Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	answer_n	answer_v	objection_n	2,644	5	9.4165	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A30907	William Michel unmasqued, or, The staggering instability of the pretended stable Christian discovered his omissions observed, and weakness unvailed : in his late faint and feeble animadversions by way of reply to a book intituled Truth cleared of calumnies : wherein the integrity of the Quakers doctrine is the second time justified and cleared from the reiterate, clamorous but causeless calumnies of this cavilling cetechist [sic] / by Robert Barclay.	Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.	1672 (1672)	Wing B742; ESTC R37062	60,482	82

but instead of one frames a distinction of Worship in Civil and Sacred the first he sayth may be given to men but the 2d to God only aledging this distinction to be founded on Scripture Luke 14. 10. Then shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at meat with thee Now these words ought to be translated thou shalt have glory praise or renown and therefore in the Latine it is Et erit tibi gloria for so the Greek word Doxa Signifies which W. M. will not show me to Signifie Adoratio or Worship it s therefore but a poor Argument that has no better bottom then this manifest mistake of the Translation For other proof he hath none neither for his Distinction nor former Assertion Thirdly I observe his Instancing of the practises of Abraham Lot Joseph Jacob adding that though they be not to be followed in all things yet in such they may as are not else were Reprehended nor Prohibited For Answer let him look unto Rev. 22. 9. where the Angel refused it and seeing I suppose he may have so much Charity for this beloved Disciple as to Judge he was not Tempted with Idolatry especially in a season wherein God was Revealing such pretious things unto him he may observe how this Holy Man was a stranger to this unscriptural distinction of Civil and Religious Worship Fourthly I observe his endeavours to shift Affinity with Popery but he hath no waydisproved the parity in that wherein I compared them viz. the Papist distingish the Worship they give to God and that they give to their Images onely in the Intention and nor in the outward Signification and ye distingish the Worship ye give to men and that ye give to God onely in the Intention and not in the outward Signification for ye bow and take off your Hats to the worst of men as well as to God and therefore ye agree in so far as both has nothing but their Simple Intention to plead the difference whereunto nothing is ansewred He concludes his Section saying I seem to Justifie Moses his doing Obeysauce to his Father in Law adding what is Obeysance but civil Reverence by bowing the Body this is a fit conclusion to close up such a silly Section for after he has laboured long in vain he Concluds thus begging the thing in question And if Moses bowed himself as I said in my last that makes nothing against us His second Section is to prove Salutations by words which might have been spared until he had proved how and where we deny them but because he had somthing to say from Scripture for this which we deny not but own as much as himself he would have it in that he might seem with some credit to bring in his Inference which is that bowing of the Body and expressing our Affection by words is agreeable to Scripture the Latter Part of this concerns not us as being not denied and for the first of bowing it signifies nothing until it be brought in with some more pressing Premisses in this Section he acknowledges that takeing of the Hat is without any Scripture Warrant and from Arguments passes here to Entreaties Begging that it may not be Quarrelled at but seeing the taking of it off or uncovering of our Heads is that which the Aopstle requires as a signe of Subjection in our Worship towards God 1 Cor. 11. 4 7. we Resolve to keep it to Him and not to give it to man wherein if he will solve our Scruple according to Scripture we may be the more easily Induced to answer his desire it is to be Observed that notwith-standing of this we are not against outward Signification of Honour though in the end of this Section he fasly would be Insinuating the contrary He hath here Subjoyned a third Section which he termeth an Answer to my Objection and which in Reason should have some relation to Salutations as being under this Head though indeed it hath none at all but is a meer Cavil at some of my words upon another Subject concerning the single Language where Page 11. I confess with him that the Kingdom of God Consists not in words adding that it seems Inconsistent with his Principles seeing the Gospel according to him is but words yea the Scripture it self I mean that which ye have of it to wit the Letter Now this Parenthesis he hath Dis-ingeniously omitted and thereupon goes about to explaine their meaning of the Scripture and the Gospel alledging if we be for another we may justly be accounted Subverters of the Christian Religion but such shallow Critisims brought in beside the Purpose whereas other things more Material are either wholly Omitted or scurvily shifted over will easily appear to the Impartial and Juditious Reader In his second Head concerning our using Thou and Thee which is the singular number to one Person I observe First how he hath given away his own Cause by confessing that Luke 22. 31. is not understood of one exclusivly of others and therefore no wonder if Christ used the Plural Number seeing as W. M. confesses he Intended to speak to all the Apostles As for that expression of Bildads Jobs Friend granting both the Transcription and Translation to be true shall this one Expression overturn the Universal practice of Christ and the whole Saints in Scripture or let him tell us plainly whither these words and Practices of Jobs Friends which are Recorded be for to be our Rule so as we ought to Immitate and follow them especially where they contradict or differ from the Practice of Christ and his Apostles but to follow this so frequent Practice of the Saints is with W. M. to be Proud knowing nothing but doting about Questions and Strife of Words for so he misapplyes 1 Tim. 6. 4. and to his own Confusion uses it himself in the end of his Epistle to the Reader where he has these Words I am thy Servant and thereby hath Condemned himself as one of those Ignorant Proud Boasters he speaks of c. Secondly The second thing I observe that he produceth not one Argument against our Practice in this thing but his own groundless yea lying Imaginations and Conjectures aledging he is of the mind that if the Translators had not kept to the Rigor of Construction but Translated Atach and so not thou which is the true Signification but you we had kept our old tone though his disdainful Insinuation of our Ignorance be here apparent yet experience might have taught him and his Brethren that even where the Translators have favored them with their escapes the Quakers have both had Hebrew and Greek enough to find them out it is also here to be observed how easily W. M. can dispence with mistakes even willful ones in the Translators when they make for his purpose thereby in effect for all his pretences of Exalting the Scripture and making it his Rule he signifies his desire not so much to Square his Practices to

