Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	ghost_n	holy_a	trinity_n	7,211	5	10.1332	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65389	A further discovery of that generation of men called Qvakers by way of reply to an answer of James Nayler to The perfect Pharisee : wherein is more fully layd open their blasphemies, notorious equivocations, lyings, wrestings of the Scripture, raylings and other detestable principles and practices ... / published for the building up of the perseverance of the saints till they come to the end of their faith, even the salvation of their soules.	Weld, Thomas, 1590?-1662.	1654 (1654)	Wing W1268; ESTC R27879	78,750	103

mayst observe he answers nothing and thereby see the spirit of those men that doe stop their eyes against the plainest light but he that hardeneth his heart shall not prosper Position 13. That the Scriptures are not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth He answers nothing according to his custome to our arguments nor excepts against our proofes but labours to confirme the Position Excep 1 Christ is the Word now if the Scriptures be the Word then there is two Words of God now prove that in Scripture or that the Letter is ●aked the Word in plaine words Reply 1. That Christ is the Word is plaine Iohn 1. and who knoweth it not The essentiall and declarative Word not all one 2. That the will of God contained in the Scripture is the Word of God is as plaine besides the Scriptures we named ●n the Perfect Pharisee pag. 24. Marke 7.13 Luke 11 28. Rom. 10.17 Iohn 12.48 we shall adde these Luke 8.11 the Seed is the Word of God ver 12. then commeth the Devill and taketh the word out of their heart least they should beleeve and be saved can the Devill take Christ out of their hearts 1 Thes 2.13 When yee receaved the Word of God which you heard of us yee received it not as the Word of Men but as it is in truth the Word of God c. This was the Word which the Apostles spake yea received it which cannot be me●nt of Christ he should have said yee received him not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God This is so plaine a case we shall not trouble thee further And here th●u mayst observe there are two words of God the essentiall and 〈◊〉 declarative and wonder the man should be so weake as to bid 〈◊〉 produce Scripture to prove this when the Scripture is so full of it to any that doth but reade it Excep 2 The Apostle calls what he wrote a Declaration 1 ●ohn 1.2.3 Reply How doth this prove the Scriptures are no● the word of God nay doth it not fully prove the contrary for that which he declares was what he had heard of the Lord Iesus Scriptures not onely a declaration of the conditions of Saints Againe we doe owne the Scriptures to be the declarative Word of God or a declaration of the minde of God but we say the Quakers doe destroy the Scriptures Divinity and authority when they call them onely a declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth For as we pr●ved before 1 They shall be then no foundation for the Faith of Saints for one mans condition is not the foundation of another mans Faith 2. The Scripture shall have no authority over the soule of any but he that is in the same condition and hath experienced it contrary to Iohn 2.4 8. this is the reason why Nayler sayes they are not commanded to forbear to weare sh●oes in his Book p. 21. if they were they should as well as they are commanded not to s●lute whereas that command if it be in any part binding Luke 10.4 requires both but this will tell thee what is meant by their calling Scripture a speaking forth of the Saints condition viz. it shall have no authority over them further then they list or have an impulse on their spirits or they practice for both the commands are of equall auth●rity yet he denyes they are commanded one of them nay they are both in the same verse Luke 10.4 Yea 3. This destroyes the divine authority of all Historicall and Propheticall Scripture which could not be the Saints conditions when th●y spoke them as also threatnings and promises c But see this at large Perfect Pharisee pag. 24.25 We sha l say but this 1 Iohn 5.16 There is a sinne unto death I doe not say that you should pray for it was this Iohns cond●●ion when he spake it did he exper ence in his heart that he had sinned to death 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is returned to his vomit c. was this the condition of Peter that spoke it but we are ashamed of this wickednesse and folly of these men Excep 3 VVhereas you say it cannot be understood to be the word Christ that came to the Prophets Samuel Ieremy c it seems your understanding is not with the Apostle who saith It was the Spirit of Ch i st that was in them 1 Peter 1 11 and you say what Christ and his Apostles Preached c. was not Christ the Father or Spirit when as the Scripture saith Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. cap. 1 ver 21. Reply The Quakers gross● confounding of Christ with the written VVord 1 Consider Reader how