Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	account_n	george_n	great_a	42	3	2.1254	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65881	The Quakers plainness detecting fallacy in two short treatises : I. The first in answer to an abusive epistle, styl'd, The Quakers quibbles, and the comparison therein between the Muggletonians and the Quakers, proved absurd and unjust, II. The second, being a brief impeachment of the forger's compurgators (in their Quakers appeal answered) whose injustice, partiality and false glosses have given the chief occasion of these late contests / by George Whitehead.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1674 (1674)	Wing W1949; ESTC R38608	33,527	88

which I presume by this time you have consider'd what say you thereunto To which he gives this Answer in the Quakers Name viz. I say tho Plagues and Judgments of God will follow thee and to this subscribeth George Whitehead But T. Hicks's Abuse and Falshood herein was detected in W. P's Answer to his last Dialogue Counterf Christian pag. 19 20 21. As also his Forgery herein laid upon him in my Appendix to Reason ag Railing p. 13. Howbeit he is not ashamed in the Barbican Relation to say The Truth of this Answer see attested under Mr John Gladman ' s hand Dial. 3. pag. 85. I do not think that T. Hicks can be ignorant of his wittingly wronging both me and John Gladman in this case for observe doth Jo. Gladman in the place quoted attest that this was G. W's Answer to the Question to which it is annexed by T. H. in G. W's Name No. But that G.W. spoak the Words in Discourse with him that is with John Gladman Not to T. H. in Answer to his Question If J. Gladman speak his Conscience he dare not attest that this was G. W's Answer to this Question to which it is here adjoyned as his Answer or saying thereunto Therefore T.H. is a Forger and hath cheated his Witnesses and drawn in J. Gladman for a Cover to his Deceit which shews his Spirit and Work to be in the Dark like that of an Impostor and Jugler in these matters And Men fearing God would be ashamed either to be his Witnesses or to countenance or encourage him therein Although I deny not that I spake any such Words against T. H. at any time as J. G. hath unfairly represented me in telling the World That G. W. denyeth he said so against T. Hicks Dial. 3. pag. 85. for my Answer shows the contrary in my said Appendix p. 13. though still I deny that to be my Answer unto T. H's Question before however as I did not question as in my Appendix but that the Judgments of God would follow T. Hicks for his Forgeries Slanders so I am of the same mind still and my so speaking I neither did give nor do give for an Answer to his particular Questions But in his fictitiously placing it as my saying to that one Question before he might as well have made it serve to every Question in all his Dialogues which was never so intended nor spoaken by me but with reference to his Forgeries and Slanders in general There are divers other things in their Relation aforesaid which concern Geo. Keith W. Penn and others that we might justly except against but they are answered elsewhere and we could have wish'd that you who are T. H's Witnesses would have seriously perus'd our former Answers to T. H. wherein his Forgeries Slanders Perversions and plain self-Contradictions are laid open particularly in those Books entitul'd Reason against Railing and Counterfit Christian detected from page 6. to p. 54. this might both have prevented that Disgrace Trouble that is since befaln you by engaging for such an Agent and that you would be pleas'd yet seriously to view all the Controversies you may perceive many Particulars charg'd against T. Hicks which neither himself nor you have either answer'd or in the least clear'd him of And further consider those Particulars charg'd against him out of his fictitious Dialogues printed in our Friends late Account of the Meeting with you at Barbican the 9th of the 8th Month 1674. as in Pag. 8 9 10 11. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39. pages of the said Account also George Keith's late Vindication I hope you have consider'd that moderate Account which your Friend and Brother W. L. hath given in his Book entitul'd The Twelve Pagan Principles or Opinions c. and what a Serious Check it containeth to Thomas Hicks for his Immoderation and Unfair Dealing George Whitehead Page 17. Line 13. there should be a noted stop or this ‖ direction after Proved to which the Margent refers p 28 l. 25. for every read very p. 4● l. 5. for for 1. so * Dial. p. 63. Title-Page Mat. 27.58 Joh. 2.19 20.12 Luke 24.3 Heb. 10.5 * Which having various Significations their being imposed hath caused Divisions and fruitless Contests * In his Book entit Light from the Sun of Righteousness p. 94. * when it is probable they had heard that before the Meeting Dial. 1. p. 62 75. Append. p. 17. Appendix p. 20 21 23. * See Hen. Grigg's Light from the Sun p. 30. 31 33 34. * See J. Newman's Light within p. 55 66 72. answered by me in my Book Christ ascended p. 18 19 20 21. Dial. 3. p. 33. P. 17. P. 26. Rom. 2.29 7.6 2 Cor. 3.6 Hebr. 9.10 Rom. 7.6 On Joh. 1.4

