to constitute one Christ which is by a miraculous and extraordinary Union that no other Creatures neither Angels or Men are dignified with and though Christ as Man was the Son of God miraculously conceived and born in Time and also as God was by a Generation from Eternity before all Worlds and Times yet he is but one Son of God and because of the personal Union of the Word with his Manhood both as God and Man he is properly the Son of God But there is yet another Fallacy in G. W's Words which is that neither the visible Body nor Manhood that was born of the Virgin was any Part of the true Christ or Son of God and first As to that visible Body of Flesh and Bones he denies that Christ consisted of it I distinguish said he between consisting and having Christ had visible Flesh and Bones but he did not consist of them Christian Quaker p. 139 140. This shews us the very Heart of their Heresie In like manner W. P's Rejoinder p. 299 to 307. W. P. argues for 16. Pages in his Rejoinder against Faldo That Christ never died for they will not have any thing properly to be the Christ but his Godhead which they make to be all one identically and essentially with his Heavenly Mandhood consisting of Heavenly Flesh and Blood that he had from all Eternity Here a Quaker called John Whiting opposed in Defence of W. Penn and said W. Penn did not deny that that outward Person was the Son of God I askt him whose Son was he properly He said The Son of Mary I replied Mary was his Mother but who was his Father properly He said He was conceived by the Holy Ghost I again replied But that 's no Answer to my Question who was his Father Every Son must have a Father and seeing Christ had no immediate Father but God then surely he was properly the Son of God as the Scripture plainly testifieth To this he made no Reply but opposed in Defence of G. W. I having said that G. W. denied that visible Body that hung on the Cross to be any Part of the true Christ I replied I have proved it already by the late Quotation here read wherein he says He denies that Christ consisted of Flesh and Bones I distinguish said he between consisting and having Christ had Flesh and Bones but did not consist of them as a Man has a Coat or Garment but doth not consist of it and that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem was Christ by a Metonimy saith VV. P. of the thing containing having the Name of the thing contained And at this rate VV. P. himself may be called Christ because he hath Christ in him The Excuse That Christ did not Meerly consist of Flesh and Bones signifies nothing for that was no Part of the Question betwixt G.VV. and his Opponent None ever said That Christ did meerly consist of Flesh Blood and Bones no Socinian will so affirm for that were to say Christ was meerly a Body of Flesh and Bones without a rational Soul whatever hath Parts doth consist of those Parts incompleatly of one or more Parts compleatly of them all The Foundation of the Quakers great Error on this Head lieth here That because Christ was before the Body was therefore that Body is no Part of him which is easily answered thus Christ was before that Body was but he was not compleatly and in all Respects fitted to be the anointed Saviour of the World until the Word was made Flesh i. e. until the Word did take our Flesh and whole Nature into a personal Union with himself the which was necessary to the compleat Performance of his Mediatory Offices of King Priest and Prophet and especially of his Priestly Office And not only G. VV. hath denyed Christ to have any created Body whereof he consists but he hath denyed that he hath any created Soul in his Answer to T. Danson ' s Synopsis p. 18. As to T. Danson's telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the Creation of his Body and Soul the Parts of that Nature he subsisted in c. To this I say if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both created doth not this render him a fourth Person For Creation was in Time which contradicts their Doctrine of three distinct increated coeternal coessential Persons in the Deity seeing that which was created was not so But herein whether doth not his and their Ignorance of the only begotten of the Father and their Denial of Christ's Divinity plainly appear yea or nay VVhere doth the Scripture say that his Soul was created For was not he the Brightness of his Father's Glory and the express Image of his Divine Substance But supposing the Soul of Christ was with the Body created in time I ask if from Eternity he was a Person distinct from God and his holy Spirit without either Soul or Body and where doth the Scripture speak of any Person without either Soul or Body T. Elwood to cover this gross Error of G.VV. in his pretended Answer to my first Narrative saith That G. W. only denyed that Christ had a created Soul as God But this was not the State of the Question for neither T. D. nor any other Man were ever so gross as to affirm that Christ as God had a created Soul And the like Evasion doth G. VV. use himself in his Antidote p. 191. This Question saith he is no Determination that it was or was not Christ as God his Soul was increated as Man his Soul or Spirit was not the Deity but formed and assumed by the VVord But it 's Evident that his accusing T. D. and others of Ignorance for saying it was created determines it sufficiently But as is above said G. W. and his Brethren will have only the Godhead to be the Christ which they call The Heavenly Man having Soul and Body Flesh Blood and Bones uncreated and existing from all Eternity which they call The Seed within them the Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Serpent's Head which G. F. as is above quoted denyeth to be a Creature What the Seed spoke in him he said he spoke it not as a Creature therefore that Heavenly Man or Seed consisting of Heavenly Flesh and Blood which they say is in them not being a Creature must needs in their Sense be from all Eternity and not from the Beginning of the World only This appears yet more fully from R. Hubberthorn When was that Christ created R. Hub. Coll. p. 49 50. which you say must as a Creature judge the World And if in Mary's Time who was Judge of the World till then Was not the Person of Christ Jesus before the World was Note here he owns Christ to be a Person and by G. W's Argument above mentioned he must being a Person have both Soul and Body before the World was And when had the Man Christ Jesus his Beginning If you can declare it how is
Blood of Christ's Humanity but of his Godhead G. W. in his Truth Defended p. 66. quotes C. Wade saying The Lord hath Bought us and Redeemed us with the Precious Blood of his Humanity and saith your imagined Christ viz. their Notion of a Christ whose Blood is shed within them never had any Humane Blood to Redeem you with and to prove it he brings 1 Pet. 1. 19. G. W. Answers That Scripture 1 Pet. 1. hast thou perverted as thou hast done other Scriptures to thy own Destruction for there he witnesses to the Blood of the Lamb which Redeemed them from their vain Conversation but doth not tell them of Humane Blood to Redeem them with for that which is Humane is Earthly but Christ whose Blood is Spiritual is Lord from Heaven and he is not an imagined Spirit but a true Spirit And what say'st thou to this Was that Humane Blood which Christ saith Except a Man drink he hath no Life in him and which cleansed the Saints from all Sin who were Flesh of Christ's Flesh and Bone of his Bone Note Thus we see what Blood G. W. esteems the Precious Blood of Christ not his Humane Blood or Blood of his Humanity and that not only he denyeth that we are Redeemed or Cleansed by any Blood of his Humanity but denyeth that Christ had any Humane Blood or Blood of Humanity and giveth his Reason against it That Humane is Earthly but Christ whose Blood is Spiritual is Lord from Heaven But again For a further evidence of his undervaluing the outward Blood of Christ and denying it to be that Blood by which Christ purchased his Church in his Light and Life p. 56. It is confessed saith he that God by his own Blood purchased to himself a Church Acts 20. 28. Now the Blood of God or that Blood that relates to God must needs be Spiritual he being a Spirit and the Covenant of God is Inward and Spiritual Note This Quotation was lately published in the Printed Sheet call'd An Account from Colchester above-mention'd to which Seven Quakers at Colchester have given a pretended Answer call'd Some Account from Colchester c. In their Answer to this Quotation they quibble Sophistically upon the Word Spiritual We would ask these Men say they if God's own Blood be not Spiritual whether it be Carnal and the Blood of his Covenant such also But was not the Blood that was outwardly shed on the Cross which John said he saw and bare Record real material Blood as really as that of other Men And granting it to be Spiritual as Spiritual signifies Holy as a Holy Man is a Spiritual Man and yet is a Carnal Man with respect to his Body of Flesh yet it was Material and Corporal But G. W. by Spiritual meant inward Blood in Men and Women and so expressed it The Covenant saith he is Inward and Spiritual and so is the Blood of it so that Spiritual and Inward are with him Synonymous But for a further Answer they quote a passage in G. W.'s Antidote p. 233 234. where he grants contrary to his former Doctrine That God purchased his Church by Christ's Natural or Outward Blood but not only by that but principally by the Spiritual Blood or Life of Christ Jesus and this Spiritual Blood he holds to be Inward in Men The Blood is the Life and the Life is the Light of Men as W. Bailie phrased it perverting and confounding two sundry Texts of Scripture But the tenor and tendency of G. W.'s former Arguments were altogether against Redemption or Justification by any natural or outward Blood whatsoever for Humane is Natural but Humane Blood G. W. would by no means admit to be the Blood of Christ by which Men are Redeemed So now he will have God's own Blood to be no less than his own dear Son and the Blood to be both Natural and Outward and Spiritual and Inward by which we are Redeemed meaning by Inward Blood his Life Power and Spirit in Men and Women and yet in contradiction to himself he saith God's sparing not his own Son but delivering him up for us all includes the whole Sacrifice of Christ in Soul and Body which were offered Note If Christ's Soul and Body without us were the whole Sacrifice the outward Blood being a part of his Body then his Spirit Life and Light in us is no part of the Sacrifice and yet in contradiction to this in his Light and Life p. 44. He brings several Arguments and Scriptures but all grosly perverted to prove That Christ in us offers up himself a living Sacrifice refering to W. Burnets Book cap. prim p. 31. Where the words are more largely quoted thus out of W. Smiths Primmer We believe that Christ in us doth offer up himself a living Sacrifice unto God for us by which the Wrath and Justice of God is appeased towards us This layeth the whole stress upon Christ within Men being the offering but now G. W. would seem to give one part to Christ without and another part to Christ within Men to be the offering and to the Blood shed without that was Natural and Outward and to the Blood shed within Men that is Spiritual and Inward But then surely he gives very little to the Blood shed without that was but once and was Natural Blood the Blood of the Humanity but he gives very much to the Inward Blood shed within Men which is a more excellent Blood it is the Blood not of the Humanity but of the Divinity and is shed many Thousands yea Millions of times for it is shed in all Men who have lived in several Ages of the World And thus Christ hath offered up himself Inwardly Millions of times and had his Blood inwardly shed to appease the Wrath and Justice of God but this is directly contrary to the Scripture that saith That Christ by one Offering hath for ever perfected them that are Sanctified and by one Offering Heb. 9. 28. 10. 14. once offered not often offered he hath appeared to put away sin and as was Prophesied of him a Body thou hast prepared me not two Bodies or many Bodies And as Christ had not two Bodies to be offered for our Sins Heb. 8. so nor had he two Bloods the Scripture never mentioneth any Blood of Christ but one we no where read in Scripture of the Bloods of Christ plural but of Blood singular And according to G. W. the Blood of Christ in his former Books is but one and that is the Inward Blood the Blood of his Divinity but not of his Humanity yea he hath denyed the Body of Christ to be any part of him whereof he consisteth as above-quoted and consequently nor was the outward Blood shed on the Cross any part of him But suppose it were allowed to call the Spirit of Christ in Believers or the sanctifying and refreshing Influences thereof his Blood by way of metaphor as Wine is call'd in Scripture the Blood of the Grape
