A92140:926
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
Chapter 28: Divers other Arguments for pretended Toleration, answered.
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.
I conceive Libertines shall have to do with the bottom of their wits, to bring arguments from the Law of Nature, to prove, that every false instituted worship, punished by the Sword of old, was against the Law of Nature, and that the Seducers, were convinced in their conscience it was so.1 2. If there was an infallible Oracle to back the false Prophet, why was he judged Deut. 17. by the Law then? why must witnesses two or three, depose against him? why must the people that stone him, or concur to execute the sentence of death, against a City that will welcome and defend false Prophets, know it by report and hear-say• Deut. 13. 12. and enquire and make search, and ask diligently if the thing be truth and certain? v. 14. what need of exposition of the written Law? Deut. 17. 11. what need of witnesses? Deut. 17. 6. here is shorter work, and we must be wiser then God, Libertines save all the travel, an immediate Oracle from heaven is both the Judge, witness, party, and all, and infallibly saith, this man hath prophesied falsely in the name of the Lord, good people rise and stone him, Judge, you need no witness […] a witness from heaven: what needed the Priests and Pharisees, trouble themselves to seek witnesses against Christ? Mr. Goodwin and others are of the mind, Caiaphas, Priest and Prophet, could have given a word from heaven, whether he was a blasphemer or not. But a Prophet of God being infallible, might have infallibly informed them, if the man were a false Prophet. Yea but what shall be done when the Priest and Prophet of God himself is called in question? shall he ask the Oracle, whether he himself be the false Prophet or no?
I conceive Libertines shall have to doe with the bottome of their wits, to bring arguments from the Law of Nature, to prove, that every false instituted worship, punished by the Sword of old, was against the Law of Nature, and that the Seducers, were convinced in their conscience it was so.1