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	law_n	life_n	5,319	5	5.2045	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65887	A serious search into Jeremy Ives's questions to the Quakers who are herein cleared from his scornful abuses : and Jer. Ives himself manifest to be no Christian from his own observations, reviling, ostentation, &c. / by a witness for Christianity in faith and life, George Whitehead.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1674 (1674)	Wing W1958; ESTC R5315	30,089	74

A Serious SEARCH INTO Jeremy Ives ' s Questions TO THE QUAKERS Who are herein cleared from his Scornful Abuses And Jer. Ives himself manifest to be NO CHRISTIAN from his own Observations Reviling Ostentation c. By a Witness for Christianity in Faith and Life George Whitehead His Mischief shall return upon his own Head Psal. 7. 16. Printed in the Year 1674. A Serious Search INTO Jeremy Ives ' s Questions to the Quakers SInce Jeremy Ives his late Daring Challenge under Pretext of a Sober Request and his attempting to prove the Quakers no Christians is now changed into Questions for the Quakers which he saith are grounded upon some Observations made upon the Papers lately published by Thomas Rudyard and one W. P. which are pretended Replies to Jeremy Ives his sober Request to the Quakers but will appear by the Light of the ensuing Observations he sayes to be but Idle Shifts and Evasions Seeing he begins at this contemning Rate against us and vilifying and slighting our Friends Answers and pretends such Light in his own Observations it is needful they should be inspected and seriously examined however he reckon his Questions and Obserservations so very clear and lightsom Proofs against us I will assure him we find no such Validity in them to u●c●ristian us I observe two general Accusations on which his Matter much depends to render the Quakers no Christians First Condemning that in others which they allow in themselves Secondly Disdaining Huffing Slandering and Reviling Both which I grant with him are so far from being either Characters of a Chr●stian or Infallible Marks of a Disciple of Christ that they are wholy inconsistent with Christianity The first Position is thus to be considered For Men to condemn that in others which they allow in them elves is an Inconsistency and a self Condemnation where the Matter is the same in every Respect both as to the Nature and Circumstance though that which is an Evil in it self is condemnable and not to be allowed either in one's self or in another much more is his Condemnation aggravated who allows that Evil in himself which he condemns in others Other things that are Lawful in themselves become accidentally Evil through the Abuse or Evil-Mind that brings them forth But to the second Position it 's granted that Disdaining Huffing Slandering and Reviling are evil in themselves if by Huffing he means a fierce Despising scornful Slighting those that are good or that deserve it not and by Reviling a making a worthy Man base or calling a Man all to naught The Truth of it is Jeremy thou wouldst appear in these Matters a very grave sober Christian and a Man only for solid and savoury Expressions But whether thou hast not plaid the Hypocrite in these Pretences of Seriousness and Christianity and brought thy self under the Guilt both of condemning that in others which thou allowest in thy self and of Disdaining Slandering and Reviling will further appear in the following Examination Thou sayest that these Papers like all the rest of the Quakers Writings are stuffed with vain and frothy Expressions and what those are thou instances W. P's saying that the Product of many dayes Travail was but a sorry Mouse the Product of Jeremy ' s great Mountain Which was with Reference to thy daring and vapouring Challenge falsly term'd by thee A sober Request to the Quakers But it disgusts thee to use such a Comparison as that of a sorry Mouse and why so Is it because of the Impropriety of the Speech or that it is too Ironical for such a grave sober Christian as Jeremy Ives would be accounted But I tell thee Jeremy thou art one of them that str●ins at a Gnat and swallows a Camel whether thou thinkest these Expressions proper or not And secondly to prove us guilty of thy second Position thou sayest that Our Friends Papers abound with Railings and bitter Invectives thinking to raise thereby a Dust a plain Falshood to darken the Understanding of the unwary Reader and what are these In calling thee Audacious Privateer Bravado Hector Senacherib Impudent c. And further to shew