grossely he abuseth and perverts the Scripture to prove that the words that they spoke were Christ and the spirit because it is said These holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost What a grosse and blasphemous con●ounding is here of the word that those men spoke and the holy Ghost that moved them to speake making the word spoken by a finite creature to be the everlasting spirit the holy Ghost The words were committed to Paper and Inke Rev. 1. Heb. 2.2 engraven in Tables 2 Cor. 3.7 Isay 30 8. write it before them in a Booke note it in a Booke c. can this be Christ or the Spirit of God and yet these are the things which they were moved of the holy Ghost to write Who knoweth not that it was the spirit of God that moved them to write that revealed the things they were to publish to the world but were those things that the holy Ghost moved them to write were those things Christ were those things the spirit What a miserable ignorance or judiciall blindnesse is this which certainely the righteous judgement of God hath given up this Generation of people to because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved Position 14. That the Spirits are not to be tryed by the Scriptures c. This Position is not denyed by Nayler we proved it from three testimonies and Nayler in his answer addes his owne defence thereof without exception against any of our proofes VVe shall take his arguments for defence thereof in order Excep 1 The infallible spirit which is the originall of all Scriptures is the tryall of all spirits and that spirituall man judgeth all things and by that spirit the Saints was to judge of all spirits and gave those up to Sathan that was for that end as is plaine 1 Cor. 5 4. Reply 1 The spirit not to be set in opposition to Scripture The force of this argument by which he would prove that spirits are not to be tryed by Scripture lyeth thus The infallible spirit is the tryall of all spirits therefore spirits are not to ●e tryed by Scriptures To

which we reply That this is no consequence at all and shall demonstrately prove it from these severall arguments 1. To set the minde and will of the spirit in opposition to the spirit it selfe can be no Gospel argument For the Scriptures are the infallible will of the spirit layd downe as the rule of Saints beleeving judging and walking What a reproach had it been when the spirit of God sent the Prophets to reveale his will or when Jesus Christ sent the Iewes to search the Scriptures what a reproach had it been to the living God for them to have answered We will not be judged not will we judge of spirits or doctrines by that Word or Scripture we will stand to the judgement of the spirit it selfe opposing the spirit it selfe to its owne will How wicked a thing had it been in them and how ridiculous an answer is this in Nayler 2. How is this to undervalue the wisedome of the holy Ghost himselfe Bereans commended for trying spirits by Scriptures Acts 17.11 who judgeth and pronounceth the Bereans more Noble then those of Thessaloniea in that they searched the Scriptures dayly whether those things that were spoken by Paul and Silas were so or no in that they searched the Scriptures the Spirit prizeth them for trying the Doctrines of Paul and Silas by the Scrip●u●es the written Word And how wicked a thing is this in the Quakers to cry downe this trying of spirits and Doctrines of Scriptures which the spirit expressely ownes with such a signall testimony as speaking out in the soule such a spirituall noblenesse 3. It is confessed on all hands that the eternall Spirit is the originall of Scriptures and the tryer of Spirits who ever questioned that But our question is what the Saints are to try the spirits by not whether the spirit can try the Doctrines No. But we affirme that this eternall Spirit hath left the written Word as that which shall be the discovery touchstone and tryall of spirits and Doctrines by authority and divine warrant from himselfe See 2 Pet. 1.21 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 3 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God c. John 5.99 Search the Scriptures Isay 8.20 c. So that our asserting the Scriptu●es to be tryall of spirits is but setting up the spirit in his owne authority and throne over the spirits and consciences of men and pleading with men that the spirit may rule in his owne way and that they will try Doctrines by that Scripture which the holy Ghost commands them to try the Doctrines by And he that refuseth that touchstone which the spirit hath layd d●wne for tryall doth destroy the authority of the holy Ghos ●et h●m speake fantastically of trying by the spirit what he will But this reasoning of Naylers is as if when the Lo●d Protector should declare what is treason by Law in publique Procl●mations a Justice of Peace should when a Person were proved before him guilty of treason according to that Law yet should say he is not to judge what is treason according to that Law but he would appeale from the Law to himselfe for