A92140:240
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.
3.1 These Precepts, Try the Spirits, Try all things, enjoin an examination of fundamentals, as well as non-fundamentalls: and what reason have Independents to say these Precepts hold in non-fundamentalls onely. Mr. John Goodwin with better ground saith, they hold in all, for must we hold that which is good onely in non-fundamentalls? And did not the Bereans try Pauls doctrine by the Scripture, in the most and only necessary fundamental which Paul preached, that Jesus Christ was the Messiah that dyed, rose again, Act. 17. 3. and are therefore commended by the Holy Ghost, v. 10. 11? above those of Thessalonica, and must we believe every Spirit who preach fundamental truths, or fundamental errors, who say Christ is not yet come in the flesh, upon trust? the contrary of which John expressly enjoineth, 1 Joh. 4. 1, 2, 3: yea we are rather to try fundamentals, and to walk upon sure and unmoveable principles, since an error here hazardeth our eternal salvation, and is of as great concernment as our souls are, but errors or mistakes in non-fundamentalls, though they be sins, yet are consistent with saving faith, and the state of salvation.
3.1 These Precepts, Try the Spirits, Try all things, enjoyne an examination of fundamentalls, as well as non-fundamentalls: and what reason have Independents to say these Precepts hold in non-fundamentalls onely. Mr. John Goodwin with better ground saith, they hold in all, for must we hold that which is good onely in non-fundamentalls? And did not the Bereans try Pauls doctrine by the Scripture, in the most and onely necessary fundamentall which Paul preached, that Jesus Christ was the Messiah that dyed, rose againe, Act. 17. 3. and are therefore commended by the Holy Ghost, v. 10. 11? above those of Thessalonica, and must wee beleeve every Spirit who preach fundamentall truths, or fundamentall errours, who say Christ is not yet come in the flesh, upon trust? the contrary of which John expresly enjoyneth, 1 Joh. 4. 1, 2, 3: yea we are rather to try fundamentalls, and to walke upon sure and unmoveable principles, since an errour here hazardeth our eternall salvation, and is of as great concernment as our souls are, but errours or mistakes in non-fundamentalls, though they bee sinnes, yet are consistent with saving faith, and the state of salvation.