Scriptures not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them This he denyeth not we proved it by five testimonies He answers by one Scripture grossely perverted and two others ignorantly applyed but gives no answer to many Scripture arguments against it 14 Spirits not to be tryed by Scripture This we proved by three testimonies none of which nor the Position is denyed but goes about to prove it and falls a rayling 15. No sence meaning or exposition to be given or studying of Scripture This we proved in foure testimonies he confesseth goes about to prove it but answers not a word to fourteen evident Scriptures but falls a rayling grossely 16. They cry downe Baptisme and the Lords Supper as types and shadowes For this we gave foure proofes which he denyed not and we further prove it He shuffles from Baptisme in generall to the businesse of Infant Baptisme and falls a rayling 17. No mediate cull to the Ministry Denies not the Proof but falls miserably a rayling as if he would powr out his gall upon us As for the rest of his Reply to what we charged upon them as their Principles and Practises there is such palpable shufflings such miserable weakenesse and such horrible rayling as that we should not have medled with it at all but that we beleeve it is the designe of God to lay more and more open the spirits of these men THis Booke pretending to Answer us is thus subscribed By one whom the World calls Iames Nayler About man being called by names given them by their Parents We are â—ot a little jealous that there lyes a mystery of iniquity in that very stile and expression For first God himselfe whom to thinke to follow any sinfull expression or custome were no lesse then blasphemous calls men by their Names of distinction given by Men. Gen. 22.11 God said unto him Abraham Hannah called her sonne Samuel 1 Sam. 1.20 She called his name Samuel c. and afterwards when the Lord appeared to him to call him out to the worke of the Priest-hood chap. 3.4 and 6. and 8. verses The Lord called Samuel and called him againe so the second and third time here its evident that God himselfe calls him by the Name that his Mother gave him Acts 9.4 there Iesus Christ from Heaven calls him Saul Saul a Name given him before his conversion Christ when upon Earth calls his Disciples by the Names given them at their Circumcision as Philip Iohn Simon sonne of Ionas c. The Apostles doe so constantly as Festus Agrippa Gaius Aristarchus c. and this without such a mysterious preamble as one whâ—â— the World calls Festus Agrippa c. You see how these pretendâ—r to Scripture depart from Scripture as if they would include God and Christ under the carnall observations of the World or else teach them to speake 2. It is apparant That these very men doe constantly call themselves by these Names as Iames Nayler doth in an Epistle at the end of Farneworths Booke George Fox in a Pamphlet lately Printed and the very men of their Generation call them so without any such preamble The mystery of â—â—e 〈…〉 â—riting tâ—emselve such wâ—o the World câ—ll so and so 3. But shall we tell you where the mystery lyes We are satisfied that this expression is meerly to cloake their pretence to an equality with God Our reason is evident For in this very Answer of Naylers pag 4. where he relates Foâ—es his evadâ—ng of the charge against him that he said He was equall with God Nayler thus hints that Fox being asked whether he spake this of George Fox as he was a creature To this he answered I deny George Fox he is dust and must be dust but I and my Father are one Is not this as plaine as the Sunne that he therefore denyes George Fox that he may deny his being a creature one that must returne to dust that so he may set up and assert his onenesse with God Compare but this with that usuall expression of theirs in their Books Whose name in the flesh is James Nayler Whose name in the flesh is Iohn Audland c. and it will be more apparent But more of this you have in our Answer to their Reply to the first Article In the Epistle in the said Answer Written by A. P. he calls us About the word Priest the Priests of the North a word on purpose given us to our reproach Surely their pretended meeknesse should have taught them other expressions though truely we finde and the Reader may even in this their answer finde more cursed rayling then we receive from the worst of men yet our suffering in that kinde from them also is not small But A. P. might know that every Priest was to offer both gifts and sacrifices for sinne and that we waite not upon any such worke and that the Gospel knowes no Chiefe Priest but the Lord Iesus who is a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedek not any Priests at all properly but the Saints metaphorically â—â—lled a Royall Priest-hood and shall the stile of the Lord Iesâ—â— and his Saints be a reproach in the mouthes of Quakers He goes on and tells the world That we 〈◊〉 all strangers to that sort of people called Quakers except one A. P. who is none of the least of that sort of people cannot but know that he is too well knowne to all of us Secondly Three of these five also have had cause to know many more of them as M. Taylour Iohn Audland Stubbs Holmes Atkinson Hedgshon Ayry c. and others from whom we suffered disturbance in our publique Ministry and some of these also are pretenders to be eminently sent forth Thirdly Though all of us were strangers to their persons yet are we not strangers to them in their writings and so if it be possible to know them by their Papers which they industriously scatter up and downe we know them fully But whither tends this aspersion that they are strangers to all of us save one but to make the world beleeve that we have taken up these things against them by report But we hope the Reader by this time understands the nakednesse of the slander and the subtilty of A. P. W. C. As for that evidence which one of us gives concerning their principles and practises which A. P. under the name of Reports would insinuate into the people as if they were lyes the Reader shall observe that the most of these evidences are not at all contradicted by Nayler in his Answer but passed over which we take as confessed by him others onely evaded which yet shall appeare to the Reader in the ensuing answer to be either such things as he was an eye or eare witnesse of or shall be fully confirmed by undeniable testimony A. P. goes on and tells the Reader that in this answer What is truth is owned and what is false is
Bâ—oke be the persecution Pauls zeale against wicked principles and unlawfull practises may as well be called persecution as our pleading for the truth of Christ against opposers we being set for the confirmation and defence of the Gospel We now proceed to take notice of his answers to the Positions they have asserted the first is Position 1. Their Equality with God Excep 1 TO the first Proofe that George Fox affirmed He was equall with God Iames Nayler answers and sayes that it is false that George Fox did say that George Fox was equall with God Reply Let the Reader take notice that Nayler in his reply doth not deny our proofe at all when we say that George Fox said these words I am equall with God he doth not except against this at all 2. Naylers further reply plainely doth evidence it also where he confesseth that George Fox when he was asked Whether he was equall with God said I deny George Fox he is dust c. but I and my Father are one VVhere he clearely asserts his onenesse with God as to equality for that was the question the Justices put to him So that our proofe against him stands cleare by his owne confession Now the strength of Naylers answer lyes in this evasion which we doubt not but any that have their eyes open will discover to be the subtilty of the Serpent viz. he doth not deny that George Fox said He was equall with God but denyes that he said that George Fox was equall with God where Nayler makes Fox to distinguish