G. W. so to charge W. B. and mistate the Controversie between W. B. and him nothing but deceit it self could invent such a forgery in G. W. as this to charge it on W. B. as if he had either said or thought that the Meritorious cause of Man's Justification was laid by him upon the Act of the Soldier that thrust the Spear into our Saviour's Side for neither did he say it nor can it be gathered from his Words by the least shadow of any just Consequence his Words being thus as G. W. cites them The shedding of the Blood upon the Cross that was let out by the Virtue of the Spear being thrust into his Side was the Meritorious cause of Man's Justification See Light and Life p. 64. The shedding of the Blood c. is the true English of the Latin Words Effasio Sanguinis which being A Noun Verbal hath a Passive as well as Active signification and that W. B. meant it in the Passive signification and not in the Active as with respect to the Soldiers Act is evident from the Words both of Jer. Ives and also of W. B. quoted by G. W. Light and Life p. 64. he quotes Jer. Ives saying My Brother Burnet meant Christ's Passion and not the Act of wicked Men. And again G. W. quotes W. B. saying Yes Brother it is proper to say It was Christ's Act to shed his Blood His meaning is obvious to any impartial Reader that it was Christ's Act freely to give his Blood to be shed for the remission of our Sins as he said himself no Man taketh my Life from me I lay down my Life and I take it up again Without all doubt though Christ was not Active to Kill himself by any Bodily Act of violence that he did to himself yet his giving up his Blood to be shed and his Life to be taken away was a most noble act of his Soul and Will who by a most noble act of Obedience and Resignation to the Will of God for the Salvation of Men gave up his Blood to be shed for that the shedding of Christ's Blood was necessary for remission of Men's Sins and their Justification before God is clear from his own words This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood shed for the remission of the Sins of many and as the Scripture saith Without shedding of Blood is no remission so that had not Christ's Blood been shed Men's Sins could not be forgiven and yet what but deceit it self can infer from this That the merit or stress of remission of Sin or Justification is laid upon the act of the wicked Soldier that thrust his Spear into our Saviour's Side Note again Seeing G. W. hath imposed such a Forgery upon W. B. without any just ground as if he had placed the Merit of Men's Justification upon the act of the wicked Man that thrust the Spear into our Saviour's Side By the like forgery he may charge the Church of England with the same absurdity though most unjustly for in the Prayer immediately before Baptism in the Office of Baptism for those of Riper Years she thus Prays Almighty everliving God whose most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of our Sins DID SHED OUT of his most precious Side both Water and Blood and gave Commandment c. Here we see it 's said that Christ SHED OUT of his most precious Side both Water and Blood Can therefore G. W. from thence infer that the Church of England believeth that she layeth the Merit of remission of Sin and Justification upon the act of the Soldier or that Christ by any act of Violence killed himself or commanded others to do it and if no just consequence as this can be gathered out of the Church of England's Words nor can they from the Words of W. B. that are of the same importance But it 's no wonder that G. W. will have the shedding of that Blood which came out of Christ's Side when it was pierced to be only the Soldiers act when T. Elwood in his Truth Defended p. 99. denyeth the Blood that came out of Christ's Side and its shedding after he was Dead to have been to compleat the Offering for this he saith and again repeats the same Words and justifies them in his pretended Answer to my first Narrative p 220 221. This offering up himself and giving himself a ransom for all included all his sufferings both inward and outward and made it a compleat and perfect Sacrifice in which his Blood was comprehended and concerned as well as his Flesh before his Side was pierced by the Spear for he had pronounced that great Word Consummatum est it is finished had bowed his Head and given up the Ghost before his Side was pierced with the Spear This is not only contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as above quoted in the Office of Baptism but of all Orthodox Christians throughout the World who teach according to Scripture That the Water and Blood that came out of our Lord's Side after his Death was a special part of the Offering as well as his Death and the wounds in his Hands and Feet and the Blood that came out of them before his Death which gross Error of T. Elwood is the Error of the Second Days meeting at London who approved his Book and of G. W. who professeth the same Faith with them is deservedly censured and refuted in Satan disrob'd p. 47. His Body pierced and his Blood shed after his Death were truly and properly a part of the Sacrifice as much as what he suffered before he expired As the legal Sacrifice was not compleated by the Death of the Beast but by the Burning of it and offering the Blood afterwards that was shed and those who reject that Blood do mutilate his Sacrifice and render it ineffectual to themselves Note again How neither G. W. nor the Colchester Quakers in their Some Account c. give any answer to what was objected against him out of his Light and Life p. 61. Though quoted by them p. 15. Where he positively asserts That to seek our Saviour above the Clouds and Firmanent i. e. to pray to him as he is in Heaven without us above the Clouds and Firmament is contrary to the Righteousness of Faith Rom. 10. 6. And to look to the Blood that was shed at Jerusalem for Justification is contrary to Deut. 30. 13 14. and Rom. 10. which seeking or looking to Christ and his Blood as is above-quoted and proved was not by any outward or bodily act but by Faith and yet even such seeking or looking is denyed and opposed by G. W. and his Colchester Quaker Brethren But whereas G. W. doth argue so much and so frequently against that Blood that was outwardly shed by the Spear its being the meritorious Cause of Justification because that Blood is not to be found at Jerusalem for it 's not in being says W. B. as G. W. quotes him
as much Charity not only to Judaising Christians that would practise outward Circumcision but to Insidels Jews and Mahometans yea and the most Superstitious and Idolatrous Papists for no doubt many of them practise what they believe is their Duty when they pray to the Virgin Mary and other Saints and adore the Bread in the Mass being misled by an erring Conscience to believe it is the real Body of Christ But they falsely infer that because unworthy Persons do partake of the outward Supper that therefore it is the Table of Devils and the Cup of Devils Paul did not say he that Eats and Drinks unworthily Eats at the Table of Devils But he that eats this Bread and drinks this Cup of the Lord unworthily shall be guilty of the Body and Blood of the Lord 1 Cor. 11. 27. Thus we see that according to Scripture that Cup which the unworthy drink is the Cup of the Lord and not the Cup of Devils and that Bread which they eat is the Bread of the Lord as Augustine said the unworthy they eat Panem Domini but not Panem Dominum the Bread of the Lord but not the Bread which is the Lord Some of the Quakers said George seeing thou art for the outward Baptism and the Supper why dost thou not practise them To this I gave the following account which many declared was satisfactory unto them that not having an outward Call I ought not to administer them to others upon the pretence of an inward extraordinary Call which too many pretend to have And for my Speaking at Turners-Hall and elsewhere as I had occasion I do not pretend to any extraordinary Call in so doing but what I did was what a private Christian who has a Spiritual Gift and Ability given him of God especially to oppose Heresie may and ought to do to teach his Neighbours Catechistically not to set up any Sect or make any Schism as Origine taught in Christian Assemblies when a Lay-man before he received Ordination and so did others as Eusebius showeth in his Church-History And as to Baptism I was satisfied with what I had received in Infancy being Born of Christian Parents for I believe That Baptism being a Seal of God's Covenant of Grace doth as really belong to Infant Chirdren of Believers under the New Testament as Circumcision did to Infant Children of Believers under the Old Testament Next as concerning the Lord's-Supper after it pleased God to convince me that it is an Institution of Christ and let me see my Error and Sin in rejecting it for which I have been humbled before God and asked his Forgiveness and which I hope God for Christ's sake has given me I had some considerable time of hesitation about the lawful and due Administrator and after I had clearness in that I delay'd for some time for the sake of some others lest my forwardness should be an hindrance and offence to them but through Mercy that being much removed I became uneasie to delay it longer so that I declar'd I did intend God willing with the first opportunity to receive it And whereas my Adversaries among the Quakers did object against me that I am a Member of no visible Society and on that pretence refuse to have any publick Dispute or Conference with me To this I answer'd first Supposing it were so why should that be made a Crime in me which W. P. in his Preface to G. Fox's Journal esteem'd so great a Virtue in G. Fox viz. That he was of no particular Society but secondly I told them I was a Member of the Catholick Church of Christ and I did own the Church of England to be a part of the Catholick Church and other Protestant Churches to be other parts of the same In the close of the Meeting I told the Auditory I was ready by God's Assistance to prove against my Adversaries the Chief Leaders and Teachers of the Quakers particularly George Whitehead Jos Wyeth and them of the Second-Days-Meeting at London who have approv'd the Quakers Books That they do not believe One Article of that call'd the Apostles Creed in the true sense of Scripture and of all true and Orthodox Christians throughout the World and I desir'd the Quakers present to acquaint their Brethren with my said Proposal I also told the Auditory that the false pretences of the Quakers Teachers to extraordinary prophetical Inspirations gave them the just Character of false Prophets and all such who had the like false pretences with them and that none could justly be so called however otherwise unsound or mistaken that had not those high pretences That it was some of the most crying Sins committed in this Land that so many false Prophets should abound in it speaking Lyes in the Name of the Lord and saying Thus saith the Lord pretending the fame Immediate Message and Authority that the true Prophets had whenas they can give no proof of it but many undeniable proofs can be given to the contrary as particularly their vile Antichristian Errors publish'd in their Books and that lewd Swearing and open Prophanation of the Name of God are not greater Sins nor so great nor dangerous in many respects as their speaking Lyes in the Name of the Lord and entituling their vile Errors and Blasphemies to the Spirit of God as they commonly do POST-SCRIPT FOR an Evidence of my owning the Church of England to be a part of the true Catholick Church of Christ I did with great inward Peace and Satisfaction I bless God receive the Lord's-Supper by D. Bedford in his Church in Buttolph-lane with others of that Congregation the first Lord's Day of the Month of February 1699 and since again in the same place by the same Person the first Lord's Day of this Instant Month of March 1699. On which same day Robert Bridgeman and Margaret Everard and some other of my Friends formerly under the profession of Quakers and in great repute among that People whom God in his great Mercy hath of late times enlightned to see their former Error and to renounce it did receive the Lord's-Supper in Huntington and have declar'd that they receiv'd it with great inward Peace and Satisfaction the account whereof I have from the said Robert Bridgeman by his Letter to me bearing Date the 5th of this Instant in which Letter he also informs me and in another of a former Date of about Ten of my Friends in Huntington and Godmanchester and there-about who formerly were Quakers all of good repute who now go to Church there and that Margaret Everard has had her youngest Son and three Daughters lately Baptized Also by Letters from Bedford I have an account that some both in the Town and County of Bedford are come off from the Quakers and gone to Church particularly W. Mather and his Wife also at Reading divers who were formerly Quakers and were so Educated have gone to Church and have been Baptized and some there have brought their Children to be
