Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	believe_v	faith_n	work_n	6,717	5	5.8349	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A63382	A true and faithful accompt of the most material passages of a dispute betwixt some students of divinity (so called) of the University of Aberdene, and the people called Quakers held in Aberdene in Scotland, In Alexander Harper his close (or yard) before some hundreds of witnesses, upon the fourteenth day of the second month called April, 1675. There being opponents John Lesly. Alexander Shirreff. Paul Gellie. Mast. of Art. And defendants upon the Quakers part. Robert Barclay and George Keith. Præses for moderating the meeting, chosen by them, Andrew Thomsone advocate: and by the Quakers. Alexander Skein, sometime a magistrate of the City. Published for preventing misreports, by Alexander Skein, John Skein, Alexander Harper, Thomas Merser, and John Cowie. To which is added, Robert Barclay's offer to the preachers of Aberdene, renewed and re-inforced.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.; Barclay, Robert, 1648-1690.; Skene, Alexander.	1675 (1675)	Wing T2467BA; ESTC R222395	25,300	72

meet with the greatest and ablest of the Preachers themselves so the Truth leads us not to despise any As R. B. was going on he was interrupted Alex. Shirreff If it were pertinent I could easily disprove much of what is said but to be short R. B. having given Theses provoking all the Scholars of Europe and Great Brittain though R. B. pretends in his Preface to be against School-Divinity yet his Theses are full of it and there are many other contradictions which I will not now take notice of The Preachers and Ministers of the Word not finding themselves concerned we Young-men and but Students have offered to dispute in the Articles the Quakers have been very unreasonable and particularly G. K. did refuse any Article should be put in against railing because he said that might be railing in me which was not in him because he to wit G. K. was immediately led by the Spirit We have concluded that being Young men in case the Quakers should have any advantage it will not be of great consequence and if we have advantage we hope it may be useful because these are the great Prophets and Preachers of the Quakers G. K. I could take notice of many things not true in that Young-mans long discourse as particularly that R. B. hath provoked all Europe but I pass them by because I 'me here exceedingiy abused and therefore desire to be heard for I declare in God's ●●ar and in singleness of my heart I never said any such thing as is by that Young-man alledged upon me as I can appeal to the Auditors who were there present but what I said was this I cannot bind my self not to rail because I 'me bound already that I should not rail by the righteous Law of God in my Conscience and may perhaps speak that as believing it to be true which ye may call railing A. Shir. I being chiefly concerned and having mostly occasioned this Debate am employed by the rest to speak first and therefore I will impugne the second thesis which R. B. read and is as followeth Seeing no Man knoweth the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son revealeth him Mat. 11.27 And seeing the revelation of the Son is in and by the Spirit therefore the Testimony of the Spirit is that alone by which the true knowledge of God hath been is and ca● be only revealed who as by the moving of his own Spirit converted the Chaos of this World into that wonderful order wherein it was in the beginning and Created Man a living Soul to rule and govern it so by the revelation of the same spirit he hath made manifest himself all along unto the Sons of Men both Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles which Revelations of God by the spirit whether by outward voices and appearances Dreams or inward objective manifestations in the heart was of old the formal Object of their Faith and remaineth yet so to be since the Object of the Saints Faith is the same in all Ages though set forth under divers Administrations moreover these Divine inward Revelations which we make absolutely necessary for the building up true Faith neither do nor can ever contradict the outward Testimony of the Scriptures or right and seund reason yet from hence it will not follow that the Divine Revelations are to be subjected to the examination either of the outward testimony of the Scriptures or of the natural reason of Man as to a ●ore noble or certain Rule and Touchstone for this Divine Revelation and inward Illumination is that which is evident and clear of it self forcing by its own evidence and clearness the well disposed understanding to assent irresistably moving the same thereunto even as the common Principles of natural truths move and incline the mind to a natural assent R. B. People this is that which we affirm and which these Young-men are about to dispute against as false notwithstanding that A. Shir. had thus offered himself first to dispute yet I. L. intruding himself put him to silence Beginning as followeth I. L. That which is not to be believed as the Rule of Faith is not to be the Rule of Faith but the Spirit is not to be believed as the Rule of Faith therefore the Spirit is not to be the Rule of Faith R. B. Having repeated the Argument I deny the Minor or second Proposition I. L. I prove it that which hath not a sufficient evidence to evidence it self to be a Rule is not to be a Rule but the Spirit in the Quakers hath not a sufficient evidence whereby to evidence it self to be a Rule therefore the Spirit in the Quakers is not to be our Rule R. B. Having repeated the Argument I distinguish that second