Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	able_a	act_n	act_v	157	3	7.1200	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A89333	A messenger sent to remove some mistakes; or A desirous instrument for the promoting of truth, unity, peace and love in the church of Christ. By way of answer to a book, untruly and improperly intitled, A vindication of that righteous principle of the doctrine of Christ called laying on of hands upon baptized believers. / By Thomas Morris, a servant of Jesus Christ. Also Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley about his practice of laying on of hands, with his answer, and R. E. reply.	Morris, Thomas, Baptist.; Everard, Robert, fl. 1664. Robert Everards Three questions propounded to Benjamin Morley.	1655 (1655)	Wing M2811; Wing E3541; Thomason E838_23; Thomason E838_23*; ESTC R207456	30,573	49

sort or kind of laying on of hands which you conceive to be first practized and then go on to perfection in relation to the number of those sorts or kinds of laying on of hands which remain But that your opinion cannot be true upon this account I thus prove because though it is true that all the Saints may subject to on sort of laying on of hands viz. that of suffering persecution it s not possible all the Saints by way of subjection should perfect the number of sorts or kinds of laying on of hands because all the Saints shall never subject as Officers nor as sick parties nor by way of receiving the extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost And seeing this therefore your opinion that Men should leave the beginning or first sort and go on to perfection as to the number of sorts that remain of laying on of hands cannot be true because it is not possible all the Saints should do it and as it cannot be true upon your account to leave the first and to go on to perfection as to the number of sorts of laying on of hands on the other hand it both may and must be true from Heb. 6.2 that Saints are to leave the first steps or degrees of subjection to one single laying on of hands and go on to perfection in the remaining degrees of the same subjection to one and the same sort of laying on of hands which will hold true in the case of suffering persecution and not in any other as I have already proved Ben. His third reason against subjection to laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 to be meant of suffering persecution is because the laying on of hands we here contend for it is a principle of Christs Doctrine whereas contrary ways for wicked to persecute the Saints is a principle of the Devils Doctrine Tho. Answer See how confused your own reasons render you in your opinion for in the beginning of your foregoing reason you confefs that the laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 peculiarly belongs to Christian Men in point of subjection and yet in this your third reason have turned the Case quite contrary in that you seem to note out unto us that those parties instructed by the Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.1 2. were layers on and not subjectors to laying on of hands But if you agree with me that the parties instructed by the Doctrine of Christ Heb. 6.2 were subjectors to and not layers on of hands as that you must do except you can prove all the Church of the Hebrews to be Administrators So that Christ teaching the Saints to suffer for the Gospel though it be from or under the hands of wicked Men is no point of the Devils Doctrine but of his own and you have deceived your self because in this your third reasons you seem to apply this point of Christ teaching to layers on and not to subject to laying on of hands So that you may clearly see the weakness and unsoundness of all these reasons you have rendred against my opinion from Heb. 6.2 viz. that subjection to laying on of hands there held forth is meant of the Saints suffering persecution from the hands of wicked Men for the Gospels sake But again Master Fisher denyes that it is meant of the Saints suffering persecution from the hands of wicked Men because saith he it is included in the Doctrine of Baptisms and therefore would be confusion and a tautology to express it over again under the tearm Laying on of hands Answer Because I would have no objection unanswered I shall say something to this subtle reason and first it is improper to apply or call Baptism or any of the other five by the name of Doctrine as will appear because there must be a clear distinction put between Doctrine or teaching matter onely which comes from God and the thing taught which on the Creatures part is to be perforformed For Repentance Faith Baptism sufferings for the Gospel Faith in the Resurrection and general Judgement being the Creatures actions performed either internally or externally being capaciated thereto by vertue of the doctrinal or teaching matter which comes from God must needs be improperly called Doctrine and therefore Master Tindal in his Translation sets down the tearm Doctrine which our common Translations apply to be Baptism as a distinct thing by it self between Baptism and laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 and so partly Baptism and laying on of hands which you so often tell us follows next in order the one to the other so that you may see how improper it is to call Baptism or any other action of the Creature by the name of Doctrine seeing it belongs onely to the Creators teaching and not to the Creatures action In the next place Master Fisher reading it Baptisms Heb. 6.2 in the Plural number is not like to be true 1. Because most of the Greek Copies if not all and many of our common Translations and Master Tindals which is one of the antients plain and soundest Translations we find read it Baptism in the singular number Again to read Baptism Heb. 6.2 in the Plural cannot