ignorantly and make a difference betwixt George Fox and himselfe so that though George Fox is not equall with God yet he that is called George Fox is equall with God Now to this blasphemous evasion we thus answer 1. If George Fox for his blasphemy be turned into Hell what will become of him that is what will become of that person that is called by the name of George Fox 2. Is not the name alwayes given for the distinguishing of the person yea even when they are in a blessed state translated from corruption Mat. 17.3 there appeâ—red Moses and Elias talking with him they were Moses and Elias still though in a state of glory So that the person is understood and distinguished by the name and therefore by the name George Fox must be understood in our Booke the person distinguished by that name we were never so childish as to thinke that a bare name without its relation to the person distinguished by â—it any should cry up to an equality with God we speake of the person understood by George Fox Such cobweb answers and childish evasions may satisfie such deluded spirits as Nayler but we cannot but in the feare of the Lord cry out Oh! the plotted blasphemy of these men 3. Did ever any of the Saints of God in the old or new Testament distinguish in this way Did not Paul say Paul a servant of Iesus Christ not saying I deny Paul Paul is dust and must to dust but I am a servant of Jesus Christ what unscripturall and ridiculous language is this 4. Hence you may see it was not without reason that we were jealous of a mystery of iniquity lying under these distinctions betwixt George Fox and himselfe and in these words one whom the World calls James Nayler and in Francis Howgill his paper called A woe to Kendall one whom the World calls F. H. 5. The very evasion that Nayler useth is a very great demonstration to us that George Fox asserted he was equall with God For Nayler confesseth he was present when George Fox was asked whether he spoke this of George Fox as he was a creature Now here is a cleare confession that George Fox did say He was equall with God that 's confessed he spoke this onely the question was about the sence of these words and whether he spoke them of himselfe as a creature What ever the person were that asked Fox that question we would leave this upon his conscience what apprehensions he had of Fox For by the necessary and infallible rules of reason there is nothing that hath a being but either a creature or a Creator and if Fox have an other consideration as that question clearely implyes besides that as a creature it must necessarily be as a Creator and so his equality with God is asserted Well t is confessed he spoke these words 2. In this answer he denies George Fox as a creature the meaning therof as given in answer to that question must be this that George Fox as a creature denyes to be equall with God but that he as under some other consideration is equall with God he denyes not nay asserts it when he sayes I and my Father are one 6. We cannot but presse it upon the Reader that in theâ—e debates about equality with God it had been easie for Naylâ—r or Fox to have declared their totall inequality with God and not so to have deluded the people in such fond distinctions as I am equall with God and yet George Fox is not equall with God nay this debate certainly was an eminent call to thâ—m to disclaime it if this wretched principle had not filled their hearts yet in stead of our ingenious denying of this blasphemy their whole worke is falsely to assert it under the cloake of subtle and unscripturall nay blasphemous distinctions and evasions Iohn 10.13 opened Now for the Scriptures he so blasphemously abuseth they are these two First Iohn 10.30 I and my Father are one this Scripture that it is properly and incommunicably spoken of Christ God and Man and cannot be applyed to any meere creature we shall thus make evident The Person there spoken of is first in the 9. ver the Doore I am the Doore by me if any enter in he shall be saved Is George Fox the doore 2. That Person spoken of affirmes ver 18. that he hath power to lay downe his life of himselfe and power to take it up againe Hath George Fox that power 3. In ver 26. He saith to the Jewes Ye cannot beleeve because ye are not of my Sheep Dare George Fox say so The reason why men doe not beleeve is it because George Fox hath not elected them from Eternity 4. That Person there spoken of faith ver 27.28 My Sheep heare my voyce and I give unto them eternall life neither shall any man plucke them out of my hands Is it not blasphemy for Fox to assert these things of him else 5. He also saith My Father that gave them me is greater then all ver 29. Did the Father give the Elect to George Fox Now ver 30. this Person of whom these things are spoken it is who is one with the Father And you may as well ascribe the other five considerations to George Fox or any meere creature as this that he and the Father are one But oh the greatnesse of his ignorance of God of Christ of Scripture of himselfe
owne imaginations to make them odious when we say according to their principle those things that are held forth of Christ without us as Hubbethorn sayes must be acted over againe within us and so Christ must be borne of the Virgin in us and Iudas and Herod and Pilate must be in us to betray and crucifie him Is not this the plaine assertion of Hubbethorn the same thiâ—gs must be fulfilled in us that was in Christ Iesus as he was held forth in the Scripture-letter and in the flesh without us And this we also proved by an assertion of George Bateman pag. 29. to which Nayler answers nothing But further it shall yet appeare that its cleare in Sauls Errand to Damâ—scus pag. 14. where George Fox expressâ—â—y sayes Christ his flesh is a figure for every one passeth thrâ—ugh the same way that Christ did who comes to know Christ in the flesh What a seared conscience must this man needâ— have that when this Doctrine is expressely found in those evidâ—nt plâ—ces in that Booke yet hath the impudence against the light of conscience to say Let that Booke he wiâ—nesse agaiâ—st yâ—u and your lying slanders herein to all that reade it But both you and we shall both learne what thâ—s man and his way iâ— Excep 2 You say this was written in a Letter which Nâ—yler wâ—ote to one in Lancashire viz. That â—e that expects to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem should be deceived which â—s a mâ—st 〈◊〉 by untruth c and so he goes on â—aâ—ling Reply 1. It is acknowledged thaâ— that Letter which had this Doctrine in it that Chriâ—t was but a figure was not Naylers Letter in which that other passage is we mistooke Nâ—yleâ— for Hubbethorne and that it was in a Letter from Huâ—bethoâ—â—e written to one in Lancashire Take this ensuing Testimony of Mr. Moore a godly Minister in Lancashire RIchard Hubbethorne wrotâ— that the câ—mmiâ—g of Châ—â—st iâ— the flâ—sh is but a figure or an â—olâ—ing 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 and actions amongst men those things that he will truely spiritually and really doe in the spirits of his people at his second comming This but being objected against him as denying the Lord that bought us He replyed in another Letter Thou dost not understand what I meant by that expression c. These words being often objected to the Quakers and particularly to George Fox though some of them made an answer to the but yet none of them deny it in these parts that I can heare of These Letters were sent to Henry Holme and are now in my hands Kellet in Lancash Jan. 16. 