Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	holy_a	person_n	trinity_n	8,176	5	10.0802	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81734	The Quakers folly made manifest to all men: or a true relation of what passed in three disputations at Sandwich, April, 12, 13, 19, 1659. between three Quakers, and a minister, viz. Mr. Samuel Fisher, George Whithead, Richard Hubberthorn, and Thomas Danson wherein many popish tenents were by them maintained, and by him refuted. Occasioned by an imperfect and (in many things) false relation of the said disputations, published by R. Hubberthorn, one of the three Quakers, which said relation is also censur'd and amended. Together with a brief narrative of some remarkable passages. / By Tho. Danson, late fellow of Magd. Coll. Oxon, and now minister of the Gospel at Sandwich in Kent.	Danson, Thomas, d. 1694.	1659 (1659)	Wing D215; Thomason E2255_3; ESTC R34492	40,882	71

pervertest Scripture T. Danson I leave it to the judgement of judicious hearers whether I have perverted Scripture or no and so pray do you The third Qu●stion debated on was though with much ado at length stated in these terms Whether our good works are the meritorious cause of our justification And Mr. Fisher held it in the Affirmative Mr. Fisher Thus I prove that our good works are the meritorious cause of our justification by a rule that you own Contraria contrariorum ratio whence I argue thus If our evil works are the meritorious cause of our condemnation then out good works are the meritorious cause of our non-condemnation or justification But our evil works are the meritorious cause of our condemnation therefore our good works are the meritorious cause of our non-condemnation or just●fication T. Danson Now you shew your self a rank Papist indeed We deny your consequence because our evil works are perfectly evil but our good works are but imperfectly good and any one evil is a violation of the Law and deserves the penalty of the Law but any one or more good work is not the fulfillin● of the Law Let me add that there is no consequence in that Popish Argument notwithstand●ng that Canon because our good and evil works are not absolute contraries the one being perfectly evil the other but imperfectly good Mulum oritur ex quolibet defectu Bonum fi●●ex integris causis which latter appears by Isa 64.6 All our righteousnesses not our unrighteousnesses only are as filthy rags And again thus the rule will allow to argue Evil works which are the violation of the Law deserve damnation Ergo good works which are the fulfilling of the Law deserve salvation And we know no good works such but Christ's And once more in respect of the subject the Rule will not hold being one who owes all his good works to God and is a finite creature now those works which merit must not be due and they must be of infinite value or else there is no proportion between them and the reward And thus we might argue à contrariis If his evil works from whom only good works are due as from a finite creature to an infinite Creator do truly deserve damnation then his good works who owes none and is an infinite person do truly deserve non-condemnation But verum prius ergo et posterius And to understand this we must know that the desert of disobedience arises chiefly from the dignity of the Object against which sin is committed when as the desert of obedience arises from the dignity of the subject by which it is performed Mr. Fisher I will prove my consequence from Gal. 5.18 But if ye be led of the Spirit ye are not under the Law Whence I argue If they who are led by the Spirit are not under the Law then the leading of the Spirit is the meritorious cause of their not being under the Law but they who are led by the Spirit are not under the Law Ergo. T. Danson Sir you are very silly your self or take your hearers to be so that you think this to be a proof of your former consequence or that there is any consequence in this Argument You should have proved that there is par ratio for the merit of good and of evil works And surely Sir the leading of the Spirit or Sanctification is a fruit and effect not a meritorious cause of not being under the Law that is obliged to its penalty Mr. Fisher I will prove by another Scripture that leading by the Spirit is the meritorious cause of our Justification 1 Cor. 6.11 And such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God Observe here the Co inthians are said to be justified by the Spirit T. Danson I might say that perhaps the clause should be referred to Sanctification which is in a more appropriate manner attributed to the Spirits efficiency as if the order of the words had been but ye are sanctified by the Spirit of our God and such transpositions are not without instance in the Scripture as Mat. 7.6 Give not that which is holy to dogs neither cast ye your Pearls before swine lest they trample them under their feet and turn again and rent you where turn again and rent you is to be joyned to the dogs for as swine do