be right because it cannot be proved that all the Church of the Hebrews to whom this was spoken were either Baptized with sufferings or with the Spirit that they were not Baptized within or under sufferings is clear because the Baptism of sufferings consists of an over-flowing or an over-whelming measure of sufferings which many if not all times takes in death it self as for instance the two Sons of Zebedec and also Christ himself Luke 12.50 where saith he But I have a Baptism to be Baptized with and how am I pained till it be accomplished From whence its clear that every degree of sufferings is not the Baptism insuffering because Christ had suffered very many things before he spake these words and yet he saith he had his payning or streightning Baptism to be Baptized with still so that every degree of sufferings is not the Baptism in sufferings But as the tearm Baptism signifies in all cases so it must be an over-flowing or an over-whelming measure which renders a Man Baptized with sufferings with which measure of sufferings it cannot be proved that the Church of the Hebrews were all Baptized for though they had suffered great afflictions yet it was no other than what Christ had suffered before he begun his Baptism of sufferings viz. to be made a mocking stock And as it is in the case of being Baptized in sufferings so it is in the case of being Baptized in or with the Spirit for every degree of receiving the Spirit will not render a Man Baptized with the Spirit as is clear from Acts 1. ver 5. where in the 4. ver Christ commanded his Disciples not to depart from Jerusalem but wait for the promise of the Father which saith he ye have heard of me And then in the 5. ver saith John truly Baptizea with water but ye shall b● Baptized not many days hence Where we may observe that the Disciples here spoken of too were not yet Baptized with the Spirit for if they had it need not be promised to be dispensed upon them a few dayes after And though they had not the Baptism of the Spirit when these words were spoken to them yet they received so much of the Spirit as that they were true believers true converts born of the Spirit which render Men capable of Salvation able to cast our Devils and to heal all manner of sickness and diseases Mat. 10.1 and yet not Baptized with the Spirit So that you see every degree of receiving the Spirit is not the Baptism of the Spirit but it must be such an overflowing measure of the Spirit whereby a Man is able by an immediate power to speak all Languages as appears from Acts the 2. ver 2 3 4. compared with Acts the 1. v. 4.5 Where Acts the 1. v. 5. it was promised to be given to them a few days after and in Acts 2. being some days after you see it was given and also it was viz. a power to speak with tongues which all beleivers in those days were not able to do as is clear from 1 Cor. 12.29 30. So that we may see from these grounds which I have laid down how at that time not any of those spoken to Heb. 6.1.2 were Baptized in sufferings Neither is it likely they could all speak with tongues and so not be Baptized with the Spirit so that Master Fisher reasons against that subject to laying on of hands Heb. 6.2 to be meant in the case of suffering persecution for the Gospels sake grounded upon that text reading Baptism in the Plural is quite taken of and he that well considers what I have spoken in this Book may see the weakness and unsufficiency of all the grounds he hath alleaged by his laying on of hands And also here is discovered the mistakes of those who put no difference between to be Born of the Spirit and to be Baptized with the Spirit which fits Men to Preach the Gospel to all Nations which was the special end of that gift as appears from Luke 24.49 compared with Acts the 1. ver the 5. Chap. 2. v. 4. Thus with as much moderation and tenderness as I could and not let you suffer I have answered to the substance in what is contained in your Book I might have been larger but that I think I shall be forced again to put Pen to Paper as in relation to this thing I intreat you and all others who it may concern not to slight or condemn any thing that is here spoken of till you have often read and well considered it and if God shall have used me as an Instrument to speak convincingly to the consciences of any I desire that they will give God the Glory and strive to learn that heard lesson of Self-denyal FINIS

all you have said makes nothing against their opinion who hold that the great and large gift the Holy Ghost was the end wherefore Peter and John laid on their hands Acts 8. for in verse 15. it is said they prayed for it which argues it was their own end and desire to have it and so much by way of Answer to your fourth Chapter Ben. As to your fift Chapter the substance of what you say here is included in your former grounds and is also answered in my foregoing matter and therefore for brevities sake I shall take notice onely of such things as I have not already answered and in the first place though you confess in your Book page the 51. that in former times the Holy Ghost did attend the practice of laying on of hands and in page the 53. do grant that those twelve men Acts the 19. did receive the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit and yet you deny that the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit are essential to it from Hebr. 6.1 2. and therefore you must tell your Antagonist that laying on of hands will stand as firm and unmoveable in these our dayes without any such extraordinary appearances of the Spirit as formerly for these Reasons first because the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit were to confirm the doctrine of the Gospel and it being confirmed there needs no such extraordinary gifts to that end and so you conclude they confirmed laying on of hands as well as