Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	believe_v	word_n	write_a	2,372	5	10.9841	5	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

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

and in p. 1. of a book called The pure language of the Spirit and many other places where they do readily in words at length give those Titles to their own books they will not give to the Scriptures Doth not this plainly shew that the designe of this generation is to do by the Scriptures as Judas did by Christ viz. betray them with a kiss even by making men believe they do own the Scriptures when indeed it is that they may have the fairer oportunity to crucifie them in the croud of their pernicious Pamphlets The third Errour in their Doctrine is 3 Error That they say they are immediately sent of God see this in James Parnel's book called A shield of Truth page 12. He saith They can witness an immediate call from God to go from their Countries and Callings c. to go to preach the Gospel I could shew this out of many of their books but I spare that labour because it is dayly owned by them and they frequently assert it in publike conferences The substance of two of them I shall give you a brief account of one was in last May 1656. in Beech-lane London at which time I did propose Question to James Nayler viz. Whether ever any was immediately sent of God to preach the Gospel but either God did bear witness to them from heaven or else he did enable them to work Miracles by which they might evince the truth of their authority upon earth To this James Nayler replyed That God might send men for ought I knew to whom be bare no such witness To this I replyed That God did never immediately send any but he did either from heaven demonstrate the truth of their authority or else gave them power to work miracles upon the earth James Nayler told me I could not prove what I said To which I replyed That the saying proved it self unless he could give an instance of some so sent to whom God bare no such witness Hereupon James Nayler tells me That Matthias was so sent and yet did no Miracle To this I replied That the 2d of the Acts tells us That the holy Ghost fell upon them and they all spake with Tongues to the amazement of the beholders * And as for Matthias he was not sent immediately for he was chose by lot Acts 1. latter end So that he hath told two lyes first that Matthias was immediately sent secondly that he could not work Miracles both which are false as the first and second of the Acts declare To which James replied So can I speak with Tongues that thou canst not understand I told him I thought so he might in their Canting dialect but could he speak varieties of Languages that was natural to several Countreys To which he replied That he was not bound to answer to my demand being an unbeliever for saith he Christ told the Jews That a foolish and adulterous generation did seek a Sign To which I did reply That if he could shew as good a Sign for his immediate Call as Christ did shew that generation to prove he was the Me ssiah we would believe all he told us for Christ said That as Jonas was three dayes and three nights in the Whales belly so should he be three dayes and three nights in the heart of the earth This Sign he said should be given to them I challenge all the Quakers in England either to shew us such a Sign of their immediate sending or else never use that Text to reprehend them that ask a Sign For though Christ did reprehend them yet he shewed a Sign unto them Nayler did further reply and say That though Christ did mighty works it was not at or upon the time that they demanded it To which I replied That if he would but say he had done it at any time we would believe him Hereupon he tells us of his Call from the Plough To which I replied and told him again This doth no more prove that which was demanded then as the story goes the Man that left his fishing to be a Priest and afterwards came to be Pope was immediately sent of God To which he replies and tells me That when Paul was brought before the Civil Magistrate he gave no other account but onely told him how God call'd him To which I answered That if James Nayler could give any history of as good authority as the History of the Acts of the Apostles is for the proof of his Call we would believe him He hereupon calls me Lyer For saith he didst not thou tell me thou would st believe if I would but say it To which I answered That I did not say I would believe he was immediately sent of God if he did but say it for then I should give away the cause but if he said that he had at any time done a Miracle we would believe him Hereupon he told us That he would prove his extraordinary Call both by himself and other Witnesses And to make this good he gave us a Narrative how be was before the Magistrates of Appleby and told them how God call'd him in the field at Plough c. To which I did reply He was not before me to give an account to me as to a Magistrate And secondly I told him That this was a meer deceit for we expected he should prove the truth of his Call and he goes to prove That he told the Magistrates of Appleby he was thus call'd And I told him That I did not want proof that he did tell them so but that that which he told them was true which was the main thing in question Hereupon several of his Proselytes stands up to witness how he had turned them from darkness to light I told them that was a begging of the Question for the great question is Whether that be not Darkness they are turned to and that the Light they are turned from I therefore did tell them all that it was horrible presumption for such as they to proclaim both in City and Countrey that they were sent of God when indeed the Pope can say as much for his Infallible Chair the Turk for his Alcaron and the Jew for his Talmud and a great deal more Hereupon he desired me to dispute some other Points of Doctrine viz. Whether Faith were the gift of God and the like To which I answered That if he could prove that he was immediately sent of God we would believe all he said and if he did but that it would save us a labour to dispute other Points for if he did prove That God sent him to check and controll all the Religions of the World we would willingly be controlled by him which we did once and again call for proof of but could not have it I therefore bade him either renounce this pretended Call or else prove it before I would dispute any other Point of Doctrine with him Hereupon he told us he was immediately sent

