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	faith_n	word_n	4,513	5	4.0717	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47778	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 ... 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 and defendants upon the Quakers part Robert Barclay and George Keith ... / published for preventing misreports by Alexander Skein ... [et. al.] ; to which is added Robert Barclay's offer to the preachers of Aberdene, renewed and re inforced.	Skene, Alexander.; Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.; Keith, George, 1639?-1716.; Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690. Theses theologicæ.	1675 (1675)	Wing L1172; ESTC R29467	32,557	98

two-fold evidence which no Heretick can justly lay claim to The one is the inward evidence of the Spirit of God by its own immediate Testimony in our hearts The other is the Testimony of the Scriptures which I affirm in the Name of the People called Quakers is the best external and outward evidence and rule that can be given And my reason why we have the Testimony of the Scriptures as an evidence that we have the Inspiration of the Spirit is this All Men have a measure of the Inspiration of the Spirit of God according to the Scriptures testimony That Christ the true Light inlighteneth every man that cometh into the world and that a manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal But this universal Illumination or manifestation is inspired and if all men be in measure inspired then consequently we who are men are inspired I. L. I prove yee have not the testimony of the Scriptures for a sufficient evidence That which is fallacious is not a sufficient evidence But the Scriptures testimony according to the Quakers without the indwelling of the Spirit is fallacious Therefore the Scriptures testimony is not a sufficient evidence R. B. Having repeated the Argument I deny the second Proposition G. K. The Argument is wrong in its Structure and vitious as consisting of four Terms which no right Syllogism should have Stud. It is not informal for it hath not four Terms G. K. It hath four Terms and this I offer to prove before either your Masters or any other judicious Logicians in any University of this Nation I say it hath four Terms because it subsumes that in the second Proposition which was not in the first Proposition At this the Students fell a laughing and so provoked the people to lightness Al. Skeine one of the Praesesses I am sorry to see those who profess to study Divinity behave themselves so lightly and so far from seriousness in such weighty matters as concern the Truths of God G. K. I am ready still to prove that the Syllogism hath four Terms but this being not so p●●per here for this Auditory proceed ye to prove the second Proposition which R. B. hath denied I. L. I prove the second Proposition That which may beguile a man is fallacious But according to the Quakers the Scriptures may beguile a man without the indwelling of the Spirit There fore according to the Quakers the Scriptures are fallacious G. K. This Argument is also wrong in the Structure having four Terms R. B. But waving that I deny thy second Proposition For the Scripture cannot beguile any man although men may or have beguiled themselves by a wrong use of it A. Shir. Take notice People The Quakers say the Scriptures cannot beguile you R. B. Speak Iowder yet for we do and have constantly affirmed it And we hope it will help to clear us of those misrepresentations as if we despised or spake evil of the Scriptures G. K. I would my words could reach from the one end of the world to the other when I say the Scriptures cannot beguile any man for the Scripture is innocent and a true testimony in it self but men do beguile themselves oft by making perverse Glosses upon the Scriptures the Script●re cannot be fallacious because according to you it is your principal rule of Faith if we can prove from your own principal Rule that we are inspired then the Scriptures testimony is not ●allaciou● else your Principal Rule would be fallacious Stud. But that is not according to your Principle G. K. But it is an Argument ad hominem which ye know is lawful and besides though we do not acknowledge them to be the principal Rule of our Faith yet we affirm that they are a a true testimony and the best outward testimony and Rule in the world And besides there is a manifestation of the Spirit in many where there is not an in-dwelling of the Spirit and by this manifestation of the Spirit all men may understand the Scriptures as they do improve it Stud. We will go to another Argument R. B. People take notice this Argument is lest upon this Point that according to the Quakers Principle these young men say the Scriptures may beguil People which we utterly deny as proved or that can be proved Al. Shirreffe I argue against the later part of the second Thesis where ye affirm That inward immediate Revelations are necessary to the building up of true faith We confess that subjective R●velation is necessary but we deny that objective Revelation is necessary which ye affirm G. K. Explain what ye mean by subjective and objective Revelation that the people may understand according to the Articles A. Sh. I explain it from this Scripture Luke 24. 