Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	bear_v	son_n	witness_n	5,359	5	7.9501	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A40080	A friendly conference between a minister and a parishioner of his, inclining to Quakerism wherein the absurd opinions of that sect are detected, and exposed to a just censure / by a lover of truth.	Fowler, Edward, 1632-1714.	1676 (1676)	Wing F1706; ESTC R1363	82,434	183

their judging faculties so that good and evil are not only so because commanded and forbidden but because they are so in themselves and were for ever so Par. I thank you for this profitable digression I have caused you to make and shall now desire you to return to your old subject concerning which I have this scruple to propose unto you viz. that those instances wherein an Oath is acknowledged to have been lawful are taken out of the Ceremonial Law which is now repeal'd by the Gospel Min. If it were so as it is not yet their having been once lawful and commanded by God proves undeniably that they are not evil in their own nature for whatever things are so can at no time and upon no tearms be ever commanded or countenanc'd by God being eternally repugnant to his Will and holy Nature as hath been before shown to you But that an Oath is not a part of the Ceremonial Law is clear from what hath been said concerning the morality of it which proved it a part of natural Religion and Justice which are the things that distinguish the Moral from the Ceremonial Law This will further appear if you consider that the Ceremonial Law is a systeme only of types and shadows and of things to come that is of the Messiah and the blessings of the Gospel for whatever was purely Ceremonial was purely typical but the Law concerning an Oath was not a type of any thing to come but had its proper and perpetual usefulness therefore was no part of the Ceremonial Law If you say it was a type of any thing pertaining to the times of the Gospel shew what was its Antitype or thing represented by it but if you cannot find an Antitype for it in the Gospel you may then be satisfied that the command of swearing was no part of the Ceremonial Law The second Argument to confirm you that Oaths are not evil in themselves nor part of the Ceremonial Law is taken out of the Examples of the holy Patriarchs with whom an Oath was of authentick use and held sacred before the delivery of the Levitical Law I shall begin with Abraham the Father of the Faithful Gen. 21. 23 24 31. where Abraham and Abimelech made a Covenant and confirm'd it by Oath interchangeably and what is observable in that passage Abraham gave the very place where they swore to each other a name which was to be in perpetuam rei memoriam a memorial of that solemnity calling it Beersheba in English the well of the Oath Consult also that other instance in that holy man Gen. 24. 2 3 9. and it is not to be thought that Abraham would give his servant an Oath rashly nor exercise his authority to impose on his Conscience The same is also confirmed by the example of Isaac making a Covenant and swearing to Abimelech Gen. 26. 28 31. as also by the example of Jacob making a Covenant and swearing to his Uncle Laban by the fear of his Father Isaac Gen. 31. 53. An Oath therefore having been so sacred and authentick with those holy Fathers before the Law was given by Moses it follows that it was no part of the Levitical but of that Moral Law which as has been said our Saviour prosesseth he came not to destroy Par. Had the Quakers liv'd under the Old Law they would certainly have been convinc't by what you have said of its lawfulness and not only so but usefulness having been made an instrument of establishing such happy leagues and bands of amity but to us that live under the Gospel are not our circumstances alter'd with the dispensation and by the prohibitions already quoted Min. I say the Gospel dispensation does not repeal any Law that is Moral and of continued usefulness as hath been said and such is this of a lawful Oath for that Law whose reason and usefulness is perpetual and the same to us under the Gospel as it was to them under the Law is it self perpetual and therefore not repeal'd by any new dispensation So that unless you can tell me some use it was to them which it is not to us you can have no reason to believe it was any of those Laws which our Saviour came to abolish there being as much need of it to the ending of strife in this litigious age especially wherein the love of many is waxed cold as there could be in former times And that those words you so much insist on do not wholly forbid all Oaths is manifest by the instances we find upon record in the Scriptures of the New Testament which were written by that infallible Spirit whereby the holy Penmen were acted and which one would think should be sufficient to convince you that call so much for examples if you were not prejudic'd They are the examples of St. Paul the Apostle of the Gentiles and of the Angel Revel 10. 5 6. As for the first of these if you do seriously consider them you 'l sind that they are as manifest Oaths and express instances of swearing as those publick forms now in use in our Courts of Justice which you are so much offended at Par. Pray produce me these places for I think I should be much satisfied if you could convince me that St. Paul swore Min. 'T is hard to convince prejudic'd persons by the clearest truths that can be produc'd till they lay down their passions and be willing to be instructed but your humility gives me confidence that you are none of those Par. I hope I am not but am willing to be convinc'd by the truth and therefore I pray you proceed Min. The Instances are in Rom. 1. 9. For God is my witness whom I serve with my spirit in the Gospel of his Son that c. Rom. 9. 1. I say the truth in Christ I lie not my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost 2 Cor. 1. 18. But as God is true c. and v. 23. Moreover I call God for a record upon my soul that c. 2 Cor. 11. 31. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ which is blessed for evermore knoweth that I lie not Gal. 1. 20. Now the things which I write unto you behold before God I lie not Read these with attention and you 'l find that in every one of these instances St. Paul makes a most solemn appeal to God as witness of what he affirms and judge of his sincerity and what other thing is an Oath for you 'l find as much of the nature of an Oath in them as in several forms recorded in the Old Testament for Oaths See Ezech. 14. 16 18. where God who can do nothing that is immoral or unbecoming his holiness swears in these words As I live c. here God swears by his life and is it not as much an Oath in St. Paul to swear by Gods truth 2 Cor. 1. 18. As God is true c. And those other Gen. 22. 16. By