the rest of Christs doctrine putting no difference between actions and doctrine a second reason why you conclude that miracles and the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit are not essential to laying on of hands is because these extraordinary appearances of God are not essential to any other Ordinances of God as you instance in Preaching and Praying Acts 10 and Acts 4. Tho. Answer although you grant the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit did attend laying on of hands Acts 19. yet you deny they were essential to it because you say Hebr. 6.2 no extraordinary gift followed laying on of hands but in this you have laid a ground for your own mistakes by comparing that sort of subjection to laying on of hands Hebr. 6.2 to that sort in Acts 19. where they subjected in order to the receiving of the Holy Ghost but in Hebr. 6.2 I shall hereafter make it appear that they subjected in order to the filling up the measure of the sufferings of Christ therefore you must not think to make us believe that the extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost is not essential to that kind of laying on of hands Acts 8. and the 19. because it is not essential to that contrary kind of subjection to laying on of hands Hebr. 6.2 neither because it is not essential to preaching and some kind of prayer for indeed preaching and some kind of prayer were never appointed to be instrumental for giving the extraordinary gift the Holy Ghost but the proper effect of preaching is to convey the ordinary gifts of the Spirit as inlightning and many other comfortable Receptions so that though the extraordinary gift of the Holy Ghost be not essential to preaching it never being appointed as the means through which this gift should be given yet they may be and are essential to that kind of laying on of hands through which they were given and never failed as Acts the 8. Acts the 19. The Scripture speaking but of those two times that this sort of laying of hands was used so that I wonder that you should say as you do viz. That we may no more ty up the reception of the extraordinary gift the Holy Ghost to laying on of hands then we may to preaching the Word because as you say the extraordinary gift the Holy Ghost did attend preaching as well as laying on hands And this you say though you may see Acts the 8. the 10. this gift the Holy Ghost was given through laying on of hands but though we find Acts the 19. this gift was given when they were at preaching yet never through preaching And whereas you say the extraordinary gift the Holy Ghost did confirm laying on of hands Acts the 8. as well as it did Preaching Acts the 10. I answer it did confirm laying on of hands Acts the 8. so as to bespeak the lawfulness of the use of that means being used in order to the same end viz. receiving the Holy Ghost And so did miraculous healing confirm or bespeak the lawfull use of laying on of hands to that end viz. to heal But again it is true and you confess it in the 6. page of your Book that the non-being of the gift of healing in the Church doth bespeak the uselesness of laying on of hands to that end viz. to heal And so on the other hand I shall affirm that the non-being of power in the Church instrumentally through laying on of hands to give the Holy Ghost doth bespeak the uselesness of laying on of hands to that end And so I conclude that though God hath the same power now as he had then yet if in his wisedom he sees it no● convenient to will the giving of the same gifts now as he did then his power doth not accomplish it for his power doth act suitable to his will for if in his will he doth not determin a thing then by his power he doth not effect it and so he divides to every one severally as he will 1 Cor. 12.11 And when in his wisdom he sees it convenient to give those glorious gifts into his Church as he did formerly he can again begin the dispensation of them without the use of outward instruments as he did at the first to the Apostles Acts 2.1 2 3 4. And as to the things you call effects of your laying on of hands viz. as you say a most sweet and precrous communion and a delightfull fellowship in the Gospell Secondly more of the manifestation of Gods Spirit to their souls Thirdly to be further strengthened in Gods way for your first effects viz. A most sweet and precious communion you instance in those Acts the 2.41 42 46. in which place there is not one word mentioned that ever they had hands laid on them and therefore though they had a sweet Communion yet it did not arise from laying on of hands and as for these three particulars which you call effects you might more properly have laid them down as three more ends which though they are propounded before hand yet for such are the same with effects and then though you had not attained to them yet at the least we should have thought you should have desired them but now you have laid them down as effects what ever you may say I with many other can from sad experience testify that in insteed of a sweet and reall Communion in the Church of Christ your kinde of laying on of hands hath effected nothing but an unsavory outside Communion and hath furnished

