Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	write_a	write_v	yield_v	28	3	6.9057	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A67209	Anguis flagellatus, or, A switch for the snake being an answer to the third and last edition of The snake in the grass : wherein the author's injustice and falshood, both in quotation and story, are discover'd and obviated, and the truth doctrinally deliver'd by us, stated and maintained in opposition to his misrepresentation and perversion / by Joseph Wyeth ; to which is added a supplement, by George Whitehead.	Wyeth, Joseph, 1663-1731.; Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723. Snake in the grass.	1699 (1699)	Wing W3757; ESTC R16372	333,418	578

the Socinians I do still confess That as the Reasonable Soul and Body is One Man so He that is God and Man is One Christ. And whether this will give Satisfaction to an Implacable Adversary or no I value not knowing my Conscience Clear in the Sight of Him who Judgeth Righteously which I am sure this my Unjust Judge and False Accuser is not who presently after he has stiled me Honest George unjustly Brands me with Infamy as Sophistry Delusion Depths of Satan Mystery of Iniquity Equivocation Jesuitical Confession c. Oh! Rank Malice Bitter Envy c. As for my Confession in the 7th Art alledged against me it stands good and true viz. We own no such saying as that the Holy Doctrine or Divine Precepts of Scripture is either Dust Death or the Serpent's Meat but truly profitable to us by the Assistance of God's Holy Spirit given to us c. And this was in direct Opposition to F. Bugg's saying These Quakers who pretend to own the Precepts and Doctrine of the Bible to be Holy and Blessed yet say 't is Dust and Death the Serpent's Meat c. Apol. Introd p. 18. to his New Rome We do not believe any of these Quakers ever so said of the Precepts and Doctrine nor do they own any such Saying I wholly disown it But then to beg the Question What was it you called Dust and Serpents Meat Was it nothing else but the Ink and Paper Did any Body ever say That these were not Dust Or Is that any part of the Controversie betwixt us Snake p. 177. Here he yields the Point he grants the Ink and Paper to be Dust. I said Will decay and turn to Dust but so will not the Word the Gospel nor the Holy Doctrine contain'd in Scripture And it has been confess'd by F. B. and others That Holiness is not ascrib'd to the Paper and Ink or Inky Characters that will decay but to the Holy Doctrine and Precepts which will not decay but be permanent and endure and therefore are called the Holy Scriptures with respect to the Holy Matters therein contained That the Books and Writings in Ink and Paper will wear out so will not the Word is evident Jehoiakim King of Judah could burn Jeremiah the Prophet's Roll or Book writ with ●nk by Baruch but not the Word of the Lord nor properly the Words thereof for the same Word caused all the former Words to be written again after the Roll was burnt Jer. 36. If then the Books the Paper and Ink be combustible or will decay and turn to Dust but not the Word nor the Doctrine where 's then the Controversie indeed when the same thing is granted on both sides He quotes Gr. Myst. p. 302. as saying Paper and Ink is not Infallible that will come to Dust unto which the Word Christ and the Spirit is preferred in the same place quoted And in the said Gr. Myst. p. 78. by Letter he there means Paper and Ink but the Scripture the thing it speaks of is Spiritual the Word is Spirit And further p. 127. the Scripture or Writing it self without the Spirit that gave it forth is a dead Letter in it self The Spirit is that that gave forth the Scriptures For my part as I am not in the least conscious to my self of the least Contempt of Holy Scripture nor yet of the Bible for I have always preferr'd it to all other Books extant in the World and more affected Reading therein than any other Book even from my Childhood and often bless Divine Providence for preserving to us the Scriptures So I know of none among us guilty of contemning them Neither is what 's said from any Contempt of Scripture no more than it is of the Earth and the Heavens to say They shall wax old and perish but the Word that made them endureth Psal. 102.25 26. Heb. 1.11 12. But say what we can in this Case to clear our selves of any Contempt to the Holy Scripture this our uncharitable Judge and Accuser will not believe us He 's bent to asperse he has swallow'd down so much of the sour Leven of the Malice of a few false Brethren Persecutors and Apostates from whom he derives much of his Authority and thus scurrilously and most falsly imposes upon me viz. And therefore George notwithstanding all thy meally Modesty it is it is indeed George it is the very Doctrine of the Scriptures which you blaspheme as Dust and Death and Serpents Meat on purpose to bring Men off from trying your pernicious Heresies by those Sacred Oracles Ibid. This is a pernicious Abuse and Calumny against my self and others of us to out-face us against our very Sense and Consciences