is necessarily implyed for how can he be said to be perfect who is subject to sin Min. Now I will shew you from this very instance which the Quakers use to prove perfection by according to their notion of it that it overthrows the tenent which they think to establish by it and that by comparing it with Gen. 9. 20 21. where we read that Noah was drunk uncovered in his Tent. It may be added that some of great note do expound perfect in his generation to be meant comparatively that is in respect of the men of that Age. A generation like that in which St. Salvian lived wherein it was accounted a great degree of holiness to be less vitious Your next instance is of Job of whom the Scripture saith that he was perfect and upright and that he feared God and eschewed evil Job 1. 1. Uprightness there explains perfection a perfect man he was that is upright sincere a fearer of God and lover of him Yet notwithstanding this character that was given he had his failings accordingly he makes consession Chap. 7. 20. I have sinned what shall I do unto thee O thou preserver of men See also Chap. 4. 34. and 42. 6. And Job answered the Lord and said behold I am vile And for your last instance of David you cannot be ignorant though he was a man after Gods own heart that he fell into the hainous sins of Adultery and Murder and besides the 51 Psalm which he composed upon that sad occasion he penned other penitential Psalms and Prayers for the pardon of his sins which would be strange to ask if he were altogether free from them So that the Quakers might as well write against those Psalms as against the confession in our Service Book Par. If perfection signify not such a state as supposeth us absolutely free from all sin what then doth it signify Min. As perfection is attributed to the Saints in this life it generally signifies no more than sincerity and uprightness a serving God with a single heart without Hypocrisie and Guile and this you will find in such Bibles as have Marginal notes in them perfect in Gen. 6. 9. is noted upright and in Gen. 17 1. upright and sincere and by observation you may find the like in more places for the word in the Original might as well be translated upright as perfect See Davids last advice to his Son 1 Chror 28. 9. And thou Solomon my son know thou the God of thy Fathers and serve him with a perfect heart That sincerity is there meant by a perfect heart will appear in the following words for the Lord searcheth all hearts and understandeth all the imaginations of the thoughts that is he sees into the bottom of our hearts whether they be sincere or no. Par. But what do you say to this text Phil. 3. 15. Let us therefore as many as be perfect be thus minded Min. Compare it with the 12th verse where it is said Not as though I had already attained either were already perfect Make a right inference from the Text compared and you will find the mistake Par. Do you suppose the Apostle contradicts himself Min. The Apostles words are justifiable from any contradiction allowing the right construction which ought to be put upon them by perfect in the Text objected he means no more than sincerity in his Christian course by perfect in the 12 verse a fulness of Grace together with the reward of it which is not to be had but in a state of Glory and Immortality Par. How doth that appear to be his sense Min. Very plainly from the 11 verse if by any means I might attain to the resurrection of the dead then follows not as though I had attained either were already perfect intimating that he could not be fully perfect till he had attained the Refurrection of the dead where you may observe that the sense we give of perfection is agreable to St. Pauls sense of it but yours contradictory to it Par. If these Scriptures already named do not prove an unsinning perfection yet that of 1 Joh. 5. 18. We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not will put this question out of all doubt Min. That the Quakers have a wrong notion of this Scripture I hope to make evident to the meanest capacity but before I proceed will you allow me this fundamental truth that the Holy Scriptures do no where contradict themselves Par. God forbid that such a thought should enter into me that the infallible Spirit by which the Scriptures were written can contradict himself Min. This being granted the Text under our debate cannot be interpreted to signify that any in this life hath gotten an absolute conquest over all sin and that for two reasons First because St. John here would contradict other plain Texts as 1 Kings 8. 46 for there is no man that sinneth not Prov. 20. 9 who can say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sin Rom. 3. 23 for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God See Ezek. 18. 24. Eccl. 7. 20. 2 Chron. 6. 36. Job 9. 20. Jam 3. 2. Gal. 3. 22. Secondly because St. John would not only contradict others but himself also having plainly said 1 Joh. 1. 8. if we say we have no sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us to all which let me add that it would be otherwise strange that our Lord should teach his Disciples to pray as often for the forgiveness of their sins as for their daily bread whilst that we must suppose that when they so prayed they had no Trespasses to forgive which very instance being inconsistent is enough to answer the objection Par. What then do these words really mean Min. The meaning of the words is this 1. he sinneth not that sin unto death ver 16. by some expounded to be the unpardonable sin against the Holy Ghost Nor 2. doth he live in a wilful course and trade of sin 1 Joh. 3. 9. he makes not sin his business he works not in it as a man doth in his trade which is the true sense of the Greek word in the Text and that is the reason why wicked men are called in Scripture workers of iniquity because they do follow it as their business while sins of weakness and Infirmity which he daily strives and prays against are notwithstanding consistent with a regenerate Estate Par. But is there not one clause in the Text you mentioned which contradicts the sense you have given of it wherein we read that he that is born of God cannot sin whereof you have this reason given because he is born of God Min. The objection will soon be answered by considering what the Apostle means by the seed of God which is a new firm Principle of Grace and Holiness wrought in him by the Spirit of God by which he is kept from habits of wilful and deliberate sins