some in it But our Lord Christ though he did mighty work in Corazin and Bethsaida he saith they repented not Which very Argument of yours is so farre from proving you are sent of God immediately that it rather proves the contrary for who hath made more Proselytes then the Roman Priests and Monks have as for instance Austine the Monk who was sent to the Saxons by the Bishop of Rome converted 10000 in a few dayes See Speeds Chronicle pag. 291 Sect. 8. And who is there that is acquainted with the proceedings of the Spaniards in the West-Indies but can tell that thousands are daily reduced from Heathenism to sober and upright lives by the Roman Ministery and yet this drawing of multitudes is an Argument That Quakers are sent of God but must not be urged by others though they are able to say more at this turn then all the Quakers in England By this you may see that the Quakers are shaking and would gladly make every Straw a Staff to lean upon But lastly if it be as they say That very man hath a Light within him that would turn him if he do follow it to what purpose do they preach one to another So that they have no cause to impute the converting of men to their Ministery for they might convert without it The last Argument to which I said little then by reason I was interrupted with their Women-preachers was this viz. That it did appear they were immediately sent of God because they did not give respect to persons I answer first then All the Quakers both men and women are sent of God immediately to preach the Gospel for none of them give respect to persons But secondly is not this an abominable piece of wickedness for by the rule of contraries Paul was not sent of God for he did respect Festus and call'd him MOST NOBLE FESTUS Acts 24.3 and 26.25 Now all the people were not Most Noble for the Scripture saith Not many Noble are called by which it appears that some were more Noble then others and had that respect given to them that was not common to all But I shall say more to this anon My last answer to this Argument if I may so call it and James not judge me for a Lyer is That if their not sitting up and giving civil respect be an argument that these are sent of God then Austin the Monk was sent of God and many others that I could name but let me trouble you with the recital of one story concerning Austin the Monk and upon the reading of it you will think if James saith true that Austin was a man sent immediately of God Austin 561 yeares after Christ in the time of Ethelbert King of Kent was sent by Pope Gregory to convert the Saxons who some time after call a Synod unto which resorted seven British Bishops and other learned men saith Beda in this History Book 2. Chap. 2. These men now ready to go to the Synod came first to a certain holy wise man to ask his counsel which some think was bishop of York Whether they ought at Austins Preaching and Exhortation to leave their Traditions Austin being come a stranger among them The good man answered If he be a man of God follow him but said they how shall we know that He answered Christ saith he said That we should learn of him for he was humble and meek of heart If therefore saith this good man this Austin be milde and bumble it is like he is of God but if he be proud no proud man is of God Then the Bishops inquired how they might know that The man answereth Provide saith he that he and his company come first to the place of Meeting and if it be so that when you approach near him he arise and salute you then think him to be the Servant of Christ but if he do not vouchsafe to rise at your presence let him be despised They hereupon took the old mans counsel and when they came in Austin the Monk sate very still in his Chair and stirred not hereupon they judged him a proud man See Speeds Chron. pag. 291. I do urge this to shew That if this be an argument a man is sent of God immediately surely this man viz. Austin the Monk was so sent of God and so are all the Popes at this day that will not reverence any Monarch under Heaven so that these Arguments are so slender that if Christ and his Apostles had had no better they had never made any Proselytes to the Kingdom of Heaven to this day how greatly soever you brag of your Converts I now come to their next Error 4 Error and that is That every man hath a Light within that will teach a man to Worship God rightly This is so common a principle of theirs that to go about to prove it were but to hold a candle to the Sun therefore taking this for granted that they thus teach as I hope I may without wrong to them I shall now shew That this is false Doctrine and is taught to no other end I fear then to thrust out the Authority of the holy Scriptures 1. For first what need is there of Scripture to declare the Minde of God if it may be known without it every whit as well But now the Scripture saith that what was writ afore-time was writ for our Learning Rom. 15.4 and John 20.31 But these things were writ that you might believe 1 Cor. 10.11 These things were written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come 2. I demand Whether by the Light which is in the whole world or in every one that comes into it all men may come to know a Virgin had a Son without any other external means 3. I demand Whether the Light in every man without the Scriptures can bring every man to know Christ dyed and rose again in three dayes 4. I demand What favour it was to the people of Israel to have the written Law of God in such a manner as it is said of them He had not dealt so with any Nation if all Nations by the Light within them might have with the like facility understood to serve and worship God as well without them 5. Whether all men by the Light within them before the coming of Christ could ever have understood that he should be born in Bethlehem as it was written 6. Whether the Name of Jesus Christ may be knowne to all the World by the Light within them without Scripture or Traditions 7. I demand if the Light within can inform all men into the Divine Worship and Service of God without the Scriptures Whether it may not do it without your Books If so 8. Whether or no you that will not be prodigal of your Apparel and who will not lay out money upon needless things are not at this turn very prodigal to buy candles to light them to the Sun My meaning is to