thy self a very moderate and sober Christian thou sayest That these Papers abound with Untruths thou wilt not break the Laws of good Manners as they do to call them LYES and FORGFRIES And so that here thy Modesty Seriousness is such as when thou hast insinuated that the Quakers are No Christians nor yet Followers of the Laws of Good Manners for Charging their Adversaries such as thou and thy Brother T. Hicks with Lyes Forgeries but thou wouldst not be thought so to Unchristian and Unmanner thy self as to use such Expressions as Audacious Privateer Impudent Impudent Lyes and Forgeries Oh demure Jeremy Hypocrita cupit se videri justum But first If he be No Christian that condemns that in others which he allows in himself then is Jeremy Ives No Christian. Secondly If he be No Christian that is guilty of such Language as he himself accounts Disdaining Huffing Reviling Railing and bitter Invectives as namely Audacious Impudent Lyes c. and thus to charge another be Unchristian and Unmannerly then is Jer. Ives NO Christian by his own Observation But that Jer. Ives is herein both Self-condemn'd Guilty take a View of his Language against us in his Pamphlet viz. Mcn of Lying Spirits gross Equivocations idle Shifts and Evasions Bedlam-man audacious and ridiculous daring Prophets your Baseness wilful Baseness pretended Impulses and Enthusiastick Necessities Lawyers Logick Figments of thy Fancy little Wtticisms to please thy simple beguiled Clients this Emperick of the Law Thomas Rudyard what Impostors they pretend the Spirit to be the Rule when they can give no more Evidence of it then Mahomet or Muggleton the sad Shifts the poor Men are put to their Enthusiastick Principles such idle Enthusiasts Thus Jeremy Ives through his Observations Judge Serious Reader Is not here both Huffing Disdaining and Reviling and what he himself hath accounted such But if Jeremy think this not enough to prove himself condemned and guilty of both Disdaining Huffing Reviling and Vanting let his Salutation to Arthur Cook upon the Exchange be added viz. Thou Pittiful Fool thou Knave thou Loggerhead And if to call any Man's Papers Lyes and Forgeries be a breaking the Laws of good Manners and to call a Man Audacious or Impudent bewray an Unchristian Spirit and be corrupt Communication as he implies then has Jeremy Ives both bewrayed an Unchristian Spirit hath broken the Laws of good Manners and condemned that in others which he hath plainly allowed in himself for in his Book entituled Innocency above Impudency he doth not only charge his Opposer with Impudency but he gives him the Lye near thirty Times and likewise in his Quakers Quaking he has shewn his Envy and Ill-Language sufficiently Where art thou now Jeremy Ives Art thou not here found guilty and allowing that in thy self which thou hast condemned others for as Unchristian And

Untruth for both our Religion and Principles as well as our Personal Reputations are concern'd in our Charge against Tho. Hicks as appears plainly both in his Forgeries Perversions and Slanders which concern both Doctrine and Practice but it seems Jeremy is very raw and unversed in the Controversies between us and yet his Confidence will serve him to engage in the Quarrel for Tho. Hicks To the second He counts this another of our poor Put-offs and Unreasonable that he should make good any more then he has charg'd against us He counts it unreasonable then to personate T. H. in the Matter that we charge against him was it not then Unreasonable he should so deeply engage for him before But Jeremy sayes He is ready to make good what he has charged against us by the Grace of God if we DARE meet him But this is to be understood as a distinct Offer of it self without Respect to the Matter about Tho. Hicks However it is but single Daring and Vapouring Jeremy still whose Brags and Attempts we value not but slight his Folly therein To the third He counts this impertinent When saith he we tell them they are no Christians either of one sort or another This he tells the Quakers and it is but his own telling and I do not think but he doth in this violate some better Perswasions and Convictions that he has had in himself And while he confesseth that he is a good Christian that hath a Rule for his Faith and Practice in the Christian-Religion and endeavours to the uttermost of his Strength and Understanding to believe and live accordingly He concludes they are No Christians that have no Rule for their Faith and Practice in the Christian Religion and such are the Quakers saith he pag. 14. See what an Imperious and Censorious