Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	father_n	good_a	holy_a	7,427	5	4.6212	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A94740	A supplement to the Serious consideration of the oath of the Kings supremacy; published October 1660. In, first, some consideration of the oath of allegiance. Secondly, vindicating of the consideration of the oaths of the Kings supremacy and allegiance, from the exceptions of Richard Hubberthorn, Samuel Fisher, Samuel Hodgkin, and some others against them, in the points of swearing in some case, and the matters of those oaths. By John Tombes B.D.	Tombes, John, 1603?-1676.	1661 (1661)	Wing T1821; Thomason E1084_1; ESTC R207991	39,490	48

that had the Law of God amongst them and were famous in the world for their earthly wisdom and knowledge Stephen was stoned and James the Apostle killed with the sword supposed to be tares or the children of the wicked One when they were the pretious wheat of God Acts 6. 13 14. and 12. 2. The Christians that suffered in the ten persecutions were they not accused of being pestilent fellows movers of sedition turners of the world upside down enemies to Caesar Acts 24. 5 12. and 17. 6 7. when the contrary was most true and they will be found to be the faithful martyrs of Jesus So in latter times many of those that have been put to death for heresie and blasphemy are by this age acknowledged to be the Saints of God O King that our words might be acceptable to thee consider that neither thy Self nor Counsellors have the spirit of infallibility if the Apostles that had an extraordinary spirit of discerning must not pluck up the tares lest they root up the wheat also how can any Prince on earth undertake a work so dangerous It is possible many of those that are counted false worshippers and hereticks in this day may at the time when God shall judge the world in righteousness be servants of the most high God Remember we pray thee that those that lived in the days of the Lord Jesus accused their fathers for being guilty of the blood of the Prophets saying If we had been in the days of our Fathers we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Prophets Mat. 23. 29 30. yet themselves killed the Lord of life The Romish Church also saith if we had lived in the days of the heathen Emperors we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the Christians yet puts to death many as righteous as they were and now many of thy subjects in this Nation are ready to say If we had lived in the days of Queen Mary we would not have been guilty with our Fathers in the blood of those good men that then suffered yet such a spirit of persecution is now risen up as if not restrained will terminate in the blood of many good men and so bring down the wrath of God upon this generation and there will be no remedy Answ I could eccho out all this after them were not this alledged as a ground of their denial of the taking the Oath of the Kings Supremacy It is a good wish that the King would deeply consider and remember all this some acts of his give cause to think he doth and to hope he will remember it I said somewhat to the same effect in my Serious Consideration of the Oath of the Kings Supremacy and such things as have lately hapned give still cause to inculcate this that his Majesty his Counsel and Ministers of justice have need of very much circumspection how they imprison and other ways punish men for their dissent from that which is established in matters of faith and worship sith this power of punishing for supposed heresies errours and schisms hath been so unhappily and unrighteously managed as gives cause to fear that it neither was nor will nor can be well used without destruction of many innocent persons God forbid I should justifie any abuse or neglect according to my power and place the seeking of reformation Nevertheless all this amounts not to a sufficient ground or reason to deny the Kings Supremacy in spirituals sith the like abuses happen in temporal things and yet these Petitioners deny not the promise yea and that indeed in words of swearing of obedience in temporal causes We might make a Catalogue of Sauls Davids Solomons and others oppressions in temporal things shall we therefore deny their regal power in them no but acknowledge the power and oppose the abuse yet not by arms or other unpeaceable ways but by Petitions to the Rulers prayers to God patient suffering which are the weapons whereby Christians conquer For which reason I except not against that which the Petitioners adde 4. To inflict temporal punishmemts upon any of us thy subjects for not conforming to thy decrees that restrain us from the worship that we know to be of God Is it not a breach of that royal law that commands thee that whatsoever ye would that men should do to you do you even so to them for this is the law and the Prophets Mat. 7. 12. And we would in all humility offer to thy consideration if thy soul were in our souls stead wouldest thou be satisfied with the same measure as is now dealt unto us when neither the God of heaven nor our own consciences condemn us of any evil intended against thy person or authority Nor can the greatest of our enemies make any due proof of any combination or plotting with any upon the face of the earth for the disturbance of the publique peace And this we can with boldness say because we know our own innocency Yet cannot this be a sufficient ground of denying the Kings Supremacy in spirituals nor is the proof of that Supremacy enervated by what follows But whereas it is objected that the Kings of Israel and Judah under the old Testament had power in spiritual causes and did punish blasphemy and Idolatry which are crimes of the highest nature against God we confess they had such power which was given to them in plain precepts written in the law of Moses but the Gospel that we live under is another dispensation in which the Lord Jesus is the only Law-giver who doth not as Moses proceed against the transgressors of his precepts by external force and power to the destroying them in their bodies and estates in this life but in long suffering waits on men not willing they should perish but rather that they should repent and be saved 2 Thes 1. 9. 2 Pet. 3. 9. Acts 17. 31. and when any continues in disobedience to the Gospel his punishment is eternal in the world to come The Apostle Paul testifies of himself that he was a blasphemer and perescuter 1 Tim. 1. 20. And if the mind of God had been that he should have suffered death in that condition how should he have had repentance given him and been such a glorious instrument in the Church as he was Furthermore it is too well known that the Jews are the greatest blasphemers against our Lord Jesus Christ as are on the earth yet it is not the mind of the Lord they should be destroyed from the face of the earth for how then should the Scripture be fulfilled wherein God hath promised to call them and to make them the most glorious Nation of the world Oh how can they be converted if they be not permitted where the Gospel is preached We speak not this in favour of any blasphemy for our souls abhor it but because we would have the lives of men as precious in thy eyes O King as they are in