and yet you are so impudent as to say That None can come but they that come to perfection The fourteenth Errour is 14 Error That James Nayler in his book call'd Love to the Lost p. 23 speaking of the Lords Supper saith That at all seasons whensoever they eat or drink they were to have communion with the Body and Blood of the Lord in their eating and drinking though it were at the Gentiles or Unbelievers Table alluding to that place of Scripture 1 Cor. 10.27 And another of them in a Book of theirs call'd Truths Defence against refined Subtilty pag. 100. calls a man Carnal Sot for asking whether Paul did administer the Lords Supper with Bread and Wine and thereupon demands Whether the Apostles did give to the Corinthians Bread and Wine The fifteenth Errour is That James Parnel in his Book call'd A Shield of Truth hath these words viz. That he denies all Baptism but that of the holy Ghost and Fire See page 12. Another of them in a Book call'd Truths Defence against refined Subtilty hath these words he being asked Whether Christ did command his Disciples to baptize with water or whether they did baptize with water he answers That the querent had shewed his subtilty in being ignorant of the Letter alluding to that place Matth. 28.19 But I demand Why these perfect men cannot speak perfect sense for what subtilty is it for a man to be ignorant yet he tells his querent he hath shewed his subtilty in being ignorant But to the thing it self viz. That there is no baptism but that of the Spirit and Fire when as the Scripture tells us of a baptism with water which is also required of them that do believe But to evade the force of the Scriptures that speak in the behalf of water-baptism they use to say That water-baptism did end when other Ceremonies of the Law ended but after the Resurrection of Christ it was not to be practised To which I answer That it was by Christ commanded after that he rose from the dead See Mat. 28. and Mark 16.16 But if any shall say This was to baptize with the Holy Ghost I demand First Whether that this baptism was not peculiar to Christ himself as appears by John's words Matth. 3.11 HE meaning Christ shall baptize with the holy Ghost and fire Secondly Whether that if the command of Mat. 28. and Mark 16. be for to command the Apostles to baptize with the holy Ghost and fire they did ever obey it if they did shew when and where Thirdly Whether we may not judge that the baptizing men and women in water in the Name of Christ which the Apostles frequently did was not in obedience to some Commission they had received from their Lord If so Fourthly Do you shew us where and when their Lord gave them a command so to do if this of Mat. 28. and Mark 16. was not it If you shall say They did it in order to the peoples weaknesses as Paul's circumcising Timothy was then I demand Fifthly Whether Paul did in the Name of the Lord Jesus impose Circumcision upon Timothy if not How doth this parallel with the case in hand viz. water-baptism which Peter Acts 10. doth command in the Name of the Lord But if you shall say That baptism with water was not commanded but left to liberty I demand Sixthly Whether to command a thing to be done in the Lords Name which he commands not be not to sin take his Name in vain See to this purpose Deut. 18.20 But the Prophet that shall presume to speak a word in my Name which I have not commanded him to speak c. even the same Prophet shall dye Seventhly And whereas it is alledged That water-baptism is a thing of indifferency that may be done or lawfully left undone I demand Whether it was not then as great a sin in Peter Acts 10. to command the doing of it in the Name of the Lord as it was for men to forbid to marry or to command to abstain from meats 1 Tim. 4.2 3. seeing that to command the doing of that which God hath left to liberty is a sin of equal extent with the forbidding of that he hath left to liberty Eighthly But if it shall be said as sometimes it is That they in the Primitive Times did receive water-baptism because they had a command immediately so to do and therefore we are not to be baptized till so commanded I answer First how will this be proved that all they that were then-baptized were so commanded is not the contrary to this easily made manifest from Acts 2. and Acts 8. and many other places where the people were mediately by means of the Apostles preaching put upon this duty and not by extraordinary Revelations But to the main Question and that is this Whether or no that this very Principle doth not lay all other Precepts waste and excuse the observance of them till I am immediately inspired thereto I believe if a man did owe a Quaker a sum of money he would be loth to be served as he would have men serve Christ As for instance Suppose I did owe James Nayler a sum of money and he should desire me to pay him and should urge this Scripture Owe nothing to any man as an argument to perswade me to pay him what if I should say It is true James this was a command to them that could witness it in themselves and when by an immediate power they were inspired to the observance of it then they were to do it but till then they did not sin in omitting of it and therefore when I can witness this Text within me I will pay thee thy money Do you think they would count this fair dealing yet in this manner would they have men deal with the commands of our Lord Jesus and the truth of it is this evasion of the command of baptism doth as forcibly evade all other Precepts in the whole Bible By this the Reader may see that these men would make the commands of God of none effect by their tradition The sixteenth Errour that I shall insist upon is 16 Error That though they say they are perfect yet they are inconsistent with themselves as appears First in as much as they make it their daily practice to preach That every man in the world hath a light within him according to that Text John 1. And yet one of their Scribes asketh a Minister of the Nation Whether he had that light which doth lighten every one that comes into the world * See for this a book of theirs cal'd Truths defence p. 3 Oh horrible blindness Did ever any man in his right wits ever ask such a question having over and over asserted that every man hath that light spoken of John 1 and yet to ask a man Whether he hath that light spoken of John 1. Surely this man did not understand that the party of whom he demanded the