greater but indeed it hath none at all against three distinct Persons for there is a plain Distinction of a Medium in created Beings betwixt Substance and Nothing the three Dimensions of a Body Length Breadth and Depth are neither three Nothings nor three Substances the Understanding Will and Locomotive Power of Man's Soul are neither three Nothings nor three Substances and yet they are but one Soul though all Creaturely Similitudes are improper to express this Mystery Beside how could a Manifestation become Flesh or take Man's Nature as the Son did And how could one Manifestation send another or beget another or a third Manifestation proceed from two other Manifestations But whereas Jos VVyeth saith in his Switch p. 184. VVe own their Distinction in all the Instances of it recorded in Holy VVrit In contradiction to this hear F. Hougil in his Collection p. 251. he calls it damnable Doctrine to say That Christ must be distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost Before in God and now from God their Quibble about separate doth not help them for some that have so called them have declared they meant nothing by separate but distinct and now if Jos VVyeth and G. VV. will have distinct to signifie separate seeing they pretend to own the Distinction of the Father and the Son they must own the Separation And whereas the Teachers among the Quakers profess they are not changed in any thing of Doctrine or Practice from what they were from the Beginning for Truth is one say they and changes not and as God is one and Truth is one and changeth not so his People are one Now let us compare the Doctrine of G. VVhitehead what it was in the Year 1659. when he writ his Truth defending the Quakers which he said was written from the Spirit of Truth concerning the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity and what it was in the Year 1697 when he wrote his Antidote against the Venome of the Snake In his Truth defending c. printed 1659. in p. 2. he saith VVhat the Scripture saith of the Godhead the Father the VVord and the Spirit which are one 1 Joh. 5. 7. we own but deny the Popish Term of three distinct Persons which you call God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost which tends to the dividing God and to the making three Gods Note here he not only denies the three Persons but the Orthodox and Scriptural Explanation of them of God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost And thou who hast vindicated such a Dream could never prove it by the Scripture when thou wast put upon it And do not you Priests in your Divinity as you call it affirm that a Person is a single rational compleat Substance and differing from another by an incommunicable Property And art thou so blind as to think that there is such a Difference in the Godhead Seeing Christ is equal with his Father who is a Spirit then what incommunicable Property can he differ in from the Father that is not communicable to the one as well as the other Here we see he not only opposes the Terms Three Persons but the Distinction of the Three their incommunicable Properties which are these That the Father begot the Son from everlasting the Son was begot of the Father from everlasting and the Holy Ghost did proceed both from the Father and the Son from everlasting and surely the Father's Property is incommunicable to the Son and so is the Son 's to the Father and the Holy Ghost's Property to both for it cannot be said that the Son begot the Father or that the Son is the Father c. or that the Holy Ghost is either the Father or the Son But now let us hear his late Doctrine in his printed Antidote 1697. p. 139. Though 't is true saith he in one Sense the Father Son and Holy Ghost are not essentially distinct as to their divine Being which is but one they are but one God but in respect to their Properties of Relation as Father Son and Holy Ghost as such they are distinct but not divided nor separate either in themselves or VVork of the old or new Creation First G. VV. should tell us where doth he find in Scripture in express Terms that they are distinct in respect to their Properties of Relation Secondly Whether these Properties of Relation are communicable or incommunicable Properties Surely he must say incommunicable and that he did in his Book Truth defending expresly deny For if he should say these Properties are communicable such as God's absolute Properties are as holy wise good c. then the Son might beget and the Father might be begotten And lastly Seeing he now owns a Distinction of Properties of Relation though in unscripture Terms he must by good consequence own three Persons to be the Subjects of those Properties for no Properties or Predicates or Attributes can be without their proper Subjects for though it is the Father's Property to have begot the Son from everlasting yet the Father is not a Property but the Person or Subject that has that Property Thus we see how Proteus-like G. VV. has changed his Shapes in the Years 1659. and 1697. and yet there is no Shadow of Change in him for all this if we will believe him But further by some of his late Books we shall find him not only owning the Distinction of the three in respect to their Properties of Relation but advanced much nearer so far as to disown his former Opposition to the Terms Three Persons which in his Book called Ishmael that was his jointly with others he had charged his Opponent to have conjured out of one and told him that both they and he are shut up in perpetual Darkness for the Lake and this he doth in two several Books one printed in the Year 1690. called The Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers where he sets down the Words quoted out of his Ishmael more largely the other called Truth and Innocency printed this very Year 1699. where he leaves out the most offensive Words and puts an c. in their room as being I supose ashamed of them and well he might but he is not ashamed to affirm he is not changed in his Faith But let us hear how he excuseth what he writ in his Ishmael that was printed in the Year 1655. Truth and Inn. p. 51. Though his Name is at the Book yet he positively disowns the Words and affirms They are none of his and that he writ not that Part of the Answer to Townsend And in his Book called The Christianity c. above mentioned he saith He looks on the Words as wrong writ or wrong printed and that he raced them out or corrected them long since where he has met with that Answer But is not this a Piece of dull Sophistry to save the Credit of his Infallibility Had he not better more like a Man and a Christian
written Lines of the Prophets are called the Word of the Lord and Joh. 15. 25. there we find the Word written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the written Word which was a short Sentence written in one of the Psalms but G. F. denyeth them to be the written Word G. M. p. 68 319. When Paul bid Timothy preach the Word it cannot be justly thought that he would have him only preach the inward Word or the essential Word or Light within but by the Word he meant the whole Doctrine of the Gospel The Quakers but trifle when they argue the Scriptures are Words and it is a Lye to call Words the Word which is not a Lye but a common Speech used by themselves who call an Epistle a Letter that yet contains many Letters And they do no less trifle when they argue to say the Scripture is the Word is to say the Scripture is Christ as if the Name Word did only belong to Christ whereas the Name Word as well as the Name Light is given both to Christ and other things Christ said to the Disciples Ye are the Light of the World and so said Christ of himself doth it therefore follow that they were Christ They say they call the Scriptures what they call themselves A Treatise but not the Word quoting Acts 1. the former Treatise but in the Greek it is Word the same in Joh. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the former Word where it is plain he calls all the Words written in the Gospel according to St. Luke the Word as each Oration in Isocrates or Demosthenes is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Word Proofs that the Scriptures are not the Rule but the Spirit or Light within as is common to all Mankind G. F. G. M. p. 39 120. and in his G. M. p. 302. he saith The Spirit is the Rule that leads into all Truth so saith Christ Note Here he belyes and wrongs Christ's Words Christ did not say the Spirit is the Rule the Spirit is the Leader who leads us into all Truth by the Line or Rule of the holy Scriptures we not having those extraordinary Leading that the Apostles had Nor is this a meer Strife of Words but a most necessary Controversie which is the Foundation of their Deism and their overthrowing Christiany and yet this very Year they have reprinted W. P's Discourse concerning the general Rule of Faith and Practice who brings fourteen Arguments to prove that the Scriptures are not the general Rule of Faith and Practice to which I have answered in my late Book in Print called The Deism of W. P. c. Three of which Arguments of his are 1. From their Imperfection Switch pag. 46. 