without doubt to us that the words which Christ spake will stand in Judgment against him and his Brethren because while in words they pretend to Exalt it both in Principle and Practice they Villifie and deny it As a 3d. Reason he Alledges We Prefer our Silent Waiting to the Reading of Scriptures as if we must first come to this ere we can know the Scripture aright adding that this waiting is defined by us to be a silent posture of the Heart without thinking good or evil Answ. These thoughts which we say ought to be excluded from waiting are mans own thoughts not such as the Spirit of God furnisheth him with and it is great Ignorance to say that without this we can use the Scriptures aright seeing the things of God knoweth no man save the Spirit of God 1 Cor. 2. 11. As for his own Imaginations which he Subjoines concerning our waiting they signifie nothing because Alledged without any proof we deny not but that Faith Hope and Charity is exercised in waiting yet not without such thoughts as proceed from the Spirit of God and whereas he finds we clear our selves of this Calumnie of being Vilifiers of the Scripture by showing how much it is our desire to try Doctrines by them he alledgeth We have herein been suspected of Jugling the proof is R. Farmer saith so but R. Farmers saying and W. M's saying is all one in this matter neither of them are to be trusted without proof Now the Reason because we say that the Scriptures are not the Saints Rule of knowing God and Living to him but this is just to beg the thing in Question That Story mentioned by him of a Quakers telling a certain Woman in Aberdeen that she might as well read a Lattin Book as the Bible doth no waies prove that we ate against trying of Doctrins by the Scripture seeing the Quaker he speaks of might have had good reason to look upon that supposed Religious Woman as one alienated from that Spiritual Key of David which can alone truly open the Scriptures and so might well tell her she would do well first to come to that else her Reading might be so far from profiting her that she might come to Wrest them to her own Destruction 2 Pet. 3. 16. Sect. 2. Page 30. he begins with acknowledging That something may be accounted the Declaration of ones Mind which is not his word though Page 12. of his Dialouge he could not but smile at it as Irrational To prove the Scriptures to be truly and properly called the Word of God he subjoyneth That the Precepts of the Scripture were uttered and spoke of God but in Answ. to this I shew him Pag. 26. of my last that the Properties peculiar to the Word cannot be spoken of the Scripture but of the Inward and Living Word to which he replys nothing onely tells there is a twofould Word a Co-essentiall Co-eternal Word and a Spiritual Word the Temporal expressed Word or the Word written in time but seeing he pretends to be pleading for the Scripture he should have used the Language of it and not such strange Antescriptural expressions which are not to be found in all the Bible Where doth he read of a Spiritual Temporal expressed Word a part of my Argument shewing that these Scriptures Hos. 1. 1. Joel 1. 1 Esa. 38. 4. are understood of that Word from which the Scriptures are given forth he hath but mentioned not answered for I told him Pag. 26. of my last that where it is said The Spirit of God came upon such a one or to such a one that therefore the Scripture is the Spirit and so as do the Socinians call the writings of the Prophets and Apostles the Spirit denying the necessity of any other Spirit this he hath wholly Omited and indeed he seemes prety much to incline to the Socinians in this matter for he sayes That the Scripture is the Sword of the Spirit and that because Christ in his conflict with Satan said it was written but had this been Christs onely Sword we must conclude the Devil to have had the same for he said also it is written and according to this Doctrine who hath a Bible in his pocket wanteth not the Sword of the Spirit which favoureth of that Popish foppery that the sign of the Cross puts away Devils but experience teacheth us both these Opinions to be alike Ridiculous Upon this occasion in his Dialogue Page 13. he asserted That it is all one to say the Scripture saith and God saith and whereas in Answer to this I told him that they might be said to be one because of their Agreement yet were no more one then the Sun Beam and the Shadow is one though they agree together because he knew not what to reply to this he mentions a part of these words of mine and Subjoyns by way of Answer to them that they tend to advance humane Writings and equal them with the Scripture when they agree with what God sayeth which as it is a manifest shift and no reply so it is a notable Impertinency to say there is any hazard of advancing such Writings as truly agree with what God sayeth for upon what other account are the Scriptures to be esteemed Page 32. to prove that word mentioned Mark 7. which he Phancies are said to be made void is not the Living Word but the outward Precept of the Scripture he sayes It is plainly held forth to be so without any further Probation He addeth Page 34. That it seems we think they set up the Scriptures as an Idoll instead of that from which they come asking If we did ever hear them call it the Eternal Son of God that Saviour who died c. Answer Though we have not heard you term the Scripture yet it is not without Reason we say ye set them up in Christs stead for I have a Letter under one of the present National Teachers hand wherein he sayes The Scriptures are the alone means of Salvation yea the alone Way Truth and Life and that none can be saved without them And I have heard another call the Greek Testament The onely foundation Now being these are the peculiar Properties of Christ have we not reason to say that such as ascribe them to the Scriptures puts the Scriptures in Christs stead though W. M. be pleased to term it unworthy dealing Sect. 2 Pag. 35. he sayes It is not dificult to prove that the Law and Testimony mentioned Deut. 8. 20. was not an inward Law The reason Alledged is Because the Prophet opposes what is written as no Light if it agree not to the Law and Testimony But what then doth this prove the Testimony here not to be inward He adds That let People pretend what they will to a Law within if it agree not with the Scripture Word there is no Light in them and that the outward Law gets the name of the Testimony but granting him all this it doth not