Reviler rebuked. PART 1. (1. Head of Scripture-contradiction.) Touching the Scriptures themselves. Section 1. He holy Scriptures (by one thunder-stricken in fpirit, and blafted in profeflion with the Quakers Books and company in Scotland) were denied to my face to be the word of Truth; which I noted as the firft and great Contradiction. R. Farnworth in anfwer returns me thus much of truth in form of words, That the Scriptures are words that proceeded from the Spirit of Truth, we do not de. ny, but own, and fo they are the words of truth. Plainly he doth not fay, they are the words of truth, not plainly joyn Scripture the iffue with him that denied them to be the word of truth: but word of truch if they be own'd for words of truth, as proceeding from the tɔ all. Spirit of truth, then, for the advantage of Truth, I argue: 1. They are the word of God, and so should be owned by them. Surely the Spirit of truth is the Spirit of God, proceeding from the Father and the Son, and these three John 15.26. being one, their word is one. That which is the word of the Spirit of truth, is the word of the Father of truth, and of the Son of truth. The Scripture by R. F. his confeflion is the word of the Spirit of truth, therefore he must grant it to be the word of the Father, and of the Son of truth; and confequently, the word of the true God. 2. If they be words of truth, as proceeding from the Spirit of truth, then they are the Rule, Standard, and Touchstone of truth: the true Spirit being known by his words, A *Page 2. Rom 3.3. cleared. val we man aon near K. F. denying the Scriptures to be the rule of a Chriftian, as of other men that are unchriftian. 3. If they be the words of the Spirit of truth, then they are fo to all men, or but to fome men. * I. If fo to all men that have the Scriptures by them, then why doth not R. F. challenge him that denied them to be fo to unbelievers, as I noted in my Book? Why doth he challenge me for falfhood? with a therefore too [therefore · thy faying is falfe.] What faying of mine is falfe, and wherefore? I truly related what I had, from him I mentioned above, in discourse once and again, That the Scriptures were not the word of truth: And doth it follow, becaufe R. F. acknowledgeth them to be the words of truth, that, therefore I heard not the contradiction, or mis-related what was spoken? 2. If they be the words of truth but to fome men, (not at all to wicked men and unbelievers, no not condemningly, as were his expreffions) then it feems, the unbelief and wic kednefs of men, doth make the Faith or Truth of God of none effect but S. Paul, Rom. 3. 3. is of another minde; yea, the Spirit there (by the Interrogation first and second, What if fome did not believe? fhall their unbelief make the hof God of none effect?) forcibly denieth the fruftration 6aking void of Gods word of truth, by the Jews former following continued unbelief. God hath laid his faith and truth to pawn (as it were) in the holy Scriptures, and as he is a God of truth, his word is a word of truth, taking hold of men by the threatning (as Zech. 1. 6.) who milbelieve or reject the promife. And, Is he the God of the Jews onely, and not alfo of the Gentiles? to juftifie and condemn all that are believing or unbelieving, according to the Scriptures? Such therefore who will fay, No more is the truth of God or word of God to me then what I believe, were they never fo dear friends) must be as roundly taken up and faithfully rebuked, as fometimes Lather took up a man of no mean account, "Bullenger, you erre, you know "neither "neither your felf nor what you hold. According to your Section 1. falfities, if the Word findes not the Spirit, but an ungodly "Perfon, then it is not Gods word: whereby you define "and hold the word, not according to God who fpeaketh "it, but according as people do entertain and receive it. "Whereas (as he again) a true Chriftian must hold for cer"tain, and muft fay, That word which is delivered and "preached to the Wicked, to the Diffemblers, and to the "Ungodly, is even as well Gods word, as that which is preached to the good and godly upright Chriftians. And I may adde, even fo are the Scriptures, that word which condemneth unbelievers already. But,as he again, "The “ Sectaries underftand not the ftrength of Gods word (read or preached) and we may wonder (with him) that they write and teach fo much of the Scriptures or of Gods word, feeing they fo little regard the fame. For whatfoever R. F. faith of his, and their owning of the Scriptures, hearken to what follows in his backing of Scripture-contradiction, That the Scriptures are the Word, God, and eternal The ScriLife, as thou mouldeft have them, thou canst not prove, nor all ptures are the the Magicians to help thee. Here is good stuff, kitchin-stuff, word of God, and truly fe or fmoak out of the bottomless pit. 1. Take the word for the Son of God, where did I ever attempt to prove the Scriptures to be the Son of God, God, and eternal Life? The Lord rebuke this falfe fpirit. called. 2. Because I with others call the Scriptures, as they are, and as they speak themselves to be, the word of God, are we therefore Magicians? The Lord again rebuke this reviling fpirit. R. F. and others may talk of owning, and owning the Scriptures as often as they fancy it, but they honor them not, I am fure, who deny them that title of honor, The Word of God. Shall R. F. his Pamphlets be called his Books, his Writings, and his Words, and fhall not that which God hath written, be called Gods written Word? He anfwers nothing to that place in Hofea, 8. 