A92140:282
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.
so Celsus plays the Atheist egregiously in setting self-murderers, Hannibal, Seneca, Empedocles, slaves of vain-glory up at the right hand of God with Christ. But if Celsus would but offer a shadow of an argument, it should be thus, Innocent men that dye for no worldly end, and will both willingly be killed, and kill themselves with their own hands, for no end but to obtain life eternal, and because they will not do that which an erroneous conscience, stuffed with, arrogance, pride, self-allocation of learning, zeal, and a name, judgeth to be sin, are not to be punished by the sword, but such are heretics willing to be Martyrs for the devil, and heathen that kill themselves to obtain eternal life; ergo, the major is false, the assumption bloody and unjust, the conclusion blasphemous and Atheistical.
so Celsus playes the Atheist egregiously in setting selfe-murtherers, Hannibal, Seneca, Empedocles, slaves of vaine-glory up at the right hand of God with Christ. But if Celsus would but offer a shadow of an argument, it should be thus, Innocent men that dye for no worldly end, and will both willingly be killed, and kill themselves with their owne hands, for no end but to obtaine life eternall, and because they will not doe that which an erroneous conscience, stuffed with, arrogancie, pride, self-allo•ation of learning, zeal, and a name, judgeth to be sin, are not to be punished by the sword, but such are hereticks willing to be Martyrs for the devill, and heathen that kill themselves to obtain eternall life; ergo, the major is false, the assumption bloody and unjust, the conclusion blasphemous and Atheisticall.
3. Consider how Celsus proveth that the heretics that dye for heresies is not taken with vain-glory▪ and for a name, because a heretic dyes infamous and filled with reproach, but make an argument of that, he that dyes for that which, in the opinion of the contrary side, is infamous and reproachful, cannot dye for a name among men, and vain-glory; but he that dyes for heresy, dyes so, ergo, The major is most false, for to dye for heresy in the estimation of the heretic, and of all of his opinion, and of all, that for all after generations shall be of his opinion is no reproach, but an everlasting name to the heretic so dying, and a name and glory with men is [Greek or Hebrew] an opinion, and is coined, lives and breaths in the conceit and brain of men; we all say, Lucretia, Seneca, Cao, dyed for vain-glory,