1653. William Moore Thus you have our confession of our mistake onely of the Name you see the truth of the thing convincingly evidenced But that it is a filthy untruth that Nayler wrote such a Letter in which were those words He that expects to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem should be deceived we answer First Nayler may know that we doe onely affirme that Doctor Marshall did object this against him at Applehy and Master Iaques Minister of Bolton in Lancashire sent his promise that he would make it appeare Had Nayler denyed that either of these two were true he might have charged us with a falsehood but this he doth not he dare not doe 2. Though Nayler doe so cry out against this as a slander yet he that considers this their Principle that Christ with all he did in the flesh is but a figure which is proved to be their principle beyond exception will wonder why Nayler should looke upon this as a slander when it is the necessary consequence of that wicked Doctrine for if Christ were but a Figure I should no more expect to be saved by him then by the figures and types of thâ— Law But because the man so loudly cryes out against this as being a filthy untruth that ever he wrote such a Letter though he deny not what we say that this was objected against him by D. Marshall and that M. Iaques engaged to justifie it yet we have affixed M. Iaques Testimony to satisfie the world of our clearenesse from the scandals and wicked reproaches of Nayler and this sent is under his Hand and Scale JAmes Nayler in a Lettor which he writ to Henry Holme gave out this expression If thou expect to be saved by him that dyed at Ierusalem thou art deceived Hoc unum test John Jaques Excep 3 There is but one thing more in Naylers answer whereby he shuffles this Position and that evasion is this We doe owne and confesse that Iesus Christ in the flesh is a figure or example as if figure and example were all one To which we answer Reply Iesus Christ not a Figure 1. We challenge Iames Nayler to shew one tittle of Scripture wherein Iesus Christ is called a Figure The first Adam is called a Figure Rom. 5.14 the Tabernacle called a Figure Heb. 9.9 but Iesus Christ is never called a Figure and therefore it is a sinfull shuffle of Iames Nayler thus to confound an Example and Figure 2. If he be a Figure we againe affirme he must typifie some thing but we referre you to our Booke as to Christ not being a Figure or onely an example where we have layd downe many Scriptures and arguments to which he answers nothing Perfect Pharisee pag. 8. 9. Position 6. That men are not justified by that righteousnesse of Christ which he in his owne Person did fulfill without us Reader thou wilt see in our Booke we had foure proofes for this three of which Nayler denyeth not and for the fourth we referre thee to Mr. Iaqueâ— testimony so that as to the truth of the assertion we must take it for granted especially considering what George Fox saith in Sauls Errand to Damascus pag. 12. He that is borne of God is iustified by Christ alone without imputation This gives us to understand the meaning of Naylers answer to that Position thus Except That righteousnesse Christ hath performed without me was not my justification c. untill Christ appeared in me c. and appeared in me my righteousnesse sanctification justification and redemption c. Reply Fox denying imputed righteousnesse in plaine tearmes 1. Let but the Reader compare this of Iames Nayler with that expressiâ—n of George Fox viz. he is justified by that alone without imputation and that of Authory Hodgson viz I beleeve to be saved not by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed to me but by the righteousnesse of Christ inherent in me which he doth not deny he wâ—ll learne the meaning of Naylers worâ—s to be clearly this that Christ in a man is the matter of his just fication so that though he labour to colour over the businesse in this answer by saying Christ was not his justification till he appeared in him yet comparing his answer with these testimonies it will appeare to be downe-right equivocation and shuffling Question betwixt Quakers uâ—concerning the
A Further DISCOVERY of that Generation of men called QVAKERS By way of Reply to an Answer of James Nayler to the Perfect Pharisee Wherein is more fully layd open their Blasphemies notorious Equivocations Lyings wrestings of the Scripture Raylings and other detestable Principles and Practises And the Booke called The Perfect Pharisee is convincingly cleared from James Naylers false Aspersions with many difficult Scriptures by him wrested opened Published for the building up of the perseverance of the Saints till they come to the end of their Faith even the salvation of their soules Mat. 16.18 Vpon this Rocke I will build my Church and the gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it Rev. 2.23 Vnto you I say and unto as many as have not this Doctrine and which have not knowne the depths of Satan as they speake I will put upon you none other burden But that which you have already hold fast till I come Gateside Printed by S. B. 1654. Christian Reader Sâ—nce our Publishing of the Perfect Pharisee as we finde we blesse God it hath been prosperous to the no small satisfaction and establishing of his people who with an humble and sober spirit have been willing to try the spirits whether they be of God So we see it hath provoked the spirits of those Quakers to more obstinacy bitternesse and rayling As in the powring out of the fourth Vioâ— Men were scorched with great heat and blasphemed the Name of God and repented not to give him glory Now though truely we must professe with Reverend Mr. Eaton Writing concerning the same people in his Epistle to his Booke called The Quakers confuted That we cannot apprehend that there is any hope of convincing these persons of the error of their way so farre are they under the very power of the spirit of delusion and professed enmity to the Ordinances of Christ Jesus our Lord Yet for the further securing and fuller satisfying of the people of God we are induced to Answer this Reply of Iames Nayler for the clearer manifesting of the wickednesse and folly of these men and their Principles And though it cost us new revilings and more bitter cursings from this People which we fully expect Yet what are we and our Names though troddon under foot so Iesus Christ may have the glory and his people the advantage of our standing for the truth But that thou mayest know the nature of their Answer thus it is We charge them to hold seventeen Blasphemous and Hereticall Doctrines besides their other principles and practises in our Booke expressed and what he sayes to them we have given thee a short account in the Draught subjoyned to our Epistle Wherein thou wilt easily see with what full proofe we have testified those things concerning them though the tongues of these 〈◊〉 accustomed to nothing more then to rayle doe so confidently charge lyes upon us But we are sure and confident in the Lord that we have spoken that of them which will if not already as it doth to all impartiall Readers fully undeniably and convincingly appeare to be truth if thou reade the clearenesse of the evidence of this ensuing Treatise Reader If thou hast Read our former Booke thou wilt finde our Arguments and assertions against the blasphemous Doctrines of these men fully strengthened by plentifull variety of evident plaine convincing Scriptures to which thou wilt finde Iames Nayler in his Reply answering not one word Certainly the demonstration of the spirit of God either hath convincingly silenced him and stopp'd his mouth for how ready is he to catch at any trifling appearance of advantage or what canst thou or any man imagine of him but that Scripture is nothing to him nor his soule under any obedience unto or conscience of the truth of God either of which What a miserable and deplorable state of soule doth it speake when men can stand out in their blaspemies against the light of Conscience It shall be our worke in this ensuing Treatise in following Iames Nayler in his Reply to answer all such Scriptures as he impertinently and injuriously wrests and to cleare the truths of God from their being misapplyed to his horrid Principles By which and other occasionall passages in this Booke thou wilt find a more full and plaine manifestation of these