Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	day_n	see_v	write_v	2,867	5	5.0971	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A87230	Innocency above impudency: or, The strength of righteousness exalted, above the Quakers weakness and wickedness; in a reply to a lying pamphlet, call'd Weakness above wickedness: published by J. Nayler, in answer to a book, entituled, The Quakers quaking. By which his notorious lyes are made manifest, and the truth of the said book justified: / by Jeremiah Ives.	Ives, Jeremiah, fl. 1653-1674.	1656 (1656)	Wing I1102; Thomason E886_2; ESTC R207339	35,836	59

thou answerest that which I never objected as my book at large will manifest You proceed in page 11. to answer my Quaeres and therein thou answerest to that I never asked For 1. I ask What need there is of the Scripture to declare the minde of God if it may be known without it every whit as well And you say I ask His 22. LYE What need there is of the Scriptures to declare the minde of God importing to the Reader as all may perceive both in the Question and Answer That I was a man that judged them needless But might he not as well have accused Paul for saying Preaching was vain when he he saith If there be no Resurrection THEN is our preaching vain as tell his Reader that I ask what need there is of Scripture when I said What need is there of Scripture to declare the minde of God if it may be known without it every whit as well as they pretend So that this fills up the measure of his Lyes Again I ask Whether by the Light which is in EVERY man ALL men may come to know a Virgin had a Son c. And you say I quaere Whether THAT Light will shew a Virgin had a Son which was not my quaere for I know that THAT Light which is Christ will shew this and all other Truths But what 's this to the question I ask viz. Whether this Light be in every man c. Which term EVERY MAN ALL NATIONS and THE WHOLE WORLD thou deceifully leavest out of most of my quaeres and so makes them speak another thing and then goest about to answer them as any one may see that reades my book and compares thy Answer to it and therefore let these instances suffice for the rest wherein the Reader may see thy deceit and also what-snuffling answers thou givest to the Twelve Quaeres viz. That all those things I quaere thou sayest and much more were made known by the Light within c. This is the substance of thy Answer But James how doth this answer the Quaeres which asketh thee Whether EVERY MAN hath a Light WITHIN him that will bring him to know that a Virgin had a Son and that Christ rose from the dead in three days c We believe That by a Light within these things were revealed to some men but that 's not our question but this viz. Whether there be in EVERY MAN a Light that will shew him these things proposed in the Quaeres page 19. And when I ask you What need there is of your preaching and writing to inform the world if the Light within the world can do it without you You answer in page 11. That there is need of preaching to direct people to the Light Oh miserable darkness what can the Light within without any other means direct people to the whole will of God and cannot this Light direct people to it self without you Is not this just as if a man should say That the light of the Sun will shew men every thing but it self You answer the fifth Error I charge which was That one John Lawson said The Day of Judgement was past already saying It may be seen whether he own it or no by them that reade the book And so it may if they reade but the 35 page of Sauls Errand to Damascus which is the book I cited for that purpose To the 6 and 7 Errors I charge which is against one George Fox for saying That he was the Eternal Judge of the World and the VVay the Truth and Life You answer That I prove this like the rest viz. as I did foamings at your Meetings because you did not deny it See page 12. of your answer To this I reply and that as I have said viz. That if any shall print to the world that they are charged with swellings foamings quakings and roarings and also that these things are found among them in little children and when they come to answer it shall onely deny to be guilty of one of these and say nothing to the rest may not a man rationally conclude these men guilty of all the rest especially considering it is testified by many witnesses who are better to be believed then themselves In like manner I still say That the Petitioners of Lancaster did witness this against Fox and he did not deny it viz. That he said he was the Eternal Judge of the VVorld and the VVay Truth and Life Now what clearer proof can be made of any thing among men then to witness what is charged and the person charged deny it not and yet James says this is no proof I pray if this must not go for proof how will you prove any thing to be true that one doth not see The eighth Error I charge is That George Fox said He that took a place of Scripture and made a Sermon of it or from it is a Conjurer This thou wouldst excuse by saying These were not Georges words but the Accusers Indeed this is like the rest But how dost thou know they were not Georges words Canst thou have the face to say that they are NOT his words when he though he prints the Charge and Answer to it doth not deny it himself Here thou exceedest Fox himself for impudency Nay doth not Fox answer in page 7. of Sauls Errand to Damascus that he that raiseth the Spirit out of the Letter is a Conjurer And how far doth this differ from the charge But however is it not more reasonable to believe the men that witness this against him seeing he denies it not then thee who wilt