what is treason though the Law had determined it before But in this case to exclude the Scriptures because the holy Ghost is the originall of them is to destroy that plaine truth Subordinate non pugnant things that act in a subordination though about the same thing doe not destroy one anothers usefulnesse or causality Nay the spirits being the Originall of all Scripture this being confessed doth necessarily confesse their divine authority for that trying of spirits for which they were given forth by the inspiration of God 2. As to that expression the spirituall man judgeth all things we have fully spoken before in pag. 79. We know there is a spirit of discerning which Beleevers have of Gospel mysteries but what absurdity is this to inferre therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures For that light which a spirituall man hath is a Scripture light 1 Cor. 5.4 opened 3. How ignorantly is that 1 Cor. 5.4 produced to prove this assertion when Paul sayes In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when you are gathered together and my spirit to deliver such an one to Sathan c. Paul is not trying of spirits or judging of Doctrines but exhorting the Church to excommunicate the incestuous Person and tells them That his Apostolicall power shall goe along with them in that sentence The verse going before tells you what is the meaning of his spirit where he sayes I as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed that is I in this Epistle doe send you my mind and my judgement what you ought to doe with this man that hath committed Incest as fully as if I were present with you and so you may goe on at your meeting to excommunicate him having for so doing not onely the authority of the Lord Jesus but also the conse●t and iudgement of me his Apostle This is that in those words In the name of the Lord Jesus and my Spirit How doth this man heape up quotations without any understanding of the minde of the spirit in them and with what exceeding ignorance doth he apply such Texts to his absurdities as neither prove them nor speake a tittle concerning them Excep 2 By this spirits were the spirits tryed before the letter was therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures Reply What a miserable non sequitur is here There was a time when the spirit had not given forth the Written Word therefore when the spirit doth give forth a written Word it is not to be regarded There was a time when the Law was not engraven in Tables of Stone therefore when it was engraven the Israelites must not looke upon it as a rule of life or judgement There was a time when the will of God was not written was not Scripture therefore when Christ bids you search the Scriptures you need not heed them at all But we leave the Reader to laugh at this absurd consequence The Bereans judged by another light then James Nayler doth who though they knew there was a time when Scripture was not written yet they tryed the spirits and doctrines of Paul and Salas by the Scriptures And the Spirit it selfe inspired and moved holy men of God to write the Scriptures to leave them as a tryall and touchstone of spirits though once there was a time when there was no written word But oh how doth God infatuate men when they will not submit to the authority of his Word Excep 3 He falls a rayling exceedingly and sayes We have no guide but the letter because we assert the authority of Scripture and addes how many minds how many formes how many gods doe ye worship and all pretend Scripture If it be possible to

Reader If thou wondre● at the length of our answer to this particular truely the dread of the great God hath been here in upon our soules and we thinke no time or paines too much to vindicate the honour of our dread Lord and his Sonne Jesus Christ remembring that his glory he will not give to any other Position 2. That there is no distinction of Persons in the God-head Except Against our proofe for this Nayler objects That such a Position is not in Sauls Errand to Damascus and sayes we have not any proofe for what we here accuse of Reply 1 That George Fox in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. being asked Whether there be one individuall God destinguished into Father Sonne and holy Ghost Answered It was but a busie minde so to aske c. so little respect he hath to that saving mystery of the Trinity this that Booke will witnesse And that we had reason to inferre this Position to be a principle of their way will thus appeare 1. If Nayler had taken notice of our Booke he might have considered these words immediately following With other assertions of the same kinde knowne to some of us Now had he considered this he might have seen that we did not gather that this denying of the Persons c. was their Principle onely from what Fox layes downe in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. but from that of Fox together with other assertions of the same kinde knowne to some of us We know it to be ther Principle by comparing that expression of