2. Their Uncertainty 3. Their Obscurity Yea Jos Wyeth in his Switch chargeth the Scriptures with Vncertainty This is a most dangerous Heresie for by this Principle they are not obliged to believe one intire Doctrine in the Apostles Creed as indeed I could easily prove by their Principles they do not believe one intire Article in that called The Apostles Creed G. F. G. M. saith The Apostle doth not tell us of a Creed but the Pope's Canon Book p. 355. yet the Quakers now say they believe that called The Apostles Creed For seeing by denying the Scriptures to be either the Medium or Rule of their Faith what account can they give for their Faith to believe one peculiar Article of Christianity If they say they have a peculiar Inspiration from the Light within to believe these peculiar Doctrines this in the first place throws down the common Illumination from being the universal Rule for common and peculiar are differing things But next It is a meer Fiction if they should say they have such a peculiar Inspiration without Scripture viz. to believe that Christ was born of a Virgin died for our Sins rose again the third Day W. P. grants the Light within doth not reveal these things to them nor is it needful and he grants the Scriptures are an historical Rule but he will not allow that the Belief of the History of Christ's Birth Death c. is necessary to our Salvation It is none of the absolute Necessaries he saith But they have not only denied the Scriptures to be the Word the Rule the external Medium of Faith but have given them Names of Contempt particularly G. F. who has called them earthly and carnal Death Ink and Paper Dust and Serpents Meat G. F's Truth 's Defence p. 14 102. See several Papers given forth c. p. 45 46. So Dust is the Serpents Meat their Original is but Dust which is but the Letter which is Death so these Serpents feed upon Dust which feed upon all these carnal things and their Gospel is Dust Matthew Mark Luke and John which is the Letter The cursed Serpent is in the Letter R. Hub's Words Truth 's Def. p. 102. Is not this to fright People from reading the Letter to tell them the cursed Serpent i. e. the Devil is in it Their common Defence is that G. F. meant all this of the Ink and Paper but none of all whom he calls Serpents that is the Protestant Churches did ever say that the Ink and Paper was the Gospel they meant the Doctrines and Truths declared by what is writ or printed with Ink on Paper As for the Switch Quotations out of G. M. to prove that some of his Opponents had said The Scripture is God yea the Letter of the Scripture is God Switch p. 15. and for Proof of this he quotes G. Fox G. M. p. 261. who affirmed that one Roger Atkinson affirmed That the Scripture is God but had this been so will that justifie G. F. â—his giving them such opprobrious Names if one or two Particulars did run into one Extream Will this justifie G. F. his running into the other Extream The bending a crooked Plant the contrary way will not serve his turn in this case But that G. Fox his Evidence is not to be trusted in his quoting his Opponents I shall clearly prove G. F. in his Great Mystery p. 247. quotes C. Wade for the same Trespass that he quotes Roger Atkinson for namely that Christopher Wade should affirm That the Scripture Letter was God and Christ for this he quotes his Book called Quakery Slain but no such Passage is to be found in all that Book and C. Wade in another Book of his entituled To all those called Quakers he charges G. F. with a Hellish Lye and Slander for affirming that he called the Letter God and Christ see this last Book of C. Wade p. 7. and compare it with his Quakery slain p. 16. and his Words in that p. 16. being That the Letter of the New Testament or Gospel containeth in it the mediate inspired teaching written VVord of Christ the VVord that was and is God which saith C. VVade is flat contrary to thy Lye And in his last cited Book the said C.
VVade mentions no less than twelve particular Lyes wherewith G. F. had belyed him in matter of fact as to his Quotations all which I have considered and so may others if they have the Books and will find them indeed to be abusive Perversions and Lies of G. F. upon this C. VVade but I shall give only two Instances more that out of the Mouth of two or three Witnesses that is plain matter of fact G. F. is guilty of false Quotations and belying the Innocent and yet these impudent Men will defend his Infallibility one of them is that G. F. in his G. M. p. 246. chargeth C. VVade to say O Luciferian Pride to save Souls to this C. VVade fully and effectually answereth and plainly detects the Lie and Perversion in his second Book where he shews out of the seventh and eighth Page of his Quakery slain that his Words were His crying out against James Milner ' s Luciferian Pride to save Souls as Christ did C. Wade's second Book p. 4. because he pretended himself to be Christ and audaciously took upon him to save Souls as Christ did by his suffering Death and hereupon James Milner did in a juggling manner die and in a juggling inchanting manner with a Knife and a Bason he pretended his Blood was shed to save the Souls of two VVomen this manner of saving Souls only C. Wade blames which G. F. either justifies or renders himself a Lyer by blaming C. Wade See the Places themselves The other Lye and Slander which G. F. is guilty of against C. Wade is that in his G. M. p. 247. he makes C. Wade to say God limits the Supreme Holy One by the inspired Writings of the Apostles but C. Wade's Words were That the Devil limits the Supreme Holy One see C. Wade's second Book p. 5. compared with p. 13. of Quakery slain Note If either the Switch or G. Whitehead could prove the like Perversions and Lies against the Author of the Snake as C. Wade hath here proved against G. F. how would they have sentenced him as indeed they have for things of small moment in comparison of what is here justly proved against their infallible Apostle as they pretend he was G. F But I do not know one Quotation of the Author of the Snake out of their Books wherein he hath in a substantial matter wronged him as G. F. here hath wronged C. Wade not only in these three but many more There yet remains two Quotations out of G. W's own Book called Truth defending the Quakers which he most fallaciously and sophistically endeavours to justifie The Question being put Whether the Quakers did esteem their Speakings to be of as great Authority as any Chapter in the Bible Truth and Inn. p. 16. 'T is answered That which is spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and greater This same Quotation is objected in a late printed Sheet called An Account from Colchester where the following Words are set down that G. W. blames the Norfolk Priests for leaving out which he calls the annexed explanatory Words and they are these As Christ's VVords were of greater Authority when he spoke than the Pharises reading the Letter and they in whom that Spirit speaks not are out of the Authority of the Scriptures and their speaking we deny But first These Words are not explanatory but a sophistical Argument to prove the former Assertion for G. VV. argues That because Christ's preaching was of greater Authority than the Pharisees reading the Scriptures that therefore what the Spirit speaks in the Quakers and by them is of greater Authority than the Scriptures which is both a false and foolish Consequence for it supposes that the Spirit of God speaks in the Quakers when they preach or speak in Meetings as it did in Christ and in the Apostles viz. by the same divine Inspiration in kind and manner immediately and infallibly which cannot be granted and the Falsehood of it appears by the many false things that they speak and write contrary to the Scriptures And though he mentions not Quakers yet that he does understand them and none else is clear from his own Words He saith They in whom that Spirit speaks not their speaking we deny This supposeth he grants that the Spirit spoke in some which they did not deny and who were these but the Ministers among the Quakers seeing they deny the Ministry of all others in our Days Next he has an impertinent Question as to the Division of Chapters and Verses Can these Men say that was done by Divine Authority But this is wholly from the purpose Another Evasion is That the Spirit of Truth immediately ministring in Man or by any spiritual Minister is of greater Authority Power or Efficacy than the Chapters are simply considered as without the Spirit But simply considered as without the Spirit is wholly remote from the Question and is no ways to be allowed for any true Vindication because the Spirit doth as truly and frequently accompany the Scriptures when read as when preached or whatever is preached by the Spirit 's Assistance if the Hearers in reading be as sincere as the Hearers in preaching But if the Hearers be careless suppose Men preach by the Spirit it doth not follow that carnal and careless Hearers hear by the Spirit more than that they read or hear what is read by the Spirit But if he will needs have the Words simply and abstractly considered without the Spirit be added to reading let them by the like reason be added to preaching what he adds of Christ and the Apostles living and powerful preaching being of greater Efficacy Power and Authority than the outward Writing or Scripture it self simply or abstractly considered as distinct from the Spirit As it was no Part of the Question nor Answer given by him in Truth 's Defence so it is altogether impertinent But he equivocates upon the Word Authority taking it for the effect it hath on the Hearers but that was not the Sense of the Word Authority in the Question asked but its Sense as it 's generally among all that treat of Scripture Authority above other Writings so taken the Obligation or Right that doth oblige or induce us to believe the Truth of them and that they are of divine Inspiration This is quite another thing than the Effect or Impression that Men feel in reading or hearing them read as well as when preached upon by way of expounding for whether the Effect or Influence and Impression be great or little as it is sometimes great and sometimes little and sometimes perhaps none upon hardned Hearts yet their Authority is still the same neither greater nor less at one time than another The other Quotation is taken out of his Truth defending and is objected against in that called An Account from Colchester to which a pretended Answer is given in that called Some Account from Colchester signed
