A92140:141
A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved
A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved by Mr. John Goodwin, John Baptist, Dr. Jer. Taylor, the Belgic Arminians, Socinians, and other authors contending for lawless liberty, or licentious toleration of sects and heresies. / By Samuel Rutherfurd professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews.A free disputation against pretended liberty of conscience tending to resolve doubts moved by Mr. John Goodwin, John Baptist, Dr. Jer. Taylor, the Belgick Arminians, Socinians, and other authors contending for lawlesse liberty, or licentious toleration of sects and heresies. / By Samuel Rutherfurd professor of divinity in the University of St. Andrews.
London: printed by R.I. for Andrew Crook, 1649
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
nor is it enough that Libertines say it may be the word of God and the infallible word of God which the Synod determineth, but it is not so to us, we are to believe it with a reserve, because we cannot know it so to be.
But I answer this concludes not only against a Synodical determination, but against all Scripture, and all Prophetical and Apostolical determinations in the Scripture, for that there is ⟨p. 37⟩one God not three as the Treithits dream, is believed by some to be false, by others to be true. Yet undeniably it is in it self, true that there is but one God, nor is it therefore to be believed with a reserve, because the Synod hath so determined according to the word of God: and this were some answer if we should teach that men should believe, because so saith a Synod. But all the mystery is, though a Synod should determine a truth an hundred times according to the word, yet if the conscience say it is no truth, the determination of a Synod doth not oblige at all (say Libertines) because the conscience according to the mind of Libertines is the nearest obliging rule, but any thing obligeth not to obedience and faith as it appears either true or good to our conscience, for to kill the Apostles appears lawful, to commit adultery and murder appeareth good to many, yet are not men obliged to kill the Apostles, or to commit adultery.
But I answer this concludes not onely against a Synodicall determination, but against all Scripture, and all Propheticall and Apostolicall determinations in the Scripture, for that there is ⟨p. 37⟩one God not three as the Treithits dreame, is believed by some to be false, by others to be true. Yet undenyably it is in it self, true that there is but one God, nor is it therefore to be believed with a reserve, because the Synod hath so determined according to the word of God: and this were some answer if we should teach that men should believe, because so saith a Synod. But all the mysterie is, though a Synod should determine a truth an hundred times according to the word, yet if the conscience say it is no truth, the determination of a Synod doth not obliedge at all (say Libertines) because the conscience according to the minde of Libertines is the nearest obleidging rule, but any thing obleidgeth not to obedience and faith as it appears either true or good to our conscience, for to kill the Apostles appears lawfull, to commit adulterie and murther appeareth good to many, yet are not men obleidged to kill the Apostles, or to commit adulterie.