17. And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets he expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself Here is the objective Revelation to wit the Scriptures so that they needed not any new objective Revelation but only that which was before but needed a subjective Revelation or Divine Illumination to make them understand the objective Revelation to wit the Scriptures G. K. That is not a sufficient explanation of objective and subjective Revelation therefore I desire to be heard that I may open it more sufficiently according as is provided in the Articles of Agreement Objective Revelation or the object of our faith is twofold to wit first the material object secondly the formal object Stud. Do the people understand this G. K. I shall explain it to them for it is necessary to the matter in hand The material object is that which is to be believed the formal object is that for which principally we are to believe or the principal motive of credibility Now to apply I say the Scriptures are the material object or a part of the ma●erial object of our faith but not the formal object of our faith Al. Shir. I prosecute my Argument against such objective Revelations as being necessary to faith G. K. We confess the Scriptures are sufficient to move us to an Historical faith and that to a more excellent degree of Historical faith than any other Histories in the world because it hath more excellent outward motives of credibility as the consent of all ages since they were written and of all Christians however differing among themselves c. but they are not sufficient to beget in us a saving faith without inward objective Revelation Al. Shir. I prove such inward objective Revelations are not necessary to beget saving faith by this Argument If there be no such Seed in man as the Quakers maintain then there are no such Revelations as the Quakers maintain But there is no such Seed in men as the Quakers maintain Therefore there are no such Revelations c. R. B. After he had repeated the Argument I deny that second Proposition A. Shir. I prove it If there be no such Seed in men as a

these few days I have seen the same Spirit to appear in men professedly very much differing from Anabaptists and slighting them as a sort of Hereticks yet one with them in the ground and in this particular work and service also to carry on the great designe of Antichrist These are some Masters of Arts Students of Divinity as they call themselves in the University of Aberdene who openly in the hearing of divers hundreds of people some whereof were sober and judicious did oppose the inward evidence of the Spirit of God in his people as not being a sufficient evidence unto them unless they could give an evidence of it unto others even their very Adversaries that they were inspired and so if we the people called Quakers could not give an evidence of this unto these our opposes we were but deceivers After it had been shewn them that Papists Jesuits used the same Argument against all the Protestants that indeed did more militat against them out of the Papists Quiver than out of these our Adversaries Quiver against us I produced the Testimony of the Scripture as the best and most convincing outward evidence that could be given as a witness to the Doctrine and Principle of Immediate Revelation and Inspiration of the Spirit of God owned by us as being in all men in some measure and consequently in us This is I say not the the best and most principal evidence nor the greatest that we have unto out selves or unto one another who are gathered into the same Faith Spirit and Power for that is the immediate evidence of the Spirit in our hearts which witnesseth both to our selves and to one another that we are the Children of God but it is I mean the Scripture the greatest outward and visible evidence that can be given unto our Adversaries who in words own the Scriptures as their only Rule and chiefest evidences And in doing so I followed the example of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who while he reasoned against the Jews who professed to own the Scriptures but denied him he brought a testimony for himself out of the Scriptures which they in words owned as their Rule Search said he or ye search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and these are they which testifie of me Now though Christ his own immediate Testimony should have been received as greater than any of his Servants such as Moses and the Prophets were yet he used this as an Argument against them as bringing them to their own Rule and said he had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me for Moses wrote of me And he said again I have a greater testomony than that of Iohn and yet Iohn was the greatest of all the Prophets So in like manner we say We have a greater testimony to Christ Jesus by his Spirit and Power revealed in us than the testimony of Moses and the Prophets even than Ioh● who was the greatest But when we produce the Testimony of Moses the Prophets and Apostles as an evidence to the truth of what we affirm I say it should be received by our Adversaries who own the Scriptures as their chief and only Rule For either they should receive it or not receive it if they should receive it then they are faulty who in the late Dispute at Aberdene did refuse to receive the evidence of the Scriptures as from us only because we say we have a greater to wit that of the Spirit within us although we own the Scripture as the greatest visible and outward evidence that we can give to our Adversaries If they should not receive the