acknowledged his Error than to lay the Fault upon as wrong writ or wrong printed And if he corrected them long since how comes it that he never published his Correction in any of the Books he has published since betwixt the Year 1655. and 1690. containing the space of 36. Years But for evidence against him that he hath not sincerely said That he writ not that Part of the Book it is enough that he owned it and this I can prove that without Exception he owned it to be his jointly with these others who signed it with him as appears from his Truth defending the Quakers p. 1. printed four Years after the Ishmael And he belches out the like antichristian and profane Expressions against the three Persons in the Godhead in Terms equivalent to those in the Ishmael He saith in his first Page in Answer to the first Question Do not you repent for your endeavouring vainly to defend August 29. 1659. in so great a Congregation these Positions printed in a Book writ by George Whitehead He answers for himself and his Brethren thus The Positions we defended are according to the Scriptures of Truth and them we need not repent of These were they contained in that very Book called Ishmael as doth appear out of the Book Ishmael it self here the Book was produced one of which Positions were in asserting the Scriptures or Writing not to be the Word Another was That there is no such Word in the Scriptures as Three Persons in the Trinity but it is a Popish Doctrine as the Mass or common-prayer-Common-Prayer-Book mentions it Fourthly And thou that affirms three distinct Persons in the Godhead art a Dreamer and he that dreams and tells Lies contrary to the Scriptures of Truth which we own he with his Imaginations and Dreams is for the Lake Here it is plain that by his Imaginations and Dreams G.W. meant the Ministers Doctrines of calling the Scriptures the Word and affirming that there are three Persons in the Godhead so whereas he said in his Ishmael Townsend and the three Persons are shut up in perpetual Doctrines Here in Truth defending c. he saith He with his Imaginations and Dreams that is the three Persons is for the Lake Now this is not one whit more sober than his Words in the Ishmael how then is it that G. Whitehead has not found some shift to put this part of his Truth defending upon another Again in his Truth defending c. p. 25. he plainly owns that Book called Ishmael to be his four Years after it was printed and now though in his Truth defending c. he saith That he and his Brethren need not repent of the Positions laid down in that called Ishmael yet now in the Year 1690. in his Christianity he saith He was sorry his Name was to that Paper and yet as before is mentioned in Truth defending p. 1. he saith They need not repent of it Is not this a plain Change in G. W. He need not repent of what was writ and yet was sorry that it was writ Formerly he owned that Book in the Year 1659 and in the Year 1690 He writ not that Part and was sorry it was writ and all this without any Change in his Mind But when People are sorry for what they do we commonly reckon they repent of it This offensive Passage objected against G. Whitehead out of his Ishmael was objected against him by Christopher Wade in his Quakery slain p. 9. printed in 1657. And though G. W. printed against C. Wade in his Truth defending 1659. yet he then took no notice of that Passage to disown it to be his But how is it that G. W. disowns what was written in the Book called Ishmael against the three Persons Doth he now own the three Persons not to be Popish as he formerly charged them Truth def p. 2 Though he has not in the least retracted his abusive and reviling Speeches against this glorious Truth both in the Ishmael and in his Truth defending c. for that would reflect upon his Infallibility yet he would seem now to own the Doctrine of the three Persons since the Act for Toleration came forth for that Act of Toleration does except those who deny in their preaching or writing the Doctrine of the blessed Trinity as it is declared in the Articles of Religion viz. the 39 Articles But that G. W. may have the Benefit of the Act which at present he has not by Law whatever he has by Indulgence he ought also to disown some other abusive Expressions of his and sophistical Arguings he has used in his other Books as particularly not only in his Truth defending c. above mentioned but in his Divinity of Christ signed by the two Letters G. W. see p. 18. he hath these Words As to T. D ' s telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the Creation of his Body and Soul the Parts of that Nature be subsisted in c. To this I say saith G. W. if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both created doth not this render him a fourth Person And as nonsensical and abusive is the reasoning of G. Fox their great Apostle in the Epistle prefixed to the Divinity signed by him and John Stubbs where in the 9th Page of that Epistle they thus argue And he speaks again in his 14th Page of three distinct Persons are one with the Godhead Now Reader is not here four to wit three Persons and the Godhead And thus G. F. and G. W. make no less by their wild and nonsensical Reasonings than five Persons in the Godhead an Absurdity they would fix on the Doctrine of three Persons for by their Arguments the Godhead is the fourth Person and Christ's created Soul and Body is the fifth Do not these Passages require a Retractation and will they say they are Protestants and one with the Church of England in Matter of Doctrine and in the common Principles of Christianity and yet boldly stand in the Defence of those abusive Passages But whereas they argue ad hominem that there must be five Persons if Father Son and Holy Ghost be said to be three Persons seeing G. W. calls them three Witnesses by their nonsensical Argument there must be five Witnesses that bear Record in Heaven viz. the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and the Godhead these are four and the created Soul and Body of Christ that is the fifth But G.W. has a way to evade this last by denying that Christ has any created Soul or Body as in the Words in p. 18. above mentioned doth appear for which I shall have some use hereafter Jos Wyeth in his Switch p. 184. would make his Readers believe It 's only the Word Person they object against as too gross We cannot saith he but think the VVord Person too gross to express them But to detect this Fallacy pray let us take notice that G. F. whom he calls an Apostle has expresly
George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL 1699. WE whose Names are under written having at Mr. Keith's Request and by the Allowance of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London carefully examin'd the Quotations of this Narrative do testifie the Faithfulness of them and that they exactly agree with the Books out of which they are taken And as we commend his Integrity in retracting publickly his Errors and his Christian Zeal for the reducing of his Brethren who are yet entangled with them so we hope they will follow his Example and discern the Perniciousness of their Ways and be led by the Grace of God to the Acknowledgment of the Truth and to the Communion of the Church Z. Isham D. D. Rector of St. Botolph Bishops-gate W. Bedford D. D. Rector of St. George Botolph-Lane R. Altham B. D. Rector of St. Andrew Vndershaft Will. Whitfield Rector of St. Martins at Ludgate J. Adams Rector of St. Alban Woodstreet George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL Divided into Three Parts Detecting the Quakers Gross Errors Vile Heresies and Antichristian Principles oppugning the Fundamentals of Christianity by clear and evident Proofs in above Two Hundred and Fifty Quotations faithfully taken out of their Books and read at three several Meetings the 11th the 18th and 23d of Jan. 1699. before a great Auditory of Judicious Persons Ministers and others More particularly discovering the Fallacious and Sophistical Defences of George Whitehead Joseph Wyeth and seven Quakers of Colchester in their late Books on all the several Heads contained in the printed Advertisement To which is prefix'd The Attestation of five Ministers of the Church of England to the Truth of the said Quotations And a POSTCRIPT By GEORGE KEITH LONDON Printed for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1700. Advertisement THIS is to signifie that it is my purpose God-willing and by his Assistance to be present at Turners-Hall in Philpot-Lane by Fanchurch-Street in London being our ordinary Meeting-place Licensed by Authority on the Eleventh Day of the Eleventh Month called January in the Forenoon there to detect and