trample under their feet so dogs do fly upon a man and tear him down Or else justified by the Spirit may be meant of the Spirits application I mean the third Person in the Trinity not of the work of Grace whereof we are the Subject Mr. Fisher In the 8th of the Rom. v. 2. The Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the Law of sin and death Now 't is the same Law of the Spirit of life that is in Christ and the Saints T. Danson That place is much against you For the Apostle asserts the Holinesse of mans Nature as a work of the Spirit conforming it to the Law to be the merito●ious cause of ou● freedom from sin and death but mark withal 't is not that which is in us but in Christ And though 't is true that the same spirit is in Christ and the Saints yet neither does the spirit in us conform us fully to the Law notwithstanding your vain assertion of perfection nor if it did were that conformity the merit of J●stification Let me add that the Law of the Spirit of life here spoken of is not only the meritorious cause of our freedom from death but from the Law of sin or obeying of sin as a Law now I would fain know what precedent holinesse in the Saints merits subsequent holinesse or whether the exercise of what they have is the meritorious cause of what they have not or of perfection especially if the law of sin intends the corruption of nature as the Law of the Spirit of life does holiness of nature I would be instructed how a nature in part corrupted can deserve total freedom and I am sure the first work of the Spirit renews our natures but in part Mr. Fisher Pray read on Rom. 8.4 That the righteousness of the Law might be fulfilled in us who walk not after the flesh but after the Spirit This place saies the righteousnesse of the Law is fulfilled in the persons of the Saints T. Danson Sure Sir you never read v. 3. which tells us that the Law was weak through the flesh that is unable to justifie us in regard of our inability through corruption to fulfill it which were untrue if we are able to fulfill it and what follows God sent his own Son to give us what we could not attain to by our own obedience to the Law and as for the 4th v. it imports the end for which God sent Christ that the righteousnesse of the Law might

of judgement shall be but as God You know well enough what communication of Idioms means And the Apostles themselves did not partake of that divine property of Infallibility for then they would have been infallible at all times and in all things which they were not as appears by the instance of Peter Gal. 2.11 But in the delivery of what was to be a standing rule to us they were so guided that they d●d not erre as you may find 2 Pet. 1. ult The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost As for our want of infallibility 't is no valid plea against our Ministry Acts 20.30 the Apostle speaking to the Elders of Ephesus ● 17 Also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And yet he saies the holy Ghost had made these fallible men Overseers over the Church v. 28. 1 Thef 5. Quench not the Spirit vers 19. Despise not prophecying vers 20. Prove all things hold fast that which is good v. 21. The connexion of these verses imports that that prophecying must not be despised nor can be without neglecting the Spirit in it which may teach us somewhat which is not good an● not to be received And both these instances are of an ordinary Ministry which is set in the same universal Church with the extraordinary 1 Cor. 12.28 and for the same end viz. to convert and build up Eph. 4.12 Note that when we had gone thus far I gave a brief account of my Call for which you are referred to Hubberthorns account of the Conference and my answer hereto annexed A short ANSWER to a trifling Pamphlet intituled The Difference of that Call of God to the Ministry c. published by R. Hubberthorn IN the Epistle to the Reader the Questions debated on are falsly stated as will appear by the Narrative hereto annexed In the Book it self you have his Call to the Ministry which is not worthy a further Reply than I made by word of mouth And an account of my Call which except two or three passages was the summe of what I spake One passage is He said I said 't is non sence to say that a man is made a Minister by the gift of grace Reply My words were that he had spoken a great deal of non-sence in his discourse not that that particular passage was non sense Yet I said and do still stand to it that if by gift of grace he means qual●fications for the Ministry more is r●quired to a mission than them Another pass●ge is That I said my qualifications were such that I might have been cloathed in Scarlet Reply I said not so of my self particularly but in general that many of us who had chosen the Ministry for our calling were capable of other callings and had opportunities of entring into them which might have cloathed us with scarlet as they did other men who followed them VVhereas he saies that T. D. provoked his Church to laughter rudeness c. Reply I