Scripture-evidence and testimony as from us because we say we have a greater to wit that of Christ himself immediately in us by his Spirit then they must needs also say for the same reason that the Jews ought not to receive the testimony of the Scriptures as an evidence for Christ because he said he had a greater and certainly he had a greater though they would not receive it nor could not as they stood in their prejudice and malice werewith they were filled against him who did not receive him Now this I say with freedom and boldness of Spirit to all those whether Papists Anabaptists Prelatical or Presbyterian Professors who with one mouth require of us an evidence that we are infpired or have a measure of the Inspiration of the Spirit of God and Christ in us I offer unto all of you the Scriptures for an evidence of this truth viz. that the Quakers so called have a measure of the Inspiration of the Spirit of God and Christ in them for according to the Scriptures testimony Christ the true Light enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world and his illumination is his inspiration I profess sincerely in Gods fear that the Scriptures Testimony is to meas full and plain and convincing to prove this Truth viz. that an Illumination Manifestation and Inspiration of the Spirit of God is given to every man is in every man as to prove this truth that Christ who according to the flesh was born of the Virgin Mary was the promised Messiah now if we can prove from Scripture that all men have in them a measure of this Divine Illumination and Inspiration by the Spirit of Christ we have gained our point which is that we have also a measure of the same in us for ALL MEN doth comprehend us called Quakers as well as other men I see not what our Adversaries can with any colour object against this evidence from Scripture but this that they will deny that the Scripture bears testimony to this Universal Illumination or Inspiration of the Spirit of God in men But this brings the matter of the debate from being personal to be doctrinal so puts us upon equal terms at least with all our Adversaries especially Prelatical Anabaptistist and Presbyterian Independent opposers whatsoever who say the Scriptures are their chief and only Rule And though our Adversaries say the Scripture doth not testifie to that universal Inspiration of the Spirit of Christ in men that moveth us not more then when the Jews denied that the Scriptures bore testimony to him that was born of the Virgin Mary to be the Christ. We are able by the help of God to prove from Scripture the truth of this Doctrine of Divine Illumination and Inspiration in all men and consequently in the Quakers as much as they or any professing Christianity upon earth can prove any Principle or Doctrine of their Faith Secondly we are able and do offer by the Grace of God against all our Opposers whatsoever to prove from the Scriptures Testimony that this universal Inspiration and Illumination of Christ by his Spirit in men is a sufficient evidence of Truth and Rule of Faith and Life in all men and consequently in us called Quakers Thirdly that this Divine Inspiration and Illumination where it is not wilfully resisted

to true Prayer I. L. I prove that that distinction concerning general and particular influences is not sufficient That which may be a ground for a Heretick to forbear Prayer for a whole year is not a sufficient distinction but this may be a ground for a Heretick to forbear Prayer for a whole year Therefore it is not a sufficient distinction G. K. Having repeated the Argument I deny the second Proposition I. L. I prove it for a Heretick may pretend he hath not those particular influences for a whole year G. K. Though an Heretick may pretend yet he has no ground from ou● Principle to pretend to any such thing because these particular influences cannot be wanting neither for one year nor for any time that the particular duties ought to be gone about and if any did pretend the want of particular influences to pray c. they are to be judged as guilty and deceitful as giving that for an excuse which is not sufficient although all have not the utterance of Prayer so as to pray in words nor can any pray truly in words but by a particular Influence A. Sh. This Influence or Inspiration is either commanding or forbidding so G. K. understood it but because of the great confusion or noise he cannot certainly say and upon this understanding G. K. answered it is not a sufficient enumeration for there is a midst Praeses A. Th. Master Keith ye know we say nondat ur medium Students There is no midst betwixt contradictory Propositions G. K. But these Propositions are not contradictory for there is a midst betwixt commanding and forbidding A. Shir. Either he doth command or not command there is no midst here chuse you whether G. K. He doth not command us in all things in which we are inspired for some Inspirations are Mandatory and commanding some Permissory or permitting and some forbidding so betwixt commanding and forbidding the midst is permitting I. L. But a Permission cannot be an Inspiration otherwise ye might say a stone doth inspire you as much as God because a stone doth permit or not hinder you G. K. I deny the Consequence for I offer to shew from Scripture that Paul when he did a thing by permission was inspired as when he said I speak this by permission and not by Commandment Here he was writing Scripture by inspiration