Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	according_a	call_v	holy_a	2,256	5	4.3530	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87231	The Quakers quaking: or, the foundation of their deceit shaken, by scripture, reason, their own mouthes at several conferences. By all which will appear, that their quaking, ministery, doctrine, and lives, is a meer deceit, and themselves proved to be the great impostors of these latter times: / by Jeremiah Ives.	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1656 (1656)	Wing I1103; Thomason E883_3; ESTC R207296	36,620	64

as a Flying fiery Roll another The Shield of Truth c. By these great bushes they call the simple in to drink of their adulterated Wine which is but as the Wine of Sodom and as the Grapes of Gomorrha These are the Out-cries by which they call the simple to drink of the wine of their Spiritual Fornications For I challenge any of them all to make it appear that any one of these Titles mere given these Pamphlets by him whom they intitle to them And therefore good Reader consider these following lines and what shall be found true imbrace though it be not bumbasted with the feigned words of them who would make merchandize of your Souls and slight it not in any thing wherein it speaks Scripture or right Reason though with some neither are of weight which is all that is desired from thy Friend JER IVES The QVAKERS Quaking OR The Foundation of their Deceipt shaken both in their Quakings Doctrines Ministerie and Lives IF ever the My stery of Iniquity or Iniquity in a mystery did work in the hearts and mindes of men or if ever the devil did manage a Designe under ground surely be doth it now by the men called QUAKERS who like so many Apes do imitate many of the Faithful in some circumstances that they may the better deceive in matters that are most substantial And this through the help of God I shall make appear by shewing that their Quaking and their Doctrine Ministery and Lives is a meer deceit And first I shall speaking somewhat touching their Quaking and therein I shall first speak something touching their Name and secondly something touching their Practice viz. Quaking and the Scriptures they urge in favour to such a practice I Shall in the first place speak to that Name or Title by which they are known to the world viz. QUAKERS In this they would make men believe they are nick-named as appears in a book of James Nayler's called The discovery of the first wisdom from beneath where in the Title-page he subscribes himself One whom the world scornsully nick-names and calls Quaker Again in another book of his called The power and glory of the Lord shining out of the North in the title-page he subscribes himself One whom Ishmael's brood calls a Quaker I could bring many instances of this kind to shew how they would make men believe they are greatly wronged when they are distinguished from other men by this term Quakers Now see their deceit they say Ishmael's Brood and the world calls them so and yet they take paines to prove themselves so see page 16 and 17 of the last fore-mentioned Book he saith But search the Scriptures and holy men of God do witness quaking and trembling See likewise Parnel's Shield of Truth p. 1. and a Book of theirs called Sauls Errand to Damasew p. 32. It being asked by a Justice How it came to pass that people quake and tremble James Nayler answered that the Scriptures witness the same condition in the Saints formerly c. Now pray observe the Christians of old were never offended at that which the Scriptures did witness them to be as for instance the Scripture calls them believers because they believed disciples because they had learned Saints because they were holy and they that prayed were called a praying people Now where do the Saints of old anywhere call these Nick-names when they were call'd according to what they either believed or practised Is it any more a Nick-name to call a man a Quaker that quakes by the power of God if that be true that they say then to call a righteous man a righteous man that is made righteous by the power of God or is it any more a Nick-name to call a man a Quaker that witnesses to quaking and owns it then it is to call a man a Christian that witnesses to Christ and owns him I believe a man may deridingly be call'd a Christian as doubtless some of these are call'd Quakers and so many are deridingly call'd Saints and holy men yet these are no Nick-names if they are so the people in captivity were deridingly bid to sing one of Sion's songs yet these were not Nick-names to those songs By this you may see that they are Lyers in saying that they are Nick-named Quakers when themselves say they witness quaking and though themselves witness quaking yet they say that they are Ishmael's brood that calls them so But I pray tell me if a man be frequently found in railing whether this be a Nick-name to call him a Railer In like maner if these people as themselves confess do frequently quake what Nick-name is it to call them Quakers But now to their Scriptures alleadged for quaking shaking and trembling it is true that some good men do say thus of themselves as Heb. 12.21 Ezek. 12.18 Jer. 33.9 Acts 9.6 Psal 119.6 and many other places To all which I answer first This doth not prove that all were good that did quake and tremble for the devils were quakers and tremblers James 2.19 Again good men made use of Scriptures to exhort and instruct yet some do make use of them to deceive and tempt as the devil did Christ Matth. 