Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	peace_n	spirit_n	unity_n	1,812	5	8.9331	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A76316	An examination of the chief points of Antinomianism, collected out of some lectures lately preached in the church of Antholines parish, London: and now drawn together into a body, and published for the benefit of all that love the holy truth of God, / by Thomas Bedford B. D. Vnto which is annexed, an examination of a pamphlet lately published, intituled The compassionate Samaritan, handling the power of the magistrate in the compulsion of conscience: by the same author.	Bedford, Thomas, d. 1653.	1647 (1647)	Wing B1668; Thomason E370_15; ESTC R201292	67,960	90

so yet so intricate is this way of Examination that a Christian shall finde himself much puzzled in it Why so Because hard it is to know both what it is to love and who is a Brother And till these be known how can we try our selves by the Sign Sol. Grant it to be hard yet if not impossible we know that difficulty doth not take off but stirreth up diligence What it is to love we may learn from 1 Cor. 13. 5. and 1 Job 3. 16 17. And who is a brother from Gal. 6. 10. Quest But who can truly say I love the Brethren if those be acts effects and properties of love Who can approve himself to have loved in all those particulars Ans. Even he that hath received the Spirit of God for Love is one of the fruits of the Spirit And though peradventure he hath not attaind to that perfection of love which another hath himself desires yet is he not therfore excluded from the truth therof Quest But who can know that this or that man is a Brother Doth not this Brotherhood confist in being united unto Christ Doth any man know this but God alone Ans. Is not this in effect to tell the Apostle he speaks absurdly and sets down a mark of knowing which cannot be known For when the Apostle saith We know Because we love Doth he not pre-suppose that it may be known We love the Brethren both in respect of the Act and Object i. e. both what it is to love and who are the brethren But admit that I cannot infallibly discern who is and who is not a Brother yet may I discern the ground of my love to him viz. because I conceive him to be a Brother I love him under that notion Object So do Papists and Sectaries these love their own and under the notion of Brethren Sol. It may be so but what then Is this therefore no sign or mark of our spiritual condition which St. John hath set down But indeed neither Papists nor Sectaries do love under this notion in St. Johns meaning if their love be confined to Papists and Sectaries He loveth a man under the right notion of a Brother who doth love him eo nomine because there is Aliquid Christi in him because he is of the Houshold of Faith a believer in Christ But if in case of a Brothers necessity yet there be no fruit of love to be seen except also there be in him Aliquid nostri viz. That he be of our Sect and Opinion If all Christianity be confined within the narrow compass of this or that Opinion surely this is not to love the Brethren Let all Sectaries look to it and the Antinomians by name who pretend to be the only Brethren because they only sit down by the free grace of God and rest themselves upon the promises of the Gospel though they see themselves full of sin Let them I say look to it for if their Charity will not extend it self to relieve the necessities and bear with the infirmities of those other whom they accuse to run after Moses and the Law for their peace and satisfaction of Spirit in as much as they cannot but know that if we do erre it is through mis-understanding of the Scripture according to which we desire to frame all our faith and practises certainly they cannot approve themselves to love the Brethren you will say this may easily be retorted Nor will I deny the justness thereof should I suffer the difference of Opinion so far to draw off mine affection from any that professeth Christ as in the case of his necessity to neglect him to reckon him no better then a Turk I should doubt whether the Spirit of Christ dwelled in me or not Is he a man that would not succor a man though a Heathen or Turk against a Lyon or a Bear And is he a Christian that will not succor a Christian though perhaps a Papist or a Sectary against a Turk Is not the Text of St Paul plain Do good to all but especially to the Houshold of Faith And why to them especially But because they embrace the Gospel and so profess themselves the subjects and servants of Christ Truth it is that among them there is some difference also by a different measure of the Spirit And as each is before other in it so the especially falls upon him We say that God himself is the first and chief Beloved other things are loved for Gods sake viz. All the Creatures but especially Man because there is in him more of God then in the rest All men but especially Christians Because they profess subjection to Christ All Christians but especially them in whom the work of the Spirit is most eminent This it is to love the Brethren But now if beyond all this there must be Aliquid nostri in them some special Relation to us or else no love extended to them This is not to love the Brethren Of such St. Iohn addeth He that loveth not his Brother abideth in Death The second Proposition That the new way of evidencing our Adoption and Iustification only by the Spirit and Faith cannot lay the Ground of a firm setled Peace except the work of the Sanctifying Spirit also do come in to give Testimony For the manifestation of which I shall shew 1. What is delivered touching each 2. Wherein I conceive it to fail of the Truth First Touching the Spirit It is termed The Revealing evidence which speaks to a mans own Spirit saying Be of good cheer thy sins are forgiven Christ administred this Comfort only in general But the Spirit cometh home to every man in particular Whence he is called The Comforter because he so speaks to the Soul that the Judge is also satisfied And when men do fear My sin is not pardoned The Spirit speaks to the Soul and saith They are pardoned Till this be revealed all the World shall never satisfie the Soul all signs and marks are meer riddles The Spirit of Adoption teacheth as to cry Abba Father The Spirit it self i. e. the immediate voice of the Spirit without any instrument what God hath determined of this or that man is not set down in the scripture But it is revealed by the Spirit Hence the Spirit is the seal and the earnest To this effect the Antinomian Doctor And hereupon he expostulateth Why do men scorn and cry out of them that teach and profess this as of Enthusiasts men that have Revelations Is not saith he the Spirit of God the Spirit of Revelation Is he not given to reveal these things And to confess the truth In all this I see not what can be denyed or much doubted of though all his proofs are not convincing that one Text of Rom. 8. 16. doth speak home to the point That the Spirit of God is the Revealing evidence The voice of the Spirit is the chief though not the only Testimony of our Adoption But all the