in the very time And again where he said I assayed to go to such a place but the Spirit permitted not A. Shir. This was not a permission but a hindering or not a permitting him G. K. But I gather out of these words by the Rules of Contraries that if the Spirit did not permit Paul at sometimes it did permit him at other times and this permission was by Inspiration and I hope it is lawful for me to make this observation or note upon this Scripture seeing your Masters will make half a dozen not so much to the purpose But for the further opening of this matter I distinguish of permission thus There is a negative permission and a positive permission A negative permission is a simple forbearance or not medling in any case and such a negative permission is no sufficient warrant to us to do any thing The positive permission is when God by some inward evidence or signification of his Spirit by words or otherwise maketh us know that he alloweth us to do such a thing although he command it not As for Example if a Scholar should go forth out of the School without getting of his Masters leave this is a negative permission and is not a sufficient ground for the Scholar to go forth but when the Scholar cometh and saith Let me go forth and the Master answereth thou mayest go this is a positive permission and not a command Praeses Andr. Th. Examples are not Demonstratious G. K. But they may be used to illustrate Praeses A. Th. But the Master saith to the Scholar exi go forth which is in the Imperative and that signifieth to command G. K. That is but a Grammaticism for the Imperative Mood doth not always signifie to command but sometimes to command and sometimes to permit which I refer to the judgment of School Masters who teach the Grammar A. Th. Praeses This is rather like a debate about Grammatications of Imperative Moods than about the matter intended therefore come to the purpose A. Shir. In the prosecution of this Argument against this Thesis alledged on G. K he will not pay his debt because he may pretend he wants an Inspiration to do it G. K. I hope none can blame me for refusing to pay my debt and I pay my debt as well as any of you nor can any be supposed that men can want an inspiration to do any such thing and we refer our selves to the judgment of discretion in all sober persons here present Paul Gelly I have an Argument to propose for Water-baptism R. B. Then let me read the Thesis which was read and is as followeth As there is one Lord and one faith so there is one Baptism Ephes. 4. 5. which is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the answer of a good Conscience before God by the Resurrection of Iesus Christ 1 Pet. 3. 21. and this Baptism is a holy and spiritual thing to wit the Baptism of the Spirit and fire by which we are buried with him Col. 2. 12. that being washed and purged from our sins we may walk in newness of life Rom. 6. 4. of which the Baptism of John was a figure which was commanded for a time and not to continue for ever As to the Baptism of Infants is a meer humane Tradition for which neither precept nor practice is to be found in all the Scripture R. B. What hast thou against this Thesis is it not the express words of Scripture P. G. It is true and therein we agree but I oppose your meaning of it R. B. We make no meaning in the Case for the Scripture declareth our meaning G. K. Ye have a large field to Dispute in in the last part of the Thesis if you please where he positively affirms that sprinkling of Infants is a meer humane Tradition Students We will not meddle with that at this time P. G. Either you mean by this Thesis that Water-Baptism is ceased or not ceased R. B. Come on we mean it is ceased P. G. I prove it is not ceased thus If the presence of Christ is to continue with his Church for ever then Water-baptism is to continue for ever But the first is true Therefore the second G. K. People take notice he saith Water-baptism is to continue for ever if so then we must be baptized in Heaven after this life with Water-baptism Stud. He means by for ever to the end of the world R. B. Having repeated the Argument I deny the sequel of the first Proposition P. G. I prove it from Matth. 28. Go teach and baptize

as suffering the universal faith of the Church to be called in quest on which had been established by many Laws for afar longer time than the Profession we oppose It seems ye defend your selves chiefly by Popish Weapone as will anon further appear in order whereunto I shall speak a word or two to Iohn Menzies and so make an end The greatest and frequentest Argument that both thy Scholars and others make against us is that we have no certain evidence by which we can make known that we are led by the Spirit that Hereticks and others cannot pretend to Now if this may be admitted as relevant or strong against us I desire thou wouldst be pleased to shew me how thou canst extricate thy self out of the same difficulty when urged by the Jesuit Dempster that the Scripture which thou assigned as the ground of the Protestant Religion is an evidence for you seeing all Hereticks also pretend to it Let me see what difficulties occur in our Case as to the Spirit which likewise occurs not the same very way in yours as to the Scripture For besides that we have as good ground to lay claim to the Scriptures as your selves and are ready and I hope able to prove our Principles from them as well as your selves If ye say men may be deceived by a seducing Spirit What then will it therefore follow that the Spirit of God will deceive any or that men ought not to be guided by it more than because many men have been and are deceived by a misunderstanding and wrong use of the Scripture that therefore the Scripture doth deceive people or ought not to be the Rule If it be said divers men pretending to the Spirit contradict one another doth not the same recur as to the Scriptures What greater contradictions can there be than there is betwixt certain Churches both acknowledging the Scriptures to be the Rule Hast thou forgotten Iohn how thou and thy Elder Brother Andr. Cant who both affirmed the Scripture to be the only certain Rule yet oftentimes before the same Auditory in the same Pulpit did from the very same ver of Scripture Ps 93. 