his Dialogue that they were the Quakers Answers c. but this Writer against us carps and traduces on every slight Occasions Would the Baptists think it fair to be publisht in Print for Lyars Fools and unjust on such an Account But for W.P. his accusing T. Hicks with being both a Lyar and Forger he hath both proved him such an one in his Books and further urged to prove his Charge against him publickly since his Abettors have endeavoured to cover and uphold him But it seems it is the Language Lying and Forgery and Lyar and Forger that is found Fault with here and not the Application thereof when as the Scriptures prove such Language as Thou lovest Lying rather then to speak Righteousness ye are Forgers of Lyes c. See Psal. 52.3 Job 13.4 Joh. 8.55 Rev. 2.2 3.9 21.8 Tit. 1.12 His accusing some of the Quakers with quibling as much about the Word Body as about the Word Christ I look upon it as no better then quibbling against us instead of proving us guilty by plain Scripture for to say the Church of Christ is his Body and that there is one Body and one Spirit and that they that are joyn'd to Christ are Members of his Body this is according to Scripture-Language as also that the Body is one and hath may Members so also is Christ and are not the Saints spiritually united into Christ and unto his spiritual and glorious Body Is Christ Head of his Church in any other Body then that whereof they are Members and united to him And will this admit of Christ's being Head of two separate Bodies or of Three Christs as his stating the Distinction upon G. Keith That Christ was most properly taken for the Divine Nature less properly for the human Nature least properly for the Carkas● pag. 28. whereas this is so far from G. Keith's proving Three Christs that the words Human Nature and Carkass were J. Ives's not G. K's as the first is herein granted though G. Keith owns the words Divine Nature Manhood and Body of Christ and confess'd the Name Christ to be given to the Body when crucified and dead though less properly then to the Divine Nature and intire Manhood since that the Son of God was the Christ of God before he took upon him the Body prepared for him as J.I. hath granted in his Book Inocency above Impudency p. 37. By his Argument That Christ is the Son of God Ergo the Son of God is Christ as I answer'd though I could not be heard that the Name Christ was mutually and reciprocally given in Scripture to the Body and Spi●it of Christ as Christ dyed and was buried when it was properly the Body of Jesus for his Soul or Spirit was immortal did not dye but was in Paradyse when his Body was buried and that Spiritual Rock which ●ll Israel drank of was Christ. Doth the Scripture herein make Two Christs No sure No more will G.K. his Distinction bear Three Christs in Three d●stinct Persons as the Man unscripturally and quibblingly words it pag. 28. And further It is very strange that W. P. in correcting the Baptists and others to set up his own as the True Church must be impos'd upon to produce some of those Gifts or Visible Demonstrations or Eminent Signs as were in the Church in the Apostles Dayes pag. 29. and 9. when as he never made that a Reason or Ground to correct others for want of such Signs as the Gift of Tongues Miracles c. but for some Un-Christian Principle or Practice however in this Case our present Opposers do argue as exactly like the Jesuits Papists against the Protestants for correcting them as if they had serv'd seaven Years at Rome But let it be remember'd how the Baptists themselves were in this manner excepted against after their first Separation from other Churches and gathering into a Church of their own It was objected against them If the Lord be with us where be all those Miracles which our Fathers told us of Where be the Gifts of working Miracles which were in the primitive time c And what