deny that for George which he denies not for himself The tenth Error I charge is upon George Fox for saying The Scriptures are carnal and thou tell'st me That this is a Lye But James how darest thou say it is a Lye when George himself in his printed answer to it would not tell the Petitioners that charged him with it They lyed but in stead thereof evades the charge by saying The Letter of the Scripture is carnall The eleventh Error I charge is upon one Leonard Fell which through the PRINTERS mistake is printed Hill and that was That he said Christ had no Body but his Church To this thou repliedst That thou doest not know that name and therefore thou makest no answer to the charge Herein thou wast glad to be ignorant else thou mightest have looked into the book and page I cited for the proof of it and easily have found it was the Printers mistake The eleventh Error I charge is against one John Lawson who said He had been in Hell but was now in Heaven Thou sayest It is plain the Saints have witnessed being in Hell and Heaven also VVhat jugling is here I charge him with saying HE had been in Hell but was now in Heaven and you tell us of the Saints of old that some of them had been in Heaven and Hell as Jonah was in

it and saith nothing to several Texts alledged and nine Questions proposed but that I brought crooked Consequences and no plain Text c. The next work is he saith TO PROVE RESPECT OF PERSONS which are none of my words And he saith His 28. LYE I pervert that Text in Lev. 19.32 because I reade it as Beza renders it Thou shalt honour the PERSON of the old man But why is this a perversion of the Text when I have as good reason to follow his translation as any But 2. is not that which is done to the face of a man done to his person be it honour or dishonour And 3. are not these terms FACE and PERSON convertible as Isa 3.15 where it is said that The FACE of the poor was grinded was not this the person of the poor And whereas you charge me with lying in saying you deny respect due to Parents Masters Husbands Wives c. I cannot but wonder at you for I did not say so in any place of my book I say you did deny respect to persons which I prove ought to be because I am commanded to honour my Father and Mother c. I brought this to prove we ought to honour some more then others and you say I charge you with denying honour to Father and Mother c. But sure James thy Conscience is very guilty at this turn or else thou wouldst never have said because I brought those Scriptures to prove what I laid down that therefore I said you were guilty But hadst thou done fairly thou shouldst have spoke to the Scriptures and Arguments alledged and have shewed us in what sense the unjust Judge was blameable in not reverencing man and many other Texts which may be seen in page 39 40. To all which thou sayest nothing but quarrell'st about that I never said You go on and say That I Lye because I say Not one in ten shall give the same answer to a question if it be ask'd them severally and this thou sayest is a lye because thou sayest I never proved ten of you therein But James this is as true as the rest for I have proved twenty of you herein and to make it appear I will meet thee at any time and ask thee a question appertaining to the things of God and not one of ten shall give the same answer with thee the question being asked apart if they do I will be content to be call'd a Lyer but not before You say the next thing I would prove is That Christ had two Bodies But James why couldst not thou as well lay down the Proposition in my words as thine own my words are That Christ had a Body besides his Church and to the Arguments and Texts alledged thou sayest nothing but tell'st us a few of your own Notions as That thou wilt not dispute with me but sayest It serveth thee to know he is thy head c. But why didst not thou answer my Arguments alledged to prove what I urged in the case You go on and say You do not deny Christ taking flesh c. James I did draw thy veil from before the face of the people which thou hadst cast upon them and made thee speak somewhat plainly at the Bull and Mouth and now thou wouldst fain speak somewhat to cover over thy vile sayings but to this I shall speak anon And as touching the next thing which is that one of them said Christ was but a figure This he saith is a Lye because of the PRINTERS Errata who put page 54 of Sauls Errand to Damascius in stead of page 8. in which page he hath the words I charge though he saith there is no such saying in the book for this very thing was objected against him and he answers That Christ in the flesh was a figure And whereas I shew you that you have affinity with Gnosticks Manichees and Familists c. you answer in page 24. that it is not worth answering a cunning shift indeed but if I should say so to your questions by and by you were well enough served You go on and tell me that I have perverted the Scriptures c. but hast not shewed one Text wherein unless it be that of Lev. 19. which I have already shewed to be no perverting of it He goes on and because I say in page 45 of my book that all that I have writ against you is either from your own Mouthes or Writings you say This is a Lye but James in the same page about the middle of it you might have found these words namely That the Errors I charge you with are either such as fell from your own Mouthes or else such as your selves being charged with could not deny Now put all this together and what untruth have I told for did you deny any of those things that I say you did not deny And though you say the men were bloody persecuting Priests c. that charged you the more