12. nor could that ftripling 7.P. give any reafon against the Argument drawn At Coggsball from it; viz. That which God hath written, is the word of God. : There fometime. Section 1. alfo. Therefore the Scriptures are the word of God. R. F. Objecteth, [fuch as witness to the word, and Gods power, witness against thee] to strengthen the new-coyned diftinction is it, which was given me in Scotland? The Scripture is not the word of truth, but the witness of Gods power. Why, I grant it to be both the word, and the witness. The The Scripture Scriptures are Gods words,and Gods teftimonies, fome make is Gods Word them,two witneffes, Revel.11.But I reasoned thus,by way of and Witness Quere, How can the Scripture be Gods witness, if not true? bow is it true, if not the word of truth? R. F. undertakes to anfwer: "That the Spirit of truth, in the Prophets, and "in the Apoftles, did carry them forth to witnefs what of "Chrift is declared in the Scriptures, by words that pro"ceeded from the Spirit of truth. Had he gone no further, he had pretily well quitted himself, but he addeth by way of objection, The Spirit is not in the Letter, neither is the Spirit given by the Letter, but by God and Christ, and yet he grants prefently, in the fame Page 2.The Letter proceeded from the Spirit.By the Letter,I meant, (when I faid pag.22 of my book,the Spirit is in the Letter &c.) the whole Scripture, and fo I fuppofe doth he:Now the whole Scripture is given by infpiration of God,the Father, Son and Spirit, who is, The Letter (in a large fenfe) and Scripture, all one. How the Spirit is in the Scriptureletter. 1. Where he breathes forth truth, holiness &c. all along. 2. Where he fpeaketh; The Scriptures are the Oracles of God, Rom. 3. 2. Will R. F. by denying the Spirit to be in the Scriptures ftop the mouth and breath of God? What. profane boldnefs is this? Can he hold the winde in his fift, and restrain the Spirit from giving forth himself, by the Letter, or Scripture, when the Spirit will make good his promife, to bless the reading of it? I think he is not fo full of prefumption, yet he prefumes to fay, The Spirit is not given by the Letter: What thinks he of Scripture-promifes? did he never finde the Spirit warming his heart, by the reading of them? He fpeaks as if he knew nothing of the Spirits confolations, enlightnings, teachings or convictions, by the Scriptures. And he writes, as if he would have none read the Letter of Scriptures, in faith of a blefling by them, but to think, when they are reading of them, they are cracking a hollow fhell, that hath no kernell in it, or drinking drinking a draught of dilute wine, that hath no fpirits in Section 1. it; or reading of his, and his fellows Pamphlets, wherein the Spirit of God is not prefent, by any gracious operation, but the fpirit of Satan (for the most part) unto efficacy of delufion. His fimple Reader may think the words that follow tend much to the honor of the Spirit of God, [The Letter proceeded from the Spirit, but the Spirit did not proceed from the Letter] but fuch expreflions as difparage the Scriptures will never bring honor to the Spirit which is in them, and worketh by them, what difparagement is there in these words to the Scriptures? (will the fimple-hearted fay) 1. The phrafe [Letter] is extenuating as if all the The Letter Scripture were Law, or had a Legal adminiftration as the (taken ftrictApostle ufeth it, 2 Cor. 3. 6. in a strict fenfe; The Letter ly) is but lekilleth: i.e. the bare legal command without a promife of adminiitration. power, or pardon, (as a bare letter void of ftrength, life 2 Cor. 3. 6. and fpirit) it leaveth all men under a killing fentence and explained. curfe: Now thus to reprefent all parts of the Scripture, is to affright men from the reading,hearing or regarding of it. 2. The Letter or Scripture is fet by R. F. (in other paffages) in fuch oppofition to the Spirit, as if the Spirit difowned it after he hath caufed it to be written, & no way accompanieth it with his power. The Spirit proceeds not from How the Spithe Scripture-Letter,in refpect of his Effence, or Being, he rit proceeds is God of himself,nor in refpect of his perfonal fubfiftence, not from the which is of the Father, or from the Father, and from the how he doth Scripture, and Son (of which R. F. is ignorant, or inadvertent, denying proceed from, him, page 8. to be a Perfon) but in refpect of his operation. by, & with its 1. Improperly it may be faid, the Spirit proceedeth from the Scripture, as a man goes from his outward fhop, to work in his inner room, fo the Spirit proceedeth from that (which he hath put within the Book, or Bible) into the heart, to work a sweet ingraven work there. 2. Properly and plainly he proceeds by the Scripture,and with the Scripture, to effect, and beget that in the foul which is like himself, Spiritual, and like the Scripture, holy, and good. That is but a bravado therefore which he addes, in the close of his fecond Page. [Therein thou haft erred, nos knowing the Spirit, nor power of God, declared in the Scri ptures.1 Rep. I.. .00 |