Defence did the Baptists make for themselves herein but that the seeking after and Working Miracles in that outward way that is sometimes in Scripture spoaken of and that these men intend is not essential to a Believer and so not to a Church nor an Administrator See p. 69. of their Book entitul'd A Way to Sion by D. King printed at London reprinted at Edinburgh 1656. Also That Miracles did not prove them Disciples That Miracles do not now distinguish a true Church from a false Ibid. p. 135 136. Yet as if they had quite forgotten these things and the Oppositions and Sufferings which they formerly met withal they bring their Adversaries Objections against us And seeing if we should only tell men We are in the Truth the Light within them will testifie to our Way it is demonstrable by the Effects that we have the Spirit and are in the Power of God and that it is within while the Baptists so say they have it as he saith p. 31 32. and that all this will not decide the Controversie or manifest to our Opposer a real Discrimination between us to demonstrate us to be in the Truth Now as we have not this way imposed a Faith upon our Opposers so we shall not thus impose upon either this man or the Baptists but desire he and they may without Prejudice seek and try further and Try all things and hold fast that which is Good and we doubt not but where or in whom the Spirit of Christ lives and rules it will manifest it self by its Fruits for it is Self-Evidencing and will discover who are the Lord 's peculiar People and who not But this Quibbler imposeth upon W. P. to bring something for Proof of his Church which the Baptists nor no False Church can pretend to and produce pag. 30. Though this seems to be a hard Task especially as to what may be pretended yet it is no difficult mater for W. P. and many more to produce or demonstrate some such Effects of that Living Testimony Presence and Power of God among us as no false Church can produce although herein neither W. P. nor any of us will admit of Prejudiced Envious Spirits to be our Judges or Witnesses in these matters but we have a Record in Heaven and also in many Consciences of the blessed Power and Presence of God with us amongst us Turning many from Darkness to Light and from Satan's Power to God And many there are among us gathered out from Baptists and other Churches and Peoples who are Living Witnesses both of the blessed Operation and Effects of the Power and Ministry of Christ Jesus among us which yet if the Baptists should object and say They see no such thing I answer That is because they have not Honestly made Tryal but stood in Prejudice and Gainsaying

as we had been some Time remote from the City And although W. Kiffin left the Meeting before the End thereof he could both be Judge and Witness as well as the rest for him from the Perusal and comparing of his Proofs with the Quakers Books which the rest might have done privately as well now my present Business is to prove them both Vnfair False Witnesses as well as Vnjust Judges even as to Citations as will appear plainly although they would fain have had us acquiesced with their Judgments as being Infallible Judges because appealed to but here it s proved That the Quakers Books do not agree with what T.H. hath laid to their Charge and that all his Quotations are not truly recited out of their Books take these following Instances being compared out of their own Relation aforesaid with what is briefly noted thereupon Sect. I. About the Soul BEcause T. H. hath made a great a doe divers Times about the Soul as charging it as the Quakers Opinion one white that the Soul is God another while that the Soul is Part of God and of God's Being without Beginning and Infinite Dial. 1. p. 16. Dial. 3. p. 2. I shall begin with this where after he hath cited W.P. as charging T.H. with Perversion Iujustice Misciting and Abusing the true Meaning of what is truly cited he here breaks off W. P.'s Words and then faith to his Auditors You hear what W. Penn hath said touching this Charge p. 8. Whereas he hath but cited the Preamble of W. Penn's Answer and left out the very Substance thereof See Reas. ag Rail p. 65. Is this fair Dealing or true to say You have heard WHAT W.P. hath said when they have not heard the very Substance and chief Part of what he hath said in this Case which follows after T. H.'s Citation W. P. thus viz. G. Fox saith thus God breathed into Man the Breath of Life and he became a living Soul and is not this of God of his Being c. and is not