George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL 1699. WE whose Names are under written having at Mr. Keith's Request and by the Allowance of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London carefully examin'd the Quotations of this Narrative do testifie the Faithfulness of them and that they exactly agree with the Books out of which they are taken And as we commend his Integrity in retracting publickly his Errors and his Christian Zeal for the reducing of his Brethren who are yet entangled with them so we hope they will follow his Example and discern the Perniciousness of their Ways and be led by the Grace of God to the Acknowledgment of the Truth and to the Communion of the Church Z. Isham D. D. Rector of St. Botolph Bishops-gate W. Bedford D. D. Rector of St. George Botolph-Lane R. Altham B. D. Rector of St. Andrew Vndershaft Will. Whitfield Rector of St. Martins at Ludgate J. Adams Rector of St. Alban Woodstreet George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL Divided into Three Parts Detecting the Quakers Gross Errors Vile Heresies and Antichristian Principles oppugning the Fundamentals of Christianity by clear and evident Proofs in above Two Hundred and Fifty Quotations faithfully taken out of their Books and read at three several Meetings the 11th the 18th and 23d of Jan. 1699. before a great Auditory of Judicious Persons Ministers and others More particularly discovering the Fallacious and Sophistical Defences of George Whitehead Joseph Wyeth and seven Quakers of Colchester in their late Books on all the several Heads contained in the printed Advertisement To which is prefix'd The Attestation of five Ministers of the Church of England to the Truth of the said Quotations And a POSTCRIPT By GEORGE KEITH LONDON Printed for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1700. Advertisement THIS is to signifie that it is my purpose God-willing and by his Assistance to be present at Turners-Hall in Philpot-Lane by Fanchurch-Street in London being our ordinary Meeting-place Licensed by Authority on the Eleventh Day of the Eleventh Month called January in the Forenoon there to detect and discover Gross Errors and Anti-christian Principles plainly repugnant to the Fundamentals of Christianity in the Books of the approved Authors and Writers of the People called Quakers by ocular Inspection presenting them in fair and full Quotations to as many as are willing to be present and make Inspection into them And also to lay open the great Fallacy and Sophistry of George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and some of their Brethren at Colchester which they have used in their late printed Defences of their Own and their Brethrens most Erronious Passages contained in their Books in order to Cloak and Hide their Antichristian Principles and vile Errors not only to the great Scandal of all true Protestants in this Nation of whom they pretend to be the more refined Part but of all true Christians any where And I do hereby desire George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and their Brethren of the Second Days Meeting at London who have approved their late Books to be present at the said Meeting for which I have Permission by Civil Authority or any others who think themselves concerned at the Time and Place above-mentioned to hear and see out of their own Books their Errors and Fallacies detected who if they have any thing to offer in their own or Brethrens Defence shall be fairly heard The particular Errors that I intend God-willing to discover them guilty of out of their Books and Authors are Concerning their Pretences to Infallibility and sinless Perfection Concerning the Scriptures Concerning the Holy Trinity Concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul and Body and Blood his coming to Judgment at the Last Day Concerning Justification Concerning the Soul Concerning the Light within Concerning the Resurrection Concerning the outward Baptism and the Supper Concerning doing servile Work on the First Day George Keith London 18th 10th Month 1699-1700 A few Words of PREFACE TO THE IMPARTIAL READERS IMpartial Readers I have these few things to acquaint you with and recommend to your Consideration First that I found just and necessary Cause to recite diverse former Quotations given in my former Narratives and in other Books formerly publish'd against the Quakers Errors to detect the fallacious and sophistical Defences that they have made in their late Books in Vindication of those Quotations to cover their vile Errors Secondly Beside the former Quotations above mentioned I have brought many new Quotations which are neither in my former Narratives nor in any other Books that hitherto have been published against them which obviates the cavelling of the Quakers who would be ready to say There is nothing to be expected of new Matter but what is contained in other Books and which hath been already answered by them The contrary whereof will sufficiently appear to any that shall compare this fourth Narrative with any other Books before this published against them Thirdly Whereas the common Objection of the Quakers is That their Books are neither fully nor fairly quoted To remove the Ground of any such Objection I have got the Attestation of Persons of known Integrity and Judgment to the Truth of them as I got the like Attestation from some the former Year to attest to my third Narrative I have given the Quotations as fully and fairly as is requisite to satisfie any reasonable Persons But the Men I have to deal with for all this will I expect renew their unjust Complaint and will tell their Readers This and the other Passage going before or following should have been inserted in the Quotations whereas the not inserting of them makes not their Cause one whit the worse nor the inserting them makes their Cause one whit the better as could be shewed in many Instances and is shewed in their late Books for when so much is quoted out of any Book that gives the full Sense of the Writer whatever is more is superfluous Note for a Proof on the last Head That the Quakers deny the Moral Law or Ten Commandments to be a Rule to the Christian's Life and thereupon do not blame but justifie doing servile Work on the first Day yea and in the Face of a Congregation while the Minister was preaching See p. 28. of this Narrative G. K. George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS The first Part giving an Account of his Proofs on the first four Heads contained in his printed Advertisement viz. Concerning I. Their Infallibility II. Their sinless Perfection III. The Scriptures IV. The Holy Trinity Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the first Head concerning their Infallibility 1. GEORGE Fox Great Mystery pag. 105. For who witness these Conditions that they were in that gave forth the Scriptures They witness Infallibility an infallible Spirit which is now possessed and witnessed among those called Quakers Glory to the Highest for
are sprung forth of the corrupt Tree which now is to be burned and its Fruit rejected Now these are all the Books and Catechisms published by any others but themselves Again in p. 23. they say And though some have known him viz. Christ after the Flesh yet henceforth know they him so no more as say the Scriptures of Truth Note Here they pervert the true Sence of Paul's Words as they commonly do in their Books and Preachings giving Paul's Words for a Reason why they do not preach Faith in Christ as he came in the Flesh died and rose again c as necessary to Salvation because say they VVe are no more to know Christ after the Flesh whereas it was the great Subject both of Paul's Preaching and of all the Apostles to wit Jesus Christ as he came in the Flesh died for our Sins and rose again and ascended c. insomuch that they did with one Accord declare That the Gift of the Holy Ghost with all the saving and sanctifying Graces of the Spirit do come to Men by Christ through Faith in him as he came in the Flesh died rose and ascended and that this Faith was wrought in Men by hearing the VVord outwardly preached Again in p. 23. they say Now Children the Scriptures of Truth do declare of God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth which are one but the Scriptures cannot bring you to know God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth And yet they say concerning this Primmer and the Contents of it p. 2. That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn that they may be turned unto the Light which is the Gift of God Here they seem to prefer their Primmer to the Scriptures for they say of the Contents of their Primmer That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn To learn what Surely some Knowledge of God and Christ they will say and yet they will not allow so much to the Scripture and on a diligent Search I find not in all this Primmer one simple Direction to Children and others to read the Scriptures and what they have quoted of Scripture in it is but little and much even of that grosly perverted and misapplied as in p. 44 45. they say They that hear the Light that is in all Men and common to all Men they hear God for God is Light and they that hear God they hear Christ also for God and Christ are one as saith the Scripture and they that hear Christ hear the Author of the true Faith and so hear the Saviour of their Souls and the Light is that Prophet which all that hear not him are to be cut off Here we see how grosly they pervert that Place of Scripture Deut. 18. 15. Acts 3. 22. 7. 37. which is not to be understood of the common Illumination given to all Mankind but of the Man Christ as he outwardly came in the Flesh and did execute his prophetical Office on Earth by preaching and teaching and as he doth now still execute his prophetical Office in his Church by his Word outwardly preached and his Spirit inwardly accompanying it to make it effectual Again p. 82. they run into the same wild Notion that others Familists and mad Enthusiasts run into of the Blood of Christ within them For say they and all wait together in the Light viz. as it is common to all Mankind Infidels Jews Mahumetans Heathens for so they understand it and believe in it that ye may be the Children of the Light and therein watch unto Prayer and one over another and this will beget ye into unfeigned Love and walk in the Light ye will have true Vnity and Fellowship one with another and the Blood which is the Life of Jesus Christ ye will feel cleansing you from all Sin and so ye will come into Vnity with God Note By this it is evident as will more fully appear on a particular Head following that by the Blood which they call the Life of Jesus Christ they meant not his Blood outwardly shed or his Life that he outwardly laid down viz. the Life of his Manhood without us for the Remission of our Sins and cleansing therefrom But according to their usual Cant and Phrase The Blood that is the Life and the Life is the Light within So that they make the Blood the Life and the Light within them to be one and the same thing but neither in this Primmer nor in any other of their Books do I find the least Direction to Faith in the Blood of Christ as it was outwardly shed on the Cross therefore in this Primmer and in their other Books they give Poison to poor Children to suck or receive instead of wholesome Food George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS PART II. Containing the Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the fifth Head concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul Body and Blood And on the sixth Head concerning the Souls of Men. Read at the second Meeting at Turners-Hall January 19. 