shame for you that you should call your book an Answer to their Petition and withall print their Objections your selves pretending to answer them and when all comes to all never deny the charge in the particulars I mention but say somewhat else in stead thereof which is nothing to purpose as you have done by me as any may see that reades your Answer both to my book and the Westmerland Petition which is a thing I never saw any further then as your selves did transcribe and print it He now comes to the Postscript at the end of my book and saith that because some saw my murtherous minde they did write down what he said Though that which they have writ to cover thy Assertion was not spoken at that time as many can witness that came out with me whatever you spake after I was gone And though you seem to carry it by witness you must know That your Witnesses are Parties being of the same faith with thy self viz. That Christ was not born after the flesh and it doth behove them to make a cloak for thee lest thy deeds sayings should be made manifest But whatever they have said that matters not since you confess all that I charge which is That Christ was not born after the flesh And how have you answered the thing I charge in the Postscript which is That it is all one to be born after the flesh as it is to be born according to the flesh and though I prove it all one in the 52 53 pages of my book yet thou makest no kinde of answer which shews that thou hast pick'd up this Letter to keep thee from the lash of the Law because thou sayest Some saw I had a murtherous design or else thou wouldst have answered what I say in the Postscript but that you did fear the light You proceed and in page 26. say that I say The Scriptures make no such distinction as born after the flesh and after the Spirit His 29. LYE

by calling what I propose Crooked Consequences See if the man be not here at a Nonplus or else how could he have the face to intitle his book an Answer to mine when he first leaves out the first two pages of my book where I shew their jugling about their Name Quakers and that they have lyed in saying The world Nick-names them so and to this he saith nothing but That he shall not contend whether the world call them truly or falsly when they call them so Again I spend other two pages to prove that they do give such Titles to their Pamphlets as they will refuse to give to the Scriptures And this I prove by their own books as the Reader may perceive and to this he sayes not one word Again I do print the substance of two Conferences where he is so miserably Nonplus'd that he cannot tell what to say to them but onely tells his Reader that I do adde words that were never spoken and diminish Truth to make my self a cover with a Lye This is all that he saith touching the two Conferences contained in the 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 pages of my book as any one may see that reades the fifth page of his book and yet he hath got such a stock of impudence as to call his book an ANSWER to mine Again I propound twelve Quaeres in the 19 20 21 pages of my book And to these in stead of answering them he proposeth questions of his own for so I call them because he hath left out the most material terms of mine in his transcribing them by which they become his own questions and not mine and to these twelve Quaeres he saith as little as to the other Again the like answer he gives to the nine Quaeres in page 25 26 of my book and the sum of his answer is That they are crooked Consequences See page 14 of his book He now comes to answer the sixteenth Error I charge upon them which was that one of their Scribes did ask a Minister of the Nation Whether he had the Light that did inlighten every one that comes into the world when he had before told him That every one HAD that Light within him This I charge as a piece of inconsistency in these that would be counted perfect To which he replies That Christ did ask the disciples who they said he was and yet they had the Light within them that revealed him to be the Son of God But what 's this to the case in hand the case in hand is not whether a man may ask a question for the further confirmation of a thing that is in question as our Lord did his Disciples in a time when there was various opinions of him But whether after a man hath preached a thing that concerneth EVERY man whether it be not very ridiculous to ask the same man to whom he hath preached whether it concerns him Where doth Christ or any wise man ask such a question Again Christ demands this question of them that owned him what their opinion was of him but he asked the question of a man that disowned the Light to be in every one So that this being considered I demand Whether Christ ever asked a man that did disown him and his Light whether his Light was within them or no as this man hath done for he asked the question of one that was a Minister of the Nation whom they all say disown the Light of Christ He passeth over the second instance of their inconsistency and saith not a word to it I do suppose as he said at first that these were some things he would not TROUBLE himself with answering and indeed I think it would trouble him to answer them and therefore he cunningly lets them alone He comes to say something to the third in stance I bring of their inconsistency and that is that though they pretend to own the Scriptures yet one of them said to Parson Camelford of Staveley-Chappel That he might as well have burnt the Scriptures as his Quaeres He answers That it doth not prove all my false accusations cast upon them c. To this I reply That I have not spoke or