men and discovery of the mystery of iniquity working in them Consider what thou Readest and the Lord give thee understanding in all things Tho. Weld Rich. Prideaux Sam. Hammond Will. Cole Will. Durant A short Draught of James Naylers Answer to the Booke called The Perfect Pharisee Quakers Positions 1. EQuality with God This we proved by six Evidences He denyes but two of them which yet we shall prove under the hand of witnesses and his very Answers doe amount to an asserting of it 2. No distinction of Persons in the God-head This is denyed by them but we shall by further testimony cleare it to be theirs 3. That the soule is a part of the Divine Essence This he excepteth not against nor takes any notice of our Arguments but is full of bitter Rayling 4. That Christ is in every man and in the Reprobates held under corruption This is confessed clearely though seemingly denyed onely one expression is shuffled which is yet proved by testimony under hand 5. That Christ was but a Figure and Example This is denyed by him and miserably shuffled yet we evidently prove it even by their owne Bookes and other testimony 6. That men are not justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ in his owne Person fulfilled without us This is not denyed though so wicked a Doctrine but a new asserted and no tittle of an answer to our Arguments 7. That men are justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ within them enables to performe This we proved by six evident testimonies two of which Nayler onely shuffles in but we shall cleare them and answers nothing to plaine â—cripture against them 8. That God and Man cannot be wholly reconciled till he be brought to the state of the first Adam and able in hâ—â— oâ—ne power to stand perfect This he denyes but we prove from his owne words it clearely is and must be his â—eaning 9. He that commits sin and is not perfectly holy can never enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory This he denyes to be so in his Booke and rayleth as if we charged a lye upon him but we shall further cleare it though in his owne answer he partly confesseth it 10. No reall Saint but he that is perfectly holy c. This he confesseth and answers onely by rayling but takes no notice of the Scriptures against that Principle 11. Every man hath a light within him sufficient to guide him to salvation without the help of outward light He confesseth all but answers nothing 12. No need of outward teaching c. He denyes one testimony of ten which yet is true but confesseth the Doctrine and falls a rayling 13.
denied truely he could not in so few words have spoken more untruely to prepossesse the Reader but we beg the Reader as to that to suspend his judgement till he have fully read the ensuing Discourse wherein whether any thing have been charged on them that is false and whether Nayler have done faithfully in owning what is truth will appeare at large In the Preface of James Nayler to his answer he tells you The Man of sin and his â—orkings in the last times Revealed That Christ now appearing in his Saints to discover the man of sinne with all his deceits and deceiveable workings now all the powers of darkenesse are gathered against him Gog and Magog As for those deceits and deceiveable workings truely these blasphemous Doctrines of these men with their Diabolicall delusions and quakings will make it appeare where the man of sin is now working To open this we shall stay the Reader a little Agreement betwixt Papists and Quakers 1. It is as claere as the noone day 2 Thes 2. chapter Rev. 12.3 Rev. 13. Rev. 17.4.5.9.10 that the Papall Apostacy and state is The Antichrist so often Prophesied of in Scripture Now it is as plainâ— that the very distinguishing Doctrines and practises of these men are such as are the maine principles of that man of sinne in opposition to Jesus Christ Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 7. 1. The Papists deny the imputed righteousnesse of Christ for justification and in scorne and derision call it A putative Righteousnesse Quak. These also from the same spirit deny the imputed Righteousnesse of Christ for justification And Nayler himselfe before the whole Court at Appleby discoursing with W. C. about justification by righteousnesse of Christ imputed not onely denyed it but in a sleighting way ended his discourse thereabout with this language That which is without is without So George Fox affirmed That he that is borne of God is justified by Christ alone without imputation Sauls Errand pag. 12. Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 3. 2. The Papists in their controversies with us doe positively affirme that justification is by inherent Righteousnesse Hence Bellermine Stapleton c. with the rest doe positively affirme that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is onely justum facere per inherentem justitiam that to justifie is onely to make righteous by inherent righteousnesse Quak. So these men doe as confidently affirme that they are onely justified by inherent righteousnesse or that righteousnesse within which Christ within them enableth them to performe See our proofe Perfect Pharisee pag. 10. Papist Bell. de juâ—tif l. 4. c. 11. 12. 13. 14 3. The Papists againe doe confidently conclude that a man may perfectly keep the whole Law Hence their neglect of the righteousnesse of Christ their workes of supererogation and the like Quak So the Quakers their great assertion as a challenge to all is that eâ—ery Saint is perfect that it is pâ—ssible to be perfectly holy and without sinne Perfect obedience to the Law of God is their great Principle which they confidently cry up more then any Papist Bell. l. 3. de verbo Dei c 4. 4. The Papists affirme that the Scriptures or the Written Word of God are not the supreame Iudge of sp rits Quak So these people that the spirits are not to be câ—yed by Scripture So A. P. in the Booke he but forth called Severall Papers p 19. The Woâ—lds touchstone is without them and they try the spirit by the letter c. but the Saints touchstone is within So that though they agree not what shall be yet both of them consent in denying the Scripture to be the judge of spirits Papist 5 The Papists call the Scripture aâ—â— ad letter a nose of wax a scâ—bbard without a sword Coâ—erus in Euchir pag. 44 Pighius lib. 1. cap. 4. So Melchior Canus sayes It is most certaine the Written Word is onely for Babes and is no way necessary for those that are growâ—e as is more fu l Melchior Canus defens each fid contra confess Worâ—berg cap. 36. Quak. So these men also not onely câ—y downe the necessity of the written word see the perfect Pharisee pag. 20. but also call it a dead letter a carnall letter that they are but a declaration of them that spake it So Melchior Canus againe saith the Gospel is not the Scripture as Farnworth in his Booke Discovery of Faith scoffes at our saying the foure Bookes of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospel pag. 1â— Papist 6. The great argument by which the Papists doe goe about to establish the truth of their way is Immediate revelations and pretended miracles the want of which they upbrayd the Protestant Ministers and charge us to be no Church Quak So the Quakers doe in their pretence to an immediate call and their supposed miracle of quaking So A. P. the Word of the Lord came to me saying So Audland the Word of the Lord came to me but of that more hereafter Papist 7. The Papists doe place much of their holinesse in their Eastings beggerly apparell and forsaking the World as they call it as their lâ—â—ing mewed up in convents and cloysters their wandring up and downe as Hermits and begging Fryers c. Quak. So these men is knowne to place abundance of their holinesse in Fasting beggarly apparell wandring up and downe the World c. we might adde much more but here you may see how the man of sinne in these men in their compliance with the principles and practises of the Romish way breaks