1699. W. P. in Serious Apology p. 146. saith That the outward Person which suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny This is expresly contrary to many Texts of Scripture and to a great Fundamental Article of our Christian Creed yea in a manner it overthrows the whole Christian Creed See the following Scriptures Mat. 16. 13 16. Luke 1. 32. Mat. 14. 33. Mark 1. 1. John 1. 14 34. John 9. 35. 10. 36. Acts 8. 37. Rom. 1. 4. Mat. 27. 54. G.W. in his Truth and Inn. p. 52. excuseth W. P ' s Words thus Here I take him to mean the Son of God in respect to his Divine Being as he is of one Substance with the Father which his Body that suffered Death was not though he was truly the Son of God as he took upon him that Body and as made of a Woman Gal. 4. 4. Being conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary The Fallacy of this is easily detected the Question in Debate betwixt W. P. and his Opponents who were Presbyterian Ministers in Ireland was not whether the Body was the Son of God abstractly considered from the Soul of Christ and his Godhead for no Presbyterian ever held that neither will any Socinian that denyeth the Godhead of Christ say that that meer Body without his created Soul was the Christ or Son of God But the true State of the Question was and is whether he that outwardly suffered Death without the Gates of Jerusalem whom W. P. calls that outward Person in Distinction from the Light within which the Quakers will have to be the whole Christ according to G. Fox's Doctrine was and is not properly the Son of God which all sound Christians say according to Scripture he was and is being both God and Man and yet one Person one Christ one Son of God having his Godhead-Nature and his Manhood-Nature so united as
as the following Words expresly declare But how could Christ in them be disobedient not only Spirits but disobedient Spirits This is that Apostle of the Quakers of whom VV. P. saith in his Preface to G. F's Journal He had an extraordinary Gift in opening the Scripture he would go to the Marrow of things saith VV. P. Is not this a rare Instance of it Upon the reading these Places Samuel Jobson one of the Quakers Elders said George doth not the Scriptures say that some crucifie Christ a-fresh I answered It is said in Scripture they crucifie him to themselves but it is not said they crucifie him to himself or in himself by crucifying him there is understood their rendring themselves guilty of his Death and depriving themselves by their unworthy Life and Practises of the Salvation purchased by him I asked him did he believe that wicked Men by their Sins do really wound Christ in them and kill him and let out his Blood in them and that that Blood is the Blood of Atonement He said The Scripture saith If we walk in the Light c. the Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all Sin I asked him Whether that Blood was the Blood of Christ without us that was shed on the Cross He said The Blood was the Life But I asked again Was it the Blood without us or the Blood within us He said It was spiritual Blood But being much pressed not only by me but some Ministers present to answer whether it was Blood without him or Blood within him He waved any direct Answer and I shewing the Auditory that the Notion of G. F. and other Teachers of the Quakers who had learned it of him was That the Blood by which we are cleansed from Sin is the Blood within which he calls The Blood of the Seed as is more fully afterwards to be proved and this Seed is Christ and is not a Creature Another Quaker said Is not the Seed Christ and is not Christ within the Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Head of the Serpent At this some of the Hearers said Here is Proof enough of their Error The Seed of the Woman it the Seed within them I answered Christ is called the Seed of the Woman and the Seed of Abraham as he came in the Flesh without us and was made of a Woman and was the Son of Abraham And though I own Christ within by his Godhead Presence and by his common Illumination in all Men and by his special Presence and special Illuminations in the faithful yet I deny that the Seed of God in Men is either Christ or God I own that there is a Seed of God in the faithful but I deny G. F. his Notion of it That it is not a Creature I asked Daniel Philips what he said to my former Question Did Men by their Sins really wound God in them as some of their Teachers have affirmed After some Demur he said he would not give a positive Answer but take it into further Consideration whereupon some of the Auditory did commend him I said it was better so to do than to assert such a vile Error however by this it appeared how uncertain they were and how little agreed about some of their chief Principles Having thus given an Account of G. W's wild Notions concerning Christ the Seed within that the Power takes hold of and raises up I will proceed to shew the like by some new Quotations out of G. F. referring to other Quotations given in my third Narrative especially on the same Subject See my third Narrative p. 25. G. F. in his G. M. p. 324. quotes his Opponent saying That the Seed to whom the Promise of Salvation is made is or hath been Sinners Ans The Promise of God is to the Seed which hath been laden as a Cart with Shaves by the Sinner which Seed is the Hope Christ that purifies even as God is pure and here is the Creature come to know its Liberty among the Sons of God and the Seed Christ never sinned in the Male nor in the Female in the Jew nor in the Gentiles And of this Mystery was the great High Professors ignorant of that stood at a Distance from the Gentiles that Christ had no room among them though they talked of him but in the Stable in the Manger and in their Mouths to talk of him with their Lips and such Christ calls Graves and Sepulchres and whited Walls and the Wall is not the Seed but the Seed is Christ and not the Sepulchre nor the Grave so this Promise is not unto Seeds as many but to one the Seed which is Christ. Note these gross Perversions of Scripture Again p. 171. G. M. Now they feel not the Comfort nor the Benefit but by the Faith of Christ Jesus the one Offering in which God is pleased with all which is acceptable which is Christ's Offering his Sacrifice his Flesh his Blood his Life his Word must be manifest and received within before they come to Justification Sanctification and Redemption P. 173. And where Jesus Christ is within the Word is there and God is there and this is the great Mistery of Godliness Again G. M. p. 158. Of this Body which is that by which Christ reconciles unto God are all the Professors Protestants and Papists ignorant of this Seed that breaks the Enmity P. 159. And by Faith is every one justified in the Blood of the Seed the Flesh of Christ the Lord from Heaven shed for the Sins of the whole World The Blood of the Seed which is the Life that cleanseth and this Blood is felt within for it purgeth the Conscience from dead VVorks to serve the living God and here is the great Mistery of God and the VVisdom of God Note This Flesh and Blood that he saith is the great Mistery which neither Papists nor Protestants know is that Flesh which was crucified in Adam when Adam sinned and the Blood that was then shed in which is the Belief that takes away the Sin as I have shewed in a large Quotation out of another Book of his in my third Narrative p. 25. For a Close upon this Head I shall quote a Passage of G. F. in that called Several Papers given forth c. by G. F. who is there called Minister of the eternal VVord of God p. 47. Now to all dear ones and dear Hearts I speak the same Seed which it Christ the same Spirit takes upon it now as ever yea the same Temptations the same Devil and the same VVorship of the VVorld is winding into another Form and Colour but Jesus Christ is the Way the Truth and the Life And the same Seed passing into the Wilderness and there is tempted to lust after the Creature you that are in the Wilderness witness this with me and the same Tentations even to Despair and make themselves away Note here all along from the Passages above quoted out of G. F. and G. W. and many
In the 4th Article of that Paper sign'd by G. W. I quoted these words The Divinity and Humanity i. e. Manhood of Christ Jesus that as he is true God and he is most glorious Man our Mediator and Advocate we livingly believe and have often sincerely confessed in our Publick Testimonies and Writings On this I noted That whatever seeming Confessions they have given in their publick Testimonies to this and other Doctrines yet seeing they have contradicted them most evidently in their printed Books and will not allow that they are chang'd in any one of their Principles they do Fallaciously and put a Cheat upon the Members of Parliament and the whole Nation A Quaker reply'd Dost thou think that the Members of Parliament are not more Wise than to suffer themselves to be cheated by the Quakers I answer'd It is one thing for the Quakers to put a Cheat upon them it is another thing for them to be cheated by them a Cheat may be put on Men and yet they not receive it I hope they are so wise as not to be deceived by them Some of the Quakers objecting That this tended to Persecution so to represent them I answered it tended to no Persecution being to rescue such from those Errors who were corrupted by them and prevent their further spreading and would they take my advice I would shew them a way to secure the Toleration unto them and that is by a free and plain Retractation of their gross Errors And for an evidence of their fallacious way of Speaking and Writing besides what was quoted and proved at the former Meeting to prove them grosly Erroneous concerning Christ his Humanity and Incarnation his Soul Body Flesh and Blood I brought a Quotation out of that call'd A Testimony for the true Christ printed 1668 and given forth as in the Title-Page from some of them call'd Quakers In page 4. As he speaks of Humane with relation to Nature and Body it hath relation to the Earth or Humus the Ground of which Man was made which the first Man is of not the second tho' he was really Man too but Humane or Humanity in the other sence with relation to Gentleness Mercifulness and the like this we know was and is in the Image of God in which Man was made and his Gentleness Kindness Mercifulness c. is manifested in Christ who is the Image of the invisible God and First-Born of every Creature which Image is not earthly for that must be put off but heavenly and so to be put on by all that come to know the Glory of the terrestrial in its place and the true and real Humanity as oppos'd to that Cruelty Envy and Inhumanity which is got up in Man since the Fall so that Humanity and the Unreasonableness of Beasts are two things Note Thus we see how they own Christ's Humanity not in the sence of Scripture and of all sound Christians viz. That the Word did take the real Nature of Man consisting of Soul and Body into a Personal Union with himself his Divinity and Humanity being two Natures distinguished in him but not divided and that he took a Body of Flesh and Blood the same in Nature with ours even our earthly Nature like to us in all things but without Sin but this they plainly deny That Christ had