejecting the revealed Will of God thereby must hate their Parents because they are to love Christ first Mat. 10. This were to say that Paul's regard to the Law of the Spirit of Life in him as his Rule was not to fulfil but to deny rej●ct the Law without If this Consequence be false agains● Paul How can T. H.'s Consequence be good against us Is it to reject and deny the Scriptures to have the good things they declare of brought in by the Eternal Spirit And since the Scriptures can not fulfil themselves in us but the Spirit is not the Spirit the Rule and Guide to our Divine Knowledge and Enjoyments But from our asserting the Spirit to be the Rule T.H. infers That we deny to live according to the Scriptures a Mi●take he fell into before which I offer'd to help him out of in my Answer for to own the Scripture to be the Rule and to live according to the Scriptures are not one and the same thing For the Gentiles did the things contained in the outward Law and yet had not the outward Law for a Rule Rom. 2.14 Nor is it to be doubted but that Paul and the primitive Christians lived up to the outward Law that is the inward Law outwarly declared by the Law of the Spirit of Life which was the Rule of their Obedience Yet can any infer that the outward Law and not the inward was the Rule of their so living And I must tell thee Th. Hicks that thy Exalting of the Scriptures is but an Endeavour to throw down the Spirit which Sacrifice be it known unto thee the Lord of Heaven loathes And I will say to thee as G. F. and R. H. said to the Priest They are Dangerous to be read and used for those Evil Purposes thou employest them upon But as they said though that also thou didst overlook so say I Blessed is He that doth read and understands them Testimonies concerning the Rule Irenaeus pag. 242 384 389. The Writing in the Heart is the Rule Again l. 5. c. 8. The Word giveth his Spirit to all to some according to Condition And l. 4. c. 30. The Fathers justified by the Righteousness of the Law in them therefore had no need of REPROVING LETTERS W. Perkins Works 3 Vol. pag. 220. The Light of Nature and Grace teacheth to do as we would be done to pag. 221. It is the Fulfilling of the Law the Rule to judge Scripture That of God made the Rule Something in the Conscience Happy Times if Men would follow it Bp. R. Sanderson De Obligat Conscient pag. 127. A Rule of Discerning without the Scriptures Regula discernendi extra Scripturam And T. C●llier in plain words saith The Spirit of God who is God is the ALONE RULE of a Christian Gen. Epist to the Saints chap. 12. The Spiritual Man judgeth all things by the RULE OF THE SPIRIT ibid. The Law of the New Testament is written in the Heart ibid. But what need is there further of my maintaining this Point concerning The Light being the Rule in all Ages since thou hast made such ample Confession That the Godly in all Ages before Christ in the Flesh were turned from the Darkness to the Light pag. 64. This Light must needs be within because the Darkness is there And it must needs be sufficient because