Judge this is He says we have No Rule though we prosess believe and practically own the Guidance of the Spirit of Christ and in Subjection thereto do own the Holy Scriptures And for our Lives and Conversations I hope he doth not conclude that either the People called Quakers in general are therein Unchristian or that his own is more Christian then theirs how comes he then to presume that we have not the Spirit of Christ or none of his Light in us for a Rule in affirming that the Quakers have No Rule for their Faith and Practice in the Christian Religion But this Presumption is not strange to us since he could openly tell William Gibson and me that We were not inlightened with the Light of Christ. I could not but then take notice of the Man's Insolency and Foolish Censoriousness but how doth he prove that the Quakers have No Rule for their Faith and Practice in the Christian Religion and therefore are no Christians He thus attempts it viz. That though George Keith to keep up your Credit with the People said The Scriptures were onned by you as a Seoundary Rule for your Faith and Practice yet Edw. Burroughs contradicts him and tells us in so many words That the Scriptures are NO Rule or Guide of Faith and Life to the Saints see his Works fol. 515. and reconcile your Prophets as well as you can Thus far Jeremy He would make the World believe that he has here given the Quakers a deadly Blow in rendring their Prophets irreconcileable yea and to fasten the Contradiction he saith that E. B. tells us in so many words That the Scriptures are NO RULE or Guide of Faith c. for this he bids us see his Works fol. 515. How now bold Jeremy I have seen the place quoted by thee and thou hast manifestly belyed Edw. Burroughs to prove thy false Charge for Edwards Words in the place are thus viz. The Scriptures are profitable and were given forth to be read and to be fulfilled yet they are not THE RULE and Guide of Faith and Life unto the Saints but the SPIRIT of God that gave forth the Scriptures that is THE RULE and Guide Teacher and Leader into all Truth See also his following words in the next Clause affirming That the Scriptures are the Words of God that the Spirit of God is THE RULE of Faith and Life to the Saints that men ought to search the Scriptures and believe what is therein written c. See now Jeremy that Edward Burroughs his words are not as thou citest them that the Scriptures are NO RULE but that they are not THE RULE and Guide of Faith and Life unto the Saints but the Spirit and yet the Scriptures to be Searched Read and Fulfilled so that he denyes them not but plainly implyes them to be A RULE but not THE RULE that is not the most Eminent or Highest Rule but the Spirit And how doth this contradict George Keith's saying That we own the Scriptures as a Secundary Rule which also implies a primary or Principal Rule to wit the Holy Spirit as well as E. B. doth in his words before For my part I cannot understand any more Contradiction between saying The Scriptures are a Secundary Rule and yet not THE RULE and Guide of Faith and Life unto the Saints then there is between saying Jeremy Ives is a Baptist Preacher and yet not the principal Preacher among them or between Jeremy Ives's being a Man and yet not the Chief or Best of Men though I confess this too mean an Instance for the Subject before but only somewhat to illustrate the Distinction I was unwilling to have charged Jeremy with Forgery from the Place he quotes in saying that E. B. tells us in so many words that the Scriptures are NO Rule But now upon Enquiry and Search into his Falshood herein I am satisfied that I should do him no Wrong to charge It upon him and let the Place quoted by him in E. B's Works determine it Again I find no Inconsistency between William Smith's confessing Christ and the Spirit of God to be the Rule for trying Spirits searching the Heart and not the Scriptures yet confessing them to be of great Service and G. K.'s owning the Scriptures for a Secundary Rule that Christ should be preferred before and above the Scriptures both as to trying and discovering and yet they serviceable in their place as Christ opens the Understanding in them can be no Opposition But Jeremy objects That the Quakers deny the Scriptures to be a Rule of Faith and Practice comprehensive of the whole Duty of Man 1. That they are so comprehensive as declaring the whole Duty of Man respecting Faith and Practice as to the Sum and Substance thereof respecting Man's Salvation I know none of us deny But that they are not that Manifesting Rule of every particular Act of Faith and Obedience that God may require respectively I think this Opposer cannot deny but that he hath granted thus much at sundry Discourses as with respect to such Prophets and Messengers as God might for ought he knew raise up in these dayes and peculiarly commissionate and