Humanity as it signifies Earthly but they tell in what sence they mean his Humanity viz. as it signifies Gentleness Mercifulness as oppos'd to Cruelty Envy and the unreasonableness of Beasts in which sence they may affirm all this of Christ's Divinity and Godhead That his Godhead is Humane i. e. Gentle Merciful Kind and yet believe not one tittle of Christ's Humanity as the Scripture holds it forth that is that he was really made of a Woman and had his Flesh of her Substance but this they not only here deny but G. F. expresly denyeth That Christ's Body was Earthly or of the Earth G. M. p. 322. He quotes his Opponent saying That Christ had and hath a Carnal Body A Carnal and Humane Body united to his Divinity In opposition to which he saith And Carnal Humane is from the Ground Humane Earthly the first Adam's Body and Christ was not from the Ground let all People read what thou say'st but he was from Heaven his Flesh came down from above his Flesh which was the Meat his Flesh came down from Heaven Again He quotes his Opponent saying That the Flesh of Christ is not in them he answers The Saints eat his Flesh and they that eat his Flesh hath it within them Again He quotes his Opponent That there is as much difference between a Body and a Spirit as there is between Light and Darkness he Answers Christ's Body is Spiritual and that which is Spiritual does not differ from the Spirit and so there is a spiritual Body and there is a natural Body and there is a spiritual Man and there is a natural Man and each hath their Body Note He plainly here denies a difference or distinction between Christ's Body of Flesh and his Spirit for he saith The Saints eat his Flesh and they that eat his Flesh hath it in them Now what Flesh can they have of Christ in them but what is merely Spirit whereas his Opponent and all Christians when they speak of Christs Flesh they meant a real Body as real as the Body of any other Man And whereas G. F. saith Christ's Flesh was not from the Ground or Earth the Scripture saith no such thing but the contrary that he did partake of the same Flesh and Blood with the Children wherefore he is not asham'd to call them Brethren * Heb. 2. 11 14. G. F. doth both Ignorantly and Fallaciously play and quible about the Word Carnal against his Opponent who said Christ had a Carnal Body he Answers Carnal indeed is Death saith the Scripture but here he belyes the Scripture it saith not the Carnal Body is Death but to be Carnally-minded is Death Could G. F. be so sottish as not to distinguish between a Carnal Body and a Carnal Mind His Opponents who said Christ had a Carnal Body united to the Divinity they meant not Carnal as it signifies Vicious or Corrupted but as it signifies Material i. e. a real Body as real a Bodily Substance as any other Man hath and tho' Christ's Body now in Heaven is a Spiritual Body yet it is a Body still and the same Body in Substance it was on Earth And when it was on Earth it was both a Material Body and yet in a sense a Spiritual i. e. a pure immaculate Body without all stain of Sin a most holy Body and in the like sense it might be said even when on Earth it was a heavenly Body to wit as opposed to sinful corrupt and tainted with Sin and not only so but in respect of its miraculous Conception by the Holy Ghost and the holy and heavenly Virtues it was endued with above the
without us is the Allegory of his Blood within so his Blood within is the Allegory of Christ's Blood without this is as great Nonsense as who would say as Hagar and Sarah were an Allegory of the Two Covenants so the Two Covenants are an Allegory of Hagar and Sarah And thus G. W. and his Brethren stand justly charged with Allegorizing away Christ's outward Birth Sufferings Blood Atonement by making them the Allegory of his Birth Sufferings Blood Atonement made within Men tho' they deny not Christ's Birth Death Blood without simply as Historically related yet seeing they deny the Merit and Efficacy of his Death and Blood without and of what he did and suffered without us they are justly charg'd to Allegorize it away that is to make no other account of it than of the History of Hagar and Sarah and other Types Symbols and Allegories of the Old Testament Besides If Men will be wilful denyers of the Historical Truth of Christ's outward Birth Death Burial Resurrection Ascension according to G. W.'s and his Brethren's way and method of expounding Scripture we have no way to convince them of their Error If we bring Isaiah 9. 6. to prove that Isaiah Prophesied of Christ's Birth and that the Child that should be Born should be both God and Man and his Mother should be a Virgin according to Isaiah 7. 14. And if we bring Isaiah 53. to prove that Christ should be wounded for our Sins be killed be buried and make his grave with the wicked or That Christ should suffer without the Camp they may Answer All these and the like places are to be meant not of any Birth Death or Burial of a Christ without us but of Christ Born Slain and Buried in Men and for their Proof vouch G. W.'s Authority and his Brethren's to confirm it who as above-quoted have expounded these places of Christ Born Slain Buried within Men. But if G. W. will say these and other the like places have two meanings one Outward and Literal and the other Inward and Spiritual to this I say First G. W. in his Voice of Wisdom pag 21. hath severely blamed his Opponent T. D. for giving two meanings to one place I agree to the most Judicious and Orthodox Expositors of Scripture that the Scriptures have but one sense or meaning properly and strictly speaking viz. That the thing principally and properly intended is but one and what other senses or meanings may be put upon some places of Scripture besides that is rather an Allusion or Allegory than the real meaning which so far as we have Scripture warrant is allowed as Paul's calling Hagar and Sarah an Allegory but otherwise is dangerous and in the present case is most Heretical as in G. W.'s and his Brethrens making Christ's Birth Sufferings Death Burial without Men the Allegory and his Birth Sufferings Death Burial within the Reality and Substance or thing principally intended in these places of Scripture That the Spirit of God with his sanctifying Gifts and Graces is called Water of Life and Living Waters whereby God doth really Purify and Cleanse the Hearts and Consciences of the Faithful and that this Work of Sanctification is Inward and Spiritual in them is no part of the Dispute or Controversie for this is not only granted but earnestly taught and pleaded for against Pelagians and others who deny it or at least the necessity of such an inward and spiritual Operation Therefore G. W. in this as in most of his late Defences doth purposely mistake the true Case to hide his vile Heresie as if the debate betwixt him and his Opponents were only about the inward Operations of the Spirit of God for the cleansing and sanctifying the Hearts of the Faithful but this is his ordinary Fallacy The true state of the Question then is this Whether there is any Inward Blood or Water that Christ Crucified in Men lets out or is pressed out of him crucified within them that is the Blood of Atonement is the Price and Ransom and Meritorious Cause of the Remission of our Sins is the satisfactory and propitiatory Offering for Sin either in whole or in part Also whether any such supposed Blood or Water or Spirit thus flowing from Christ as Crucified and Wounded within Men is the meritorious and procuring Cause either of Men's Justification before God or of the saving and sanctifying Graces of the Holy Spirit and whether the Gift of the Holy Spirit given to Believers with the sanctifying Graces thereof proceeds from Christ Crucified within having made the Atonement and Satisfaction by his Blood shed within Risen and Ascended within Sitting at the Right Hand of God within Men making Intercession for them or from Christ as he was crucified without us having made the Atonement and Satisfaction without us by his Blood shed without us Risen and Ascended and sat down at the Right Hand of God without us and there Interceding for us This is the true state of the Controversie all true Christians say that all this is from Christ without us as outwardly Born Crucified Risen Ascended from him thus only considered as without us all Believers have the free gift of the Remission of Sins free Justification freely by God's Grace being the real effect of Christ's Purchase and of the Merit of his Precious Blood and also the Holy Spirit with the sanctifying Gifts and Graces thereof inwardly to renew and sanctifie them So that the Work of Christ or of the Spirit in Believers is not at all either in whole or in part to suffer for our Sins or to procure by way of Merit the pardon of our Sins and our Peace and Reconcliation with God for that 's wholly and only done by Christ without us but to work the sincere Faith of all that he hath done and suffer'd for us without us and give us the Spiritual Knowledge and Comfort of it in our Hearts and Souls The Plaister and healing Medicine of Christ's Body and Blood was prepared for us when he gave his Precious Body to be broken for us and his Blood to be shed for us this was once done and is no more to be doue again Christ having once dyed dyeth no more by the one Offering of himself once only offered without us his Soul Body and Blood he hath intirely and completely prepared the wholsom Medicine and Food of Life for us But now the work of Christ and his Spirit in us is to apply it effectually to us that is to enable us effectually to apply it to our selves for our Eternal Health and Salvation to give us a Spiritual discovery and sight of that living Food a Hunger and Appetite after it and to teach us spiritually by Faith to receive it and feed upon it to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood not by the bodily Mouth but by the Mouth of the Soul which is Faith a true and living Faith wrought in us by the powerful Operation of Christ in us or his Spirit
And tho' the Blood of Christ that both justifieth and sanctifieth is without us yet the application by Faith is within both for our Justification and Sanctification Note again That as G. W. doth fallaciously state the Question concerning Men's being Cleansed i. e. Justified and Sanctified by the Blood of Christ as is above-shewed so he argueth most fallaciously for his false Notion of a Blood of Christ within Men to be the Atonement by the merit whereof they are Cleansed from Sin as because the Operation of the Spirit of God is within Men whereby he applieth to them the Merit Virtue and Efficacy of Christ's Blood which application by a Metaphorical Speech is call'd in Scripture A sprinkling the Conscience that therefore the Blood of Christ is Inward which is the like Sophistical and Nonsensical Argument with that of G. F. The Saints eat the Flesh of Christ therefore they have it in them Thus they both argue from a Metaphorical Eating and Sprinkling or Cleansing to a Literal or Material as because what Men eat of Material Food they receive it into them so because they eat Christs Flesh they have it in them and because the Blood of Christ Sprinkles the Hearts and Consciences of the Faithful therefore that Blood is in them not considering the application here both with respect to Eating and Sprinkling is not Material but Spiritual by Faith as Christ hath plainly explained it that to eat Christ is to believe in him to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood is sincerely to believe with the Heart that Christ gave his Body of Flesh to be broken for us and his Blood to be shed for us for the Remission of our Sins and both for our Justification and Sanctification and eternal Salvation Joh. 6. 