Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	church_n	scripture_n	testimony_n	4,093	5	8.2532	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52606	A brief history of the Unitarians, called also Socinians in four letters, written to a friend.	Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.; Biddle, John, 1615-1662.; Firmin, Thomas, 1632-1697.	1687 (1687)	Wing N1505; ESTC R37735	58,564	186

Marseils who wrote about the Year of our Lord 460 saith thus concerning one sort of Vnitarians viz. Arians They are Hereticks but not knowingly They do so much judg themselves Catholicks that they defame us with the Name of Hereticks They err but with a good Mind not of Hatred but of the Love of God. How they shall be punish'd in the Day of Judgment for this Error of a false Opinion none can know but the Judg. De Gubern Dei. l. 5. where may be read more to the same purpose Though this Author according to the Vogue of Those times calleth the Arians Hereticks yet that which he says farther of them shows they were not so for the Character he gives of them shews them to be conscientious Christians and Lovers of God. St. Austin against the Manichees a sort of People that held there were two Gods one good the other evil saith thus Let them be fierce against you who know not how laborious a thing it is to find out the Truth and how difficultly we escape Errors Let them be fierce against you who know not how rare and hard a thing it is to overcome carnal Imaginations by the Serenity of a pious Mind c. Contr. Ep. Fausti Thirdly I added that the Trinitarians ought to own the Vnitarians for Christian Brethren and to behave themselves towards them as such For Protestants do agree that all necessary and fundamental matters of Faith are clear and plain in Scripture but other matters not so evident but that good Christians may err concerning them as we see they did even in the times of the Apostles now this Doctrine of the Trinitarians appearing to be no fundamental Doctrine it does by no means unchristian those that hold the contrary nor excuse the Trinitarians from those Offices which are due to them as Christians And the rather because they are not only willing to make Confession of Faith in all the forms of Words contained in the Holy Scripture but in the Words also of the Apostles Creed as also because they are not liable to any charge of Idolatry or Superstition in their Worship or of Uncharitableness in condemning those of contrary Minds as the Confederacy of Rome is Therefore I cannot but wonder at some learned Men that are so far carried away with an overweaning Opinion of their own Judgment that they will not allow those the name of Christians who do not believe besides the Bible and the Creed of the Apostles also the Nicene and Athanasian Creeds Nay some account the Trinitarian Doctrines to be so necessary to Christianity that though those who deny them be otherways very pious and useful Men yet going against the sense of the Catholick Church they err not for want of Instruction but from a certain Wantonness and Pride of Vnderstanding and are guilty of such unpardonable Immodesty as admits of no Excuse If what is hinted in these Letters concerning the Catholick Church of the Apostles times and first Ages be true then that Author builds his Condemnation upon a false and rotten Foundation and the Building falling impresses Rashness and Uncharitableness upon himself I mean as to this particular Case for otherways I readily acknowledg the Worth and Learning of the Author Neither can I sufficiently admire that another learned Man and a Sufferer for his Conscience should in a Pacifick Discourse treat the Socinians in the same contumelious manner not allowing them worthy of the Name of Christians because they go about saith he to overthrow the whole frame of the Christian Doctrine by arrogant Presumptions of false Reasonings and Sophistical Arguments Yea it is commonly objected against them that they exalt their Reasonings above plain and express Revelation in Scripture Which Crimination seems to me to be clearly taken away by the four Letters in which it appears by the many Unconcluding Texts false Translations unintelligible Reasonings and Distinctions cited and urged on the Behalf of the Trinitarian Doctrine and on the other hand by the numerous clear Texts allowed Translations Reasonings and Distinctions common to Mankind produced by the Vnitarians that these last may reasonably retort this great Objection on their Opposites the Trinitarians who in a thousand express Texts of Scripture do exalt their Reasonings to maintain another sense than the plain Words require For one Instance how many express Texts ascribe Parts and Members Affections and Passions Shape and Figure Place and Circumscription to God all which as the Author of these Letters notes are otherways expounded by learned Men because they judg these things in reason unsuitable to God. But