Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	call_v	ghost_n	holy_a	25,488	5	5.6892	4	true

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

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

say Peter and John had no such power as through laying on of hands to give the Holy Ghost because Peter declared to the men of Israel Acts 4. ver 10. that by the Name of Jesus did he that was cured stand whole before them from whence you infer that as Peter had not the gift of healing so not the power of giving the Holy Ghost yet Acts 4. and the 10. doth not prove that Peter wanted power upon either acount for if you look into Acts the 3. the 4 5 6. where Peter bad the lame man look on them it is said he gave heed to them expecting to receive something of them but Peter said unto him silver and gold have I none but such as I have give I thee In the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth stand up and walk from whence it is clear though Peter had no such power of his own procuring yet he had it by vertue of gift from God as appeares from these words Such as I have give I thee and if you look into Matth. 10. ver 1. you shall not only see how that the Apostles had such a power but also how they came by it for speaking of Christ the Text saith He called his Disciples and gave them power over unclean spirits to cast them out and to heal all manner of sickness and all manner of diseases from all which it is clear that the twelve Apostles of which Peter and John were two had a power given them from God to do miracles and heal all manner of diseases and again if Peter and John had not received from God a power instrumentally to give the Holy Ghost through laying on of hands Peter should have reproved Simon for two faults First for thinking that they had such a power as they had not Secondly for thinking that power which God gives freely might have been purchased with money but you may see Acts 8. v. 20 22. when Peter comes to reprove Simon he reproves him only for one single sin committed by way of thought saying unto him Thy money perish with thee because thou hast thought that the gift of God might be purchased with money and verse 22. Peter saith to him Repent therefore of this thy wickedness and pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee from whence it is cleer that Simon did not sin in thinking Peter and John had a power as instruments through laying on of hands to give the Holy Ghost because Peter did not reprove him for two mistakes in the plural but onely for one fault in the singular in these words Pray God if perhaps the thought not the thoughts of thine heart may be forgiven thee so that it is clear the Apostles had a power instrumentally through laying on of hands to give the Holy Ghost And Simon was not mistaken in what he saw nor in what he thought as touching their power but this one thing was his sin viz. in thinking that that spiritual power which God then gave to those his servants Peter and John might be purchased with corruptible silver or gold Ben Again say you Antagonist Suppose it should be granted by way of supposition that these in receiving the Holy Ghost did receive the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit yet this is nothing to prove what they say viz. That laying on of hands upon Baptized believers was to this end that they might receive the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit and why here is a great mistake in laying down this to be one end for in this here is no difference put between the End of a thing and the Effect of a thing men commonly propose their end before hand that is before they do their work but the effect followes the work done as for instance the end wherefore the Husband-man plowes and sowes is that he may have his ground fruitfull the effect it may so fall out it will be barren again the end wherefore such a one builds a house is that he may dwell in it the effect perhaps may so fall out that it may be blown down of winds and so become useless Again I shall give you another instance two Ministers of Christ they go to such a place to preach their end is to convert souls the effect is they are claped up in prison and persecuted as some have been and so you conclude the gift of the Holy Ghost was not the end but the effect of their laying on of hands Tho. Answer you say suppose it were granted that these in receiving the Holy Ghost did receive the extraordinary gists of the Spirit yet it will not prove that they laid on hands to that end because as you say we greatly mistake in not putting a difference between the end and the effect of a thing but I must tell you I think that you have not dealt fairly for at first you seem to us as if you would distinguish between the end and effect of one and the same thing and yet in your three instances the ends effects you speak of relate to several causes For though it is true the end wherfore the husbandman plowes and sowes is that he may have his ground fruitfull yet though barrenness fall out it is no effect of his plowing and sowing for the natural and proper effect of plowing and sowing is to make the ground fruitfull and barrenness is the effect of some cross cause as either blasting or overmuch drought or some such like And secondly it is true the end wherefore a man builds a house is that he may dwell in it but if the effect be blowing down yet this effect ariseth not from the mans building of it but from another cross cause viz. great winds And thirdly if any of Christs Ministers go to any place to preach it is true their end is to convert souls but if they be clapt up in prison it is no effect of their preaching though you seem to affirm it is for preaching bears no such bitter fruit as imprisonment but their imprisonment is the fruit or effect of a contrary cross cause viz. the malicious proceedings of wicked men the Devills instruments so that it is clear you said we were mistaken in not distinguishing between the end of a thing and effect of a thing it is clear your self is mistaken because the end and effect you speak of belong not to one and the same thing but receive their beings from direct contrary causes now that which a man desires or aimes at or layes down as the end wherefore he useth meanes is the same which through the meanes instrumentally is effected or brought to pass again the Husbandmans desire or aim or end is through the use of meanes to enjoy a plentifull harvest and if no cross cause prevent the thing effected or brought to pass is a plentifull harvest so that it is clear the end aim or desire and the thing effected is one and the same in substance and

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