35. He that cometh to me shall never hunger he that believeth in me shall never thirst and verse 40. This is the will of him that sent me that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day Again Whereas they say in that Printed Paper above-quoted signed by G. W. and Thirty more We do highly value his Death Sufferings Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind That all this is extremely Fallacious doth largely appear from what is above-quoted Do they highly value his Death and Sufferings when some among them have Printed as above-quoted That when they come to the Operation of the Spirit or Light Within them they will cease remembring Christs Death at Jerusalem Do they value Christ's Sufferings and Death c. who deny it to be the Gospel that Christ impowered the Apostles to Preach for which hear what they say in their Book above-quoted call'd A Testimony for the true Christ c. p. 16. Their Opponent they quote saying p. 16. Christ impowered the Apostles to go forth to Preach the Gospel to the ends of the Earth which Gospel was his Sufferings Death and Resurrection Baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost c. To this they Answer The Gospel which they Preached was Everlasting it was the Power of God to Salvation to as many as Believed both of Jews and Gentiles But were his Sufferings Death c. Everlasting Is this good Doctrine say they So that according to them it is not good Doctrine but bad to Preach Christ's Sufferings Death c. to be the Gospel either in whole or in part for their reason is of equal force against that Doctrine either in whole or in part The Gospel is Everlasting but Christ's Death and Sufferings c. Note the c. which both the Opponent and they add is not Everlasting for that they say was Temporal therefore Christ's Death and Sufferings is not the Gospel and by this their profound Logick or rather beggarly Sophistry nothing is the Gospel but that which is Everlasting i. e. was from Eternity to Eternity and thus according to them nothing is the Gospel but the Light Within because that is Everlasting the Power the Spirit the Light is Everlasting and therefore that only is the Gospel But tho' the Spirit and Power and Light was and is Everlasting yet it was not within them from Everlasting because they were not from Everlasting and therefore by their Logick as the Light or Spirit is in them and as tâ—â— Gift of God to them it is no more the Gospel than Christ's Death and Sufferings c. because they had it not within them from Everlasting if they will acknowledge themselves to be Creatures Created and Made by the Great Creator in Time But they quibble Sophistically upon the word Everlasting for tho' Christ's Suffering and Death were not Everlasting yet both the Merit Virtue and Efficacy of them both for procuring Remission of Sin and the Holy Spirit with the sanctifying Gifts and Graces thereof was from the beginning of the World and will continue to the end of the World yea and to all Eternity and the Doctrine of it in some measure was Preached from the beginning as God revealed it first to our first Parents and then successively to others of his Holy Prophets and was held forth both by Prophecy Promise and Sacrifices to the Faithful Again They are grosly Fallacious when they say in that Printed Paper We do highly value and esteem his Sufferings Death Precious Blood and whole Sacrifice for Sinners Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind But what do they mean by Christ's Merits Do they mean the Merits of what Christ hath done for them without them suffered without them his Righteonsness without them his Blood shed without them so as thereby to be justified Nay The following Quotations will sufficiently evidence the contrary viz. That not the Righteousness or Merits or Blood of Christ shed without us but the Merits of Christ within them his Righteousness wrought in them his Blood shed within them the Blood of his Divinity or Godhead but not of his Humanity or Humane Blood by which they are justified for further proof of which hear what G. W. saith in his Voice of Wisdom p. 48. where he blames T. Danson and chargeth it on him to be false Doctrine held by him That there were two Righteousnesses of Christ the one without the Saints to justifie them and the other within the Saints that did sanctifie them And in p. 26. he chargeth T. Danson with Ignorance for his asserting two Righteousnesses of Christ the one without us for Justification the other within us for Sanctification And in p. 35. He argueth against Justification by a Righteousness of Christ without us thus If it be the same Christ that justifies and Janctifies then it 's but one and the same Righteousness which effecteth both these in and for the Saints And in p. 19. he expresly defends that Popish Argument used by S. Fisher the very same Argument is used by Bellarmin De Justif That because evil
and Christ calleth himself the Vine and Believers in him the Branches yet by no means can the Spirit or influence thereof in Men be call'd the Blood shed for remission of Sin the Blood of Atonement that by way of Merit and Satisfaction to Divine Justice removes the guilt of Sin and makes Peace betwixt God and Men for whatever Sacrifice makes Atonement for Sin must be Slain and the Blood of the Sacrifice shed or poured forth as the Beasts that were offered for Sin under the Law behoved to be Slain and their Blood to be shed which were Types of Christ who was outwardly to be slain and his Blood outwardly shed for without shedding of Blood there is no remission as the Scripture testifieth the which sheding of Blood must be by the Death of that whose Body was to be Slain Now the pouring and shedding of the Spirit of Christ and his Graces and Gracious influences into the Hearts of the Faithful is the effect of Christ's Death without us as he was outwardly Slain and offered up for us by way of Merit and Purchase as it is also the effect of his Mediation and Intercession for us now in Heaven by way of impetration and actual dispensation having received power to give those gifts to Men as he is now at Gods Right Hand in Heaven in his glorified Humanity which he procured and purchased for them when he was upon Earth in his state of Humiliation by the proper Merit of his Obedience both Active and Passive who humbled himself and became obedient unto Death even the Death of the Cross wherefore God hath exalted him to be a Prince and a Saviour And therefore it is Coloss 1. 20. that the Blood of Christ by which he made peace for us is called the Blood of the Cross because it was shed and poured forth on the Cross and he is said to have reconciled us in his Body of Flesh through Death all which bespeaks that our Redemption and Reconciliation by way of Purchase and Merit was wholly done and transacted by Christ without us and could not be done within us by way of Sacrifice and Atonement for that required the Sacrifice to be Slain and the Blood thereof to be shed and poured forth But the Authors of this abominable Heresie which teacheth that Christ in Man by his Blood shed in them is the offering for Sin and the Blood thus shed in them is the Blood of Atonement yea the Blood of the Cross within them to make things seemingly consist and hang together they have invented an Inward Crucifixion and Killing of Christ in Men as well as an inward shedding of his Blood in them to answer by way of Analogy to the outward Killing of the Sacrifices under the old Testament But when this Crucifying or Killing of Christ in Men was beside many other questions about the manner of it they are put hard to it to resolve and indeed the resolution of it is impossible for it implys not only manifest contradictions to Scripture but to all true and right Reason as much as the Popish Transubstantiation doth For as nothing can be properly said to have been Killed but what was formerly alive If Christ has been Killed suppose in every Quaker he behoved to be first alive in them and as Christ in the Figure or Type as some of them call him was Born long before he was outwardly crucified for though when he was a Child Herod sought his Life yet by his being taken by his Mother into Egypt he was preserved and this very passage of Christ's being persecuted by Herod soon after he was Born the Quakers have made an Allegory not that the inward is the Allegory of the outward which were somewhat tolerable as some of the Ancients have so Allegorized though some went too far even so but the outward is the Allegory of the inward and as then there passed some considerable space of time betwixt Christ's typical Birth in the outward and his typical Crucifixion so that being about Twelve Years of Age he disputed with the Doctors and about Thirty he began his Ministry wherein he continued for about three Years and a half and then was Crucified after he was Betrayed by Judas denyed by Peter and Sentenced to Death by Pontius Pilate falsly Accused and cruelly Mocked by the Jews all which according to W. P. are so many Facile representations of what is to be accomplished in Men. And I have heard since the difference betwixt the Quakers and me began about Preaching Christ without some of their Preachers in their Publick Meetings Preach a great deal of the History of Christ's Birth Persecution by Herod and the Jews Betrayed by Judas denyed by Peter Sentenced to Death by Pilate and made it all an Allegory of what was to be witnessed within with an Exhortation to Friends to wait to have it all fulfilled and witnessed within them And particularly I heard Jacob Talner the Dutch-man above-mention'd Preach at a Publick Meeting in Philadelphia about the time our differences began there about Christ That Christ must be first Born in us and after that must be Crucified in us c. On which I asked some of their Preachers Were it not better after Christ is Born in Men using their Phrase that Men would not Crucifie him in them but rather that he might live in them For who can Crucifie Christ in Men but they themselves on supposition that he can be Crucified For the Devil cannot do it by himself without Men's consent and concurrence and being the main Actors But G. F. whom J. Wyeth calls the Apostle in this Age hath resolved this Question but whether effectually so as either consistent with Scripture or true and right Reason to which no true Revelation can contradict I leave to the intelligent Christian to judge in a Treatise of his call'd Several Papers given forth for the spreading of Truth one of them bearing this Title Concerning Christ's Flesh which was Offered p. 54. Christ the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World when it began its Foundation then the Lamb was slain then the World was set up in Man's Heart that he did not see the beginning nor the ending of the Works of God Then came their Understandings to be darken'd and Christ ACCORDING TO THE FLESH CRUCIFIED the Lamb Slain that FLESH of his which is a Mystery and when the Jews did transgress the Law of God the Prophets told them they OPPRESSED the Seed as a Cart with Sheaves Note the word Oppressed tho' G. W. is so impudent in his Judgment Fixed p. 322. as to deny that the Seed is Christ and God that is Oppressed That they may come to a thing that 's lower and under and higher and over all and before all that is the Righteousness it self so in this lies the Belief so then in the Life and in the SUBSTANCE and in the end of all Types so through this Flesh he doth reconcile and by the