his Practice as well as they It seems Immediate Inspiration is of a very little Esteem with thee and of as little Use with thee If because some falsly pretend it for that which is Absurd others cannot thereby Reprove him for it at this rate of Arguing the True Prophets Mouthes should have been stopt from Reproving the False because they pretended the same the True did and could say Thus saith the Lord c. And likewise the True Apostles should not have Reproved the False because they pretended the same thing doubtless when they transform'd themselves as the Ministers of Christ. But if by Immediate Inspiration Absurd or Evil Actions cannot be reproved where the same is but pretended then farewel all true Christianity true Savour true Sence and Judgment But doth not the Spirit of God search all things and the Spiritual Man judge all things Surely if this man did really own that there 's any such thing in being now as either Revelation from Heaven or Immediate Inspiration or that there is a True God and that He is Known he durst not talk at this idle sleighting rate as he doth about Immediate Inspiration as not a sufficient Rule to reprove Absurdities where It can but be pretended for them But yet a little before he grants a super-natural Evidence that if we can give some super-natural Evidence why we should be received as namely in writing against the absurd Opinions of such as pretend they are revealed to them but what Super-natural Evidence this is that he means he tells us not while he does not own the Sufficiency of Immediate Inspiration to reprove absurd or evil Practices Opinions by for if a supernatural Evidence doth not attend Immediate Inspiration or Revelation from Heaven it is no where to be found then it follows the Spirit is insufficient to evidence it self or it is not Self evidencing and such Doctrine as this will at length lead some to be such Fools and Atheists as to say in their Hearts There is No God But I tell this Adversary to Immediate Inspiration That the Spirit of God can no more be without a super-natural Evidence then the Sun can be without its Light God has given an Universal Evidence thereof by his Light in all men's Consciences which answers to the Spirit 's Testimony and Ministry in the Ministers of the Spirit which men may evidently see if they close not their Eyes or harden not their Hearts to cause their own Stumbling and Overthrow In order to a manifest Decision of the chief Matters in Controversie I desire Jez Ives or any of his Brethren for him to give a plain and ingenuous Answer to these Questions distinctly I. Whether Immediate Inspiration and Revelation from Heaven are in Being in the True Church in these dayes yea or nay II. Whether Immediate Inspiration be not necessary to the being of a True Christian or Jew inward III. What super-natural Evidence or necessary Proof doth J. I. require of any ones having Immediate Inspiration from God IV. Whether any one be fit to try or judge of a Super-natural Evidence or Immediate Inspiration in another but such a one as doth acknowledge and partake of immediate Inspiration in himself V. Whether he that undertakes to prove others No Christians ought not to be a True Christian and first to approve himself such a one upon a true and undeniable Definition of a True Christian Thou Hypocrite first cast out the Beam out of thine own Eye c. VI. What is the true and proper Signification and Discrimination of Enthusiast and Impostor and so the real Derivation of Enthusiasm and Imposture And whether there be not a plain Difference in the Nature of the Words For Words and Terms where either difficult or doubtful must be explaind before Matters can be clearly discussed thereupon VII Whether it be not an Undervaluing of immediate Inspiration for any to hold That thereby men cannot Reprove an Absurd Opinion or Practice in such as pretend a Revelation from Heaven for it VIII Whether the Apostles and primitive Christians were oblieged to produce an Evidence of their Faith and Practice by Inspiration at the Demand of their Enemies or only when God call'd them thereunto IX Whether to require an Evidence for our Faith by immediate Inspiration be not all one as to put us upon proving our selves Christians or equivalent thereto X. Whether it be proper or