confess the Assembly did laugh oftentimes at their sorry shifts and poor evasions in our discourse but that I did compose them I have many witnesses And I deny not but that now and then I could not forbear smiling at them which I presume as justifiable in me as Elijah the Prophets scoffing at Bauls Priests 1 Kings 18.27 Whereas he sayes that none of my people can set to their seal that my Ministry hath brought them to a perfect man c. Reply 'T is readily granted nor was the Ministry intended for that end but only to br●ng the Saints to that degree of Grace in this life which might make them immediatly capable of perfection in the next life Note that R. H. brings in several passages as mine some of which I own and others which I own not I shall name them briefly That every individual man is not enlightened by Christ and he complaines that I brought two meanings of that Scripture and know not which is the meaning of the holy Ghost Reply I still affirm the Proposition mentioned and I would have him to know that both the meanings are the Holy Ghosts though but one is intended in that place the phrases will bear either senses and either of them cross his Interpretation That the whole body of the Gentiles was not enlightned Reply He leaves out what I added viz. by Christ or with the knowledg of salvation As for his answer I refer you to the dispu●e upon that principle That the Gospel is an external Light and not invisi●le and that it is not the Light within Reply My wo●ds were that the Gospel is an external L●ght as that of the Sun and that there is an inward Light created in the soul c●ll'd an understanding g●ven us c. 1 John 5.20 which is as the Light in the eye and that the light of the Gospel is not the light which every man naturally hath with in him That Christ is a propitiation but for the world of believers intend●d 1 John 2.2 Reply I expla●n'd my meaning when I so interp●eted the ph●ase by c●mparing it with Rom. 3 25. Whom God hath set for●h to be a Propitiation through Faith in his blood the ph●ase Prop●tiation intends not the price but the actual atton●ment and this latt●r is not without the intervention of Fa●th So th●t John intends as Paul that the terms of actual reconciliation w●th God are the same to all the world viz. beli●ving in the blood of Christ T●at we must reconcile Scriptures and he saies I gave two contrary meanings of one Scripture Reply I have said enough to this in the D●spute the Scriptures are not at variance among themselves but they s em so to be and 't is part of our wo●k to l●t p●ople see how well they are agreed And I dare leave it to any Reade●s j●dgement whe●h r these two interpretations which R. H. intends be contrary to one another viz. that Christ enl●ghtens every man who is spi●itually enlightened or that he enlightens a number of every Nation which were the two meanings to use his phrase of John 1.8 That the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ was not the Law of the Spirit in the Saints but that they were two Laws c. Reply My words were that by the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus Rom. 8 2. was not meant our personal righteousn●sse but Christs imputed to us and that though the righteousnesse in Christ and in us are of the same kind yet they have not the same use the former being alone our justification the latter our sanctification That there are two righteousnesses of Christ the one without the Saints to justifie them and the other within the Saints that did sanctifie them Reply My words were that there is a righteousness whereof Christ is the subject and the efficient viz. that of his

salvation to some who accept not of it out of particular fancy to them but exact of others that acceptance and for default of it deny them salvation then there might be some ground for the cavil but now that 't is offered upon equal terms there is none And for Christ being given for salvation to the ends of the earth that imports not so much as that the offer much lesse the benefit should be of su●h extent in all ages and generations as I shewed before but the fulfilling of that prophecy bears date from the Apostolical Commission Mat. 28.19 and it intends that no Nation how remote soever from Judea should want the offer nor some of it the benefit of salvation That a Minister of the Gospel doth not know who are elected And to this R. H. says there he hath belied the Ministers of the Gospel for they could discern the elect from the world as 't is written Ye shall discern between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not and these Teachers who know not the elect and yet exhort all their hearers to believe their preaching is in vain Reply I see you are hard put to it for a Scripture to bring that Mal. 3. ult I could have fitted you with one that would have been more specious 1 Thes 1.4 Knowing Brethren beloved your Election of God As for Mal. 3. ult 't is not strictly true till the day of judgement Solomon says No man knows love or hatred by all that is before him I should