Fox with what our selves did know from others of them those truths compared were our proofe of that assertion as the Reader will presently fully see 2. Had we had no other ground but that expression of Foxes when he sayes It s a busie minde to enquire c. this had been enough For certainely if Fox thinke it to be a busie minde to enquire it its cleare he doth not beleeve it himselfe as he would not have it to be a matter of any others Faith 3. But thirdly Doth he say we have not any proofe for what we here accuse of Let both him and all men know that we have not charged that assertion on them without sufficient evidence Tomlinson an eminent man in that way in his Book called A Word of Reproofe to the Priests pag. 4. line 20. boldly affirmes the spirit to be no other but Christ himselfe in flesh Is not this to deny the Trinity and take away the distinction of Persons in the God-head 2. One of us doth know this was the Principle of Mr. Taylour Coll. Benson c. and so it was not asserted without reason and their owne spirits and consciences will beare me witnesse W.C. 3. A godly Minister in Westmoreland wrote to us that one of his charge being perverted to become a Quaker affirmed that there was one God b●t no such thing as a distinction of Persons in the God-head and spoke many words passionately against it And now whether there is not just cause to charge them with maintaining this blasphemy will be fully manifest and how un●ighteously Nayler hath so reviled us upon this account But we leave him to the Lord to rebuke Position 3. That the soule is a part of the Divine Essence Excep To that we layd downe as to the proofe and confutation of this Nayler onely replyes What the soule is you know not who live in the fall and are vaine contenders and pleaders for sinne and so goes on grossely rayling Reply For the proofe the e set downe let the Reader observe that he doth not in the least deny it though it be a blasphemous Principle W. C. And one of us doth still affirme that he was an eare witnesse of it Secondly Here we might very well expect that sith he could not deny our proofe he sh●uld answer to our confutation of that blasphemy Against which we have given six reasons but instead thereof he falls a rayling as if a Rabshakehs spirit were divine Rhetoricke And what sayes he He sayes We know not what a soule is and that we pleade for sinne c. and seeke gaine from our quar●ers c. This is h●s answer to our arguments We shall not trouble the Read ● with answering their scandals and reviling● b●t s●● the e●ample of Christ before our eyes 1 Pet 2.23 who wh●n he was reviled reviled not againe Position 4. That Christ is in every man and in the reprobates he is held under corruption Excep 1 To this Nayler answers thus When will you cease to adde your lyes to slander withall Reply We admire how the man can have so much impudence to charge lyes upon us When as first within six lines Nayler himselfe confesseth that he said That if an Indian were there he should witnesse against him viz. W. C. for affirming that Christ did not dwell in the Indians that never heard the Gospel For the said W. C. did he not thinke the conscience of Iames Nayler feared durst appeale to himselfe whether that discourse was not about every mans having a light within them and that light to be Christ so that he cannot but remember that he affirmed Christ to be a light within the very Indians Secondly Nay further lines 16. 17. Nayler most ignorantly reasons that Christ is in the most vile in the World else he cannot judge them Certainely had the man any sparke of conscience or ingenuity left he durst not in the same page and with the same breath deny and affirme the same Doctrine Excep 2 But oh thou full of all subtilty Did I say that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption let all that were there be witnesse against thee Reply 1. In our proofe there is no such thing layd to Naylers charge For that Position of theirs as we layd it consisteth of two parts and Nayler might clearely have seen that he is brought onely as a proofe to the first part of it viz. That Christ is in every man for all he is charged with is that he extended the in-dwellings of Christ to Indians and therefore it shares but of the fulnesse of his gall thus to poure it out without cause The proofe of the second part viz. that Christ in the reprobates is held under corruption we layd downe in our second proofe in a Letter of Iohn Audlands to Edward Briggs which Letter Nayler doth not deny For having told him he was damned yet he also tells him that he crucifieth Christ within him c. What is this but to affirme Christ under corruption But to make this further cleare this Nayler himselfe in Edward Briggs his house used this expression Father rayse up thy owne Sonne from under bondage as we have it from his testimony under his hand in a certificate dated Ian 14. 1653. And to put it yet out of all possibility of denyall that the jugling of these men may further yet appeare in denying their owne Principles We