Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	ghost_n	holy_a	interpretation_n	2,811	5	9.4838	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40718	A parallel wherein it appears that the Socinian agrees with the papist, if not exceeds him in idolatry, antiscripturism and fanaticism / by Francis Fullwood ...	Fullwood, Francis, d. 1693.	1693 (1693)	Wing F2513; ESTC R38752	24,721	38

that they lay it aside altogether as a Rule or measure it by a Rule of their own which they set up in the room of it or above as the Papist do This Socinian Rule which they measure the Holy Scriptures viz. The Divine Rule by is nothing else but their own private Sense if not their Wit and Phansie much the same with the Quakers Light within which they call Reason I have elsewhere distinguish'd betwixt a Rule and a Judge and observ'd that these are not the same but two distinct things with respect to Religion I shall explain and apply them more fully in the present Argument We must in order hereunto distinguish betwixt Natural and Revealed 1. Explain't Religion as such 1. I grant with respect to meer Natural Religion Reason seems to be both a Rule and a Judg for we have nothing without our selves that can well be conceived to be either we know nothing of it but the rational Notices which Humane understanding suggest or the Dictates of pure Reason called forth or occasioned by the works of Creation and Providence 2. But Revelation being from without us is therefore a Rule imposed on us from without and must be distinct from Reason which is within us and part of our selves and consequently tho' Reason be a Judge it must Judge of Revealed Religion by a Rule from without us which is another thing and not our Reason I mean we must Judge of Revealed Religion as such by that Rule by which that Religion is only made known to us that is the Holy Scriptures and then 't is no wonder if all our Religion as Christian or Revealed be not dictated or to be comprehended by Natural Reason For if Reason had discovered all before What need of Revelation And indeed those that say all our Religion lies within the compass of Reason are in a fair way to reject all Revelation and to advance the Natural or Pagan Religion in the World in the room of the Christian But seeing Socinus tho' erroneously supposeth the Being of a God could not have been discovered without Tradition or Revelation how absurd doth it seem for him especially to imagine that things that can be known only by Revelation can be known or may be measured by Reason or any other Rule but Revelation or the Writing in and by which they are made known to Reason it self as Sencible Objects being to be known only so far as Sence represents them to our imagination can have no other Rule by which our Reason can Judge or measure them but our Sences And seeing our Revelation is from Heaven we must not only acknowledge the Being of such a Rule but the Fulness Rectitude and Authority of it by which all the rules of Reason are to be determined even in such things as reason falls short of and could not have been any other way discovered or being discovered cannot be apprehended but as they are Reveiled if this be not granted where is the Authority or Divinity of that Higher Rule which is given by God to be the only Rule and Standard of the Christian Religion as such It hence follows that this Divine Rule being supposed Reason my Judge of it but by no means presume to Judge it so as to question mind alter correct or lay it aside or advance it self above it We must indeed judge by Reason what the things are that are so reveiled we must measure all Articles imposed on us by our Reason indeed yet the Rule by which we are to do so is only the Word of God To exalt Reason or the inward rules or dictates of it to be the measure of things reveil'd is to lay aside the True Rule or to judge God himself in the Authority of his holy word A Humane Judge hath likewise his Rule without him viz. The Publick Laws and if he should make his private Sentiments of Justice and Right the rule of his Judgment he falls under his Superiors and every Mans Censure 'T is not his Office to question or mend or any way alter much less abrogate the Law but he is only Jus dicere to declare and apply the Laws in his Jurisdiction not to judge the Laws by the Rule of his own Reason but to use his Reason to know and understand and to pass Judgment according to the Laws much less are we to question the reasonableness or equity of Gods Laws or judge them unreasonable or unfit for reasonable Creatures to give credit to because they seem not to square with our Natural reason This were to believe our selves and not God to exalt our selves above God yea to discredit and make God a Lyar. I am sorry we have so much reason to apply all this to Socinus and Application his Followers how shall we forbear to arraign Arrogance with the Apostles words Thou art not a doer of the Law but a Judge Who art thou O vain Man that repliest against God Is it not a marvelous thing to see poor ignorant lapsed Man to errect a Tribunal against his Maker and with a shadow of Carnal Reason to sit in Judgment upon Gods Word and to level the greatest Articles of the Christian Faith to their own shallow and partial apprehensions And yet thus the Socinian aspires with his presumptuous Reason to dogmatize upon Revelation To judge the Messias and all his concerns His Generation Incarnation Natures Offices Passion Satisfaction Mediation and Intercession To Judge and Condemn the Holy Ghost and the ever Blessed Trinity and to measure the Resurrection of our Bodies by the Model of his private apprehension Yet this sort of Men shew great Reverence to and very strongly argue the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures And they do not deny but these great Articles are matters of pure Revelation in the same Scriptures Neither can they evince any one of these great and misterious Points are repugnant to Sence or Reason or any other part of Gods Word Men should have methinks so much modesty as to judge that their corrupt Reason is as fallible as the Holy Pen-Men Or That it may be reasonable we should have a Rule without to Discipline and bound our extravagant Phansies in matters of Faith Or that private reason may be mistaken in judging that a Contradiction which the Church of God I mean the generallity of Christians Semper ubique could never discover and have hitherto verily believed that it is none I think 't is plain from what hath been said that the Socinian falls in with the Papist and goes beyond him not only in villifying and laying aside the True Rule of Faith but in setting up another Rule of his own instead of it They both are guilty only with this difference The Papist's Rule is the Publick Reason and sence of his Church The Socinians Rule is his own and every particular Mans private Reason and which of these is the wiser and safer let every Mans Reason judge That I do not herein