Proposition If thou meanest any Spirit in the Quakers which they peculiarly assume to themselves as Quakers or say they have as a part of themselves or of Mans Nature we concede that such have no evidence neither do we say that any such Spirit is to be our Rule but if thou meanest that Universal Spirit of God a manifestation whereof is given to every one to profit withall we affirm it hath a sufficient evidence in us and in all Men. I. L. I urge that distinction If the Spirit hath a sufficient evidence either this evidence is from your own declaration or some other but it is neither from your own declaration nor from some other therefore it hath not a sufficient evidence R. B. It is from both J. L. What is it then R. B. That it teacheth us to deny ungodliness and worldly Lusts and to live soberly righteously and godly in this present World this is an evidence to all Men. J. L. I prove that is not a sufficient evidence thus That is not a sufficient evidence which Hereticks may pretend unto as a sufficient ground for their heresie but Hereticks may pretend this as a sufficient ground for their herisie therefore it is not a sufficient evidence R. B. I answer this first by a Retortion this is the same Argument upon the matter which the Jesuit Dempster used against your Master viz. John Menzies for the Jesuite pressing him to assign a ground for the Protestant Religion which Hereticks could not pretend unto J. M. named the Scripture and the Jesuite further urged that Hereticks could and did pretend unto the Scriptures Now what evidence can ye give from the Scriptures which we cannot give yea and greater from the Spirit that Hereticks cannot justly lay claim to Stud. With one voice We will not have Retortions R. B. Praeses read the Articles which contain a particular provision for Retortions as being lawful if not insisted too much on so the fifth Article above-mentioned was read G. K. I offer to answer directly to his Argument without Retortion though I pass not from the Retortion for it stands over your heads which ye will never get over Then I say we have a two-fold evidence which no Heretick can justly

Anabaptists and slighting them as a sort of Hereticks yet one with them in the ground and in this particular work and service also to carry on the great designe of Antichrist These are some Masters of Arts Students of Divinity as they call themselves in the University of Aberdene who openly in the hearing of divers hundreds of people some whereof were sober and judicious did oppose the inward evidence of the Spirit of God in his people as not being a sufficient evidence unto them unless they could give an evidence of it unto others even their very Adversaries that they were inspired and so if we the people called Quakers could not give an evidence of this unto these our opposers we were but deceivers After it had been shewn them that Papists Jesuits used the same Argument against all the Protestants that indeed did more militat against them out of the Papists Quiver than out of these our Adversaries Quiver against us I produced the Testimony of the Scripture as the best and most convincing outward evidence that could be given as a witness to the Doctrine and Principle of Immediate Revelation and Inspiration of the Spirit of God owned by us as being in all men in some measure and consequently in us This is I say not the the best and most principal evidence nor the greatest that we have unto our selves or unto one another who are gathered into the same Faith Spirit and Power for that is the immediate evidence of the Spirit in our hearts which witnesseth both to our selves and to one another that we are the Children of God but it is I mean the Scripture the greatest outward and visible evidence that can be given unto our Adversaries who in words own the Scriptures as their only Rule and chiefest evidences And in doing so I followed the example of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ who while he reasoned against the Jews who professed to own the Scriptures but denied him he brought a testimony for himself out of the Scriptures which they in words owned as their Rule Search said he or ye search the Scriptures for in them ye think ye have eternal life and these are they which testifie of me Now thoug● Christ his own immediate Testimony should have been received as greater than any of his Servants such as Moses and the Prophets were yet he used this as an Argument against them as bringing them to their own Rule and said he had ye believed Moses ye would have believed me for Moses wrote of me And he laid again I have a greater testomony than that of John and yet John was the greatest of all the Prophets So in like manner we say We have a greater testimony to Christ Jesus by his Spirit and Power revealed in us than the testimony of Moses and the Prophets even than John who was the greatest But when we produce the Testimony of Moses the Prophets and Apostles as an evidence to the truth of what we affirm I say it should be received by our Adversaries who own the Scriptures as their chief and only Rule For either they should receive it or not receive it if they should receive it then they are faulty who in the late Dispute at Aberdene did refuse to receive the evidence of the Scriptures as from us only because we say we have a greater to wit that of the Spirit within us although we own the Scripture as the greatest visible and outward evidence that we can give to our Adversaries If they should not receive the Scripture evidence and testimony as from us because we say we have a greater to wit that of Christ himself immediately in us by his Spirit then they must needs also say