4.6 In like manner may Deceivers fall into quaking fits that so they may ho●●●●me resemblance with the servants of God that did tremble for fear of God though the fear of God be departed from them for the devil many times and his ministers that they may the better effect their deceits do transform themselves into the likeness of the ministers and servants of Christ 2. None of the Saints of old did ever foam at mouth in this their trembling but some of you do as many are able to witness and as your selves cannot deny When it was objected against you in the Westmoreland-Petition that your practces did exceedingly savor of Sorcery because of the swellings quakings and roarings and foamings that were among you at your meetings but especially of young children you deny no part of the Charge in your Answer but Blasphemy and Sorcery by which it plainly appears that swellings and foamings could not be denyed else you would as well have replyed to that as Blasphemy and Sorcery For this see their Book in answer to the West morland-Petition p. 35. where they make no reply to foaming and swelling though it is charged upon them to be in yong children as well as old folks Whereupon I demand Whether any of the Saints of old ever foamed at mouth when they trembled 2. Whether any young children did ever foam at mouth quake swell and tremble in the Saints meetings 3. Whether such kinde of trembling that is accompanied with foamings do not rather argue a man to be possess'd with the devil then with the Spirit of God according to that of Luke 9.39 Lastly Whether this be a good Argument viz. Some of the Saints did quake and that by the impulse of the Spirit of God Therefore every one that quakes

and trembles is a Saint of God and doth it by the impulse of the Spirit of God The next thing I shall speak to is their Doctrines And though I confess they preach somewhat that is true yet in this they are but the greater Deceivers For what Heretick is there but preaches some truth and what counterfeit silver will pass in pay if there be not some appearance of real silver So these men to put off their bad ware which other wise would not vent do usher it in with many truths But that the Reader may see that All is not gold that glisters take notice in the first place that these men will allow nothing to be call'd God's Word but Christ This is their first Errour in Doctrine which I thus prove 1 Error First because God hath but one onely-begotten Son Jesus Christ but he hath many Words That he hath but one Son Jesus Christ I prove from Joh. 3.16 1 Cor. 8.6 Eph. 4.5 That he hath more words then one I prove from Deut. 8.3 Man liveth not by bread alone but by EVERY word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God Prov. 30.5 EVERY word of God is pure Jer. 23.36 the complaint is that the false Prophets had perverted the WORDS of the living God So that from this Scripture this Argument may be drawn against this Error viz. If God have plurality of words then somewhat else may be called the Word of God beside his onely Son Jesus Christ But God hath plurality of words Therefore somewhat else may be call'd Gods Word besides his onely begotten Son Jesus Christ And the fallacie of the Argument for the contrary is thus detected Jesus Christ is called the Word Ergo Nothing else must be call'd the Word but Jesus Christ May not a man as well say that Jesus Christ is call'd God's Son Ergo No one else may be call'd Gods son but Jesus Christ When we read that men are the sons of God by saith and Joh. 1. As many as believed to them be gave porter to become the sons of God though I confess they are not sons in the same sense that Christ is so likewise nothing is call'd the Word of God in the same sense the Scriptures call Christ so but himself Again the Scriptures call Christ a vine a door a shepherd but would it not be madness to say Where-ever we read of a vine a door or a shepherd it must be understood of Christ Their next Errour that I shall name 2 Error and which is a consequence of the former is this That they say the Scriptures may not be call'd the word of God and in many of their books they blame the Ministery of the Nation and others for saying the Scriptures are the word of God when Christ calls the written Law of Moses the word of God which he said the Pharisees had made of none effect by their traditions Mark 7.13 But see the horrible deceit of these men The Scriptures they say must be call'd a declaration of the minde of God but at no hand they must be call'd the word of God see their book call'd A cloud of witnesses in the Title-page and also in pag. 