and in good Conscience I Testifie against it it never entred into my Intention or Thoughts so to blaspheme the Doctrine of the Scriptures as to term or deem it Dust Death or Serpents Meat the Lord rebuke this lying envious Spirit Neither do I vilifie the written Doctrine and Precepts of God in comparison of our New Light as he falsly calls it p. 177. but reverently esteem them The Man makes no Conscience of Defaming us Neither do we quarrel with the Law and the Testimony nor yet with Writing or Scripture as 't is in Ink and Paper but distinguish between the Writing and the Things written which is no contempt to either We are thankful to Divine Providence for both the Scripture or Writing and the Holy Doctrine and Divine Precepts therein written for they testifie unto Christ our Light and our Light to the Truth of them And to what he saith If any do not teach the same i. e. according to the Law and the Testimony or written Word it is because there is no Light in them Isa. 8.20 And then puts this Emphasis upon it No Light George Mark that Your false Pretences to the Light within are here over-rul'd Ibid. I deny that our Pretences to the Light within is either false or are here over-rul'd if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no Morning to them If he 'll see the Note from the Hebrew in some Bibles he may see no Morning in the Margin over against no Light Then let him Mark that But is there no Light in the Creation before Morning either inward or outward pray Did not the Light shine in Darkness before it shined out of Darkness And had not the Believers a more sure Word of Prophecy whereunto they did well to take heed as unto a Light shining in a dark place until the Day dawned and the Day-star arose in their Hearts 2 Pet. 1.19 And are not many reproved by the Light in them for telling Lies and speaking contrary to the Word c. And therefore there was some true Light in them before the Morning appeared to them And though my Accuser says Ibid. These and such-like Texts detect and explode the miserable Ignorance and Blasphemy of these Pretenders to Light For which we have

of the Fathers first Book p. 194. Whilst they beat down one Error they seem to run into the contrary Error In like manner as those who would streighten a crooked Plant are wont to bow it as much the contrary way that so having been worked out of its former bent it may at length rest in a middle posture Now if our Friends have formerly met with those in the Priesthood whose crooked expressions did need streightning they are not to be wondred at or condemned in their Christian endeavours for that end And whether there were such or not I will now joyn Issue with the Snake and shew from a much narrower compass than the extents of the Snake's Challenge which is That there never were in any place such Priests I shall at present only give some few instances out of the Book Great Mystery which the Snake does so often quote which take as follows P. 16. John Timson did affirm that the Holy Scriptures alone is to be the object of Faith P. 38. Tho. Collier did affirm that the Scriptures shall be our Judge one day which we call the Letter P. 111. Jeremy Ives did affirm it to be an Error to say the Letter of the Scriptures was Carnal P. 247. Christopher Wade affirmed The Written Word is the Sword of the Spirit P. 261. Roger Atkinson affirmed That the Letter of the Scripture was God Ibid. Richard Stoakes affirmed That the Scripture is God P. 280. Edw. Price affirmed The Scriptures is the Power of God and that all Men shall be Iudged by them Now Reader upon the Issue joyned in this little space whether appears the Arrant Lyar G. Whitehead in saying There were in the North where most of these did live Priests who had so affirmed of the Letter of the Scriptures or the Snake in saying That neither there nor any where else were such Priests For it cannot be allowed I suppose That the Written Word and Letter of the Scripture as above affirmed is either God or the Power of God or the Iudge of the World or Spiritual or the Sword of the Spirit These and the like crooked Expressions of some in the Priesthood it was the necessary work of our Friends to oppose and straiten according to the Authority of Holy Writ not that we then did or now do charge all the Men with whom these so affirming have held fellowship to have the same Sentiments tho' this be the Practice of the Snake against us notwithstanding his distinction in the Title page of his Libel Ibid. p. 88. How comes it that since they are such bitter Enemies to the Letter they yet make a Conscience of saying Thee and Thou instead of You in the Singular because these were old English words in the first Translations I need not ask How comes it That envy and prejudice is Blind and Ignorant We are not bitter Enemies to the Letters of which the Books of Scripture are composed No Sober Reader that which we have opposed and for our so doing have the Authority of the Scriptures is that Men should only from them gather some account of the dealings of God with the Holy