and that is a very plain one and one would imagine beyond exception 'T is St. Stephen praying in these words Lord Jesus receive my Spirit Act. 7. 59. but behold the fineness of Fr. Davids Invention saith he 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be either the Genetive or the Vocative Case according to the usual art of Socinian reasoning it must be taken in that sence that will best serve a Turn tho' never so alien or contrary to the true interpretation and the Reason of the Context he must have it Lord of Jesus or else it will prove either that 't is Lawful to Worship our Saviour and to pray unto him or this first Martyr died with Idolatry in his mouth But this Criticism is not so fine as 't is forced and absurd The Learned observe that if Jesus had been the Genitive Case the Article would have been added 't would have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We find the same words Rev. 22. 20. and there they cannot bear the sence of the Genitive and must be understood in the Vocative Case But besides the ilness of the Grammer the harshness of the Sence and the Novelty of this rare discovery two or three things might abate the Authors confident boasting of this Invention The Syriac is beyond the reach of it Domine Noster Jesu Some Copies have it plainer yet and Read it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 O Lord Christ And their admired Grotius's gloss is utterly inconsistent with it Invocantem nempe Jesum Christum But why should I trouble my Reader any farther about this Ridiculous shift of David which you may find was long since exposed and baffled by Socinus himself in a very strenuous confutation of it which its Author David had never courage or skill enough to encounter again that I can find Now my Brethren consider 't is eternal Reason that Reliously to Worship any Creature is Idolatry but we have found it the common practice of the best men in Scripture thus Religiously to Worship our Saviour Christ it seems to follow clearly that either these Holy Men so doing were Idolaters or our Saviour Christ is more then a meer Creature that is he is the True God I know you will deny the First I heartily wish you would confess the Second it would be so far well betwixt us However you do not undertake to defend the part of Socinus from Idolatry more haynous then that of the Papists which I hope I have demonstrated sufficiently before CHAP. II. The Socinians Antiscripturist as truly as if not more then the Papists HAving ended our First Parrable betwixt the Socinian and Papist with respect to the Term of Worship we come next to compare them with respect to their Rule of Faith the Canonical Books of the Holy Scriptures Herein also they both concur viz. In their endeavours to undermine their Authority And when they think they have occasion so to do they lay this Rule aside and set up another of their own in the stead of it That the Papists do so the Socinians readily grant and that the Socians do like the Papists and exceed them therein is as easily demonstrated SECT I. The Papists vilifies the Holy Scripture 1. FOR the Papists the World is sensible enough how vilely they deal with this Rule of the Holy Scriptures and make them indeed as they sometimes call them A Nose of Wax and a Leaden Rule They take upon them to sence them as they please and use them only as Tools to serve a turn and little otherwise Sometimes they will admit nothing but the bare Words without any reasonable Construction of them when they would advance their Transubstantiation At other times when the proper and Litteral Sence is against them O then the Scripture is a Killing a Dead Letter and must receive its Life and Sense from their Churches Interpretation how wild and absurd soever it be to serve their Hypothesis Thus when they have disparaged sleighted and set aside the True Rule 't is no wonder they introduce and obtrude another Rule of their own devising which they do not only make equal with it but prefer before it I mean their Oral Tradition and the Authority of the Roman Church Yea when they seem to allow the Holy Scriptures any Authority they at the same time rob them of it by transfering that Authority to themselves their own Sence and Sentiments tho' diverse from and even contrary to the Letter or plain and obvious meaning of the Written Word SECT II. The Socinians vilifie the Scripture more then Papists WHile I have been speaking of the Papist I have given you but an imperfect draught and Character of a Socinian in this point Verily the Papist seems to be the honester of the two His is an open and down-right attacking and villifying those Holy Books while the Socinian doth it in disguise and wounds it deeper lies in its Bosom and stabbs it to the Heart and with splended Colours of Honouring and Arguments proving its Divine Original and Authority makes it utter Non-sense bad sense or any sence that their cause requires Now seeing these men in other things are Masters of a great deal of Reason it may be worth a Question whether their Writing so much for the Divine Authority of the Holy Scriptures be from a real Opinion of the Truth of it or only in pretence to serve their own purpose and varnish their designs For how is it possible if their Opinion of it were Real they should use it so slightly and after so trifling a manner as 't is pitty to see they do With how much gravity and solemn circumstances do they make the Word of God Felo de se not so much by opposing as by Apposing one part to another and by the idlest Phansies or an odd kind of skill peculiar to themselves make a weaker text take off the life and sense of a Stronger and by a likeness or sameness or neerness of expression when there is no other reason in the World for it to enervate the strength of the best Arguments it affords for the God-head of Christ and the Sacred Trinity To make this out beyond exception give me leave only to mention some Instances of it The mention only is shame and reproach enough one would think as well as confutation in the sense of an Indifferent or modest Man 1. When we prove Three Persons and each of them God from the great Commission for Propagating the Christian Church by Baptising in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost They gravely answer and would have us take it for a full Answer That 't is said the Israelites were Baptized into Moses and in the Cloud and that they believed in God and his Servant Moses 2. When we urge John 1. 1. In the beginning was the Word they reply that it must signifie the Beginning of the Gospel or New Creation And their