5. Holiness becometh thy house O Lord for over draw different and contradictory Doctrines Uses and Applications If that then will not infer according to you the Scriptures to be an uncertain Rule neither will the other as to the Spirit If it be said that the same man pretending to be guided by the Spirit hath been of different Judgments doth not the same also recur as to the Scriptures Or need we go further Iohn than thy self to prove this who hath all along acknowledged the Scripture to be the Rule and yet sometime judged the Congregational way to be preferable to the Presbyterian then the Presbyterian better then Independent and now the Episcopal preferable to both Or tell me Iohn honestly did the Scripture deceive thee when thou preached upon that Text Why mournest thou for Saul If thou say thou only here misunderstood the place and misapplied it yet is the Scripture for-all that true and certain may not the same be said if one pretending the Spirit to be the Rule should fall in the like error that the Spirit were not to be blamed or thence termed uncertain but the man that mistook the voice thereof or took his own imaginations instead of it as thou didst thy misapprehensions for the sense of that Scripture If thou canst extricate thy self out of these difficulties so as to satisfie me or any other rational and indifferent person I may seriously say to thee according to the Proverb Eris mihi magnus Apollo And really thou mayst not be without hopes of making a Prosel●te But if it appear to all judicious and unprejudicate persons that Iohn Menzies's Arguments against the Quakers are no other than the Jesuits against him and whatever way he can defend himself against the Jesuites so the Quakers can do against him and impugn and straiten him the same way so that his Argument is like the Vipers brood that destroys him that brings it forth I say if this appear what may candid persons judge of Iohn Menzies honesty that has asserted in Print that Quakerism is Popery under a disguise and the Papists and Quakers are one The state of the Controversie in the first place then both upon our part and yours is in Thesis and not in hypothesi that is not whether or not we be truly ruled by the Spirit or can give an evidence of it more than whether ye be truly led by the Scriptures or can give any evidence that ye are but whether we do well in saying the Spirit is the principal Rule of Faith for though divers Sects now t● wit Lutherans Calvinists Episcopalians Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists● Antinomians Arminians c. do all quarrel one another each laying claim to be led by the Scripture denying it of the● other yet do they all agree in this tha● the Scripture is the only Rule will i● therefore follow that the Scripture is no● the Rule or certain because none o● these can give a certain evidence convincing their respective opposers that they are led by it So on the other hand ● though such as affirm the Spirit to be the● principal Rule cannot give any evidence to convince their Opposers that● they are led by it it will not follow that it is not the Rule or that they err in● affirming it so to be A Postscript AS the Apostle Paul said concerning the Spirit of God that there are diversity of operations but one Spirit and one body of Christ which is his Church so I may say concerning Antichrist and his spirit and body The body of Antichrist is but one having many members and the spirit of Antichrist is but one in the root though in different operations appearances And what is this body of Antichrist but all these whether Papists or others though pretending to Reformation under what soever designation as Episcopal Presbyterian Independent Anabaptist or any else who oppose the Spirit of Christ in his spiritual appearances and operations in the body of Christ which is his Church A manifest instance of the truth of this I my self of late have been an ear and eye witness of For not many months ago I 'had occasion at London both to see with my eyes and hear with my ears how the people called Anabaptists some of their chief Teachers opposed denied slighted and by all means their earthly and devilish wisdom could invent laboured to make of none effect the inward evidence of the Spirit of God in his people alledging openly in the faces of thousands That whoever ●ould not give an evidence to their Adversaries that they were inspired with the Spirit of God such as no hereticks could pretend to were no Christians but deceivers So these Anabaptists lately argued against us at London in an open Assembly And so now since in my own native Country within