what Principle more clear both in Reason and Scripture than this that there is but one God or that God is one All Christians and all Jews and all Mahometans who are said to be more in Number than Christians besides the wise Heathens do acknowledg it and all these understand by the term God a necessary existent Person Upon these clear Grounds the Vnitarians deny that there are three such as contrary to that Unity and introducing into the Godhead two unnecessary or superfluous Persons For if one be sufficient and he cannot be God if he be not sufficient then the two more are supernumerary and unnecessary and consequently not God. For my own part I was bred up in the Trinitarian Faith and took the Truth of it for granted but when these Scriptures and Reasons came into my View and I had got over the Fear of examining what some Men who name themselves the Church call Fundamentals I conld not avoid the Force of them though it grieves me that I cannot continue in consent with my old Friends as well in this as other parts of Christian Doctrine But certainly as in Philosophy Truth should be more dear to us than Plato or Socrates so in Theology the Testimony of plain Scripture agreeing with evident Reason should prevail with those who believe the Scriptures Divine more than obscure Texts dissonant to the clear Reason of Mankind And it may well allay any ones Fear of examining and judging concerning pretended Fundamentals when he shall consider that even the Church of England in another of her Articles says that as the Church of Jerusalem Alexandria and Antioch have errred so also the Church of Rome which contends that she is the Catholick Church hath erred not only in her living and manner of Ceremonies but also in matter of Faith. So also Chillingworth with his Approvers says I see plainly and with mine own Eyes that there are Popes against Popes Councils against Councils some Fathers against others the same Fathers against themselves a consent of Fathers of one Age against a consent of Fathers of another Age. There is no sufficient Certainty but in the Scripture only for any considering Man to build upon As to the boast of their Numbers 't is well known there was a time when the Christian World was Arian that is Vnitarian so that the Council of Ariminum and Seleucia in which 560 Bishops were present the greatest Convention of Bishops that ever was decreed for the Vnitarian Faith. Was number in those times an Argument of Truth If not how can it be so now The Author of these Letters has well observed besides that the Doctrine of the Trinitarians in these days is widely different from the Doctrine decreed in the first Council of Nice from whence I infer that their Boast of Antiquity is as vain as the other of Number I will only add to this Observation that though the more ancient and the modern Trinitarians may agree in terms yet those times and these have different senses of the same Words and Phrases SIR I pray accept of my hearty Thanks for this Publication and shew the Author how great an Honour I have for him I am Yours c. FINIS

However I can do no less than conclude and expect every judicious Man's Assent to it 1. That the Doctrine of the Trinitarians is no necessary or fundamental Doctrine of Christianity 2. That 't is unjust and unchristian to lay the Vnitarians or Socinians under any Penalties or Forfeitures upon the account of their Doctrine 3. That Trinitarians ought to own the Vnitarians for Christian Brethren and behave themselves towards them as such First I said the Doctrine of the Trinitarians is no necessary or fundamental Doctrine of Christianity For to say it is doth 1. Reflect upon the Goodness of God and his Love to Mankind as making that fundamental and necessary to Salvation the Truth whereof must be confessed to be so very obscure and uncertain that where the Prejudices of Education Respect of Men and Fear of Penalties do not prevail the vulgar who are ten to one of Mankind either do not believe it at all or confess it as Parrots speak Words without Understanding 2. To make the Doctrine of the Trinity fundamental is to joyn Hands with Papists in contradiction to Protestant Doctrine owning with them that the Scriptures are obscure and unsufficient even in Fundamentals and so bringing in a necessity of admitting and believing unscriptural Traditions Of this the Papists are so sensible that it is the chief of those Arguments with which they attack Protestants and which they urge in their former and latter Writings wherein they not only seem to have but have in reality great Advantage as will I am perswaded appear to those that impartially consider it It will not be here impertinent to tell you a story that hapned in the present Reign A certain great Lord was assaulted in his Faith by a Jesuit or other Seminary who began with him thus My Lord I know you believe the Creed of Athanasius to which the Lord wisely perceiving what he would build upon that Concession answer'd Who told you so which quick Answer by Question did so surprize and disappoint the Seminary that he had no more to say It seems his intended Arguments leaned on that Pillar alone to wit the Belief of the Creed commonly called the Athanasian 3. The Trinitarian Doctrine reflects Weakness and Unsufficiency upon the whole Christian Church and Faith of the first Ages which as our Author has noted knew or professed no other but the Apostles Creed which doth fully agree with the Vnitarian or Socinian but by no means with the Trinitarian Doctrine of fundamental Faith. 