Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n authority_n divine_a infallible_a 2,602 5 9.2547 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A47174 A serious appeal to all the more sober, impartial & judicious people in New-England to whose hands this may come ... together with a vindication of our Christian faith ... / by George Keith. Keith, George, 1639?-1716. 1692 (1692) Wing K205; ESTC R33000 63,270 72

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

show according to that Latine Verse Fabula narratur mutato Nomine de te i.e. Change the Name and the Tale is told truly of thy thy self CHAP. III. IN his first Argument he accuseth me to be guilty of a Lye in matter of Fact and that I pretend to an assurance for it from the Spirit of God and the Lye he alledgeth in matter of Fact is That I charge their Confession of Faith for holding that the Scriptures ought to be believed for their own outward Evidence and Testimony and not for the inward Evidence and Testimony of the holy Spirit in mens Hearts And to prove this to be a Lye he citeth some words of that Confession which saith Our full perswasion and assurance of the infallible Truth and divine Authority of the holy Scriptures is from the Inward Work of the Holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word in our Hearts And for a further Confirmation he alledgeth John Owen saying That the Scripture be received as the Word of God there is a twofold Efficacy of the Spirit c. withal affirming That I cover Lye with Lye To which I Answer Cotton Mather and not I is guilty of two gross Lyes or Falshoods in this Charge first That I pretend to an assurance from the Spirit in matter of Fact concerning what they hold is a manifest Perversion for I bring my assurance in matter of Fact not from the Spirit but from their Confession of Faith which I have diligently examined but the knowledge I have that their Doctrine in that particular is false I bring from the Spirit of God that hath given me the understanding thereof and is Truth and no Lye 2 dly That he saith Their Confession doth grant that the Scriptures are to be believed for the inward Evidence and Testimony of the holy Spirit in mens hearts but this it doth not say nor can it be gathered by any just consequence to be their sence seeing they deny with C.M. and his Brethren all inward objective immediate Testimony and Revelation of the Spirit And whereas the Confession mentioneth the inward Work of the holy Spirit bearing witness by and with the Word viz. the Scripture in our Hearts This doth sufficiently prove That their Confession doth not mean or intend any inward Testimony of the Spirit reall● and properly so called as having a standing Evidence of its own b●● only borrowed from the Scripture and therefore is no true and proper Evidence at all but only and altogether improper yea as improper as if I should say when I hear but one man give Evidence to the Truth of a thing and that I read it also in w●it from his hand that three Evidences or Witnesses have given their Evidence to that Truth as 1 st the Ma● ● dly my Ear that heard him 3 dly my Eye that hath re●d his writ But what sober Man will say these are three Witnesses or Evidences And would it not be a great Cheat to say That whereas the Law requireth two Witnesses and there is but one man that giveth witness to Cotton Mathers hearing that C.M. should alledge his Ears are other two Witnesses because they have heard him and so they are three in all And as great a Cheat and Fallacy is it to call the witness of the Scripture the inward Witness of the Spirit when they confess the inward Work of the Spirit is only Effective to open the Ear to hear the outward Witness of the Scripture but not to speak by any distinct Witness to the inward Ear And it is like that other Fallacy as if James being required to give his Witness he giveth it not by himself but by John and John being required to give his Witness he giveth it by James but neither of them by himself or at least the one not by himself for when they are asked By what do they know the Scriptures to be the Word of God they answer By the Spirit And again By what do they know the Spirit they answer By the Scripture And thus the Fallacy and Falshood both of the Confession and of C.M. is detected and G.K. is cleared from being no wise guilty of any Lye in the case And what I said of John Owen is true for the Title and design of his Book is concerning The Self-Evidencing Authority of the holy Scriptures only he confesseth the Spirits inward Work is necessary to let men see or know it but that is no proper Witness more than a mans hearing is one Witness and the thing heard is another I do therefore Appeal to all sober impartial and judicious Readers Whether not I but Cotton Mather be not convicted of gross Lying or Falshood and whether the Society he belongs unto ought not to bring him to Repentance for such Crimes to use some of his own words His Second Argument is That I am guilty of having committed most horrible Blasphemy against the holy Spirit of God which is the unpardonable Sin And though he doth charge this one while positively yet another while If I have not the certain yet fearful Marks of it and my Sin is very like that Sin and yet again charging it positively on me That I have taken part with the Pharisees in dorg that impardonable Injury to the Eternal Spirit of God But how doth he prove any thing of this to have the lest show or shadow of truth Why because as he alledgeth I called his and his Brethrens Prayers more than once a Conjuring of the Devil and do put on them the stile of Charms and Spells by which Prayers he alledgeth he and his Brethren did cast out the Devil that did Bodily possess some Young People and that therefore their Prayers were the special Operations of the holy Ghost which I blaspheme and that therefore I have committed the Vnpardonable Sin But I Answer 1 st As I said in my Book called A Refutation c. I am little concerned whether or not these Young People were bewitched or had a Diabolical Possession further than to take notice That C.M. will have it to be so to make the simple believe that his and his Brethrens Prayers did conjure the Devil and cast him out by which it is most clearly apparent to every one of common sence that I did not mean that his or his Brethrens Prayers were done by any Diabolical Art or Craft of Conjuration for I do not think them to be Conjurers but that they would have People believe that by some divine Power of Exorcism as was frequent in the primitive Church they did conjure the Devil which is as widely different from his Perversion as East from West Now I cannot believe that they had this divine Gift of Exorcism which was a Miraculous Gift in those primitive Times that Popish Priests do also pretend to have and many strongly affirm they have cured many by their Prayers because they commonly say That Immediate Revelaiion with the Gifts of Miracles are ceased How then can