This that came out from God Part of God and from God Where nothing can well be clearer then that G. F. intends that Divine Life Power and Virtue by which Adam in Soul and Body came to live to God with other Passages about the Words Breathed Inspired after which he addeth But this Ungodly Person would infer from our asserting That the Breath God breathed into Adam's Soul whereby it liv'd to God was of God's Divine Life That the Soul of Man as a meer Creature or created Capacity is of God's own Being and Substance c. See further Reas. against Rail pag. 66 67. And further let it be observed wherein T. Hicks hath dealt Unfairly by G. F. in this matter Though it be true that G. F. saith That God breathed into Man the Breath of Life and he became a living Soul and askt Is not this which cometh out from God of God being without Beginning Infinis in itself c Gr. Myst. fol. 29 68 90 100. But then T. Hicks having left out those Passages that chiefly explain G. F's Sense in this matter takes it for granted without Distinction that it is our Opinion That the Soul is God as he hath charg'd us and this he hath made one main Reason for his accusing us with Denying all future distinct Beings or Rewards of Men after Death which must procede either from his Mistake or wilful Perversion he taking G. F's Question about the Soul to intend the meer Spirit of Man that God form'd in him or the Soul that is a Reasonable Creature which could not be intended in G. F's Question which concerns that Immediate Breath or Spirit of Life which came out from God by which Man became a living Soul wherein what is more evident then that G.F. doth not at all confound the Being of Man with the Being of his Maker though God may be truly said to be the Being of Beings the Life of Lives so the Soul or Life of Souls even of all Mankind with respect unto this G. F's words appear very plain where he saith God breathed into Man the Breath of Life and he became a living Soul for that which came out from God was the Cause that MAN became ALIVE a living Soul and is not this of God Gr. Myst. pag. 68. See how plain and distinct these words are between That which came out from God and Man himself and whether it was not an Abuse in T. Hicks to leave out those G. F's explanatory words which are in the very same Page that he quotes and misconstrue his Question and Words to another Intention then they will bear while G. F's words relating to that which came out from God do not at all mention Man's Soul or Spirit that I do or can find Although T. H. and his Brethren take Soul in G. F's Question for the Spirit of Man or the Reasonable Creature so far as I can gather as W. Kiffin and the rest do in their Epistle entituled Heart-Bleedings for Professors Abominations and annext unto their Confession of Faith printed 1651. where they have these Phrases viz. The Spirit which God formeth in Man Our Spirit or Soul a Creature The reasonable Soul c. Here they grant man's Spirit or Soul to be the same whereas when G. F. speaks of the Soul in that sense he hath this Phrase The Soul being in Death in Transgression man's Spirit there is not sanctified Gr. Myst. p. 91. These plain words T. H. also hath left out though in the very next page to what he quotes What is more plain then that G.F. could not intend that Soul or Spirit of Man which could be in Death in Transgression to be either God his Divine Life Being or Part of God but of Man only for the Being of God can never be either in Transgression or Corrupted because God is Incorruptible And now from the Understanding that I have of G. F's words about the Soul as in divers places of his said Book He speaks of the Soul as under a two fold Consideration 1st with respect unto that Breath of Life which God breathed into man by which MAN became a living Soul 2 dly with the respect to Man himself as being thereby made a living Soul And of Man as under a three fold Consideration 1. As Man was in the Beginning before the Fall being made Alive a Living Soul by the Breath or Spirit of God 2. To Man faln and in the Fall from God wherein his Soul or Spirit is brought under Death in Sin and Transgression and so is polluted with Sin while Unsanctified 3. To Man as restored and his Soul quickned to God again by the Spirit of Life and so saved by and in Christ Jesus who is the Bishop of the Soul This I do understand and plainly gather from the Tenour of G. F's Words and Answers But sith Thomas Hicks's Charge against the Quakers was that they are No Christians and that one