3. of the same Book toward the later end of it and the beginning of pag. 4. you have these words But the blinde guides the Priests of England that Preach for Tythes hire gists and rewards they do teach the people and say Hearken to the Word of the Lord as it is in a chapter and a verse and many other passages which I forbear to cite because it is a thing so generally preached and received by them viz. That the Scriptures are not the word of God but a declaration of the minde and will of God See now their deceit they would make the world believe that it detracts from the honour of Christ to call the Scriptures the word of the Lord and the word of God when in truth the designe is to raise up the honour of their own Pamphlets by the ruines of the Scriptures reputation in the hearts and mindes of men And therefore do but behold their impudence The holy Scripture say they must not be call'd God's word no no but see if they do not give the same titles and as great to their own bumbasted contradictious lying Pamphlets And for the proof of this let me give thee a recital of some of them among many They have one book called Love to the lost which is a Title proper to none but God and Christ yet this is given to one of their books Another is called A discovery of the wisdom from beneath which none but the word of God can do by their own confession many a time Another book is called The power and glory of God shining out of the North. Is not this Title as great as if they had call'd it the word of God Read and judge you whose light is not darkness Another is call'd The Royal law and Covenant of God which is as great a Title as the word of God Another is call'd News out of the North written from the mouth of God Another is call'd The Vials of the wrath of God upon the seat of the man of sin Another is call'd A warning from the Lord to Teachers and people Another is call'd A true prophecie of the mighty day of the Lord. Now if by the mighty day of the Lord they mean that there shall be such a day which they can hardly do because some of them have said The day of Judgment is past already but if that should be their meaning it could be no Prophecie for what prophesying is it for men to foretel such a thing shall be if others have said it before them for do not many by the writing of the Scriptures believe there shall be such a day yet these cannot be said to prophesie of it But if by prophesying of the mighty day of the Lord they mean to foretel the very day then they presume to know more then Christ or the Angels or any man according to that of Mark 13.22 But to proceed They have another book that is called A Trumpet from the Lord sounded out of Sion Another is call'd A whirlwinde of the Lord given forth as a flying fiery roll I would from all this ask but one question Whether these Titles which they give these books are not equipollent to the Title we give the Scriptures viz. The Word of God and yet these men blame us for this and give as great to their own Pamphlets But what shall we say they stop not here but at last call their own writings The Word of the Lord and A Word from the Lord as you may see in a book of theirs called A prophecie of the mighty day of the Lord p. 13. and the like in a book called The vials of the wrath of God p. 57. p. 9. p. 10. and in a book called News out of the North p. 10. and p. 24.

a lye The next thing I have to present the Reader with 18 Error is their Lying and that first in saying They are perfect when all the fore-cited imperfections are found in them besides many more as shall be named The second Lye is that they say They are immediately sent of God which nothing is more false The third Lye is That one Fox writ a book and in the Title-page said The world did not know his Name and yet in two several places of the said Book he subscribes himself Known by the Name of GEORGE FOX The fourth Lye is That one Edward Boroughs said His Book was sealed by the Spirit of the Eternal God and being demanded to prove it he asked If any thing he writ in it was false it was replyed to him again If he proved that God sealed his Book we would believe all that was in it which I am sure he can never do while the world stands A fifth Lye is That James Nayler in a written Paper which he sent to me calls me shameless man for tempting him to deny the Lord when I said no such thing but that I did say to which he alludes in his Paper was That either he should prove he was immediately sent of God as he profest or else that he should renounce it and thereupon he calls me shameless man in tempting him to deny the Lord. A sixth Lye is That James Nayler in the said Paper saith If he had come in his own Name I would have received him as he saith I did plainly confess I do believe this man hath bent his tongue like a Bowe for lyes for I dare appeal to all the company which I believe were at least two hundred if I said any such thing A seventh Lye is that being charged with writing such falsities in his Paper by a friend that read it and knew what was in it he at a Meeting at the Bull