discover Gross Errors and Anti-christian Principles plainly repugnant to the Fundamentals of Christianity in the Books of the approved Authors and Writers of the People called Quakers by ocular Inspection presenting them in fair and full Quotations to as many as are willing to be present and make Inspection into them And also to lay open the great Fallacy and Sophistry of George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and some of their Brethren at Colchester which they have used in their late printed Defences of their Own and their Brethrens most Erronious Passages contained in their Books in order to Cloak and Hide their Antichristian Principles and vile Errors not only to the great Scandal of all true Protestants in this Nation of whom they pretend to be the more refined Part but of all true Christians any where And I do hereby desire George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and their Brethren of the Second Days Meeting at London who have approved their late Books to be present at the said Meeting for which I have Permission by Civil Authority or any others who think themselves concerned at the Time and Place above-mentioned to hear and see out of their own Books their Errors and Fallacies detected who if they have any thing to offer in their own or Brethrens Defence shall be fairly heard The particular Errors that I intend God-willing to discover them guilty of out of their Books and Authors are Concerning their Pretences to Infallibility and sinless Perfection Concerning the Scriptures Concerning the Holy Trinity Concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul and Body and Blood his coming to Judgment at the Last Day Concerning Justification Concerning the Soul Concerning the Light within Concerning the Resurrection Concerning the outward Baptism and the Supper Concerning doing servile Work on the First Day George Keith London 18th 10th Month 1699-1700 A few Words of PREFACE TO THE IMPARTIAL READERS IMpartial Readers I have these few things to acquaint you with and recommend to your Consideration First that I found just and necessary Cause to recite diverse former Quotations given in my former Narratives and in other Books formerly publish'd against the Quakers Errors to detect the fallacious and sophistical Defences that they have made in their late Books in Vindication of those Quotations to cover their vile Errors Secondly Beside the former Quotations above mentioned I have brought many new Quotations which are neither in my former Narratives nor in any other Books that hitherto have been published against them which obviates the cavelling of the Quakers who would be ready to say There is nothing to be expected of new Matter but what is contained in other Books and which hath been already answered by them The contrary whereof will sufficiently appear to any that shall compare this fourth Narrative with any other Books before this published against them Thirdly Whereas the common Objection of the Quakers is That their Books are neither fully nor fairly quoted To remove the Ground of any such Objection I have got the Attestation of Persons of known Integrity and Judgment to the Truth of them as I got the like Attestation from some the former Year to attest to my third Narrative I have given the Quotations as fully and fairly as is requisite to satisfie any reasonable Persons But the Men I have to deal with for all this will I expect renew their unjust Complaint and will tell their Readers This and the other Passage going before or following should have been inserted in the Quotations whereas the not inserting of them makes not their Cause one whit the worse nor the inserting them makes their Cause one whit the better as could be shewed in many Instances and is shewed in their late Books for when so much is quoted out of any Book that gives the full Sense of the Writer whatever is more is superfluous Note for a Proof on the last Head That the Quakers deny the Moral Law or Ten Commandments to be a Rule to the Christian's Life and thereupon do not blame but justifie doing servile Work on the first Day yea and in the Face of a Congregation while the Minister was preaching See p. 28. of this Narrative G. K. George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS The first Part giving an Account of his Proofs on the first four Heads contained in his printed Advertisement viz. Concerning I. Their Infallibility II. Their sinless Perfection III. The Scriptures IV. The Holy Trinity Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the first Head concerning their Infallibility 1. GEORGE Fox Great Mystery pag. 105. For who witness these Conditions that they were in that gave forth the Scriptures They witness Infallibility an infallible Spirit which is now possessed and witnessed among those called Quakers Glory to the Highest for
ever Again a little after So Isay the Devil false Prophets Antichrists Deceivers Beast Mother of Harlots none of these can witness an infallible Spirit But being out of the Spirit that Christ the Prophets and Apostles was in that gave forth Scriptures they are not infallible as they were but with that they are all judged out II. Great Mystery pag. 98. And thou and you all that speak and write and not from God immediately and infallibly as the Apostles did and Prophets and Christ but only have gotten the Words you are all under the Curse in another Spirit ravenned from the Spirit that was in the Apostles Saul 's Errand to Damascus pag. 7. They are Conjurers and Diviners and their Teaching is from Conjuration which is not spoken from the Mouth of the Lord and the Lord is against all such and who are of God are against all such Truth defended by G. F. and Rich. Hubb p. 104. Our giving forth Papers or printed Books it is from the immediate eternal Spirit of God to the shewing forth the filthy Practices of the World's Teachers c. George Whitehead Voice of Wisdom pag 33. his Opponent Th. Danson having said As for our Want of Infallibility 't is no valid Plea against our Ministry G.W. answers His Falshood here appears plainly for they that want Infallibility and have not the Spirit of Christ they are out of the Truth and are fallible and their ministry is not of the Spirit seeing they speak not from the Spirit but from their own Hearts which are deceitful where they want Infallibility so out of the Abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh Note Jos Wyeth in his Switch for the Snake p. 87. states the Question concerning their Infallibility fallaciously in three several Particulars 1. That the holy Spirit of God is infallible c. This is no Part of the Controversie 2. That the holy Spirit leads all such who obey him infallibly into all Truth necessary to Salvation This is wrongly stated the true State of the Question being Whether the Holy Spirit leads us into all Truth necessary to Salvation without the external Doctrine externally delivered in the holy Scriptures by preaching and reading and without all external means This they affirm as shall hereafter be proved but this all sound Christians deny who yet grant that all the Faithful are infallibly led into all Truth necessary to Salvation by the infallible Spirit in the Use of the holy Scriptures which contain the infallible Truths of the Gospel 3. That the Ministers who are sent forth in the Work of the Ministry have or may have if they diligently attend to the Voice of the infallible Spirit speaking in them a certain infallible Knowledge and Assurance of the Truth of what they so deliver This also is wrongly stated the true State is not what they have or may have but what they really have in all they preach and write as is clear from the above given Quotations of G. F. and G. W. their great Leaders To say they may have implies that they may not have and in that case they are fallible and so by their own Verdict are under the Curse Conjurers Deceivers Note that their great Teachers and Leaders G. F. and G. W. have taught that the infallible teaching of the Spirit is not by the medium or external Means of the Scriptures and that Faith is not given by the external Word doth appear from their Books 1. G.F. Gr. Myst pag. 350. Ye tell People of an outward ordinary means by which Christ communicates the Benefit of Redemption The means of Salvation is not ordinary nor outward but Christ is the Salvation who is eternal 2. Gr. M. p. 133. His Opponent T. Moor having said The Scripture is the absolute Rule and Medium of our Faith In pag. 134. he answereth The Scriptures is not the Author nor the Means of it nor the Rule but Christ who gives it and he encreaseth it 3. Gr. Myst pag. 243. And the things of the Gospel and of the Spirit are not attained by an external means 4. Gr. Myst pag. 320. His Opponents having said God works Faith in us inwardly by his Spirit and outwardly by his Word He answers Here thou goest about to make the Spirit and the Word not one is not the Word Spiritual and Christ called the Word Gr. Myst p. 168. Them that never heard the Scripture outwardly the Light that every Man hath that cometh into the World being turned to it with that they will see Christ with that they will know Scripture with that they will be led out of all Delusion come into Covenant with God with which they will come to worship God in the Spirit and serve him Note the Quakers that say they are turned to the Light yet are not led out of all Delusion but many of them are under great