offering up his Body his Flesh that which hath been Slain from the Foundation of the World and yet never corrupted And this Flesh is a Mystery and in this Flesh is the Belief that takes away the Sin that never corrupted that is the Offering for Sin and the Blood of this Flesh clear seth from Sin so through this Offering is the Reconciliation through the Offering of his Flesh that never corrupted but takes away Corruptions and his Blood Cleanseth from Corrupâ—ions THE LIFE READ See the Quotation more at large in my Third Narrative p. 24 25. And it is observable that he saith with respect to Christ being thus inwardly Crucified for as he was God he did not die but whether he did suffer as he was God he doth not here determine tho' G. W. hath determined it as above-quoted That Christ as God doth suffer in Men by their Sins Note Whereas many of the Quakers particularly G. W. doth argue against Christ without us being the object of Faith Can saith he the object of Faith he divided from the Faith Which Argument has no more force than if he should argue Light and Life p. 45. The Sun cannot be the object or Foundation of his Sight because it is without him and at a great distance from him but his Sight is within him And he hath of late been heard several times to preach in the Quakers Meetings that Christ without us cannot be the object of our Faith doth not G. F. here propose an object of our Faith without us and such an object as is very difficult if not impossible to apprehend to wit the Flesh of Christ which was Crucified when Adam sinned and that Blood of his that was then shed or offered together with the Flesh And in this Flesh is the Belief saith he that takes away the Sin But possibly G. W. or some other will say the Flesh of Christ that was Crucified in Adam when he sinned is conveyed or transmitted from him into us If any of them will adventure to say so it will occasion such Intricacies and Niceties that the Quakers pretended plainness doth not suit with for G. W. in his Book call'd The Divine Light of Christ in Man p. 13. giveth this description of the People call'd Quakers That they are not only esteemed an illiterate People but are a plain simple innocent People who most affect plain Scripture-Language without any School-glosses or nice distinctions to deck adorn or illustrate their Christian Profession of Christ or his Divine Light in Men. And many thousands may not understand the terms Vehiculum Dei Intermediate Being nor is Jesus Christ preached among us under those terms but in Scripture terms The terms Vehiculum Dei had been used by R. Barclay in his Apology p. 83. and Intermediate Being by me in some of my former Writings concerning the Seed of God or principle of God's Grace in Men but which we carried not to that height nor had that sense of it to be the Flesh and Blood of Christ that is the Offering for Sin and makes the Atonement by way of Expiation to take away the guilt of Sin But is not G. W.'s Fallacy very plain in this Case Did not G. F. Preach Christ as he Writ and Printed concerning him and what though G. F. and none of the Quakers ever used the word VEHICULUM DEI or INTERMEDIATE BEING before R. B. and G. K. used them which they chiefly used to help the Quakers out of the Mire and render if possible the Quakers Notions about the Seed within intelligible but they carrying it far beyond whatever R. B. or I ever thought of particularly G. F. and G. W. as I have found by my late more exact search into their Books than ever formerly I made I find it not only difficult but impossible to reconcile them either with Scripture or right and true Reason and therefore I disown them and whatever I have formerly Writ that seemed in the least to justifie such Notions as I have found in the Quakers Writings particularly in the Writings of G. F. and G. W. let them be as void and null as if they had never been Writ See my late Book of Retractations Altho' as I have already said I carried them not so far so much as in my thoughts and I think no more did R. B. as they have done Now since G. W. professeth that the Quakers are such a plain simple People who most affect plain Scripture Language how is it that both G. W. himself and G. F. the chief Leaders and Teachers among them have gone so far from Scripture Language about Christ within that they have run into most wild and extravagant Notions that they sucked in from Familists and Ranters about Christ within Where do they find such Scripture Language That Christ according to the Flesh was crucified when Adam sinned and his Blood then shed and that that Flesh then crucified was the Offering for Sin and the Blood of that Flesh cleanseth away Sin and that the Belief or Faith is in that Offering the Flesh that was then Crucified And where doth G. W. find his wild Notion of a Blood of Christ within Men that cleanseth from Sin by way of Sacrifice and Atonement or of any other Blood of Christ than the Blood of his Humanity for tho' that place of Scripture Acts 20. 28. calls the Blood of Christ wherewith he purchased his Church the Blood of God yet it doth not say it was a Blood within Men or the Blood of the Godhead and not of Christ's Humanity it is call'd the Blood of God because Christ whose Blood it was was not a meer Man but both God and Man the Man Christ Jesus was God tho' his Godhead was not his Manhood But as to this Conveyance of Christ's Flesh conveyed or transmitted from Adam into his Posterity since his Fall what Scripture Language is this If any of them will dare so to affirm give us Chapter and Verse for any such Doctrine or Terms But yet further to discover the grossness of this wild Notion Is this Flesh of Christ conveyed or transmitted into his Posterity Crucified or Alive If they say Crucified it is scarcely intelligible how dead or crucified Flesh however so Spiritual can be conveyed or transmitted from Adam into us or how any crucified Seed or Principle can be so conveyed and seeing that as we are all descended of Noah and he was descended of Seth and Seth was descended of Adam by humane Generation long after Adam's Fall and the Seed of the Woman was promised to him it is most probable That if there was any crucified Flesh or Body of Christ in Adam when he Fell that crucified Body Seed or Principle was quickened and raised in him some time before he begot Seth and it will-therefore follow rather that such a Body Seed or Principle if conveyed or transmitted from Adam into his Posterity is conveyed alive and not dead Beside how can it be conveyed
Suppose W. B. had positively said as if they had been his words originally That Blood is not in being yet he was far from inferring thence that we are not justified by that Blood this was G. W.'s consequence and not W. B.'s for W. B. did strongly assert that Men are justified by the Blood that was then shed tho' it was not now in being but said he the Efficacy of it is still in being but G. W. did draw a quite contradictory Conclusion to that of W. B. as thus That Blood that was shed by the Spear is not in being saith W. B. therefore G. W. concludes Men are not justified by it which Argument of G. W.'s has equal force against Christ's Death and Bodily pains as well as his Souls Dolours and Griefs they are not now in being therefore Men are not justified by them And his Argument has the like force against Men's being justified or having their Sins pardoned by the Merit of Christ's Blood before Christ came in the Flesh for example David had not the remission of his Sins by the Merit of Christ's Blood because G. W.'s Logick in David's time the Blood was not in being But as I shewed in the Meeting the Words that Blood is not in being were not originally W B's but some Quakers Words or some other that held the like false notions with them which W. B. calls a Cavillation Capital Principles p. 40. Of late saith he I have frequently met with a Query by way of Cavillation Which is whether that Blood spilt upon the Cross run not on the ground c. If so how then can Man be justified by that which is not in being Thus we see W. B. censures the consequence of that Argument to be invalid but G. W. again and again I know not how frequently makes use of it and thinks the Conclusion to be good and I said in the Meeting had G. W. been present I would have asked him what was his Answer to that Question Is the Blood that was shed on the Cross now in being If he happen to reply to this 4th Narative I desire him to give a positive answer to it seeing he makes it the Foundation of his Conclusion that Men are not justified by the Merit of that Blood because that Blood is not in being but seeing I had not G. W. there I asked Dan. Philip who was present and sat near where I stood and is one of the Quakers in the Unity whither that Blood was in being He replied he knew not whither I meant the Blood that was without Christ's Body or within it I told him the Blood that went out of his Body whether that Blood was in being but he gave no reply I asked him again whether he believed that the Blood that was outwardly shed was Meritorious to Justification and that true Believers were justified by it he said he knew not what I meant by the Word Merit or Meritorious I told him it was a shame for him to pretend to be so Ignorant of the signification of the Word that an ordinary School Boy did know seeing he was a Scholar and did not long ago commence Dr. of Physick at Leiden and had there a Latin Oration However I gave him the signification of it that Merit signified that it was of that Worth and Value by way of Atonement and Expiation to make satisfaction to God for the guilt of our Sins He also pretended he knew not what I meant by the Word Atonement I told him it signified reconciling and bringing Men into savour with God I asked again were Believers justified by the Merit of the Blood that was outwardly shed he answered it was a part of the Offering but I asked were Believers justified by it He said that Blood will justifie none that are not Sanctified I replied that was not the question nor is it any part of the Controversie I further asked him what did he mean by the Offering whether Christ only as without us or as within us or both without and within and both by Christ's Blood without us as outwardly shed and by the Blood of his God-Head as inwardly shed in Men as G. W. will have it now at last but to this he gave no positive answer and though in all his answers he gave on this or other heads he greatly foiled himself He is as I am informed so confident that he tells in private how he foiled me But seeing neither he nor any of the Quakers there present offered any answer to that question Is that Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed in being I told them I believed the substance of it was still in being for not the least atome of any Bodily substance was ever annihilated but to enquire where that Blood now was or whether Christ did take it back again into his Body which no doubt he was able to do having all power was a curious and unnecessary question to be resolved And here I brought a saying of B. Burnet whose Name I mentioned with due respect to the same effect in his Exposition on the xxxix Articles of the Church of England and also sometime afterwards at the same Meeting I quoted him in the same Book to show my Agreement with him as I do with all sound Christian Teachers that our Lord has the same Body in substance he had on Earth and that his Body is not changed in substance but in the different Contexture of parts And on this Head also I queried Dan. Philips Whither Christ's Body was the same in Substance now in Heaven that it was on Earth and whether it was when on Earth a terrestrial Body he said He did not know what I meant by Substance I told him the same that others meant who had any true skill in Natural Philosophy and it was a shame to a Dr. of Physick to profess his being ignorant to define a Substance however I told him that a Substance understanding a created Substance was a Being or Thing that did only depend on God Almighty the first Cause and was the subject of certain Accidents that did depend on it and could not be without it He asked whether a Substance could be without Accidents I answer'd him it could be without Accidents of this or that kind and could be wonderfully changed in Accidents and yet remain the same Substance I asked him again Was our Lord's Body earthly when it was on earth He answered it was like ours in all things Sin excepted I again asked but was it earthly when on earth Here he demurred and would not give a positive Answer a Minister that stood by said by his confessing it was like ours he has confessed it was an earthly Body I said to them that are sound in the Faith it is so but not to the Quakers for they will not allow that an earthly Body and an heavenly Body can be the same Body in Substance or that a natural Body and a spiritual Body are the