4. They that urge the Doctrine of the Trinity as fundamental do clearly impugn the sixth Article of the Church of England which saith Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation So that whatsoever is not read therein nor may be proved thereby is not to be required of any Man that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith. Such also was the Judgment of Mr. Chillingworth that eminent Defender of Protestantism ch 6. n. 56. where he saith By the Religion of Protestants I understand that wherein they all agree THE BIBLE THE BIBLE I say THE BIBLE only is the Religion of Protestants Whatever else they believe besides it and the plain irrefragable and indubitable Consequences of it well may they hold it as a matter of Opinion but not as a matter of Faith or Religion neither can they with Consistence to their own Grounds believe it themselves nor require the Belief of it from others without most high and most scismatical Presumption Secondly I said it follows from the foregoing Discourses that it is unjust and unchristian to lay the Vnitarians or Socinians under any Penal Laws or other Hardships on the account of their Conscience and Doctrine For we may see here that an honest and sincere Man may in the Pursuit of his own Salvation and in adhering to Protestant Principles of the Clearness and Sufficiency of Scripture in Fundamentals as also in reverence of the ancient Faith held forth in the Apostolick Creed and of the Church of the first Ages he may I say with clear Satisfaction in his own Conscience disbelieve the Trinitarian Doctrine But how can Christians with Satisfaction to their Consciences punish such a Man As for the publick Peace there is not only nothing in the Nature of their Doctrine that inclines them to Unpeaceableness but they have also always been extremely candid to those that differ from them from a Principle common I think to them and the Remonstrants only that Conscience ought to be free in matters of Faith This is a Principle with the Socinians and the Remonstrants other Families of Christians take it up as an expedient when they have need of it Briefly If the Socinians appear to be as careful and diligent to know the Truth as Athanasians if they are in their Stations as learned as they and as innocent and virtuous Men in their Conversations how can any Christian judg and condemn them without incurring our Saviour's Judgment and Condemnation He that believes the whole Bible heartily and indeavours sincerely to know the Mind of God and Christ therein and to purge himself from those carnal Affections and worldly Interests that hinder Men from seeing and obeying the Truth and perhaps as a Testimony thereof suffers the Loss of Advantages and Goods Kinsfolk and Country nay undergoes Penury and other Hardships in foreign Countries as many do at this Day how can any who pretend to give Obedience to the Law of common Reason of Moses and the Prophets and of Christ himself in his Sermon on the Mount to wit of doing to others as we would they should do to us how I say can such think a Socinian so qualified as we have but now described him doth deserve Punishment for his Faith And how can any Man without transgressing Christ's Law of Charity judge such a one to be guilty without any Appearance of Guilt more than may be easily seen in himself Is it not the common Principle of all Protestants to believe the Holy Scriptures are sufficient to all Religion and clear in all Necessaries of Faith and Manners and that every Man is obliged by our Lord Christ to believe and practise according to his own Knowledg Light and Understanding of the Scriptures He that does so is not only a Christian but a Protestant that is a reformed Christian I am fully assured says Mr. Chillingworth and consequently those learned Persons the Vice-Chancellor of Oxford the Regius Professor and others who licensed and approved his Book that God does not and therefore Men ought not require more of any Man than this to believe the Scripture to be God's Word to endeavour to find the true sense of it and to live according to it ch 6. n. 56. The same Author says ch 5. n. 96. I have learnt from the ancient Fathers that nothing is more against Religion than to force Religion and of St. Paul that the Weapons of the Christian Warfare are not carnal The famous Salvian of