lawfulness of oaths in all which the Apostle took God to witness his love to the Saints and labour in the work of his Ministry signifying that all understand how that he spoke the truth and did not lie and kept to his yea and nay according to Christs doctrine and did not swear at all I reply 1. Those Texts were not brought by me as a proof for men to swear and take oaths for men or against men but to prove that some swearing in Gospel-times may be lawful sith the Apostle Paul a man moved by the holy spirit even in his holy writings and speeches did swear which is enough against R. H. and his complices who deny any swearing lawful in any case 2. I say that these speeches God is my witness I speak the truth in Christ I lie not my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost behold before God I lie not God is my record are forms of swearing it being the definition of an oath which all Writers that I know of agree in that an oath is an appeal to or invocation of God as joint witness with us of the truth of our speeches and therefore in this I write nothing but what God will witness the truth of I speak truth before God without abusing the Apostles words in pleading for the lawfulness of some swearing and in this I dare stand to the arbitrement of sober honest-hearted intelligent men not fearing the censure of R. H. as if I were a Novice who have been a professor of Christianity above forty years and a Preacher of the Gospel above thirty and wish R. H. do not accuse me as lifted up with pride with the like spirit as it is said that Diogenes trampled on Plato's pride with greater pride there being not many branches of pride greater then this to take on him to judge the secrets of anothers heart and to foretel what he will do it being to behave himself as if he were God Sure they that know me and judge of me with a charitable mind they that have had experience of my adventures and losses for asserting truth will not believe R. H. in what he here suggests that I would do or say any thing for hire Who would thank R. H. if he would shew what hire I have taken which the words of Christ and his Apostle allow not Luke 10. 7. 1 Cor. 9. 7 10 11 13 14. 1 Tim. 5. 17 18. Gal. 6. 6. But if he think his tongue is his own that he may accuse and reproach at his pleasure I think it my duty to tell him that his practice is rayling and false accusing and that his tongue is set on fire of hell and that without repentance he shall not inherit the kingdom of God 1 Cor. 6. 9 10. He proceeds in the same vein of reviling censuring and false accusing in his speech of my fifth Argument to which he makes no answer but this That to break Christs command is of no necessary use that I might as well have stated my Argument That to break Christs command is of benefit to humane society therefore to break Christs command is lawful c. and might thus have proved it that except we break Christs command we cannot preach for hire nor sue men at law for tithes nor live in pride ease and vanity nor keep our places of profit and benefits which is necessary for our society of Priests Ergo. But we whose eyes God hath opened do see that all his book tends to perswading of people to swear when Christ hath said Swear not at all and that which he would now swear for again would swear against for the same advantage and profits which he hath in his eye yea or he would perswade all men not to swear and bring scripture to prove it upon the same account so that what he doth in this kind is because of advantage for two years since he did not preach this doctrine nor write those arguments To which I reply The Lord rebuke thee there 's none of thy accusations of divinations here after thy rayling fashion brought by thee which thou canst prove by me and those that know me know it to be false which thou suggests concerning my seeking gain and suiting my actions thereto and changing my doctrin There is no doctrin in that book thou here opposest or the other of the insufficiency of light in each man which hath not been my constant doctrine What thou wouldst have imagined as if no swearing were of necessary use to humane society is contrary to all experience of governors of Kingdoms and Commonwealths and the Apostles words alledged by me Heb. 6. 16. An oath for confirmation is to men an end of all strife That which Samuel Fisher saith That what swearing was then allowed of as before a ruler it then was to end a strife among men who are yet in strife is now unlawful among his Saints who are redeemed out of strife and the rest of those fleshly works which it is one of Gal. 5. is a silly shift For 1. The Saints are men 2. Those of the old Testament were Saints and yet were to swear 3. If men not Saints may swear to end strife then it is not prohibited by Christ to them to swear in some cases and sith the precept of not swearing is not limited to Saints if others may swear in some cases notwithstanding that precept Saints may swear also 4. Saints are redeemed from other works of the flesh yet are not so redeemed but that they may have envyings wrath emulations However Quakers imagine themselves perfect yet the Scripture doth not say that the most eminent Saint is so redeemed out of strife but that he may be tempted to and guilty of some unlawfull strife while he is in the body 5. There was strife between Paul and Barnabas Acts 15. 39. Paul and Peter Gal. 2. 11. the Corinthians 1 Cor. 1. 11. Who were termed Saints ver 2. 6. Quakers are guilty of strifes in opposing Preachers and reviling dissenters from them and therefore if it be necessary to end strifes of men that there be oaths it is also necessary to swear to end strifes with them Do not they seek to recover stollen goods due debts and if so oaths are necessary for them 7. Oftimes Saints are found so guilty of contentions among themselves that were not Magistrates impowred to compose them they would be endless and remediless The story of the libels brought to Constantine the great at the Nicene Council of one Bishop and Confessour against another and burnt by him shewes how ill it would fare with the best Saints if Magistracy did not quiet them Our own times have had too much experience of this 8. Saints live among men unholy to whom they owe duties of love and righteousness which cannot be done without testifying the truth in many cases wherein they differ to end their strife and therefore Saints are bound when the laws require oaths