Men in past Ages and from their Declarations therein nay sometimes contrary to them make to themselves Creeds and herein Copy after those to whom our Saviour says Ye search the Scriptures in them ye think to have Eternal Life but ye will not come unto me that ye may have Life This we have opposed and directed Men to the Spirit of God in them to which as they are obedient they will find it to open the Scriptures to them and give comfort in the reading of them Thee and Thou instead of You in the Singular are as well Modern English Words as Old from the Essential difference that there is between the Signification of One and Many and upon this account it is according to the best Information I can get that there is hardly any Nation whose Language does not differently express that different Signification And that which engages us Conscientiously to this Practice is not that they are Old English Words but that the same Holy Spirit in us at this day leads to that same Simplicity of Language which it did lead the Servants of God into in former Ages And in all Ages of the World it hath been the Language of the Holy Spirit to Man And accordingly before our day at the beginning of the Reformation Erasmus and others whose Language was not Old or Modern English did reprove that Vanity of Mind which did practice and acccept the contrary Ibid. p. 88. Is there any Immorality or Iniquity in these Letters Y. o. u. more than in T. h. o. u Foolish Question Which may serve to please and tickle the Wanton But Sober Reader I doubt not thou wilt perceive the Vanity of the Querist The Alphabet which with us according to its various joynings does serve to express the thoughts of our Minds cannot have Immorality or Iniquity in the Letters Yet whosoever in evil Mind by joyning them does express words either Blasphemous Profane Hypocritical Unjust as this Snake or any other way bad in their Signification of these Men do pronounce accordingly And thus it is if any to shun the Cross of our Lord Jesus tho' in this small matter of the plain Language and to please the vain Mind contrary to the Convictions of the Spirit of Truth in themselves shall say You instead of Thee and Thou such will find that disobedience their Burden In p. 89 90. Snake has gathered many instances from G. F's Writings wherein he saith This is the Word of the Lord which the Snake puts in opposition to G. F's Answer to Christopher Wade Great Mystery p. 246. They the Scriptures are not the Word of God But this soon vanishes for upon Examination of Christopher Wade's words they seem to imply as if he affirmed of the Scriptures that they were the Eternal and In-dwelling Word of God and therefore and thereupon G. Fox opposed him and asserted Christ to be the Word of God p. 247. Great Mystery which is true and from him the Eternal Word the Servants of God have often said to the People Hear the Word of the Lord. And the meaning of it both in the Prophets and since is only this Hear from the Eternal Word a Declaration of his Will Ibid. p. 91. They knew that the Holy Scriptures could not be discarded openly and above-board nor all at once That the World has been long in the possession of them and of a just Veneration of them and therefore would not part with them nor accept of any Fox 's Inspirations instead of them That the World hath been long in the possession of the Books of Scriptures we well know but for want of being in possession of the Holy Spi-the Power of God they have erred not knowing the Scriptures and therefore could not have a just Value or Esteem for them And God who knoweth the Sincerity of

Christ Jesus a Type or Figure of their Light within p. 183. I know no such Books of the Quakers that so call Christ Jesus A Type of our Light within but that he is our Light which hath inlighten'd us among the rest of Mankind It 's implied by way of Question That Christ clothed himself in Flesh and Blood and that he took Flesh c. for so quoth he it may be said that our Soul is clothed with our Body as with a Garment or Veil It is not Words but the meaning that we contend about saith he p. 180. We know best our own Meaning being well satisfied that 't is according to Holy Scripture Where 's then the defference he then quarrels with our Meaning not with the Words here but elsewhere he doth as his Author F. Bugg has done with the words Veil and Garment in J. P's Question to Professors But this Author yields the Point he assents to both As our Soul is clothed with our Body as with a Garment or Veil and so of Christ. Which warrants J. P's Question against his Author F. B. and himself at least so far as not to make a Subject of any further Contention against us Again my Accuser brings a heavy black Charge upon me in these Words Ibid. p. 180. viz. In this same 11 th Article we are now upon after your full and Affirmative Declaration before he would have it Negative you s●bborn Two Texts as Favourers of your damnable Heresie before-told yet say you slily his Flesh was called the Veil Heb. 10. And he took upon him the form of a Servant and was