and Mouth at Aldersgate in London did utterly deny it and while the said friend ran from them to my house which is not farre to fetch the said Paper to prove that he had writ those untruths that he had charged Nayler with in the mean time he slips away and was gone If these are tokens of perfection sure one may as well say the Devil is perfect but sure if these men are perfect in any thing it is in the art of deceiving lying and equivocation These are but few of those legions of Lyes and Inconsistencies that their Writings and Preachings are stust withall as the judicious may perceive that will but strictly weigh what they either write on speak in the balance of the Sanctuary Having now been in the place of a Respondent to shew the Fallacies and Non-sequiturs and absurd Contradictions of the Arguments that these men bring for their Quakings and Infallible Preachings together with other their vain Conceits of the Scriptures and of the Ordinances of our Lord Jesus Christ I shall now assert something briefly by way of opposition to these mens conceits and endeavor the proof thereof from Scripture and Reason as God shall enable me And first of all I shall affirm That the written Precepts and Promises of God together with his Threatnings of Judgements and Exhortations to amendment of life they are and ought to be esteemed the Words of God That his written Commands may and ought to be so called I prove from Mark 7.10 for Moses said Honour thy Father and Mother c. which was the writing of Moses Exod. 20.12 And Christ saith their making this written Law of none effect in doing nothing for their Father or Mother was To MAKE THE WORD OF GOD of none effect by their Tradition John 10.35 and Jer. 36.2 5. And Baruch wrote at the mouth of Jeremiah all the WORDS OF THE LORD and ver 8. He was reading in a BOOK the WORDS OF THE LORD Again the Apostle calls the Law of Moses which contained Precepts Promises Threatnings and Exhortations The Oracles or WORDS OF GOD Rom. 3.2 But it is objected The written Word did not make the World To which I answer That if they mean the Ink and Paper we make one minde with them But yet further I reply That the same God whose Word made the World and whose Word preserves the Fabrick of the World did speak those words that are written for the admonition of the World and therefore they may truly be call'd Gods Words according to the fore-cited Scriptures and many other that may be named Again it is objected That the Word of God abides for ever but the Writings may be burned To which I answer That this doth not prove that which they would have viz. That the Commands contained in the Scriptures may be burned or any of Gods Promises to him that sears him or his Judgements upon them that do not fear him No these remain like Mount Sion that shall not be removed As for example the Words of God were writ upon Tables of Stone yet the breaking of the Tables did not put a dissolution to those words that were contained in them but they were as truly to be observed as if the Tables had been whole Reader I should not urge these as arguments to those that disown the Scriptures in words at length but sure I am that they will serve to confute these men that in words own them yet in works deny them Again I prove the Scriptures as aforesaid to be the VVord of God out of their own mouthes though it may be they may deny the consequent for they though they deny them to be the VVord of God yet they say they are a declaration of his Minde and VVill. VVhence I thus argue That which declares Gods VVill is Gods VVord But the Scriptures declare Gods VVill Ergo it is Gods VVord The major I prove out of their own mouthes for they all say that Nothing can inlighten but the Word and that Nothing can bring us to know Gods Minde but the Word though it may be they mean somewhat else by Word then I do yet that matters not for if nothing can manifest Gods Minde but Gods VVord and the Scriptures by their own confession do so then it follows That by their own Principles if they have any that the Scriptures may be so called though in words at length they do deny it By which you may see how miserably these men contradict themselves in saying The Scriptures are not Gods Word and yet say They are a declaration of his Will when at another time they say Nothing can declare Gods Will but his Word which they say the Scripture is not Secondly I do assert That the Light which every man hath doth not direct him into the worship and service of God and though Christ be the true Light that inlightens every man that comes into the world or that doth that which in its nature and property hath such a tendency for so the Scriptures speak sometimes Ezek. 24.14