for the same reason that the Jews ought not to receive the testimony of the Scriptures as an evidence for Christ because he said he had a greater and certainly he had a greater though they would not receive it nor could not as they stood in their prejudice and malice werewith they were filled against him who did not receive him Now this I say with freedom and boldness of Spirit to all those whether Papists Anabaptists Prelatical or Presbyterian Professors who with one mouth require of us an evidence that we are inspired or have a measure of the Inspiration of the Spirit of God and Christ in us I offer unto all of you the Scriptures for an evidence of this truth viz. that the Quakers so called have a measure of the Inspiration of the Spirit of God and Christ in them for according to the Scriptures testimony Christ the true Light enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world and his illumination is his inspiration I profess sincerely in Gods fear that the Scriptures Testimony is to me as full and plain and convincing to prove this Truth viz. that an Illumination Manifestation and Inspiration of the Spirit of God is given to every man is in every man as to prove this truth that Christ who according to the flesh was born of the Virgin Mary was the promised Messiah now if we can prove from Scripture that all men have in them a measure of this Divine Illumination and Inspiration by the Spirit of Christ we have gained our point which is that we have also a measure of the same in us for ALL MEN doth comprehend us called Quakers as well as other men I see not what our Adversaries can with any colour object against this evidence from Scripture but this that they will deny that the Scripture bears testimony to this Universal Illumination or Inspiration of the Spirit of God in men But this brings the matter of the debate from being personal to be doctrinal so puts us upon equal terms at least with all our Adversaries especially Prelatical Anabaptistist and Presbyterian Independent opposers whatsoever who say the Scriptures are their chief and only Rule And though our Adversaries say the Scripture doth not testifie to that universal Inspiration of the Spirit of Christ in men that moveth us not more then when the Jews denied that the Scriptures bore testimony to him that was born of the Virgin Mary to be the Christ We are able by the help of God to prove from Scripture the truth of this Doctrine of Divine Illumination and Inspiration in all men and consequently in the Quakers as much as they or any professing Christianity upon earth can prove any Principle or Doctrine of their Faith Secondly we are able and do offer by the Grace of God against all our Opposers whatsoever to prove from the Scriptures Testimony that this universal Inspiration and Illumination of Christ by his Spirit in men is a sufficient evidence of Truth and Rule of Faith and Life in all men and consequently in us called Quakers Thirdly that this Divine Inspiration and Illumination where it is not wilfully resisted and rejected but regarded and attended is a greater evidence than the Scripture is and witnessed by the Scriptures Fourthly and yet the Scripture is the greatest visible and outward evidence that either we or they can give of their Rule I shall conclude with a reasonable demand to these Young men Masters of Arts their Masters and Teachers which is this Whether they own these Assertions Affirmations and Arguments of their Scholars in the late Dispute as followeth viz. That whatever is of God is God that the Scriptures according to the Quakers is fallacious and can beguil us that the Baptism with the Holy Ghost is ceased and the rest of their Discourse inserted in this foregoing Treatise If yea Let them declare so much to the people who are greatly stumbled at these their expressions even divers of their own Church if nay then let them publickly reprove and disown those words otherwise not only we but many others will say ye have both taught and allowed them so to affirm G. K. And it may here be observed that afterwards J. L. speaking reflectingly against the Quakers said it was no railing to speak the truth which was all we pleaded for I appeal to all Logicians if when any thing is subsumed in a Syllogism which is neither in the first Proposition nor in the Conclusion whether that Syllogism hath not four Terms N●te divers of the Auditors were displeased with their going from the Theses See 1 Cor. 7.6 compared with 40. verse See Acts 16.7 As in the third person in the Imperative exeat Let him go is permissive Note that while this young man was prosecuting his Argument J. L. did insolently intrude himself and interrupted him and they spoke of them three at sometimes

established by many Laws for a far longer time than the Profession we oppose It seems ye defend your selves chiefly by Popish Weapons as will anon further appear in order whereunto I shall speak a word or two to John Menzies and so make an end The greatest and frequentest Argument that both thy Scholars and others make against us is that we have no certain evidence by which we can make known that we are led by the Spirit that Hereticks and others cannot pretend to Now if this may be admitted as relevant or strong against us I desire thou wouldst be pleased to shew me how thou canst extricate thy self out of the same difficulty when urged by the Jesuit Dempster that the Scripture which thou assigned as the ground of the Protestant Religion is an evidence for you seeing all Hereticks also pretend to it Let me see what difficulties occur in our Case as to the Spirit which likewise occurs not the same very way in yours as to the Scripture For besides