Selected quad for the lemma: reason_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
reason_n	divine_a	faith_n	revelation_n	3,413	5	9.3938	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63382	A true and faithful accompt of the most material passages of a dispute betwixt some students of divinity (so called) of the University of Aberdene, and the people called Quakers held in Aberdene in Scotland, In Alexander Harper his close (or yard) before some hundreds of witnesses, upon the fourteenth day of the second month called April, 1675. There being opponents John Lesly. Alexander Shirreff. Paul Gellie. Mast. of Art. And defendants upon the Quakers part. Robert Barclay and George Keith. Præses for moderating the meeting, chosen by them, Andrew Thomsone advocate: and by the Quakers. Alexander Skein, sometime a magistrate of the City. Published for preventing misreports, by Alexander Skein, John Skein, Alexander Harper, Thomas Merser, and John Cowie. To which is added, Robert Barclay's offer to the preachers of Aberdene, renewed and re-inforced.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.; Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.; Skene, Alexander.	1675 (1675)	Wing T2467BA; ESTC R222395	25,300	72

meet with the greatest and ablest of the Preachers themselves so the Truth leads us not to despise any As R. B. was going on he was interrupted Alex. Shirreff If it were pertinent I could easily disprove much of what is said but to be short R. B. having given Theses provoking all the Scholars of Europe and Great Brittain though R. B. pretends in his Preface to be against School-Divinity yet his Theses are full of it and there are many other contradictions which I will not now take notice of The Preachers and Ministers of the Word not finding themselves concerned we Young-men and but Students have offered to dispute in the Articles the Quakers have been very unreasonable and particularly G. K. did refuse any Article should be put in against railing because he said that might be railing in me which was not in him because he to wit G. K. was immediately led by the Spirit We have concluded that being Young men in case the Quakers should have any advantage it will not be of great consequence and if we have advantage we hope it may be useful because these are the great Prophets and Preachers of the Quakers G. K. I could take notice of many things not true in that Young-mans long discourse as particularly that R. B. hath provoked all Europe but I pass them by because I 'me here exceedingiy abused and therefore desire to be heard for I declare in God's ●●ar and in singleness of my heart I never said any such thing as is by that Young-man alledged upon me as I can appeal to the Auditors who were there present but what I said was this I cannot bind my self not to rail because I 'me bound already that I should not rail by the righteous Law of God in my Conscience and may perhaps speak that as believing it to be true which ye may call railing A. Shir. I being chiefly concerned and having mostly occasioned this Debate am employed by the rest to speak first and therefore I will impugne the second thesis which R. B. read and is as followeth Seeing no Man knoweth the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son revealeth him Mat. 11.27 And seeing the revelation of the Son is in and by the Spirit therefore the Testimony of the Spirit is that alone by which the true knowledge of God hath been is and ca● be only revealed who as by the moving of his own Spirit converted the Chaos of this World into that wonderful order wherein it was in the beginning and Created Man a living Soul to rule and govern it so by the revelation of the same spirit he hath made manifest himself all along unto the Sons of Men both Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles which Revelations of God by the spirit whether by outward voices and appearances Dreams or inward objective manifestations in the heart was of old the formal Object of their Faith and remaineth yet so to be since the Object of the Saints Faith is the same in all Ages though set forth under divers Administrations moreover these Divine inward Revelations which we make absolutely necessary for the building up true Faith neither do nor can ever contradict the outward Testimony of the Scriptures or right and seund reason yet from hence it will not follow that the Divine Revelations are to be subjected to the examination either of the outward testimony of the Scriptures or of the natural reason of Man as to a ●ore noble or certain Rule and Touchstone for this Divine Revelation and inward Illumination is that which is evident and clear of it self forcing by its own evidence and clearness the well disposed understanding to assent irresistably moving the same thereunto even as the common Principles of natural truths move and incline the mind to a natural assent R. B. People this is that which we affirm and which these Young-men are about to dispute against as false notwithstanding that A. Shir. had thus offered himself first to dispute yet I. L. intruding himself put him to silence Beginning as followeth I. L. That which is not to be believed as the Rule of Faith is not to be the Rule of Faith but the Spirit is not to be believed as the Rule of Faith therefore the Spirit is not to be the Rule of Faith R. B. Having repeated the Argument I deny the Minor or second Proposition I. L. I prove it that which hath not a sufficient evidence to evidence it self to be a Rule is not to be a Rule but the Spirit in the Quakers hath not a sufficient evidence whereby to evidence it self to be a Rule therefore the Spirit in the Quakers is not to be our Rule R. B. Having repeated the Argument I distinguish that second Proposition If thou meanest any Spirit in the Quakers which they peculiarly assume to themselves as Quakers or say they have as a part of themselves or of Mans Nature we concede that such have no evidence neither do we say that any such Spirit is to be our Rule but if thou meanest that Universal Spirit of God a manifestation whereof is given to every one to profit withall we affirm it hath a sufficient evidence in us and in all Men. I. L. I urge that distinction If the Spirit hath a sufficient evidence either this evidence is from your own declaration or some other but it is neither from your own declaration nor from some other therefore it hath not a sufficient evidence R. B. It is from both J. L. What is it then R. B. That it teacheth us to deny ungodliness and worldly Lusts and to live soberly righteously and godly in this present World this is an evidence to all Men. J. L. I prove that is not a sufficient evidence thus That is not a sufficient evidence which Hereticks may pretend unto as a sufficient ground for their heresie but Hereticks may pretend this as a sufficient ground for their herisie therefore it is not a sufficient evidence R. B. I answer this first by a Retortion this is the same Argument upon the matter which the Jesuit Dempster used against your Master viz. John Menzies for the Jesuite pressing him to assign a ground for the Protestant Religion which Hereticks could not pretend unto J. M. named the Scripture and the Jesuite further urged that Hereticks could and did pretend unto the Scriptures Now what evidence can ye give from the Scriptures which we cannot give yea and greater from the Spirit that Hereticks cannot justly lay claim to Stud. With one voice We will not have Retortions R. B. Praeses read the Articles which contain a particular provision for Retortions as being lawful if not insisted too much on so the fifth Article above-mentioned was read G. K. I offer to answer directly to his Argument without Retortion though I pass not from the Retortion for it stands over your heads which ye will never get over Then I say we have a two-fold evidence which no Heretick can justly