and rejected but regarded and attended is a greater evidence than the Scripture is and witnessed by the Scriptures Fourthly and yet the Scripture is the greatest visible and outward evidence that either we or they can give of their Rule I shall conclude with a reasonable demand to these Young men Masters of Arts their Masters and Teachers which is this Whether they own these Assertions Affirmations and Arguments of their Scholars in the late Dispute as followeth viz That whatever is of God is God that the Scriptures according to the Quakers is fallacious and can beguil us that the Baptism with the Holy Ghost is ceased and the rest of their Discourse inserted in this foregoing Treatise If yea Let them declare so much to the people who are greatly stumbled at these their expressions even divers of their own Church if nay then let them publickly reprove and disown those words otherwise not only we but many others will say ye have both ●aught and allowed them so to affirm G. K. THESES THEOLOGICAE OR Some solid POSITIONS OF SOUND DIVINITY asserted Unto the Clergy of what sort somever unto whose hands these may come but more particularly unto the Doctors Professors and Students of Divinity in the Universities and Schools of Great Britain whether Prelatical Presbyterian or any other ROBERT BARCLAY a Servant of the Lord God and one of these who in derision are called Quakers wisheth un feigned repentance unto the acknowledgment of the truth Friends UNto you these following Propositions are offered in which they being read a●d considered in the fear of the Lord you may perceive that simple and naked Truth which man by his wisdom has rendred so obscure and mysterious that the world is even but the ned with the great and voluminous Tractates which are made about it and by the ●ain jangling and Commentaries by which it is rendred a hundred-fold more dark and intricate than of it self it is which great Learning so accounted of to wit your School-divinity which taketh up almost a mans whole life-time to learn brings not a whit nearer to God neither makes any man less wicked or more righteous than he was therefore hath God laid aside the wise and Learned and the Disputers of this world and hath chosen a few despicable and unlearned Instruments as to Letter-learning as he did Fisher-men of old to publish his pure and naked Truth and to free it of these mists and fogs wherewith th● Clergy hath clouded it that the people might admire and maintain them and among many others whom God hath chosen to make known these things seeing I also have received in measure Grace to be a dispenser of the same Gospel it seemed good unto me according to my duty to offer unto you these Propositions which though they be short yet are weighty comprehending much and declaring what the true ground of knowledge is even of that knowledge which leads to life Eternal which is here witnessed of and the testimony thereof left unto the light of Christ in all your Consciences Farewel R. B. THESIS I. SEing the height of all happiness is placed in the true knowledge of God This is life eternal to know the true God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent John 17. 3 the true and right understanding of this foundation and ground of knowledge is that which is most necessary to be known and believed in the first place II. 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 can 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 appea●ances 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 sound 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 more noble or cetain 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 III. From these revelations of the Spirit of God to the Saints have proceeded the Scriptures of Truth which contain 1. A fai●●●ul historical account of the actings of Gods people in divers Ages with many singular and remarkable Providences attending them 2. a Prophetical account of several things whereof some are already past and some yet to come 3. A full and ample account of all the chief Principles of the Doctrine of Christ held forth in divers pretious declarations exhortations and sentences which by the moving of Gods spirit were at several times and upon sundry occasions spoken and written unto some Churches and their Pastors Nevertheless because they are only a declaration of the fountain and not the fountain it self therefore they are not to be esteemed the principal ground of all truth and knowledge nor yet the adequate Primary Rule of faith and manners Nevertheless as that which giveth a true and faithful testimony of the first foundation they are and may be esteemed a secondary Rule subordinate to the Spirit from which they have all their excellencie and certainty for as by the inward Testimony of the Spirit we do alone truly know them so they testifie that the Spirit is that guide by which the Saints are led into all truth therefore according to the Scriptures the Spirit is the first and principal Leader and seeing we do therefore receive and believe the Scriptures because they proceeded from the Spirit therefore also the Spirit is more originally and principally the Rule according to that received Maxime in the Schools Propter quod unum quodque est tale illud ipsum est magi● tale Englished thus That for which a thing is such the thing it self is more such IV. All Adam's Posterity or Mankind both Jews and Gentiles as to the first Adam or earthly man is fallen