writ any syllable of untruth concerning you and further it doth prove all that I charge against you about the case in hand and all that I do urge in the foregoing pages about your slighting the Scripture For for any one to say that a man might as well burn the Scriptures as his Quaeres doth not this prove that your design is to eat out the honour of the Scriptures and build up the honour of your contradictious stories And whereas in a Parenthesis you question if there was any such that said so Fie James do not I in p. 29. of my book cite those passages and tell thee That they are in a book call'd Truths Defence which is owned by you all and yet you question if there be any such Dost thou think that book did write it self and if not why shouldst thou question whether there be such a man as saith those words in his book for the words are there asserted as I have transcribed them But James thou wouldst willingly be ignorant of this story because it doth so much lay open your hypocrisie and double-dealing about the Scriptures And further is not this book bound up and owned by you among the rest of your Works and yet thou wouldst fain make the Reader believe that there was no man among you that published such a thing Thou passest over my fourth instance of your inconsistency and sayest not a word to it which would trouble thee too much to answer it and that is That one Tomlinson in his book call'd A word of Reproof p. 11. did blame the Ministers of the Nation for doing that they had no Rule for when they prayed before or after Sermon this book is also owned by you and bound up with the rest of your stories and yet Edward Boroughs did pray after Sermon before hundreds of people at the Bull and Mouth near Aldersgate To this inconsistency among themselves he says not a word but leaps over it He proceeds and saith The fifteenth Error I charge is a Lye which is That they study deceitful terms that look with two faces c. James it is not thy saying I Lye in charging you that proves it to be a Lye as any one may see in page 30 of my book And for all thou sayest A man may affirm a Negative yet that will not serve thy turn for that is not the question but Whether a man being charged with speaking a thing that is Negative for that 's the case doth not equivocate in saying He spake no such Affirmative He comes now to answer the eighteenth Error I charge and that is Their Lying First in saying They are perfect and sin not This he saith is a Lye of mine own and shall rest upon my head till

face did I ever say any such thing nay do not I say Page 34. the writings may be burned but the Word of God contained in them cannot And That the Tables might be broken but the Commands contained in them did remain like Mount Sion c. And yet this man hath the Impudence to tell his Reader that I say I would prove the writings of the Scripture to be the Word of God But at this turn the Devil makes him speak nonsence as well as falsities for is it not non-sence to say the writings of the Scriptures What is that but in plain English to say the writings of the writings which is absurd and therefore the more like the Author that devised it for my words are these that the written precepts and promises of God together with his threatnings of Judgements and exhortations to amendment of life they are and ought to be called the Words of God and this I have used arguments to prove to which he says little His next Lye is that he saith in Page 14. His 26. LYE of his Book that I would prove that the letter of that roll is the Word of God which Baruch read VVhen there is no such passage in my whole book and having thus set up a man of straw he valiantly goes to fight with him and saith that Baruchs roll might be burned but the VVord of God cannot See if this man hath not belyed me in his letters that will thus bolye me about things that are published in print charging that to be in my book which is not in it and then go about to confute it for I say nothing of Baruch but the very words of the text Jer. 36.2 5. He proceeds in Page 20. and calls the next proof of mine AS CONFUSED AS THE REST because I charge them to deny the Scriptures to be the Word and yet say I will prove the Scriptures to be the Word of God out of their own mouths But what confusion is this doth not Christ prove God to be just and judge the unprofitable Servant out of his own mouth And yet the unprofitable Servant said God was not just for he said that he did reap where he sowed not so may I judge you out of your own mouths that deny the Scriptures to be the word who at some turns to save your credit own them and because I prove from your own words as doth appear by my Book page 35. that the Scriptures must be call'd Gods Word because you say nothing can declare Gods VVill but Gods VVord you from hence would prove that Balaams Ass was Gods VVord because he declared Gods VVill and this you would fasten as an absurdity upon me which is an Argument that I raised upon your own principles and therefore the absurdity lights upon your own head who say nothing can inform into the Will of God but the Word and yet at another time say the Scriptures declare Gods VVill but are not his VVord You go on still in Page 20. of your book and say That I confess Christ is the light that lightens every man that comes into the World and yet say it is an error for you to say that THIS light will teach people to worship God rightly Now James when did I count it an error in you to say that the light of Christ is sufficient to teach people to worship God rightly this is another of thy lyes Indeed I have often said that every man hath not the light of