Selected quad for the lemma: head_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
head_n	body_n	church_n	invisible_a	4,247	5	10.9779	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40787	The snake in the grass further discovered, or, The Quakers no Christians proving out of their own writings, that they deny, I. The Scriptures to be the Word of God, II. Baptism, and the Lord's Supper, III. The manhood of Christ, &c. : with an account of their canons, constitutions, ecclesiastical order and discipline.	Faldo, John, 1633-1690.	1698 (1698)	Wing F305; ESTC R40574	226,252	360

dishnourable to God and unworthy of his Grace Another fallacy in your arguings is from the Spirits § 8 teachings Indefinitely to the Spirits teaching Universally at least all that concerns the duty of the people of God in religious things The people of God have the Spirit therefore they could not be destitute of an unerring Spirit in what concerned them either towards God or men But your main fallacies are these two from an SECT VII infallible Spirit teaching to the infallibility of the Subjects in which the Spirit dwells as a Teacher and from the Spirits teaching to its immediate and peculiar teaching For the first of these I shall produce some of your wild reasonings 1 Thes 15. 19. Quench not the Spirit Page Those to whom he gave the caution had the Spirit if those could not quench the Spirit who had it not Consequently the Primitive Churches were not without an unerring Spirit But I believe and can prove that they who had not the Spirit themselves might quench it in others by despising Prophecyings in the exercise of its gifts 20. ver and those who have the motions of the Spirit as you say the old World had before the Flood may be far from having the Spirit in the Scripture-sense i. e. dwelling in them to sanctification But supposing they had the Spirit dwelling and teaching in them 't is a miserable erroneous and weak Conclusion that they were infallible That this is that you would conclude from such improper premises is apparently your drift all along A taste of this you give us p. 32. in these words § 2. Page 32. If God sends forth his Spirit into the hearts of his children then are they not without an infallible Spirit but the express Letter of the Scripture affirms it and consequently our Adversaries reflection upon us for making it part of our belief is unsound and condemnable Your Adversaries have not so little knowledge of the Spirit of God as to say the Spirit of God is fallible nor yet so ignorant of your spirits and of the Scripture as to say you are infallible If the latter be it you say is unfound it is upon no other grounds than your arguing from the infallibility of Gods Spirit to the infallibility of your spirits or of theirs who are Gods people But we are not ignorant that your principles make no distinction much less a difference between the spirits of Gods people and the Spirit of God which is indeed the secret byass which moves you so obliquely of which I shall give a more ample account in its place But you are yet so unwilling to speak plainly your mind that you appear in many shapes to insinuate this untruth but are industrious to be uncertain and amphibious Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo You say page 31. And how this man can be esteemed § 3. Page 31. a good Christian who would render Christ Jesus the Head of a fallible body by divesting Christians of an infallible Spirit I leave to persons of better judgment more honesty and greater moderation to judge By this we may more than guess your mind But verily if the asserting Christ to be the Head of a fallible body i. e. that may in some things erre or be mistaken be worthy of your such reflections I know none will escape them among professed Christians but Quakers and Papists I see by this you may serve for a Voter at Rome but your Logick is so leaky you will hardly attain a higher promotion there she will be loath to venture her Grandeur built upon the Foundation of the Churches infallibility upon your pitiful scribling I wonder how you came to talk of Christs body to § 4 which he is Head Or what men of your principles can mean by it with the qualification of infallible Sure you do not mean his body in the most strict sense i. e. the invisible Church that is not yet compleatly existing and I doubt not but when they meet and vote they will be infallible but that will not be yet Nor yet the Universal Church visible i. e. Professors of Christianity Members of the Universal Church or any particular organical Church for your party have gored and besmeared those to excess I know not how we shall get a vote from them except in the Creed called the Apostles to which a small matter excepted all give consent But then the Quakers are none of the Church who will subscribe but to few of the Articles in that Creed How shall we find your meaning I will undertake to shoot near the mark if not hit the pin in the white You intend it of all the Quakers and every individual person among them at least such who give up to the light within and its guidance and is the Church in Spirit a Phrase used by Friends more than once in their writings but never in the Scriptu●e But Mr. Pen if Christ be Head to none but the infallible wo to the poor Saints who have trusted hitherto they had a Head in Heaven who hath pity on the ignorant and those that are out of the way who is their Advocate with the Father and thereby a remedy against the the sad consequences otherwise of their errings And I am sure Christ is then none of your Head But to conclude this form of your reasoning what § 6 I shall say to it You may as well conclude all Gods people are omnipotent because they have the Spirit of God which is omnipotent And they are omniscient because the Spirit of God who teaches them is so And they are infinite upon the same grounds The last two of these I can prove from some of the Quakers writings to be their blasphemous Opinions from this ground on which you build Monstr ' horrend'inform ' ingens cui lumen ademptum Were you so judicious and humble to submit to the certain teachings of the Spirit in and by the § Scripture you may know that the Spirit though it never teacheth an errour yet those whom it teacheth directively may erre either not understanding or not submitting to his teachings that where the Spirit moves and strives too though it self be omnipotent yet it may move and strive in such a measure as the corruption of bad men and sometimes of good men do prevail against its strivings and motions Although the Spirit of God will teach and move all the Elect so largely and so effectually that they shall not fail of heaven nor the necessary means thereunto yet there is not one that can be proved not to err in practice much less to have learned all things of a Religious concern to them I might proceed to your fallacious arguing from SECT VIII the Spirits teaching indefinitely expressed to its teaching peculiarly and immediately which is frequent in your Pamphlet particularly page 18 29. and many more of your fallacious and confused arguings I might expose were it worth while to trace such a Trifler in