out in his deceit and deceiveâ—ble workings 2. He is a stâ—anger in the Booke of God as to the discovery of Antichrist The spirit of errour the spirit of Anti-Christ who doth not observe the spirit of God mightily unvailing Antichrist by the revealing of the spirit of errour in him for 1 Iohn 2.18 there it plainly appeares that horrid errors are of that affinity with the Antichrist that when he would describe that man of sinne in the last time he calls the Heretiques by that very name Now are there many Antichrists whereby we know it is the last time c. Now besides those which we have named the Reader will easily observe such a masse and heape of Arminian Socinian Familisticall errors in their Doctrines layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee that he may câ—earely observe where the spirit of Antichrist works in all deceiveablenesse in this last time 3. Lastly It is the Saints bulwarke against the Papists while they call for our miracles that the spirit of God clearely holds forth that the comming of the man of sinne is after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders 2 Thes 2.9 So Rev. 16.13 the three uncleane spirits ver 14. are the spirits of Devils working miracles to gather together c. Now this further evidenceth the spirit of the man of sinne
he know them for they are discerned spiritually There the Apostle gives the reason why no light implanted in our natures in the creation can discerne the things of the spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned where he makes an opposition betwixt naturall and spirituall light and puts an impossibility upon discovering Christ by the light of Nature We may adde that ver 9.10 Eye hath not seene Eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of man to conceive c. but God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit 3. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted in the soule is not a knowledge of Christ as a Mediator will appeare by undenyable examples for there are multitudes of men and women without contradiction never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator though it must be confessed they had a rationall or naturall light Those thousands of Saints that went over into new England fully experienced it that there is not the least hint of a Christ implanted in those Indians one of us having often conversed amongst them can also fully witnesse it as is more fully also evident by the confessions of many of them in Print who have been converted by the Ministry of Mr. Eliot of which we spake in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 19. But may not these Scriptures fully confound these mens pervertings of that Scripture Reade Psal 143.19 He shewd his Word unto Iacob his statutes and judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any people and as for his judgements they have not knowne them Psal 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the Heathen that have not knowne thee Col. 1.26 the disponsation of God is given to fulfill the Word of God even that mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations But let Paul determine the contrary to whose judgement we shall desire to stand 2 Thes 3.2 All men have not Faith Light in all not sufficient to save 3. That this light which by Christ in creating of the world is implanted in man is not sufficient to bring to a Gospel salvation is also plaine from what we have convincingly proved that this naturall light may be in thousands that never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator and Iohn 17.3 this is life eternall to know thee the very God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent So that there is an utter insufficiency and incapacity in this light to bring to salvation So that though A. P. hath lately expressed his abhorring the distinction betwixt naturall and spirituall light yet our Lord Iesus and the Apostles are so full in it that they are of more authority with us then the novell opinion of A. P. Thus you see this Scripture fully vindicated from their wrestings for hence it is apparent that though Iesus Christ by whom the Father made the world Heb. 1.2 in his creation of man did enlighten and create a principle of light and naturall reason and understanding in the soule which we have proved is eminently there understood yet this proves nothing for the Quakers that either therefore every man that hath a reasonable soule Christ dwells in him or that he knowes Christ or that his naturall light can possibly suffice to bring to Gospel salvation Excep 4 Naylers next defence is this ridiculous argument If Christ be not in the most vile in the world c how shall he judge every one according to their thoughts as well as according to what they doe must he proceed as carnall Iudges doe by proofe or confession and no further Reply We need say no more to shew the simplicity of this argument then to aske them these questions Doth the Scripture say that Christ is in the Devills and yet he sees and knowes and judgeth them Or doth the Scripture say that the damned in Hell Christ is in them Nay but doth not Scripture speake in this language Christ in you the hope of glory Col 1 27. so that Scripture speaking of Christ in you speaks of him as being the hope of glory where he dwells And is Christ in Devils and damned soules the hope of glory For geâ—â—â—er the Quakers nor we are in this controversie at all disposinâ— concerning the abiquity of the Divine Nature by reason of which he is above all and through all and 〈◊〉 all But of Christ in us in that sense the Gospel useth the expression viz. as a saving light and principle the hope of glory 2. How ridiculous is it from Christs knowing all things to inferre that he dwells in all can he not know things unlesse he dwell in them Doth he not know the inward motions of Brutes Horses Fishes c. and is it Scripture Language from thence to inferre his dwelling in them Oh! the vainenesse and frothinesse of such a spirit and how are these men given up to blasphemy We shall conclude with that of David Psal 11.4 The Lord is in his holy temple the Lords throne is in Heaven his eyes behold his eye-lids try the children of men He hath another argument that Christ dwells in the Saints which we know in its Gospel sense but not in Naylers that Christ as man dwells in them but how absurdly and un-scripturally doth this conclusion follow therefore Christ doth dwell in all Thus you see our proofes fully confirmed his lyes confuted his perverted Scriptures cleared and answered and the folly of his arguments fully opened though he hath not answered one of our arguments and many Scriptures against that Doctrine Position 5. That Christ in the Flesh with all he did and suffered therein was but a Figure and nothing but an Example Excep 1 O deceitfull spirits c. are those words expressely found in Sauls Errand to Damascus as you say they are let that Booke be witnesse against you and your lying slanders to all that reade it Reply Surely this man pretends neither to conscience nor modesty that doth challenge us here for a lye for saying that Doctrine was expressely found in Sauls Errand He that shalâ— but looke upon that Booke pag. 2. pag 8. pag. 14. shall begin to know the impudence of Iames Nayler pag. 2. 9. line last in the schedule annaxed to the Lancashire Petition to the Councell of State you have this charge Richard Hubbethorn wrote that Christs comming in the Flesh was but a Figure Now are we lyars in affirming those words are expressely found there Nay further in pag. 8. where Hubbethorne answers to that charge we will give you his owne words Christ in his people is the substance of all figures types and shadowes fulfilling them in them but as he is held forth in the Scripture-letter without them and in the flesh without them he is their example or figure which is both one that the same things might be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Iesus Could a man have spoken more plainely to affirme what we asserted of him And doe we adde our