same in Substance for which I quoted G. W.'s Light and Life p. 69. Who calls him a very blind and ignorant Man that will affirm That Bodies Celestial and Terrestrial differ not in Substance whereby he has proved himself to be both blind and ignorant by his ignorant Assertion And I told the Auditory how the Quakers ignorance and false Notions of Philosophy destroy'd their Faith and hindred them to believe that necessary and fundamental Article of the Christian Faith That Christ's Body that he had on Earth is the same in Substance it was in Heaven and tho' when on Earth it was earthly and is heavenly now yet the change was not in Substance but in Accidents for if it be not the same in Substance it is in no respect the same for take away the Substance and no Accidents can remain of any thing And by the like false Philosophy both G. W. and W. P. have argued against the Resurrection-Bodies of the Saints that they shall not be the same in Substance with the Natural Bodies they had on Earth And I further shewed that Muggleton said Christ's Body was like ours and yet would not own it was the same Substance with ours for he held that Christ's Body that hung on the Cross and was laid in the Sepulcher was the Godhead yea was God the Father Son and Holy Ghost Nor is G. W. and his seven Colchester Brethren less fallacious in his and their Defence of Solomon Eccles's Blasphemous saying That the Blood of Christ that was forced out of him by the Soldier after he was dead was no more than the Blood of another Saint In their Some Account they quote G. W.'s Antidote for his defence p. 223 224 225. 1. He saith he shewed a dislike of S. E.'s Expressions before-cited but how in that he did not allow them as an Article of their Faith But nor did he censure them as contrary to their Faith which he ought to have done and would have done had he been in the true Faith And that his dislike did not proceed from any detestation of the Error is very apparent that he said in his defence of S. E. That S. E. did highly speak in esteem of the Blood of Christ and New Covenant as more excellent and living and holy and precious than is able to be utter'd c. which G. W. faith might have satisfied any spiritual or unbyass'd Mind therefore it seems it satisfy'd G. W. But the deceit of G. W. lyeth in this That the Blood which S. E. did so highly esteem was not that Blood that was let out of his Side after Christ was dead as S. E. plainly confessed in his Letter to R. Porter but another kind of Blood that is the Blood not of the Humanity but of the Godhead the Blood of the New Covenant which is Inward and Spiritual saith G. W. 2. He saith he shewed in part his estimation of the Blood and whole Sacrifice or Offering of Christ both in respect to the blessed Testimony Value and Efficacy thereof more than that of any other Saint or Saints But I find no such Testimony in all that Book to any Value or Efficacy of it by way of Merit as it was shed for the remission of Sins For it is a great part of his work throughout his whole Book Light and Life to contend against the Merit and Value or Efficacy of it for Men's Justification and Salvation as is largely above-proved out of many Quotations in that very Book and can be further proved Yea he would not so much as allow it to be concerned in any part or respect as the meritorious Cause of Men's Justification Light and Life p. 56. For We are not saith he to suppose two kinds of Saviours and Sanctifiers that is both a Natural which is not in being as is said of the Blood that was shed and the Spirit which still liveth Thus he wholly excludes the outward Blood which he calls Natural and placeth all upon the Spirit arguing most weakly and impertinently That to say we are saved by the Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed as the meritorious Cause of our Justification and Sanctification and Salvation and by the Spirit of Christ as the internal Agent and Efficient that applyeth to us the Merit and Efficacy of that Blood that was outwardly shed is to inser two kinds of Saviours and Sanctifiers he might by as good an Argument infer That a Medicine and he that applyeth the Medicine to the Patient are two Doctors of Physick as to argue that Justification or Sanctification by the Blood of Christ and by the Spirit of Christ is to suppose two Saviours But how will G. W. answer his own Argument who of late but without any Retractation of his former Error doth own Redemption both by the natural Blood outwardly and by the Spirit inwardly Antidote p. 232 233 234. And it still remains as a vile Error justly charged on G. W. which he hath never to this day fairly answer'd nor any for him that in Light and Life p. 59. he blames W. B. for saying That Blood that Christ shed in order to the effecting the Salvation of Man must needs he visible and material Blood in opposition to which he plainly denies That the material Blood of the Sacrifices was a Type of the material Blood of Christ for that were to say saith he that material Blood was a Type of that which was material this to give the Substance no Pre-eminence above the Type which clearly proveth that G. W. held that the material Blood of Christ was not the Substance signified by the Blood of the Sacrifices that were offer'd under the Law but a Type or Figure of some inward thing to wit their spiritual Blood within which they call the Life and the Light 3. But after all tho' G. W. would seem at last to be full and plain in his passing censure on S. E.'s words he remains still Fallacious and Sophistical as much as formerly I disown saith he his said Comparison of the Blood of Christ with that of another Saint and believe he was not in the Counsel or Wisdom of God therein Here he nothing blames the matter of his Words but saith he was not in the Counsel or Wisdom of God therein that is to say He was not wise nor well advised to disclose that great Secret or Mystery among the Quakers so as to let the World know it that the Quakers held as a Principle among them That that Blood was no more by way of Merit than that of an ordinary Saint for in effect G. W. himself as to all the real worth of it above that of other Saints by way of real Merit for Men's Justification or real necessity to Salvation hath plainly excluded it not only by his many impertinent and nonsensical Arguings and Quibblings against it as above-quoted but by his plainly asserting in his Antidote p. 28. That the Quakers are offended with G. K. for saying
the places above-quoted and is the Blood of Atonement 7. This Light is first a Seed then a new born Child and lastly the Mighty God see W. P.'s and W. B.'s words above-quoted 8. This Light within being God c. teacheth the Quakers immediately and infallibly as it did the Prophets and Apostles and they Speak and Write from the same Prophetical Illumination and Inspiration that the Prophets and Apostles had yea from the same degree at least some of them and G. F. was come to the same Fulness that was in Christ and the Works of their Ministry is to bring People to the same Fulness that was in Christ that it may be in them i. e. to make them all equal to Christ and God as above-quoted 9. The Light within teacheth them what they Preach and Write without the Scriptures being the means or a means to help or assist them in so Preaching and Writing hence it is that E. B. upbraids all Protestant Ministers Coll. p. 126. saying Their Prophecy and Preaching would soon be ended if they had not the Scripture which is other Men's Words and that which was spoken to others to speak their imaginations from 10. That this Light within every Man is the Gospel the Power of God unto Salvation to every one that believeth in it and is the alone Object of Faith as above-quoted and that Prophet whom God promised to raise up 11. That the Light within every Man is the Rule of Faith and Life to all Men as above-quoted yea a full Rule to lead to Salvation where it is obeyed The Glory of Christ's Light within by G. W. and others p. 32. and p. 28. from the Light of Christ within they i. e. all Men have so much of the Instructions or Precepts therein in Scripture contained as are necessary to Salvation Note This is to teach People to be saved by a meer Covenant of Works Do and live which none ever yet fulfilled but Christ for all have sinned Rom. 3. 12. This Light within them is whole Christ God and Man Flesh and Spirit G. F. G. M. p. 246. 249. and G. E. is so much for the Flesh Body Blood and Bones of Christ within that he denyeth that Christ has any Body that is absent from his People and is now in the presence of his Father G. M. p. 211. 13. It is the Flesh and Bone of Christ a measure in one and a measure in another Note This is to make the whole to be the part and the part or G. M. 246. measure to be the whole 14. The Saints eat his Flesh and they that eat this Flesh hath it within them G. M. p. 322. Thus arguing most grosly from a Metaphorical eating to a Literal 15. The Light within is the Urim and Thummim as G. W. says Truth and Inno. p. 16. which not only the Quakers have but all Men Heathens and Infidels as really as they 16. Christ within is the Doctrine of Salvation which IS ONLY necessary to be Preached and he is a deceiver that exhorts People for Salvation to any other thing than the Light of Christ as he hath enlightned them within Note This evidently appears from those passages in E. B.'s The true Faith of the Gospel of Peace p. 29. 30. quoted in that called Some account from Colchester signed by Seven Quakers above mentioned the whole of which account is in the several heads of this Narrative fully replyed unto which these Seven Quakers are so far from Censuring that they have justified them p. 16. 17. But to hide their deceit in their reply they transpose the Words of E. B. in his Q. 12. which were the Light of Christ to Christ who is that true Light whereas it is manifest that by Christ that true Light they meant the same which E. B. viz. ONLY the Light within Again in their p. 17 18. they justify G. W. 's saying They that want infallibility and have not the Spirit of Christ they are out of the truth and are fallible and their Ministry is not of the Spirit Note Here they not only disown such Ministers who have not the Spirit but who are fallible in any case for that 's the true state of the Controverse as stated betwixt G. W. and T. D. Voice of Wisdom p. 33. Want of infallibility is a valid Plea against the Ministry let the intelligent therefore judge whether G. W.'s fallibility sufficiently proved in this Narrative as well as that of his Brethren by his Argument has not manifestly discovered him and them to be no Ministers of Christ Note Their faulting so much some small Errors of the Press no wise materal as by the Original manuscript yet extant and ready to be produced if required is to be seen shows their quibling Humour straining at a Gnat and swallowing down a Camel as also their querying if this or that of the Quotations brought against them be against the Foundation of the Christian Religion as was said in the Title-Page of the Sheet to which they have made a pretended reply but are they so ignorant as not to know that every Error is against the Foundation in some degrees though every Error is not Fundamental so as to destroy the Foundation 2. That Errors as well as other ill things receive their denomination from the greater and worse part as indeed the far greatest part of all therein contained is destructive to the very Foundation of Christian Religion as is on the several Heads plainly shown And as to the Printed Testimony of John Gledhill Nonconformist Minister which they have prefixed to their Some Account it avails them nothing for he grants that he did witness to the truth of the Quotations and no more was desired from him The Printing of his Name without his knowledge and consent reflects no blame on the Person who desired him to set his hand to it even tho' he told him that that Paper was not designed for the Press for that Person did not put it to the Press but it was Printed without his leave or consent and the Person who put it to the Press was under no tye to hinder him from so doing but judged it would be of Service to the Truth to make it publick as he still so judgeth and it is no dishonour to J. Gledhill nor his Brethren but commendable to have their Names in Print to attest to the great Truths of the Gospel in opposition to the Quakers great Errors that do so manifestly contradict them And it would be yet more commendable in him and them to bear a more full and zealous Testimony against them to stop the gangrene of the Quakers vile Errors that have so much prevailed in Colchester as in many other places of the Nation Note By this and all the foregoing Quotations it is sufficiently evident that the Light within not as taught by the Scriptures but as taught by the Quakers hath led them into manifold Blasphemies and vile Errors as the Norfolk