Christ in him and that that light which every man hath is not sufficient to teach him to worship God rightly but did I ever say the light of Christ was not sufficient Do I not say the contrary viz that the light of Christ is sufficient Page 36. of my book Thou goest on glorying in lyes and sayest Page 21. of thy Book that I do apply that text of Gods purging Israel Ezek. 24.14 to the light of Christ to prove it was not sufficient See thy false tongue when I do bring those words to parallel with Joh. 1. to prove That that Light is sufficient to inlighten all though all have not this Light within them See my book page 36. You go on and call this The next piece of my divination because I say that if every man have received the Light then every man hath received Christ c. All thou sayest to take off the edge of the Argument is That because Christ is that Light I would make that Light Christ And James what hast thou said to the contrary for is it not the same Christ is THE Son of God Ergo THE Son of God is Christ and how canst thou deny this And yet the like Argument to this thou callest Divination You answer the Scripture I bring Joh. 11.10 where it is said He that walks in the dark stumbleth because there is NO LIGHT IN HIM by telling us There is no Light in his WAY For shame man leave off thy adding to Scriptures Dost not thou adde to the words of the book doth not the Text say There is no light in him and thou sayest There is no light in his WAY But may not a man as well interpret Joh. 1. and say That when the Text saith He lightens every one that comes into the world that it is to be understood of his lightning the worlds way and not as you notion it That every one hath this Light in him This is the man that would have nothing proved by Consequences and yet when we have a plain Text for what we say viz. That they that walk in the dark stumble because there is no Light in them he shuffles it off by telling us He hath no Light in his way So that James it seems we must believe thy conceited Consequences by which thou wouldst prove every man hath the Light within him spoken of in Joh. 1. and not the plain Text that saith He that is in the dark hath no light in him You come to the next thing and that is that I say The day of Judgement is not past This thou seemest to own to be a truth by bidding me prepare for it c. But if with Lawson thou didst not believe it past thou wouldst never tell those untruths as I have made appear thou hast told in thy book For didst thou believe Judgement to come thou wouldst tremble after another manner then ever thou hast done in Quaking Delusions and fear to lye at this rate You go on still in page 22. and touching what I have asserted about Baptism and the Lords Supper in page 38 39 of my book you say You have spoken somewhat already and that must stand till it be disproved I see a short Answer serves your turn or else you might have told us where we might have found it that so it might be disproved but though thou didst finde something proposed by me about baptism thou leapest over it as though thou wast afraid to look on

sometimes lay down such sayings that are to be understood chiefly and eminently and not exclusively as Labour NOT for the meat that perisheth doth this therefore prove that believers are not to labour for earthly bread at all but eat the bread of idleness as you do in like manner is this saying of Pauls to be understood who though he was not chiefly and eminently sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel yet he also did baptize as the same place 2 Cor. 1.14 16. doth declare Now if Paul did baptize it was either in the Name of God and Christ or his own Name but it was not in his own Name for this he denies ver 13. when he saith Either were you baptized in the Name of Paul Well then if he did baptize in the Name of Christ then I quaere Whether it be not great wickedness to do a thing in the Name of God or Christ that Christ never commanded and therefore I say Pauls saying he was not sent to baptize doth not prove that therefore John was decreasing if by decreasing you mean that the things that John was a Preacher of should decrease for John was a Preacher of Repentance as well as Water-baptism And may you not as well say That he decreased in one thing as well as another And to the last branch of the quaere I say That in the sense Paul was a Minister of Christ and was not sent to baptize a man may be a Minister of Christ now But did you ever finde a Minister of Christ in all the New Testament that did not baptize at all or that said as you do That Baptism with water is not Gods Command 15 Quest Your next question is seeing the last of Matthew is your strength for Water-baptism I ask Whether one may not be baptized into the Name of Father Son Holy Ghost without being dipt in carnal water also whether all you dip in water you baptize into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if the first of these be Yea and the later No then I conclude that carnal dipping is not the thing Answ As for thy word carnal water it is a word of thy own and therefore I have nothing to say to it But as touching the rest of the question I say That the former is Nay and the latter Yea to use your own phrases for none were ever baptized into the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost that were not baptized with water and do thou prove it if thou canst without a crooked Consequence and I will believe all you say and the latter is Yea for we do not baptize any but we do it in the Name of Father Son and holy Ghost 16 Quest Doth every one that reades the Bible hear the Word of God or hath