made like unto Men and was found in the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shape or Figure of a Man Phil. 2.6 7. And then exclaims Ah George George I could forgive thee any thing but this What! put upon us at this rate It seems my citing those Two Texts and alledging them to prove that the word Veil was applied to Christ's Flesh which he took upon him and the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shape or Figure of a Man to the form of his Manhood or outward Man tho' I intended no other than that without the least Contempt to Christ Such Words might be used as they had been by some of our Friends For this it seems I have committed such a heinous and unpardonable Crime or Sin as this my Severe Judge cannot forgive This is represented as my highest Offence and truly I shall not need seek to him for Absolution or Pardon nor to be my Confessor I have a merciful and faithful High Priest to apply and appeal to I need not go to unmerciful and implacable Ones for Pardon especially such a one as has so shamefully calumniz'd me with subborning Two Texts as Favourers of damnable Heresie How comes this Accuser in his Fallibility or Uncertainty thus severely to condemn me when he cannot refute Matter of Fact about the Two said Texts being alledged in behalf of my Friend's meaning and not at all with the least Intention to lessen the Dignity or Glory of the Son of God No far be it from me And where 's my unpardonable Sin in the Application of the Text Phil. 2 Why he saith George Whitehead brings in the word Figure which is not in the English Translation And what then But let him have it he himself makes it syn●●nimous to Shape p. 183. And he is forced to let me have it because he cannot well deny it without disparagement to himself But herein he would place on me a Mis-application of the Words Who being found in the Shape or Figure of a Man c. And therefore saith what relation has this to the calling Christ Jesus a Type or Figure of their Light within which I have shewn 〈◊〉 ●ut of the Quake●s Books And I have denied this as a ●alshood before and now declare against 〈◊〉 manifest Perversion and Injury to me and m● Words herein For as I sincerely disown the Word● charged Ibid. viz. The calling Christ Jesus a Type or Figure of our Light within so I could not apply the Words before in the Text Phil. 2. to have any relation thereto and much less as proof of that which I never held And I know none of us that doth so call Jesus Christ A Type of our Light within he being the Fountain thereof Nor that Christ is Only a Figure as falsly charged by F. Bugg Which Perversion so far as I can find was first forged from these Words in the Book Saul's Errand viz. Christ in the Flesh without them is their Example or Figure which is both one For his being their Example 1 Pet. 2.21 and 4.1 and 1.15 and John 13.15 are quoted See also Luke 2.31 he was called a Sign Now hence to say he was Only a Sign were a Gross Perversion Christ was our Example Now hence to say he is nothing else but an Example were an Abuse and to lessen his Dignity and a variation from the Sense as our Adversary has done upon Trus● of his Author F. Bugg upon his False Report which is besides all Justice Morality and 〈◊〉 Proceedings Now the Question is Whether Figure may be made synonimous to Example for the words Example or Figure as before I conceive it may For Type or Figure sometimes points a thing to come as in Rom. 5.14 who was the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Figure of him that was to come And sometimes Type or Figure denotes a present Example or Pattern as in Phil. 3.17 Mark them which walk so as ye have us for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Example And the same word is used in 2 Thes. 3.9 and 1 Tim. 4.12 and Titus 2.7 and 1 Cor. 10.11 only in different Cases or Terminations And the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Example or Type John 13.15 Heb. 9.23 Thus Example or Type are made synonimous in T. C's Lexicon and the like in Crit. Sacr. but more fully explain'd for there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e Exemplum Exemplar Triplicem habet in Scriptura significatum 1. Significat Typum seu Figuram rerum vel praeteritarum Heb. 8.5 vel futurarum Heb. 9.23 2. Exemplum imitationis John 13.15 1 Tim. 4.12 Titus 4.7 3. Exemplum Monitionis sive Cautelae ut 2 Pet. 2.6 i. e. Exemplum Exemplar hath a threefold Signification in Scripture 1. It signifies a Type or Figure of Things either past or to come 2. An Example of Imitation 3. An Example of Warning or Caution Now see how synonimously the Terms Type Figure Pattern and Example are rendred in Scripture and of what extent not only in relation to the Types under the Law but in some respect to Christ and his Ministers tho' he be also confessed to be the Antitype Substance and End of all Legal Shadows Types and Figures But I have not called Christ himself a Type of our Light within nor justified the same As to my Accuser's Offence at my saying Christ's Flesh is called a Veil Heb. 10.20 it