reasonable for one that has charged us with being Impostors and Men of Lying Spirits and promised to prove it insteed thereof to require a Proof or Evidence from us of our being immediately or divinely inspired and if we do not at his Demand produce such Evidence as he requireth to conclude us Impostors XI And how does Jeremy Ives prove his Call to Dip or Plunge People in Water Or what Evidence can he produce for His particular Call thereto XII And whether he does profess any Immediate Inspiration and Revelation from Heaven for his Dipping People if he doth what super natural Evidence can he produce for it if he doth not whether he may not be deemed an Impostor therein XIII Whether divers of the Baptist-Preachers have not heretofore imposed their Water-Bapitsm as Gospel or as a thing necessary to Salvation and so to the being of a Christian and Church of Christ threatning affrighting many simple People into Water upon pain of Damnation or the Curse some by telling them They must Dip or Damn XIV Whether the Baptists are of the same Opinion still That their Water-Baptism or Dipping is Gospel necessary to Salvation or to be practised upon pain of Damnation XV. And how proves Jeremy Ives that the One Baptism spoaken of Ephes. 4. is that of Water And whether his Instance of Lords many for divers Baptisms as of Water Affliction and the Holy Ghost were a pertinent and meet Instance and Comparison as between One Lord Jesus and but One proper Baptism to wit that of Water and between the Lords many divers Baptisms to wit of Afflictions and the Holy Ghost see his Quakers Quaking p. 38. XVI And what Call Gospel-Rule or Precept have Baptists for Night Dipping and Fleeing or Absenting from Meetings in Times of Persecution And whether their envious Invectives and abusive Pamphlets now in Times of Peace against their Neighbours do not proceed from the same cowardly Spirit which acted them in Times of Suffering XVII After the Baptists have try'd their Strength made Enquiry of Apostates and searched Books and Courts to pick out Occasions against us to render us as Vile as they can and not only no Christians but inconsistent with Government and all this if possible to destroy us May they not justly expect that their Mischief will return upon their own Heads and that they will fall into the Pit which they dig for others XVIII If they persist in this their course of Envy against us whether they may not as men conscious justly expect a publick Reprehension we having Occasion sufficient out of their own Books and former Proceedings to exhibit a History of Anabaptists both with relation to Religion and Government For our parts we value not their Envy nor the Worst they can do but are at Defiance with it knowing also that Christian-Life and Spirit that shall out-live their inveterate Enmity who are Confederates a gainst us and we shall therein be further manifest and Encrease but they shall Decrease XIX I would further ask if Jer Ives and his Brethren do not own them to be Christians whom they Baptize XX. And what Evidence of their Faith or Christianity do those their Baptiz'd Believers produce Answer these I have taken Occasion of late Time to take Notice of Jeremy Ives's former Envy Confusion Ignorance and Abuse that he has shewn against the People call'd Quakers in his two Books the one entituled The Quakers Quaking printed in the Year 1656. and the other entituled Ianocency above Impudency printed 1656. which I had a mind to have given the Reader some Hints of but for Brevity's sake I reserve them to a further Opportunity if Occasion be given me Though I am rather desirous that our Daring Opposer may by the Light of Christ consider his Wayes and Repent of his Evil then be concerned in Contests with him For God knows I contend not for Contention but for Truth 's sake Reader If that Passage in the 8th Page of this Treatise touching Jer. Ives his calling Arthur Cook Pittiful Fool and Knave and Loggerhead on the Exchange should be doubted of This may inform that I have several Certificates thereof under the hands of credible Persons G. W. Pag. 12 lin 21. for of Faith read of our Faith p. 16. l. 24. r. a Meeting again pag. 23. l. 12. f. had 1. hath p 30. l. 12 r. saith that now God is pag. 32. lin 14. f his r is p. 36. l. 7. r. confound and break THE END ‖ E. B. being really satisfied th●y could convert no real Quaker to the Church of Rome. 1 Kings 18. * As in his Primer pag. 10 11 12. * As the World knew him not should only be the Antecedent to so it may be said of this true Prophet G. F. and not that the World was made by him