Because I have purged thee and thou wast not purged that is as if God had said I have done that which was sufficient for thy purgation And the like in Joh. 1.29 Christ is called The Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world though he that believes not shall dye in his sins the meaning then must not be that every man hath his sins pardoned In like manner then when the same pen saith that as he taketh away the sins of the world ver 29. so he doth inlighten every one that comes into the world ver 9. which is as much as if he had said Jesus Christ by his blessed mediation hath done that which is able to effect pardon of sins for the world and which also is able to inlighten and inform the world into the knowledge of it How then doth this Text prove That every man hath this Light within him any more then the other Texts proves every mans sins were took away the latter of which themselves will not allow But further if every man hath received this Light Joh. 1. then every man hath received Christ for he is that Light ver 9. But every man hath not received Christ Ergo. The minor I prove from the 11 ver of the same Chapter He came to his own and his own received him not and the Builders were said to refuse him Matth. 21.42 and many other places But if they shall think to be relieved at this turn with this distinction viz. That it is one thing to have the Light and another thing to receive it Then I demand If this Light was not received how can it be in all men unless they are born with it Secondly whether men HAVE ANY THING but what they have RECEIVED according to I Cor. 4.7 especially any Light or Knowledge of Jesus Christ Lastly whether the Scriptures do make a distinction between a mans having the Spirit of Christ or the Light of Christ within him and his receiving Christ and receiving of the Spirit within him or in his heart as the Apostle phrases it Rom. 8. But to proceed Doth not the Scripture say John 11.10 That He that walks in the dark stumbles because there is NO LIGHT in him And Isa 8.20 If they speak not according to this rule it is because there is NO LIGHT in them and yet these say Every man in the world hath the Light within him spoken of John 1. which Light is Christ Thirdly In opposition to another of their Errours I shall prove That the day of Judgement is not past which I prove thus If the Heavens and the Earth are reserved to the Fire of that Judgement-day then is it not past already But the Heavens and the Earth are reserved to the fire of that day therefore that day is not past already The major is unquestionable For if they are yet kept from the fire of that day and are reserved to the fire of it then it followeth That none bath seen that day because the Heavens have not felt the heat of it The minor is proved out of 2 Pet. 3.7 Again if the day of the perdition of the ungodly be not past then the day of Judgement is not But the day of the perdition of the ungodly is not therefore the day of Judgement is not Again if in that day all must give account of the deeds done in the body and there are thousands and ten thousands that have not given an account then it follows that the day of Judgement is not past But there are thousands and ten thousands that have not given an account of the deeds done in the body therefore the day of Judgement is not past already Again if the day of Judgement be past already then the Resurrection is past already But the Resurrection is not past already Ergo. The major I prove from John 5.29 The minor I prove thus In the Resurrection they neither marry nor give in marriage But now men do both therefore they are not in the Resurrection Fourthly They say There is no Baptism but that of the Spirit In opposition to which I do affirm a Baptism with water which I prove from Mark 16.16 and Matth. 28.19 * Act 2.38 41. 8.3 6. 10.4 7. And that the baptism here commanded was water-baptism it appears by what I have already said by way of Reply to this notion Also the Scripture tells us Heb. 6. of the Doctrine of BAPTISMS And whereas it is objected That the Scripture tells us of one Lord and one Baptism I answer First this is not exclusive for there are Lords many yet he saith There is but one Lord Jesus So in like manner we reade of divers baptisms as of water and afflictions and the holy Ghost yet there is but one properly so call'd to wit That of water and the other are metaphorical baptisms Fifthly That the Lord Christ did administer bread and wine in token of his blood-shedding and bodybreaking which they deny This I prove from Mai. 26.27 28. where Christ did use both bread and wine upon that occasion and that the Apostles did so appears from 1 Cor. 11.23 where he saith That that which he received of the Lord he did deliver unto them how that Christ when he was betrayed took bread and ver 25. In like manner saith the Apostle he took the Cup when he had supped c. All which shew That bread and wine was instituted by Christ and practised by the Primitive Christians in remembrance of the dyings of the Lord Jesus Sixthly That civil honour and respect is due to some persons more then other which they deny First from the childe to the father as Exod. 20.12 Eph. 6.2 Secondly from the wise to the husband Eph. 5.33 and 1 Pet. 3.6 Sarah obeyed Abraham and called him LORD Thirdly this is due from servants to their Masters 1 Tim. 6.1 Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their Masters worthy of All honour c. Fourthly it is due from young solks to the aged Levit. 