mayst observe he answers nothing and thereby see the spirit of those men that doe stop their eyes against the plainest light but he that hardeneth his heart shall not prosper Position 13. That the Scriptures are not the Word of God but a Declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth He answers nothing according to his custome to our arguments nor excepts against our proofes but labours to confirme the Position Excep 1 Christ is the Word now if the Scriptures be the Word then there is two Words of God now prove that in Scripture or that the Letter is â—aked the Word in plaine words Reply 1. That Christ is the Word is plaine Iohn 1. and who knoweth it not The essentiall and declarative Word not all one 2. That the will of God contained in the Scripture is the Word of God is as plaine besides the Scriptures we named â—n the Perfect Pharisee pag. 24. Marke 7.13 Luke 11 28. Rom. 10.17 Iohn 12.48 we shall adde these Luke 8.11 the Seed is the Word of God ver 12. then commeth the Devill and taketh the word out of their heart least they should beleeve and be saved can the Devill take Christ out of their hearts 1 Thes 2.13 When yee receaved the Word of God which you heard of us yee received it not as the Word of Men but as it is in truth the Word of God c. This was the Word which the Apostles spake yea received it which cannot be meâ—nt of Christ he should have said yee received him not as the word of men but as it is in truth the word of God This is so plaine a case we shall not trouble thee further And here thâ—u mayst observe there are two words of God the essentiall and 〈◊〉 declarative and wonder the man should be so weake as to bid 〈◊〉 produce Scripture to prove this when the Scripture is so full of it to any that doth but reade it Excep 2 The Apostle calls what he wrote a Declaration 1 â—ohn 1.2.3 Reply How doth this prove the Scriptures are noâ— the word of God nay doth it not fully prove the contrary for that which he declares was what he had heard of the Lord Iesus Scriptures not onely a declaration of the conditions of Saints Againe we doe owne the Scriptures to be the declarative Word of God or a declaration of the minde of God but we say the Quakers doe destroy the Scriptures Divinity and authority when they call them onely a declaration of the conditions of them that spoke them forth For as we prâ—ved before 1 They shall be then no foundation for the Faith of Saints for one mans condition is not the foundation of another mans Faith 2. The Scripture shall have no authority over the soule of any but he that is in the same condition and hath experienced it contrary to Iohn 2.4 8. this is the reason why Nayler sayes they are not commanded to forbear to weare shâ—oes in his Book p. 21. if they were they should as well as they are commanded not to sâ—lute whereas that command if it be in any part binding Luke 10.4 requires both but this will tell thee what is meant by their calling Scripture a speaking forth of the Saints condition viz. it shall have no authority over them further then they list or have an impulse on their spirits or they practice for both the commands are of equall authâ—rity yet he denyes they are commanded one of them nay they are both in the same verse Luke 10.4 Yea 3. This destroyes the divine authority of all Historicall and Propheticall Scripture which could not be the Saints conditions when thâ—y spoke them as also threatnings and promises c But see this at large Perfect Pharisee pag. 24.25 We sha l say but this 1 Iohn 5.16 There is a sinne unto death I doe not say that you should pray for it was this Iohns condâ—â—ion when he spake it did he exper ence in his heart that he had sinned to death 2 Pet. 2.22 The Dog is returned to his vomit c. was this the condition of Peter that spoke it but we are ashamed of this wickednesse and folly of these men Excep 3 VVhereas you say it cannot be understood to be the word Christ that came to the Prophets Samuel Ieremy c it seems your understanding is not with the Apostle who saith It was the Spirit of Ch i st that was in them 1 Peter 1 11 and you say what Christ and his Apostles Preached c. was not Christ the Father or Spirit when as the Scripture saith Holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Pet. cap. 1 ver 21. Reply The Quakers grossâ— confounding of Christ with the written VVord 1 Consider Reader how grossely he abuseth and perverts the Scripture to prove that the words that they spoke were Christ and the spirit because it is said These holy men of God spoke as they were moved by the holy Ghost What a grosse and blasphemous conâ—ounding is here of the word that those men spoke and the holy Ghost that moved them to speake making the word spoken by a finite creature to be the everlasting spirit the holy Ghost The words were committed to Paper and Inke Rev. 1. Heb. 2.2 engraven in Tables 2 Cor. 3.7 Isay 30 8. write it before them in a Booke note it in a Booke c. can this be Christ or the Spirit of God and yet these are the things which they were moved of the holy Ghost to write Who knoweth not that it was the spirit of God that moved them to write that revealed the things they were to publish to the world but were those things that the holy Ghost moved them to write were those things Christ were those things the spirit What a miserable ignorance or judiciall blindnesse is this which certainely the righteous judgement of God hath given up this Generation of people to because they received not the truth in the love thereof that they might be saved Position 14. That the Spirits are not to be tryed by the Scriptures c. This Position is not denyed by Nayler we proved it from three testimonies and Nayler in his answer addes his owne defence thereof without exception against any of our proofes VVe shall take his arguments for defence thereof in order Excep 1 The infallible spirit which is the originall of all Scriptures is the tryall of all spirits and that spirituall man judgeth all things and by that spirit the Saints was to judge of all spirits and gave those up to Sathan that was for that end as is plaine 1 Cor. 5 4. Reply 1 The spirit not to be set in opposition to Scripture The force of this argument by which he would prove that spirits are not to be tryed by Scripture lyeth thus The infallible spirit is the tryall of all spirits therefore spirits are not to â—e tryed by Scriptures To
rake up a reason out of a heape of rayling this it is Those that doe uphold the Scriptures to be the tryall of Doctrines doe yet differ amongst themselves therefore the Spirits or Doctrines are not to be tryed in Scriptures Reply Quakers Popish argument This as many other of their answers is a knowne thread-bare Popish argument they say You Protestants cannot agree in your Discipline and therefore the Scriptures are not to be the judge of Doctrines but the infallible spirit of the Pope We hope God will discover them ere lonâ— to be men meerely acted by the spirit of Anti-christ but we shall give you a full answer under these two considerations Difference in non-fundamentals no prejudice to the Scriptures being judge of spirits 1. First as it reflects upon our selves We say to differ in discipline is not to worship severall gods as Nayler rayles while it is knowne we hold the head the Lord Jesus but this we looke upon as the spitting of his venome When Peter was for Circumcision and Paul was against Circumcision Gal. 2.13.14 did they worship severall gods So those Acts 15. that contested in different judgements did they worship severall gods But this man cares not what he sayes so be may throw his dirt upon us though he bewray his excessive ignorance in it before the world 2. As it fights against the Scriptures being the judge and tryall of spirits we shall shew there is no strength in this exception at all For the Scripture loseth not its authority for the tryall