rather think our preaching is to more purpose because we know not who are elect for the ignorance of that gives us a ground to hope well of any man and indeed it were to no purpose to preach to those who are not elected unlesse that of leaving them inexcusable did we certainly know who are elect and so who are not for the latter would have no ground of hope which now they have in the indefinite promise made of none effect through their unbelief did we let them know they were excluded out of Gods purpose of salvation That the sword of the Spirit is ineffectual without the Letter To which R. H. says the sword of the Spirit is the Word of God which was effectual before the Letter was Reply This man is so used to speak non-sense himself that he can understand it as well or better than good sense I did not say as he relates but that the Spirit was not wont to be ●ff ctual without the Letter or that he wrought upon the souls of men in and by the Letter of the Word and I gave that instance Rom. 10.17 Faith which is the Spirits work comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God As for what he sayes that the sword of the Spirit is the Word of God if he means like a man in his oppositions he must mean Christ who but once is called the Word of God Rev. 19.13 And Christ cannot be intended Eph. 6.17 because he is not the sword of the Spirit but the Spirit his sword rather for by the Spirit he works in the hearts of men and therefore Gen. 6.3 he sayes My Spirit shall not alwayes strive with man which is meant of the holy Ghost as will appear by comparing it with Act. 7 51. where Stephen tells the Jews Ye do alwayes resist the holy Ghost Christ by the common operations of his Spirit strives with men and by the special operations thereof prevails with them That there was no Scripture written but what is extant and in the Bible Against which assertion R. H. produces the book of Nathan Iddo c. mentioned in the Bible which he sayes were written for the same end and use Reply It does not appear that any of the Books mentioned in the Old Testament and to which we are referr'd for further satisfaction in historical matters were of Divine Inspiration but we may rather conclude that the Holy Ghost mentioning no more of History than was necessary for our Instruction refers us for the rest which was not of the like necessity to books of humane original And though they are the Books of Prophets yet it follows not that they were divinely inspir'd For they might as well write from their own spirits or upon humane credit as sometimes speak from their own spirits 2 Sam. 7.3 Nathan told David when he spake of building a Temple Go do all that is in thine heart for the Lord is with thee whenas God for bad him by the same Prophet which prohibition is call'd the word of the Lo d that came to Nathan v. 4.5 plainly enough intimating that the incouragement he gave David before was but the word of man And indeed 2 Pet. 2. last speaking of the motion of the Holy Ghost to write the Scriptures seems to limit it to that which was intended for a sure word of prophecy wherunto we should do well to take heed c. v. 19. That there was no Scripture appointed of God to be a Rule of Faith and manners but what is bound up in the Bible Reply That was my assertion and besides what I spake I shall adde that 't is not enough if it could be proved that other writings besides those we have were of Divine Inspiration For besides such Inspiration to make a Rule is necessary Gods appointment of a writing to that end Hence 't is observable that John is bidden to write what he saw and heard in the Book of Revelation no lesse than twelve times and some things of the like inspiration he was forbidden to write because not intended for the same end Rev. 10.4 And when the seven thunders had uttered th●ir voices I was about to write and I heard a voice from Heaven saying unto me seal up c. and write them not John 20.30.31 A●d many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his Discipl●s which are not wri●ten in ●his book but these are written that ye might bel●eve c. Those things which were not written might have b●en us●ful if they had been wr●tten for th●y were done for the same end with tho●e which are left u● yet because God thought that suffi●ient which we have we can look upon no more wi●h such regard as we do upon that That the letter doth antecede the Spirit in all that walked in the Spirit Reply I opened my own meaning as you may find in the dispute about the Scriptures and 't is this that the Spirits act of r●veal●ng the letter of the Scriptures antecedes the Spirits assistance in walking according to it That the works of Christ in some respect are not perfect To which R. H. saies that is false for every gift of God is perfect Reply I spake those words with reference to the work of sanc●ification which I affirmed to be imp●rfect in this life in comparison of what it is in the life to come For which I produced Phil. 3.12 Not as though I had already attained either were