19.32 Thou shalt rise up before the boary head and honour the face of the old man and fear thy God or as Beza hath it Thou shalt honour the PERSON of the old man Fifthly this respect is due to persons in Authority as not onely the Apostle exhorts I Pat. 2.17 but as Paul himself practiseth as I have said when he calls Festw Most Noble and our Lord Christ notes the unjust Judge for one that did not reverence man Luke 18.2 and yet the Quakers make it a note of their infallible Ministery that they do not reverence men when Christ makes it a character of a wicked man This was urged by James Nayler at the Bull and Mouth near Aldersgate viz. That their not respecting persons was a sign they were immediately sent of God as I have already minded Again was not Jacob a faithful man and doth not the Scripture say that he called Esau LORD Gen. 32.18 Gen. 33.13

the flesh To this I did reply saying that I had heard it reported that the Quakers should deny Christ to be born according to the flesh but I never heard it from any of their mouths before which saying I told Ja Nayler was contary to these express Scriptures Rom. 1.3 where it is said that Christ was made of the seed of David according to the FLESH and Rom. 9.5 Of whom as concerning the FLESH Christ came who is over all God blessed for over and Gal. 4.4 Christ was MADE of a woman c. and Acts 2.30 James Nayler seeing this was a broad-fac'd piece of Heresie was willing to cover it with the Fig-leaf of this distinction viz. That it was one thing for Christ to be born after the flesh and another thing to be born according to the flesh To this I replyed that the Scriptures made no such distinction for when Moses did all things ACCORDING to the patern shewed him in the Mount Heb. 8.5 do but compare it with the command in Exod. 5.40 and you will finde That God bids Moses look that he made things AFTER the fashion shewed him in the Mount Now may not a man as well say that Moses did not do things after the patern because the Scriptures saith He did it according to the patern as this man may say Christ was not born after the flesh because the Scriptures saith He was born according to the flesh Therefore let me ask one question Whether a man may not as well say That Moses did not all things after the patern because the Scriptures say He did all things according to the patern as say That Christ was not born after the flesh because the Scriptures saith He was born according to the flesh But further That you may see that there is no place for this distinction about the case in hand do but take notice That Beza renders the Text in Gal. 4.29 where it is said That Abraham had a son born AFTER the flesh c. Sed quemadmodum tunc is qui SECUNDUM CARNEM word for word with Rom. 1.3 I mean by word for word so far as concerns the case in hand viz. That it is all one to deny Christ to be born after the flesh as it is to deny him to be born according to the flesh And therefore where it is said That Christ was born according to the flesh in that place of the Romans before-cited Beza likewise renders it De filio suo facto ex semine Davidis SECUNDUM CARNEM So that these men you see are forced to take Sanctuary at any vain distinction that may keep the world from seeing into the bottome of their Designes which is indeed to deny Christ to be made flesh or to be come in the flesh For is it not the same to say That he was not born after the flesh This was the sum of the last Conference with some additional Answers that I had not then liberty by reason of the confusion that was among them to give in at that time And lest any should think that these words are such as might fall from him in haste or unadvisedly about his denying Christs being born after the flesh and therefore I ought not to insist so much upon them Let me tell thee Reader whoever thou art that for more surety when I was going away I did ask the question again Whether he did believe Christ was born after the flesh or Whether he did deny it He answered That he did deny Christ was ever born after the flesh and so did another of their Proselytes the same day in the afternoon before hundreds of people at a private Meeting in Beech-lane who when the Sermon was ended stood up and opposed what was then and there delivered and withall did say That he did deny that Christ was born after the flesh Now what is this less then to deny Christ come in the flesh which is an Antichristian Doctrine 1 Joh. 4.3 And the same John saith that Whosoever shall deny Christ come in the flesh is a deceiver 2 Joh. 7. For many deceivers are entred into this world which confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh He is a Deceiver and an Antichrist and if these men are not such Deceivers I know not what deceit is Therefore let every one in the fear of God try the Spirits of these men and see if this which hath fallen from their mouthes doth not prove them to be what I have said of them and the Lord give you understanding in all things Vale. FINIS