Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	faith_n	revelation_n	2,202	5	9.5251	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A69915	A plea for the Non-Conformists giving the true state of the dissenters case, and how far the Conformists separation from the Church of Rome, for their Popish superstitions and traditions introduced into the service of God, justifies the Non-Conformists separation from them for the same : in a letter to Dr. Benjamin Calamy, upon his sermon, called, Scrupulous conscience, inviting hereto : to which is added, A parallel scheme of the pagan, papal and Christian rites and ceremonies : with a narrative of the sufferings underwent for writing, printing and publishing hereof / by Thomas De Laune.	De Laune, Thomas, d. 1685.; Danson, Thomas, d. 1694.; De Laune, Thomas, d. 1685. Eikōn tou thēriou.; De Laune, Thomas, d. 1685. Narrative of the sufferings of Thomas Delaune.	1684 (1684)	Wing D893; Wing D891; Wing D892; ESTC R12757	93,215	122

Penalties But out of a Noble Christian Principle that you may have an Opportunity to discover with how much meekness of Wisdom and demonstration of Truth you can treat convince and satisfie a Gainsayer having so generously declared That you do not desire men should become your Proselites further than you give them good Reason and Scripture for it Club-Law being none of the Arguments you treat a scrupulous or tender Conscience with The Arguments and Objections are these that follow The first Objection we shall mention as brought against the Non-conformity and Separation of the Dissenters from the Church of England is this That they have no Reason or Cause upon a Conscientious Account so to do because the principal things they take offence at are not forbidden in the Scriptures and till they can produce a Scripture to the Negative as a Negative Article of Faith that says we are not to do so or so Kneel at the Communion Cross in Baptism keep Holy-days use Liturgies Letanies c. they can have no cause of just scruple And thus Sir you are pleased to Argue viz. That there can be no Transgression but by either omitting what the Law Commands or doing what the Law forbids For Instance If a man can shew where Kneeling at the Sacrament is forbidden in Scripture where sitting is required where praying by a Form is forbid and extemporary Prayers are enjoyned then indeed the Dispute would soon be at an end But if neither the one nor the other can be found as most certainly they cannot then Kneeling at the Sacrament and Reading prayers out of a Book must be reckoned amongst things lawful and then there is no need of scrupling them because they may be done without sin nay where they are required by our Superiors it is our Duty to submit to them because it is our duty to obey them in all lawful things This way of Arguing you say is very plain and convincing And to the same purpose we have Dr. Stillingfleet in his late Answers to several of the Dissenters affirming that those are Schismaticks that Deny submission to the Government of the Church of England and he tells us in plain terms assuredly that the Reasons of this Denial do not signifie a Button those saith he who seperate from the Church of England make this their fundamental principle as to Worship wherein the difference lies that nothing is lawful in the Worship of God but what he hath expresly commanded We say all things are lawful which are not frobidden and UPON THIS SINGLE POINT stands the whole Controversie of Separation as to the Constitution of our Church Here 's the Objection in words at length and which you will find to be no other then what the Papists make to the Church of England upon the same occasion which I shall transcribe in their own words and the Answers of your own Party to it which I hope will be esteemed a fair and satisfactory way of Reply Dr. Stillingfleet giving us an accout of his Popish Adversaries Plea and how he Returned the Negative Articles to be proved by him makes to him this Answer But the strangest Effort of all the rest is what he hath reserved to the last place viz. That the Charge of Idolatry against them must be vain and groundless because if I be pressed Close I shall deny any one of these Negative Points to be divine Truths viz. That honour is not to be given to the Images of Christ and his Saints that what appears to be Bread in the Eucharist is not the Body of Christ that it is not lawful to Invocate Saints to pray for us These are the Jesuits words requiring the Doctor to prove those Negatives upon which single Point he puts the stress of his Argument Then follows his Answer which I pray you to mind well because it is the Answer you must take to the like Question from us viz. But the Answer to this is so easie that it will not require much time to dispatch it For I do assert it to be an Article of my faith that God alone is to be worshipped with Divine and Religious Worship And he that cannot hence infer that no Created Being is to be worshipped hath the name of Reasonable Creature given him to no purpose What need we make Negative Articles of Faith where the Affirmative do necessarily imply them If I believe that the Scripture is my only Rule of Faith as I most firmly do Will any man that considers what he saith require me to make Negative Articles of Faith that the Pope is not Tradition is not Councils are not a private Spirit is not for all these things are necessarily Imply'd therein And so for all particular Doctrines rejected by us upon this principle we do not make them Negative points of Faith but we therefore refuse the Belief of them because not contained IN OUR ONLY RULE OF FAITH On this account we reject the Pope's Supremacy Transubstantiation Infallibility of the present Church in Delivering Points of Faith Purgatory and other FOPPERIES impos'd upon the Belief of Christians So that the short Resolution of our Faith is this That we ought to believe Nothing as an Article of Faith but what God hath Revealed and the compleat Revelation of God's will to us is contained in the BIBLE c. And what could have been spoken wi●h fuller Evidence and greater Demonstration of Truth Therefore as joyning issue with the Doctor that upon this single point stands the whole Controversie of Separation as to the Constitution of their Churches viz. That nothing is lawful in the Worship of God but what he hath expresly commanded as say the Dissenters and not all things lawful which are not forbidden as say the Advocates for the Church of England let his own words decide the matter and forever determine the Case For what need the Dissenters as the Doctor affirms on their behalf make Negative Articles of Faith where the Affirmative does necessarily imply them If they do believe with the Doctor that the Scripture is their ONLY Rule of Faith as they most firmly declare to do will any man that considers what he saith require them to make Negative Articles of their Faith that Popes Councils Private Spirits Traditions are not and so for all particular Doctrines rejected by them upon this principle They do not with the Doctor make them Negative points of faith but they therefore with him refuse the Belief of them BECAUSE NOT CONTAINED IN OUR ONLY RULE OF FAITH On this account they do with the Doctor Reject the Pope's Supremacy Transubstantiation Infallibility of the Church of Rome in Delivering points of Faith viz Purgatory and other Fopperies as Salt Oyl Spittle Exorcisms Conjurations baptizing of Bells c. And upon the same account do they Reject what the Protestants have received either from Pagans or Papists as to National Provincial Diocesan and Parochial Churches Because not Contained in