A95413:140
The doubting conscience resolved. In answer to a (pretended) perplexing question, &c. Wherein is…
The doubting conscience resolved. In answer to a (pretended) perplexing question, &c. Wherein is evidently proved, that the holy Scriptures (not the pope) is the foundation whereupon the Church is built. Or, That a Christian may be infallibly certain of his faith and religion by holy Scriptures. By William Twice D.D. Prolocutor of the Assembly of Divines. Written at the desire of Samuel Hartlib, Esquire, for the satisfaction of his friends beyond the seas; and now divulged in print for more public edification.The doubting conscience resolved. In answer to a (pretended) perplexing question, &c. Wherein is evidently proved, that the holy Scriptures (not the pope) is the foundation whereupon the Church is built. Or, That a Christian may be infallibly certain of his faith and religion by holy Scriptures. By William Tvvisse D.D. Prolocutor of the Assembly of Divines. Written at the desire of Samuel Hartlib, Esquire, for the satisfaction of his friends beyond the seas; and now divulged in print for more publick edification.
London: printed for Thomas Matthews, 1652
Title page typeset from the transcription.
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.
Also many have their senses exercised in the Scriptures, or are more inventive than others; therefore if a man could by disputing and reasoning confute some Thesis, and as it were take away a mans opinion from him, and become conqueror, he should also take away his Religion, and the other should be constrained either to take up his Conquerors Religion, or against his conscience to keep his own.
Also many have their senses exercised in the Scriptures, or are more inventive than others; therefore if a man could by disputing and reasoning consute some Thesis, and as it were take away a mans opinion from him, and become conqueror, he should also take away his Religion, and the other should be constrained either to take up his Conquerors Religion, or against his conscience to keep his own.
Nor will that Answer serve the turn, our Divines and Pastors can answer you, though I cannot: for then should I believe with another ⟨p. 108⟩mans faith; but saith must be mine, not another mans, else should salvation also be another mans. If Religion be the service of God, certainly it is necessary that I should understand that service which I must perform to my Lord. Seeing God will not reckon another mans service for mine, and cannot be served by a Substitute, it remains that we conclude, Controversies are to be left to learned men, and are not so very necessary. It may be answered, Then also Religion is to be left to learned men; for Controversies are our very Religion, for (saving the consideration of them) there is no difference, but Papists are Protestants, and Protestants are Papists; look how much a man knows of Controversies, so much doth he know of his own Religion. The state of a mans salvation is such as his Religion and his Faith. Now there is but one salvation ⟨p. 109⟩and but one faith: But if Controversies belong to the learned only, wherefore have Lay-men endured so many afflictions, distresses, nay and death it self for these controversies sake? I know indeed that a Calvinist Doctor, one Doctor Bergius, a Preacher at Bremen, affirms in his late published Sermons, that Controversies are not merely necessary to salvation, that the Scripture is plain and clear about those things which are necessary to salvation, and that there was never any contrariety between the Religious themselves. At which also the Leipzig-Collation between the Lutherans and the Calvinists seems to aim.