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	mount_n	zion_n	24	3	8.8400	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

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

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

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