Delusions and Error concerning the great Truths of the Gospel as doth evidently appear by these and the following Quotations A Quotation being brought out of Gr. Myst in the Snake of the Grass G. Myst p. 213. Switch pag. 79. Thou cast not know the Scriptures but by the same Degree of the Spirit that the Prophets and Apostles had Jos Wyeth saith in his Switch By the Error of the Press the Word ALL is left out For which he quotes Gr. Myst pag. 212. In answer to this hear what G. F. saith in Gr. M. pag. 120. And he that hath found the true Record the Spirit of God with that he shall know ALL the Scriptures and is come within the Book where all things are written and which writes all things forth the Spirit Note G. F. no doubt and G. W. did think they had found the true Record the Spirit c. and therefore they knew ALL Scripture and had the same Degree that the Prophets and Apostles had G. F. G. M. p. 222. The Light c. is the Substance of all Scriptures opens all Scriptures and that all Scriptures ends in Le ts see all Scripture But that the Quotation of the Switch G. M. p. 212. is lamely made the following Words prove that some of the Quakers at least did understand as they thought ALL Scripture The Passage is this But they cannot know all Scriptures but as they vttain to the full Measure of the Spirit of the Prophets and Apostles and to the Measure and Stature and Fullness of Christ And if they do not attain to all this they are not able to know all the Scriptures and the Work of the Ministers of God was to bring People to this to the Measure and Stature and Fullness of Christ. Note that they thought their Ministry had brought some of the Quakers to this we shall see hereafter and no doubt they judged they were come to it viz. G. F. and G. W Gr. M. p. 47. The Light which every one hath that cometh into the World is sufficient to Salvation without the Help of any other Means or Discovery But which
Church who yet have not arrived to a sinless Perfection but are in that Time of Travel But what if they die in that Time of Travel before a sinless Perfection be attained G. VV. has passed a nibst severe and uncharitable Censure on them Voice of VVisdom p. 42 43. This sinless Perfection for that 's the true State of the Question all must come to witness who ever come to be saved for there is no unclean thing must enter into Christ's Kingdom therefore People must either expect Freedom from Sin in this Life or never Note Thus he has passed a most uncharitable and cruel Sentence nor only upon many who were in a sincere Travel towards Perfection and yet have not attained to a sinless Perfection before their Decease but also upon his deceased Brethren many of whom deceased as I judge he must confess while they were in the Travel towards it for Quakers commonly are not longer lived than other Men they die at all Ages young as well as old and many die that are but Novices in their Way And certainly G. Fox and E. Burr Fr. Hougel Rich. Hubb and some of their greatest Saints lived in great Ignorance Error and Unbelief in divers great Fundamentals of the Christian Faith and in great Uncharitableness towards such as differed from them and remained in these Sins to their dying Day shall we therefore be so uncharitable to them as G. Ws Doctrine is to conclude they are all damned and parished eternally God forbid we will be more charitable to them than his Doctrine alloweth But then again in Contradiction not only to G. F. but himself he pleads in his Voice of Wisdom That the Believers Works are perfect and God hath wrought all their VVorks in them citing Isa 26. 12. So these VVorks of God which true Believers witness are perfect and the Believers have ceased from their own VVorks which were imperfect and are come into God's VVorks which are perfect But then what saith he concerning them who are in the Travel towards Perfection Are not they Believers Have they no Faith Thus their Confusion is evident They do not consider that though the Work of Faith Labour of Love and Patience of Hope in Believers are the Works of God yet they are also the Works of those Men in whom they are wrought it 's they who believe who love and hope by God's Operation or working in them and therefore they being imperfect though God is a perfect Being and Agent their Faith Love and Hope are imperfect it being the Property of all Effects to be according to the weaker and more imperfect Causes according to that true Maxim Bonum ex integra causa malum ex quolibet defectu a perfect Effect must have all its Causes perfect But whatever Charity we may suppose they may have for their deceased Brethren they have little or none for any such who do not believe to the Hight of their Doctrine of a sinless Perfection before Death their Doctrine obligeth them to judge that none of other Societies are saved because they do not believe the Quakers Doctrine of Perfection before they die the contrary of which they call the Doctrine of Devils the which if any die and do not renounce before their Decease by the Quakers Principle they cannot be saved But some of them now begin to go into the same Road with others of other Professions and after a large Circumference wherein they have far departed from them who say That the Souls of Believers are at the instant of Death made perfect in Holiness yet return and say the same thing concerning their imperfect Brethren who are deceased and yet before their Decease arrived not to a sinless Perfection which if it may be allowed to imperfect Quakers may be as well allowed to others sineere Travellers towards Perfection many of whom no doubt have arrived to greater Perfection before their Decease than any among the Quakers Worthies of whose Perfection they so much boast who lived in great Error and Unbelief in the great Fundamentals of Christianity and Uncharitableness towards others and of whose Repentance for the same we never heard any Account Again G. F. in his G. M. p. 251. in Defence of his and his Brethrens sinless Perfection thus answers to that in Eccles 7. 20. There is not a just Man upon the Earth which doth good and sinneth not This just this wise Man upon the Earth which doth good and sinneth not that was the Estate of the Law which Christ is the End of who is a greater than Solomon who is the just and Righteousness it self and makes Men free from Sin Note that G. F. in Contradiction to his own Gloss in the same Page to prove a sinless Perfection brings the Examples of Job and David both which were long before Christ came and to prove David's sinless Perfection he brings David's Words and David said He had seen the End of all Perfection Is not this a rare Proof for a sinless Perfection But if G. F. did not mean Christ without but Christ within to be the End of the Law As this is a false Gloss on Paul's Words so that imports that Solomon was not come to the Light within him which G. F. calls Christ within but how then could Solomon pen such Books of the Scripture which the Quakers confess to have been writ by Divine Inspiration if Solomon had not come to the Light within him But let us hear another as nonsensical Gloss of G. VV. on the same Place Voice of VVisd p. 18. Eccles 7. 20. Ans The Conversation of the Saints is in Heaven Eph. 2. 6. Philip. 3. 20. And they are redeemed from the Earth and from the Vanity where Solomon saw all things in the Days of his Vanity in which all were Sinners Note Is this any Proof that the Saints such as Paul who writ these Words were not real Men upon Earth And is not G. W. a Man upon Earth so long as he eats drinks sleeps c Thus we see how they pervert the Scriptures to prove their sinless Perfection for if G. W. will own he is one of these just Men on Earth that Solomon writes of he must confess himself to be a Sinner if he will not own himself to be a just Man upon the Earth yet he must allow his Body to be upon Earth unless he will say our Sight deceives us when we see him in the Streets and then either his Body is no Part of him or if it be it hath Sin and consequently he also hath Sin if he will own his Body to be a Part of him But let us yet again hear another nonsensical Gloss of G. F. to maintain his and his Brethrens sinless Perfection on the Words of James In many things we offend all G. M. p 309. Mark saith G. F. In the many things we offend all but we are come to the one thing Christ Jesus the End of the many things and in him there