that we have as good ground to lay claim to the Scriptures as your selves and are ready and I hope able to prove our Principles from them as well as your selves If ye say men may be deceived by a seducing Spirit What then will it therefore follow that the Spirit of God will deceive any or that men ought not to be guided by it more than because many men have been and are deceived by a misunderstanding and wrong use of the Scripture that therefore the Scripture doth deceive people or ought not to be the Rule If it be said divers men pretending to the Spirit contradict one another doth not the same recur as to the Scriptures What greater contradictions can there be than there is betwixt certain Churches both acknowledging the Scriptures to be the Rule Hast thou forgotten John how thou and thy Elder Brother Andr. Cant who both affirmed the Scripture to be the only certain Rule yet oftentimes before the same Auditory in the same Pulpit did from the very same ver of Scripture Ps 93.5 Holiness becometh thy house O Lord for ever draw different and contradictory Doctrines Uses and Applications If that then will not infer according to you the Scriptures to be an uncertain Rule neither will the other as to the Spirit If it be said that the same man pretending to be guided by the Spirit hath been of different Judgments doth not the same also recur as to the Scriptures Or need we go further John than thy self to prove this who hath all along acknowledged the Scripture to be the Rule and yet sometime judged the Congregational way to be preferable to the Presbyterian then the Presbyterian better then Independent and now the Episcopal preferable to both Or tell me John honestly did the Scripture deceive thee when thou preached upon that Text Why mournest thou for Saul If thou say thou only here misunderstood the place and misapplied it yet is the Scripture for all that true and certain may not the same he said if one pretending the Spirit to be the Rule should fall in the like error that the Spirit were not to be blamed or thence termed uncertain but the man that mistook the voice thereof or took his own imaginations instead of it as thou didst thy misapprehensions for the sense of that Scripture If thou canst extricate thy self out of these difficulties so as to satisfie me or any other rational and indifferent person I may seriously say to thee according to the Proverb Eris mihi magnus Apollo And really thou mayst not be without hopes of making a Proselyte But if it appear to all judicious and unprejudicate persons that John Menzies's Arguments against the Quakers are no other than the Jesuits against him and whatever way he can defend himself against the Jesuites so the Quakers can do against him and impugn and straiten him the same way so that his Argument is like the Vipers brood that destroys him that brings it forth I say if this appear what may candid persons judge of John Menzies honesty that has asserted in Print that Quakerism is Popery under a disguise and the Papists and Quakers are one The state of the Controversie in the first place then both upon our part and yours is in Thesis and not in hypothesi that is not whether or not we be truly ruled by the Spirit or can give an evidence of it more than whether ye be truly led by the Scriptures or can give any evidence that ye are but whether we do well in saying the Spirit is the principal Rule of Faith for though divers Sects now to wit Lutherans Calvinists Episcopalians Presbyterians Independents Anabaptists Antinomians Arminians c. do all quarrel one another each laying claim to be led by the Scripture denying it of the other yet do they all agree in this that the Scripture is the only Rule will it therefore follow that the Scripture is not the Rule or certain because none of these can give a certain evidence convincing their respective opposers that they are led by it So on the other hand though such as affirm the Spirit to be the principal Rule cannot give any evidence to convince their Opposers that they are led by it it will not follow that it is not the Rule or that they err in affirming it so to be A Postscript AS the Apostle Paul said concerning the Spirit of God that there are diversity of operations but one Spirit and one body of Christ which is his Church so I may say concerning Antichrist and his spirit and body The body of Antichrist is but one having many members and the spirit of Antichrist is but one in the root though in different operations appearances And what is this body of Antichrist but all these whether Papists or others though pretending to Reformation under whatsoever designation as Episcopal Presbyterian Independent Anabaptist or any else who oppose the Spirit of Christ in his spiritual appearances and operations in the body of Christ which is his Church A manifest instance of the truth of this I my self of late have been an ear and eye witness of For not many months ago I had occasion at London both to see with my eyes and hear with my ears how the people called Anabaptists some of their chief Teachers opposed denied slighted and by all means their earthly and devilish wisdom could invent laboured to make of none effect the inward evidence of the Spirit of God in his people alledging openly in the faces of thousands That whoever ●ould not give an evidence to their Adversaries that they were inspired with the Spirit of God such as no hereticks could pretend to were no Christians but deceivers So these Anabaptists lately argued against us at London in an open Assembly And so now since in my own native Country within these few days I have seen the same Spirit to appear in men professedly very much differing from