A92140:212
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.
Quer. 11. Whereas this distinct argument presupposeth that the Magistrate should tolerate errors in fundamentals, and in non-fundamentalls, because of the difficulty of knowing of fundamentals, must it not follow that men are far rather to be tolerated,1 […] ••re in fundamentals, […] such as erre in non-fundamentalls, and so the more blasphemous that seducing teachers be, as if they deny there is a God, and that nature, and chant rules all, and that Christ was an impostor, the Gospel a fable, the Scripture a mere […], the more they are to be pitied, and […] measure of indulgence and toleration is due to them then to such •• are godly and err but in lesser points, that are more easily […] concerning usury, accidental killing of our neighbour, or the meaning of some places of Scripture, or err in matters touching Church-government or the like?
Quer. 11. Whereas this distinct argument presupposeth that the Magistrate should tolerate errors in fundamentalls, and in non-fundamentalls, because of the difficulty of knowing of fundamentalls, must it not follow that men are far rather to be tolerated,1 〈…〉 ••re in fundamentalls, 〈…〉 such as erre in non-fundamentalls, and so the more blasphemous that seducing teachers be, as if they deny there is a God, and that nature, and chante rules all, and that Christ was an imposter, the Gospel a fable, the Scripture a meer 〈…〉, the more they are to be pitied, and 〈…〉 measure of indulgence and toleration is due to them then to such •• are godly and erre but in lesser points, that are more easily 〈…〉 concerning usury, accidentall killing of our neighbour, or the meaning of some places of Scripture, or erre in matters touching Church-government or the like?
- 1Augus. […] dicu, relinqus liber orbatrio, cur enim non in homicidiis & in stupris, & in quibuscunque […] facinorib & flagiciis libere arbitrio dimittendum to esse proclamas? quae tamen omnia justis leg ib comprim utilissimuma ahiberrimu est, dedit quidem De homini liberani […] sed nec bonam Infruct: osam, nec malam voluit esse impunitam, li. 1. Con. Gaudenti c. 19. secundum est as fallatissimas vanissimsque rations, haberis laxatis atque dimissis, humana licentia impusta pecata omnia relinquentur, […]