is no Sin and who is in him sins not who put an End to the many things that must end and change Thus we see his and his Brethrens Presumption who plainly declare they were got beyond James and all the Faithful to whom he wrote those Words and he chargeth both James and all the Faithful to whom he wrote all these Words with a horrid Falshood that they were not come to the one thing to wit to Jesus Christ And if none are come to Christ or in Christ but who are perfect with a sinless Perfection as G. W. doth here argue then young Believers and Converts who are travelling towards Perfection are not in Christ nor come to Christ because they have not that sinless Perfection which is both a most false and most comfortless Doctrine and injurious to all young Christian Converts at least and may be thought by young Quaker Converts injurious to them also Note while the Proofs were reading out of the Quakers Books for their sinless Perfection a Quaker supposed to be John Whiting said George if Men are not perfect before Death when are they made perfect It must be either before Death or after Death I answered In the instant of Death and that is neither before Death nor after Death as if one should ask when did Peter and other deceased Saints put off the earthly Tabernacle whether before Death or after Death The Answer is neither before nor after but at the Instant of Death But let us hear yet somewhat more of G. F's great Conceit of his and his Brethrens Perfection even in Equality with God himself Abrief Discovery of the Threefold State of Antichrist G. W's brief Discovery p. 15. printed 1653. he being charged with saying That he was as upright as Christ he answers these Words were not spoken by me but that as he is so are we in this World that the Saints are made the Righteousness of God that the Saints are one in the Father and the Son that we shall be like him and that all teaching which is given forth by Jesus Christ is to bring up the Hearers to Perfection even to the Measure Stature and Fullness of Christ this the Scripture witnesseth and I witness fulfilled in me Note this is more than what is in Saul's Errand above-quoted for there the Words of Scripture are kept to that mention the Measure of the Stature of the Fullness but here it 's far beyond what is written in Scripture that he was come not only to the Measure but to the Stature and Fullness of Christ and what is this but to be equal with Christ and God Saul's Errand p. 13. G. F. He that is perfectly holy is perfectly just where this is revealed there needs no Addition for the Man of God is perfect This will yet more fully appear by the following Quotations In Truth def by G. Fox and R. Hubb page 65. a Query being proposed by the Opponent Who is like to be the Man thou speakest of he that saith he is equal with God and Christ or he that preacheth Christ the Head The Answer is Here in this Question thou openly shewâ—d by self 〈…〉 the Mind the Apostles had for saith he I would the some Mind were in you that was also in Christ Jesus who thought it no Robbery to be equal with God and yet made himself of no Reputation Philip. 2. 5. And here thou hast shewed thy self that thou hast neither the Mind of Christ nor his Apostles but art an Antichrist and an Enemy against them that witness these things which the Apostle said I would that ye were of the same Mind And again the Apostle saith Our Fellowship is with the Father and the Son 1 Joh. 1. 3. Again in his G. Mystery p. 248. he quotes but very lamely and corruptly C. Wade in his Book Quakery Slain He denies the Son of God to be revealed in Man only by Adoption and cries against Equality with the Father Here before I give you G. F's Answer I shall give you C. Wade's Words as they stand in his Book to which he answers C. Wade's Words in his Quakery slain are these p. 23. G. Fox in the 8. pag. of Saul's Errand affirmeth That he that hath the same Spirit that raised up Jesus Christ is equal with God and the Saints have the same Spirit in Measure for God's Spirit is but one And G. Fox saith in pag. 11. That he is a Saint Thus he would again prove That he a poor wicked Creature is equal with God the Creator and if so then G. Fox is the Creator of G. Fox and the whole World and he intimately claimeth Christ's Equality with God by his perverted citing of Philip. 2. 6 7. Now in Opposition to G. F's affirming He was equal with God C. Wade in his pag 24. saith The Scripture saith that even the Saints themselves are not God's Sons otherwise but by Adoption only by Christ note that you Quakers not as being Christ as you foolishly fancy but by Christ for it 's written Having predestinated us unto the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ Eph. 1. 5. See this confirmed Gal. 4. 5. Rom. 8. 23. and Creature adopted Sons cannot be equal with their Heavenly uncreated Father who vouchsafeth by free Grace by and in his Son Christ to adopt them to be his Sons in Acceptation only Neither can any Creature adopted Sons be equal with God's only begotten Son the Creator of all adopted Sons and all other things both in Heaven and in Earth also This is the true and full Quotation out of C. Wade his Quakery slain In Opposition to which sound Doctrine of C. Wade G. Fox thus answers G. M. p. 248. Ans And that is contrary to the Apostle who had the Son of God revealed in him and the Assembly of Divines gave forth a Catechism which Children old and young was to learn and said The Holy Ghost and Son was equal in Substance and Power and Glory with the Father What Then all that have the Son and the Holy Ghost hath that which is equal in Power and Glory with the Father In this thou hast not only judged thy self but all the Assembly of Divines at Westminster 1649. Note G. Fox here doth not quote the Page of C. Wade's Book as frequently he doth not throughout his G. Myst give his Opponents Pages of their Books which it seems was in Design that his unfair Quotations might not be so easily found out Now observe whereas G. F. brings C. Wade crying against Equality with the Father we see by the Quotation given what Equality with the Father C. VVade cries against to wit not the Equality of Christ the only begotten of God with the Father for that he expresly affirms by saying That Christ God's only begotten Son is the Creator of all things but the Equality that C. Wade cryed against was the Equality of G. Fox and Creature adopted Sons with the Father and for his so saying G.
Fox makes him to have contradicted the Apostle and also the Assembly of Divines at Westminster and judged both himself and them This I think so evident a Proof that G. F. thought himself equal with the Father that neither G. W. nor Jos Wyeth nor any of their Brethren with all their little Craft and Sophistry can clear this Passage from that down-right Blasphemy That G. F. was equal with God for neither the Assembly of Divines at Westminster nor C. W. deny the Equality of the Son and of the Holy Ghost for G. Fox grants they owned it but the Equality which C. Wade cryed against was the Equality of G. F. or any of the Saints with the Father But here we find the Strength of G. Fox's Logick The Son and Holy Ghost are equal with the Father therefore G. F. is equal with the Father the Proof of which Consequence must be one of these two following Assertions the one is That G. Fox thought himself to be the Son of God or such a Son as was equal with the Father the other is That because the Son of God was revealed in G. Fox as he thought that therefore G. Fox was equal with the Father As to the first of these Assertions as it is utterly false that G. Fox was the Son of God to wit the only begotten Son of God the Word made Flesh so the other is utterly a false Consequence that because the Son of God was revealed in him that therefore he was equal with the Father but surely if the Son of God had been revealed in him that Revelation would have taught him not to utter such horrid Blasphemy But that C. Wade did not deny but own as much as the Scripture warranteth That God the Father as also Christ the Son were manifested or revealed in the Saints I shall quote a Passage in his Book being originally the Words of one T. Moor that wrote against the Quakers whom J. Nailer had charged That he would exclude God and Christ out of the World and that he should no more dwell in his People till Doomsday In Opposition to which C. Wade quotes the following saying of T. Moor which he approves pag. 23. of Quakery slain That the Majesty of God whose Throne is in Heaven is in his Inspections Influences and Operation every where and in his gracious and spiritual Presence and manifested Nighness in and through his Son dwelling in Sion even in the Hearts and Societies of his People Now let us hear what Jos Wyeth and G. Whitehead say in Defence of that blasphemous Passage above-mentioned quoted from Saul's Errand to Damascus p. 8. He that hath the same Spirit that raised up Jesus from the dead is equal with God Jos Wyeth doth plainly justifie it by the like false Consequence as G. Fox made Switch pag. 59. he saith For when Men are guided by the Holy Spirit they are certainly guided by God for the Father Son and Holy Spirit are one God and therefore equal and that which is equal as G. Fox he saith often expresseth it But doth it therefore follow that because the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are equal that therefore he that hath either the Son or the Holy Ghost is equal either with the Son or Holy Ghost or with the Father yet this is Jos Wyeth's blasphemous Consequence to justifie G. F's Blasphemy But G. W. hath found two other Ways to defend the above-said Blasphemy of G. F. in the Supplement to the Switch he saith p. 528. And if any among us have writ of them who are perfect in Christ Jesus being led by his Spirrt as in that Sense equal I understand equal only as like unto God or in Vnion with him being united unto him by his Spirit as he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit Note first The Word Equal no where that I know either in Scripture or other Books or common Speech in any Language signifieth only as like therefore this is a meer Force put upon the Word and a strained Sense But Secondly That could not be the Sense intended by G. Fox because as I have above shewed in a former Quotation he proves that he is equal with God the Father because the Son and Holy Ghost are equal with the Father Now will G. W. say That the Equality betwixt the Son and the Holy Ghost and the Father is only an Equality