of spirits by reason of the darkenesse and different apprehensions of spirits How darke were the Apostles in the Prophesies of Christs Resurrection Luke 24 25. Fooles and flow of heart to beleeve all that the Prophets have spoken c. yet the Scriptures lost not their touchstone authority upon the account of their darkenesse though Christ saw thâ—t truth of the Resurrection in the Scriptures spoken of which they could not apprehend ought not Christ ver 26. to have sâ—ffoâ—ed these things and to enter into his glory Doth not Peter say plainely that in the writings of Paul there are 2 Pet 3.10 difficult things and hard to be understood and such as the unstable and unlearned rest and yet those Writings and Epist es doe not lose their authority because of the diversities and darkenesse of Beleevers thoughts Scripture rightly understood will clearely discover every spirit and every Doctrine though the best of men knowing but in part 1 Cor. 13.9 and so not fully taking in the genuine sense of Scripture may have through their darkenesse difference of judgement in things lesse fundamentall But we may be weary in following such triviall arguments onely we would not have the saints entrapped in any of Satans snares nor the blessed word that 's sweeter then hony and the hony combe subjected to the delusions of evill men Thus we have given thee the strength of his answer onely he addes his false glosse upon that of Isay 8.20 Isay 8.20 vindicated by us objected against them in the Perfect Pharisee the glosse is this Whereas you quote that place To the Law and to the testimony it is true the Law of the new Covenant is written in the heart by God and the testimody of Jesus is the spirit of Prophesie and if any be not guided by and speake according to these it is because they have no light in them but without them But we answer As he plainly by this overturnes all Scripture and leaves no rule but the Law written upon mens hearts which we have confuted in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 25. so it is a grosse perverting of the text and truth for it is clearely spoken of the Written Word and the very next words expresseth it clearely If they speake not according to this Word the Hebrew is full beyond exception cedabar hazzeh according to this Word so that that text is no reference that God makes to the Law written upon mens hearts but to the Law written in Tables of stone which tables were called the testimony and the Arke thereof called the Arke of the testimony Exod. 25.22 because the Tables of stone in which the Law was written called Exod. 31.18 the tables of the testimony were layd up there We have fully showne in the Booke called the Perfect Pharisee pag. 26. the sad fruits of this Doctrine of denying the Scripture to be the rule of trying doctrines and spirits that it is to open a gap to all the delusions of Satan and we instanced sin the knowne case of Iohn Gilpin who was sometimes a Quaker to which Nayler replyes onely thus It is no more then if the chiefe priests should have cited Iudas to confute Christ c. as he consulted with the priests to betray the truth so Iohn Gilpin hath done now who shall receive his reward and you priests also as Nayler sayes To which rayling we thus answer Shaking off the Sâ—ripture tâ—e â—â—ler to Satans delusions 1. That Iohn Gilpin was thus acted by the Devill is a known truth beyond questioning 2. That he did verily beleeve he was acted by Christ when yet the Devill acted him is very apparant Nay Atkinson the boy that pretends to answer that reâ—ation of Gilpin doth all along confesse that he was acted by the Devill is plaine to any that reades that his childish â—nd non-sensicall piece of rayling 3. Iohn Gilpin himselfe â—â—ee the Lord hath delivered him in mercy out of the snares of Satan hath fully confest that it was the spirit of Satan and not the Lord Iesus that then acted him 4 And that all this grew â—ut of his casting off the Scriptures searching to a light within Take his owne words pag. 15. of a Booke called The Quakers shaken It was most just with God to give me over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes c. as for other provocations sâ— especially for rejecting the revealed will of God in his Word and heaâ—kning onely to a Voyce within me nay not onely to l sten to the Devils suggestions but to embrace his Voyce for the Voyce of Christ Thou seest now Reader what reason we had to say this rejecting the Scriptures from being the tryer of Doctrines doth open an unavoydable gap to Satans delusions 2. But what reason hath the man to say in this both Iohn Gilpin and we have consulted against Christ Nay have we not been pleading for Christ against Iudas the desperate betrayen of his truth and Gospel while we have been discovering â—he subtilties of Satan in those that are acted by him and pleading for the authority of Christ in his word against all the delusions of the Devill And as we can thankefully and comfortably looke upon it that God hath engaged us in so good a work so we can looke for our reward not what Nayler we beleeve could wish us but how can he defie when God hath not defied but what Christ hath promised to them that can
comming to her house she went to meet him and when Abigail saw David she hasted and lighted off the Asse and fell before David on her face and bowed her selfe by the ground Thus you see the practice of the saints in high-way salutes 3. Nay it was not onely the custome of the saints to salute by bodily gestures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Salutes of Primitive times but by words also and words equivalent to what are used by the people of God in England in their salutations See 2 Iohn 10. where Iohn forbiddeth them to give the least countenance to the hereticall venters of false Doctrines commands them not so much as to bid them God-speed which clearely proves that that high-way salutation was a common thing in the Apostles dayes and not to be denyed to any but such wicked persons as the Apostle there speaks of in carrying on their wicked Principles If any man bring not this Doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God speed Hence Naylers colour of taking the name of God in vaine we fully declare against peoples using that Phrase without any sense of God upon their soules Yet looke upon salutes as a command of Christ and so wish all such as doe use the name of the blessed God in their salutes either to keep a due regard of that Majesty upon their spirits when they use his glorious name or else to use some other expression Excep 2 His next cavill is against that plaine Text Mat. 5.47 If yee salute your Brethren onely what doe you more then doe others doe not even the Publicans so Where in stead of submitting to the authority of the commands of Christ He sayes thus It is no command to them to salute all but a warning to them of their partiality Reply 1. He that hath but looked upon that Text Mat. 5.46.47 but with halfe an eye will clearely see that he must as well except that Christ doth not command to love all as to say that Christ doth not command to salute all when its apparant that the very phrase and reason in both commands is the very same 2. Sure this man doth not understand himselfe when he affirmes that this is a command against partiality in saluting and yet is not a command to salute all for what is partiality in saluting but this saluting some and not saluting all What a ridiculous cavill is this even to the contradicting of himselfe 3. As to his endeavouring by this ridiculous and selfe contradicting exposition to charge us with partiality as that we salute onely those whom we love and who are rich c. we say it is a malitious slander for t is sufficiently knowne we salute strangers whose face we never saw before and the poore of the people as well as the richest of them nay the very Quakers themselves also But how doth this againe fly in their Faâ—es who for the most part carry with