every one the Word that hath a Bible and what difference is there between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time BOTH denying the Faith which is the gift of God and will that save now more without the ministration of the Spirit then in their dayes Answ First every one that reads the Bible READS the VVord though it is true that many can reade that do not hear Again 2. every one that hath the Bible hath the VVord if by VVord you mean the written Commands of God and his Promises to them that obey and his Threatnings to them that obey not And whereas you ask me what difference is between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time since both denied the Faith which is the gift of God c. I wonder at thy ignorance James doth not Paul say 2 Cor. 3.7 that the ministration written with Letters was glorious and was not that to the Jews in the Jews time and yet thou hast the face to say That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time did deny the Faith of God and so thou sayest now But where hast thou a text for this that proves the ministration of the letter to deny the Faith of God at any time is not this one of thy brain-sick Notions And whereas you ask if it would save now without the Spirit more then in their dayes I say That question is needless for neither then nor now can men be saved without Gods Spirit But what 's this to thy purpose who saith That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time and now do both deny the Light and Faith which is the gift of God For shame man leave off thy talking of God without thou couldst speak more to purpose and less to his dishonour 17 Quest VVhether that righteousness that a man reades in the letter sets him to do the like without Faith which is the gift of God or the leadings of the Light of Christ the ministration of the Spirit be the righteousness of Faith or Self-righteousness Answ The letter no where sets men to do the righteousness which it calls for without the Faith of God and Christ 2. To the latter part of your question I answer That the righteousness of Faith which men have by the Light of Christ and the ministration of the Spirit is not self-righteousness Thus have I plainly and faithfully transcribed thy questions and answered them which in reason thou couldst not expect since thou hast left mine unanswered And were it not but that thou wouldst have been wise in thy own conceit I should scarce have taken the pains and if thou shouldst joy in the strength of thy Quaeres know That the joy of the hypocrite will be but for a moment till my Answer can overtake them Postscript READER SOme passages thou hast for which there is but his Yea and my Nay and therefore that you may know on which side the truth lieth examine my former book and his Answer and see if that he hath not accused that book of many things that were neither in the book nor the Authors heart and by that thou wilt perceive that he that will not stick to belye me in a matter so publickly made known as my book is will not matter to do the like and worse concerning what I spake more private And also compare this Reply with his Answer and see if I have falsly related or perverted any saying in his book but have faithfully and impartially transcribed them and see if I have omitted replying to any thing that is of weight or indeed to the lightest thing that doth but look like an Argument and see also if he hath not left out many Arguments and many Pages to which he saith nothing and whether he hath not added to and taken from most things that he mentions of my book and then attempts to answer it And whereas he would excuse his Error of denying Christ born after the flesh by saying That that which is born after the flesh is flesh and that which is born after the Spirit is Spirit Whether by the rule of Contraries it doth not undeniably follow That that which is NOT born after the flesh is not flesh and then what doth he less then deny Christ to be made flesh by the perverting those Scriptures Joh. 3. and Gal. 4. whatever he saith to the contrary Consider and weigh things aright and the Lord give you understanding in all things VALE Reader thou art desired to correct these two mistakes and all others thou meetest with of this or any other kinde Page 30. lin 21. for fifteenth reade seventeenth p. 35. l. 14. for page 14. reade page 19. FINIS REader These may certifie That Jer Ives did not utter any such thing as James Nayler falsly charges upon him viz. As that all good was not of God neither did he deny Faith and obedience to be Gods gift but in the sense mentioned in this Reply Neither did he say any of those things as That the Wilderness where John baptized was in Jerusalem c. And we do further certifie That the account he hath given of that Conference at Gerard Roberts in this Reply to James Nayler is true we being there all the time and heard none of those things save what Jer Ives hath here acknowledged and given an Account of in this his Answer to that lying Letter Witness our Hands John Fry Rich. Cleiveland William Nash REader Whereas James Nayler denies that ever he knew of the fetching the last Letter mentioned in this book which Letter was to prove he had writ some things that was false concerning Jer Ives Now these may certifie That it was publickly declared to his face That the Letter should be fetch'd for to prove him a Lyer and accordingly it was and when the Letter came he was gone though it was told him If he would stay the Letter should be produced to prove his false speaking though in his book he denies he knew of the fetching of it Witness my Hand this 21 of July 1656. John Fry