of Likeness as to say the Son and the Holy Ghost are only like the Father but are not really equal with the Father This was the Arian Heresie that the Son was like the Father but not equal or of the same Substance with the Father they said he was Homoiusios but not Homouisios But he hath yet another String to his Bow in his Truth and Innocency pag. 10. Therefore the Words He that hath in the said Instance should be left out being contrary to G. F 's and our Principle and to his own very Words and Confession a little before in the same Book quoting Saul's Errand p. 5 6. where G. F. saith It was not so spoken as G. Fox was equal with God but the Father and the Son is one But the Fallacy lyeth here he did not say George Fox to wit the Name George Fox or the outward visible Body that bears that Carnal Name as he somewhere calls it but the new Name that he hath that is the He that is equal with God because that He is the Son and as to what G. W. saith of Union with God that G. F. did not mean Union by Faith and Love but a personal Union appears from G. M. p. 100. He brings in his Opponent saying God dwells not in the Saints as a Personal Union In Opposition to which he answers How comes the Saints then to eat of his Flesh and to be of his Flesh and Bone Note it should be by a personal Union And God dwelling in them and have Vnity with the Son and the Father and to be of his Body which is the Church and Christ the Head Yea he blames his Opponent G. M. p. 258. for saying To say that God is substantially in Man as essentially one with him can be no other but the Man of Sin But whereas G. W. saith He that hath should be left out pray who put them in That they were G. Fox's Words the Book called Saul's Errand affirms if this Liberty be allowed to transpose leave out and add Words in a Sentence nothing so vile and blasphemous or atheistical but may be justified by G. W. who hath used all these three Methods to defend his and his Brethrens vile Errors But let us hear one Passage more of G. F. out of G. Myst p. 299. to let us know what Conceit he had of himself as being more than a Creature he tells That one had raised a grievous Lye against G. F. and said he said he was Christ p. 298. to the End This Man having so charged him and having told him
are sprung forth of the corrupt Tree which now is to be burned and its Fruit rejected Now these are all the Books and Catechisms published by any others but themselves Again in p. 23. they say And though some have known him viz. Christ after the Flesh yet henceforth know they him so no more as say the Scriptures of Truth Note Here they pervert the true Sence of Paul's Words as they commonly do in their Books and Preachings giving Paul's Words for a Reason why they do not preach Faith in Christ as he came in the Flesh died and rose again c as necessary to Salvation because say they VVe are no more to know Christ after the Flesh whereas it was the great Subject both of Paul's Preaching and of all the Apostles to wit Jesus Christ as he came in the Flesh died for our Sins and rose again and ascended c. insomuch that they did with one Accord declare That the Gift of the Holy Ghost with all the saving and sanctifying Graces of the Spirit do come to Men by Christ through Faith in him as he came in the Flesh died rose and ascended and that this Faith was wrought in Men by hearing the VVord outwardly preached Again in p. 23. they say Now Children the Scriptures of Truth do declare of God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth which are one but the Scriptures cannot bring you to know God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth And yet they say concerning this Primmer and the Contents of it p. 2. That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn that they may be turned unto the Light which is the Gift of God Here they seem to prefer their Primmer to the Scriptures for they say of the Contents of their Primmer That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn To learn what Surely some Knowledge of God and Christ they will say and yet they will not allow so much to the Scripture and on a diligent Search I find not in all this Primmer one simple Direction to Children and others to read the Scriptures and what they have quoted of Scripture in it is but little and much even of that grosly perverted and misapplied as in p. 44 45. they say They that hear the Light that is in all Men and common to all Men they hear God for God is Light and they that hear God they hear Christ also for God and Christ are one as saith the Scripture and they that hear Christ hear the Author of the true Faith and so hear the Saviour of their Souls and the Light is that Prophet which all that hear not him are to be cut off Here we see how grosly they pervert that Place of Scripture Deut. 18. 15. Acts 3. 22. 7. 37. which is not to be understood of the common Illumination given to all Mankind but of the Man Christ as he outwardly came in the Flesh and did execute his prophetical Office on Earth by preaching and teaching and as he doth now still execute his prophetical Office in his Church by his Word outwardly preached and his Spirit inwardly accompanying it to make it effectual Again p. 82. they run into the same wild Notion that others Familists and mad Enthusiasts run into of the Blood of Christ within them For say they and all wait together in the Light viz. as it is common to all Mankind Infidels Jews Mahumetans Heathens for so they understand it and believe in it that ye may be the Children of the Light and therein watch unto Prayer and one over another and this will beget ye into unfeigned Love and walk in the Light ye will have true Vnity and Fellowship one with another and the Blood which is the Life of Jesus Christ ye will feel cleansing you from all Sin and so ye will come into Vnity with God Note By this it is evident as will more fully appear on a particular Head following that by the Blood which they call the Life of Jesus Christ they meant not his Blood outwardly shed or his Life that he outwardly laid down viz. the Life of his Manhood without us for the Remission of our Sins and cleansing therefrom But according to their usual Cant and Phrase The Blood that is the Life and the Life is the Light within So that they make the Blood the Life and the Light within them to be one and the same thing but neither in this Primmer nor in any other of their Books do I find the least Direction to Faith in the Blood of Christ as it was outwardly shed on the Cross therefore in this Primmer and in their other Books they give Poison to poor Children to suck or receive instead of wholesome Food George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS PART II. Containing the Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the fifth Head concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul Body and Blood And on the sixth Head concerning the Souls of Men. Read at the second Meeting at Turners-Hall January 19. 1699. W. P. in Serious Apology p. 146. saith That the outward Person which suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny This is expresly contrary to many Texts of Scripture and to a great Fundamental Article of our Christian Creed yea in a manner it overthrows the whole Christian Creed See the following Scriptures Mat. 16. 13 16. Luke 1. 32. Mat. 14. 33. Mark 1. 1. John 1. 14 34. John 9. 35. 10. 36. Acts 8. 37. Rom. 1. 4. Mat. 27. 54. G.W. in his Truth and Inn. p. 52. excuseth W. P ' s Words thus Here I take him to mean the Son of God in respect to his Divine Being as he is of one Substance with the Father which his Body that suffered Death was not though he was truly the Son of God as he took upon him that Body and as made of a Woman Gal. 4. 4. Being conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary The Fallacy of this is easily detected the Question in Debate betwixt W. P. and his Opponents who were Presbyterian Ministers in Ireland was not whether the Body was the Son of God abstractly considered from the Soul of Christ and his Godhead for no Presbyterian ever held that neither will any Socinian that denyeth the Godhead of Christ say that that meer Body without his created Soul was the Christ or Son of God But the true State of the Question was and is whether he that outwardly suffered Death without the Gates of Jerusalem whom W. P. calls that outward Person in Distinction from the Light within which the Quakers will have to be the whole Christ according to G. Fox's Doctrine was and is not properly the Son of God which all sound Christians say according to Scripture he was and is being both God and Man and yet one Person one Christ one Son of God having his Godhead-Nature and his Manhood-Nature so united as