so much incivility to all but to people of their owne way Excep 3 3. There is a third exception which we must not passe over without serious observation it being a more then ordinary discovery of the spirit of the Quakers Where when we charge them for picking and choosing at the command of Christ such things in Scripture as doe most agree with their humors and fancies thus though they are forbid in the same place Luke 7.4 to carrie mony in their purses or to weare shooes on their feet as well as to salute any by the way yet we charge them in this because they stand upon the one command and not upon any of the rest and doe evidently bring themselves within the curse Rev. 22. Nayler thus replyes to it pag. 21. l. 4. c What we doe is not from the command that was to others ☞ but from command of the same power by which we are sent forth and if we were commanded to forbeare wearing shooes as well as we are commanded to forbeare your Heathenish customes c. we should be made willing to obey as some have done who have been commanded to goe naked c. Reply Now thou mayst see the mystery of iniquity that lyes in the Quakers layd open we can blesse the Lord that hath made them thus unvayle themselves and discover the rottennesse of their hearts as to the authority of the Scriptures which they have so long by their jugling endeavoured to conceale For here thou wiâ—t clearely see that the Quakers looke upon the commands of Christ in Scripture as having no soveraigne or binding authority over their consciences and practises further then agrees with their owne Principles and fancies For what means that expression What we doe is not from the command that was to others This without controversie is utterly to shake off the authority of the the Word For 1. Was not the whole Word written to others Did any now alive live in those dayes when the Prophets or Apostles writ their severall Bookes Were we of the Church of Corinth or Philippi Were we of the seven Churches of Asia or did we live in these dayes Alas there is no command in Scripture but was given to others long before the dayes of our Fathers and shall no command given to others be binding to us Let them Reade these convincing Texts Rom. 15.4 Whatsoever things were Written before time were Written for our learning where Paul makes the Books of the Old Testament binding to those who were not alive when they were Written for the Romans to whom he then Wrote were borne many hundred yeares after the writing of those Scriptures 1 Cor. 10 11. All these things happened unto them for examples and they were Written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come 2 Tim. 3.16 All Scripture to whomsoever Written or to what man soever the command was given before time yet all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine reproofe correction instruction in righteousnesse So the 2 Peter 1.19 speaking of the Scriptures that sure Word of Prophesie sayes they doe well to take heed to them as to a light in a darke place though they were Prophesies and commandâ— given forth to other persons many hundred yeares before Thus you see that commands in Scripture that were given forth to others are yet of universall concernment unto all to those that lived not in those dayes even such upon whom the ends of the world are come For that other expression of Naylers If we were commanded to forbeare to weare shooes c. what a wretched casting off is this of the yoke of Christ and a desperate picking and choosing in his commands onely what is agreeing to their owne fancies Iâ— not this to breake his bonds asunder and cast his cords from them Psal 2.3 If we were commanded Is not the revealed will of Christ a command Is one part of the same verse a command see Luke 10.4 and not the other part Is
nakednesse The next exception is against our objecting Perf. Phar. p. 48. Christopher Atkinson his immodest familiarity with a woman of that way c. where Atkinson challengeth the proofe of it we shall onely say that that immodest familiarity if he will needs force us from our modest covering of that carriage to speak out it was his familiar Kissing of her as we are fully informed by the testimony of M. Walker and M. Wallas and we cannot but account it as a sinfull behaviour But to weaken the strength of this testimony Atkinson tells the Reader that M. Wallace said It was no murther in him to murther Christopher Atkinson and the rest of the prisoners at Kendale Truely we are afraid this whole generation of men are in a confederacy of lying we have purposely sent to finde out the truth of this foule challenge and shall give thee his clearing of himselfe word for word as we received it M. Wallace his vindication from Atkinsons lye HAving received a Paper from the Quakers that were prisoners containing horrible blasphemies viz. That they were the searchers of hearts and saying Let them be accursed from God for ever that will have Christ have any other Body but his Church I spoke these words and no more in the hearing of many viz. That I thought it was no murder in the civill Magistrate to put such blasphemers as they were to death it being according to the Law of God Reade Lev 24.10.16 Deut. 13. the vvhole chapter But that I ever said It was no murder in me to murder them or to put them to death I declare it to be a manifest lye Kendale Ian. 14. 1653. Iohn Wallace We whose names are subscribed did heare when M. Wallace spoke these words above written namely these which are inclosed within the parenthesis but no more Thomas Barket Miles Harrison Now let the Reader judge of what spirit these men are and as for the rayling which Atkinson powres out by reason of this testimony like a floud upon W. C. we his Brethren sâ—y we hope he hath learned that of Christ 2 Pet. 2.23 who when he was reviled reviled not againe when he suffered he threatned not but committed himselfe to him that judgeth righteously There is but one thing remains And that is the account we gave why we called our Booke the Perfect Pharisce which thou mayst reade in pages 49. 50. 51. and so conclude We therein prove from Scripture that that Title was most truely and properly applicable to them to which Nayler answers so exceeding weakely and raylingly that we are resolved not to reply one word thereto as having said enough before to that purpose to discover how weakely he struggles to evade the clearenesse of these Scriptures against himselfe and that way Reader thou wilt by this time see the falsenesse of what Nayler speaks in his word of conclusion to us five as if we had uttered many untruths and false reports taken up by heare say without any ground at all and divers things out of Books which we have on purpose wrested to slander with c. Thou wilt in this reply see the fullest evidence we thinke that can be given as to such cases and all these particulars that he excepts against made the more apparant unto all We professe before the Lord that it 〈◊〉 nothing we have against their persons that should any way leade us to wrest any of their writings to make them odious it is our onely zeale for the truth and Saints of the high God that hath carried out our spirits thus to expose our selves to the revilings of all this generation if by any meanes we might be serviceable to the Gospel and save our selves and them that heare us Thou wilt finde in the close of Naylers Booke two leaves put forth in the name of one who sayes his name in the Flesh is Iohn Andland t is such a perfect piece of bitternesse and rayling and no way in answer to our Booke that we leave it for waste Paper Thus having been carried on by the Everlasting Arme and drawne out by the cords of Love to our deare Lord Iesus his Ordinances and his Saints to beare witnesse to the true grace of God wherein we stand we shall sit downe in comfort and fly to him who is a refuge from the storme and a shadow from the beat when the blaâ—â—â—â— the terrible ones shall be as the storme against the Wall FINIS