so he may comply with that duty of Obedience which he oweth to Authority Not so the other He neither grieveth nor prayeth but pleaseth himself and pleadeth against Authority yea and censureth their proceedings as if all the world were bound to learn of him and subscribe to what he hath concluded And is it fit that such a man should by the pretence and plea of Conscience thus palliate his affected ways and yet escape the just lash of Authority The second Argument NO sort of men can presume of an unerring spirit for evident it is that all of them Fathers Councels Parliaments have been grossly mistaken nor are the presnet times exempt from error Why then should one sort compel the other in as much as hereby hazard is run that he who is in the error may be the constrainer of him who is in the truth Ans. Grant the truth of what is laid for the ground viz. That none are free from error according to that of Rom. 3. Nor can any one presume of an unerring spirit And yet I deny the inference viz. That therefore one sort may not compell the other For why Though no man may presume of such a spirit yet they that are of God may comfortably expect the conduct of the spirit Psal. 25. 14. Joh. 16. 13. Again though none may expect to be guided by inspiration yet by the manuduction of that Rule which the Spirit of God hath fitted and perfected for the Church of God by this I say may the man of God expect to be throughly furnished 2 Tim. 3. ult. Now then might the Prophets and Apostles who were guided by an infallible spirit might they be alowed to compel them that were contrary minded which is evident both by the president of Saint Paul 1 Tim. 1. ult. and also by the mans Argument For if they that want it may not because they want it then they that have this infallible spirit may compel because they have it might they be alowed And may not the Pastors of the Church who have a Rule which is no less infallible Is not the Text of Scripture as infallible a Rule of Direction to the Church of God in present as the Inspiration and Revelation was to the Prophets and Apostles If not why is that exchanged for this Is the spirit less careful of the Church now then in times past Lesse careful I mean to lead it into all truth I may grant indeed that the Inspiration and Revelation did carry with it a more active impression of light upon the understanding of the Prophets and Apostles to evidence the truth of what they received But the Question is not so much whether that way had not greater evidence but whether this way hath not as great assurance Things concluded by reason and received by Faith have in them no less assurance then things perceived by sense though not so great evidence So then In those things whereof the Pastors of the Church are infallibly assured by the text of Scripture that they are not deceived they may even by vertue of the Authors Argument use compulsion to restrain the violence of them that oppose the truth of God Object But of all ways compulsion is the most unlikely to beget unity of minde and uniformity of practise Sol. Compulsion is not used to this end but onely ex consequenti as the suppression of different judgements and practises may conduce to unity and uniformity It is a vain thing to think that by fines and imprisonments the Magistrate doth seek to perswade men to piety and honesty No his primary and proper end is to suppress the contrary As the weeding of the Garden doth not make the seeds to grow yet in removing impediments and making room it doth accidently prosper their growth So is it here Object But Club-law causeth prejudice against what is so propugned Sol. It may be so in some and for a time Yet God who is wiser then man by his own practise hath given us to see that when the way is hedged in with thorns and when the Back doth smart under the Rod the ear is opened to discipline and instruction So that though the Rod do not directly convince or perswade yet it hath its efficacy in the way and work of preparation The third Argument TO compel me to do contrary to my Conscience is to compel me to sin Because whatsoever is not of Faith is sin Of Faith i. e. Whereof I am not certainly perswaded that it is lawful But the Magistrate ought not to tompel any one to sin therefore Not to do contrary to his Conscience nor to worship God in a way of the justness whereof he is not perswaded nay is perswaded that it is unlawful Ans. True indeed The Magistrate ought not to compel any one to sin understanding the Proposition of Malum in se of that which is simply evil in it self Not so if we speak of Malum ex accidenti of that which is accidentally evil Evil to me because of a misguided Conscience ex gr. Nebuchadnezzar did ill by threatnings to compel the People to worship the Golden Image So that second Beast mentioned Rev. 13. did ill in causing them to be killed who would not worship the Image of the first Beast Verse 15. Not so the Magistrate in compelling a Papist or a Separatist to come to Church Because though this may be evil to him in respect of his unperswadedness yet is it not evil in it self Again It is not fit that the Magistrate do forbid what is good in it self or lay a restraint upon what God hath commanded It was Darius fault to restrain prayer Dan. 6. 7. And the Scribes and Rulers sinned in forbidding the Apostles to preach in the Name of Jesus Act. 4. 19. But lawful enough it is for the Magistrate to forbid the doing of something which is only good by consequence So likewise to lay restraint upon what is only lawful because not prohibited ex gr. if a man will say This is a truth and therefore I will speak it and publish it Or if he say This is just and fit to be done and therefore I will do it The Magistrate may put in a bar of restraint and punish him that shall transgress For neither is every truth to be published at all times and in all places nor is every man alowed to do every thing that is lawful and good And as for things that are not prohibited by God but left at large who knoweth not but that the use of them is to be regulated and ordered by the advice and direction of Authority The Commandments whereof though they binde not the Conscience of and by themselves yet whoso doth make no Conscience of them sinneth against God whose precept it is to be subject to the power not only for wrath but even for Conscience and for the Lords sake Rom. 13. 5. 1 Pet. 2. 13. Now as touching the power of the Magistrate in matters of Religion