that they may compleat their subjection as in relation unto the principles of the foundation And thirdly that they may compleat the order of their subjection And fourthly that they may thereby demonstrate their love to Jesus Christ Tho. As to your first end you lay down if your kinde of laying on of hands could be proved by command as it never hath been yet proved yet this your end is denied viz. That laying on of hands doth put any man into a further capacitie to go on to persection for these Reasons because the Text you bring to prove it Hebr. 6.1 2. doth not speak nor hold forth any such sense as I desire the Reader will well consider of but I shall say more in order to the explaning of this Text Hebr. 6. in my answer to your last chapter A second Reason why laying on of hands doth not put believers into a further capacitie to go on to perfection is because not actions but the indowments of nature together with the teachings and commanding part of the Scriptures do fully capaciat men not only to begin but also to go on to such perfection as God requires of any of the sons of men as appears Matth. 25.14 15 16 17 18. where it appears the noble man namely Christ called his servants and delivered unto them his goods and as in Luk 19. ver 13. said unto them Occupy till I come to one he gave five tallents to another two to another one to every one according to his several abilities or as every one was capable to improve the second and the first to their capabilitie did improve their talents but the third though he was as able to improve one as the other were to improve five or two yet did not one action well-pleasing to his Master From whence it is clear that actions do not capaciate men for work because that this man was in a capacity and yet had done nothing well-pleasing to his Master from all which its clear that the indowments of nature together with the teachings of God do fully capaciate men both to begin and also to finish their dutie and as for the other three ends if the means you use in order to the attaining of them were commanded by God viz. Laying on of hands so as you practise it I should not deny them but seeing laying on of hands so as you practise it was never commanded by God you do no more compleat your subjection nor the order of it nor demonstrate love to Jesus Christ than they do who sprinkle Infants for they think they do God as good service in sprinkling Infants as you do by laying on of your hands upon your account that is without respect had to healing or receiving that great gift of the Spirit or ordaining to office so that seeing your kinde of laying on of hands is no where commanded by God you do but confound your subjection and the order of it and demonstrate want of love to Jesus Christ Ben. In the next place you tell us that those who hold that hands were laid on in Acts 8. for the receiving of the extraordinarie gifts of the Spirit have nothing but supposition for their ground and all the Reason you can shew against it is First because the tearm extraordinarie is not found in the Text Acts 8. Secondly because as you say an ordinarie thing is as soon beheld as an extraordinarie Thirdly because as you say Simon Magus was a carnall wicked man and for ought you know might be as much mistaken in his seeing the Holy Ghost given through laying on of the Apostles hands as he was in offering money to buy the power Fourthly you endeavour to prove that the Apostles had no such power as to give the Holy Ghost from Acts the 4.9 10. And fiftly your endeavouring to distinguish between the end of a thing and the effects of a thing Tho. Answer though the tearm extraordinarie be not in the Text yet you know it notes out unto us some great thing unusual or not common to all and though by way of answer to an objection which saith the gift was extraordinarie because Simon Magus saw it you say Simons seeing of it doth not prove it extraordinarie because an ordinarie thing is as soon beheld as one extraordinarie but I shall desire the Reader seriously to consider whether ordinary reception of the Spirit which are onely internal and do not demonstrate themselves by such external operations as those we call extraordinarie do for the greater the gift is the greater externall operations do appear and so this great gift outwardly demonstrating it self Simon saw it for the common or ordinarie gifts of the Spirit are like if not the same with that hidden Manna and white stone wherein is the new name written which no man knowes but he that receives it Revel 2.17 Therefore Simon could not see the ordinarie but the extraordinarie gift of the Spirit Ergo it was an extraordinarie gift and this gift the Holy Ghost Acts 8. will further appear to be extraordinarie if we compare Scripture with Scripture for when we read of the Holy Ghost being given it notes out more than an ordinatie gift for we read of five times in the Acts that the Holy Ghost was given and in three of them it is expressed how they spake with tongues as in Acts 2. the 10. and the 19. and in the 57. page of your Book you confess that in the 4. of the Acts where the Holy Ghost was given it was an extraordinarie gift yet there is nothing expressed that they spake with tongues or that it was extraordinarie and though in Acts 8. it is not expressed that it was extraordinarie by speaking with tongues yet comparing this gift Acts the 8. with the other four places where the Holy Ghost was given in an extraordinarie way as in Acts 2. the 4. the 10. and the 19. And observing the same tearmes by way of falling upon them and those notable operations which Simon saw and took notice of which drew his desire to buy the power of giving the Holy Ghost through laying on of hands it will appear it was extraordinarie and whereas you say Simon was a carnal wicked man and for ought you know might be as much mistaken in his seeing the Holy Ghost given through laying on of the Apostles hands as he was in offering them money to buy the power it appeares that he was not mistaken in what he saw because the Holy Ghost takes it for granted in these words Now when Simon saw that through laying on of the Apostles hands the Holy Ghost was given he offered them money saying Give me also this power that on whom soever I lay hands he may receive the Holy Ghost as if he had said that glorious and wonderfull power which the Apostles had as a gift from God through laying on of hands instrumentally to give the Holy Ghost drew Simons desire to have it himself And whereas you