intire Christ but only as a Vail or Garment that is a Man's Garment but is no Part of him The other Fallacy is that he would cast it upon his Opponents that they held The Body that suffered was properly the entire Son of God which were to make him but a meer Man But none of his Opponents said That that Body without the Soul of the Manhood and without the Godhead of the Word was the entire Christ nor could it be so much as meer Man without a Soul even a created Soul belonging to it Whether Christ's coming in the Flesh was a Figure THE next thing I charge to be a vile Error in the Quakers Books especially G. F. and G. W. That Christ's coming in the Flesh and his Sufferings without us in the Flesh and his outward Flesh and Blood was a Figure and But a Figure of Christ and what he suffereth in us and of his Blood shed in us This being charged in Saul's Errand That R. Hubberthorn writ That Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure It is answered in Saul's Errand in two several Places first in p. 8. thus Christ in his People is the Substance of all Figures Types and Shadows fulfilling them in them and setting them free from 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 must be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Jesus for which he quotes 1 Pet. 2. 21. 1 Pet. 4. 1. 1 Pet. 1. 15. Joh. 13. 15. Again in Saul's Err. p. 14. Q. Whether Christ in the Flesh be a Figure or not and if a Figure how and in what Ans Christ is the Substance of all Figures and his Flesh is a Figure for every one passeth through the same way as he did who comes to know Christ in the Flesh there must be a suffering with him before there be a rejoycing with him Christ is an Example for all to walk after and if thou knewest what an Example is thou wouldst know what a Figure is To come up to the same Fulness Note Had R. Hubb and G.F. taught That Christ is our Example and if by Example they only meant to be our Example to follow him in the Virtues of Love Humility Self-denial Patience Resignation c. none would have blamed them but what they talk of his being such an Example is but mainly to hide their vile Heresie For first saith G.F. Christ is an Example for all to walk after to come up to the same Fulness No sound Christian ever taught so for the Apostles never taught That they or any other were by following Christ's Example to come up to the same Fulness but still spoke of the Measure as with respect to all others To come up to the same Fulness is to come to be as much Christ as he was and according to VV. Penn see his Preface to R. B's Collection the Passage quoted in my third Narrative p. 10. attested c. The VVork of Regeneration is a greater Mystery than God manifest in the Flesh without us And saith G.F. Christ in his People is the Substance of all Figures Types and Shadows fulfilling them in them and his Flesh is a Figure Now that by Figure or Example they meant not only or indeed so much that he is our Example in holy living and walking which none ever found fault with of any called Christians but that as he was outwardly born was crucified had his Blood shed was buried rose and ascended so he is inwardly born and has been crucified in the Quakers and all other Saints buried risen and ascended and is King Priest and Prophet in them and G. VV's Light and Life p. 44. Christ in them offers up himself in the Nature of a mediating Sacrifice to appease the VVrath of God That not the outward Blood that was outwardly shed is the Blood of God by which he purchased his Church but God being a Spirit his Blood his inward and spiritual as G.VV. hath expresly affirmed in his Light and Life p. 44. And VV. P. in his Rejoinder to I. Faldo p. 336 337. comparing Christ his dying as a Malefactor by his Death to reconcile us to God to what was to be accomplished in Man saith 'T is strange that should be reputed most misterious which was the Introduction to the Mistery and those Transactions counted most difficult that were by the divine VVisdom of God ordained as so many facile Representations of what was to be accomplished in Man c. And a little before comparing the outward with the inward in Relation to Christ he saith The History is made the greatest Mistery which he blames in I. Faldo for making Christ without us a greater Mistery than Christ within us so that whether by Figure or Example the Quakers mean the same thing it is horribly offensive that Christ without us and what he did and suffered without us is such an Example as is to be wrought and accomplished in us by a greater Missery so that the Work or the thing wrought and effected is greater and more excellent t han the Example according to which it is wrought as the building some great Fabrick the Example Type or Figure according to which it is built is made perhaps of Wood or Past-board in a small Model whereas the Fabrick is great and consisting of rich and very precious Materials Thus they magnifie the Flesh and Blood of Christ within them above his Death and Sacrifice without them and well they may if Christ's Flesh and Blood with in them be unerected and from all Eternity and that Christ's material Blood on the Cross was the Type of Christ's inward ward and spiritual Blood he had from all Eternity for the Word Example in this case is fully as offensive as Figure and can signifie no other than Figure for if there be any such inward and spiritual Blood of Christ and Flesh that he had from all Eternity and if the material Blood be the Example of it and Christ's material Flesh the Example of that Heavenly increated Flesh It must needs be granted that the thing exemplified is greater than the Example of it in the case and the shedding of that Heavenly Blood which Christ had from all Eternity and which was shed in Adam when he sinned is more excellent than the shedding of that material Blood which is but its Figure according to them But now let us hear how G.VV. first defends himself and next VV. P. in his Truth and Inn. p. 53. He gives a lame Quotation objected against him out of his Truth defending the Quakers Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure i. e. a Figure or Type of the inward Christ or Light within Here is a lame Quotation which at full is thus Truth defend p. 21. Did R. Hubberth well in writing That Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure Ans
Quaker Zealots to this flat Denial of his own and his Brethrens former Doctrine and yet this without any Change in him he is the same infallible G. W. still for he is that incorruptible Seed and Word of Life which begets Forms and brings forth the Soul of Man into his own Nature and Image and so he renews his own Image in Man that believes in his Power and so Christ may be said to be formed in us as in a misterious and elegant way of speaking the Property and Effect being put for the Cause for Christ in himself hath all Power in Heaven an Earth given to him and it hath pleased the Father that all Fullness should dwell in him Again in Judgment fixed p. 322. We deny the Doctrine that the Word GOD is in Bondage or Captivity in the Sons and Daughters of Men but only that there is a Seed of God and of Christ that is opressed and suffers in many by reason of Transgression A Seed of God is commonly our Phrase and Terms in this case And p. 124. These are certain Allusions and Elegancies Note this is expresly contradictory to what he hath frequently printed in his other Books particularly to what is at great length quoted above out of his He-goat◠Horn p. 8. and his Brief Discovery p. 21. where he calls the Seed that suffers within People and that desires to be freed from Sin Christ and the Lamb that was slain that is worthy to receive Power and Wisdom and Riches and Strength and Honour and Glory and Blessing Now if by Christ the Lamb that was slain within the Seed that suffers within and desires to be freed from Sin c. G. W. does not mean Christ really and strictly speaking but will have it to be a misterious and elegant way of speaking the Property and Effect being put for the Cause so that by the Seed Christ in Men according to his Explication in Judgment fixed just now given he meaneth only the created Souls of Men as begotten and born of the immortal Seed then how will this agree with his making the created Soul as begotten and born of the immortal Seed to be the Lamb that was slain who is worthy to receive Power and Riches and Wisdom and Strength and Honour and Glory and Blessing Rev. 5. 12. which is a Doxology of divine Praise and an Act of divine Worship given to that Lamb by Angels and Saints and seeing according to G. W's Explication here given in his Judgment fixed the Seed that is born in them suffers in them slain in them is neither God nor Christ and yet had divine Worship and Honour given thereto by Angels and Saints It follows that according to G. W. divine Adoration is due to regenerated Souls of Men or at least to something in the Souls of regenerated Men that is neither God nor Christ but a meer Creature which is abominable Idolatry and yet justified here by G. W. in his Judgment fixed compared with his He goats Horn. I cannot understand how G. W. can clear himself here unless he should tell us of another elegant way of speaking that is to give to this Allegorical Christ Jesus born within them the Lamb that was slain within them an allegorical divine Adoration and Worship and that it was only this allegorical divine Adoration that the Saints and Angels gave to this Lamb slain within Men Rev. 5. 12. But how nonsensical and idle any such Gloss would be I need not shew and yet I suppose it is the best he can find But again that not only a Seed of God suffers in Men by their Sins but that God and Christ as God suffers in Men by their Sins in plain Contradiction to what he has delivered in his Judgment fixed is evident from his Divinity of Christ p. 55. 5◠where he hath these following Words in Opposition to T. Vincent who had affirmed That Christ as God did not suffer but only as Man VVhereas saith he T. V. had affirmed That Christ as God could not suffer As to his saying That God cannot suffer is in one Sense not true though he intended as to Death yet the Spirit of God hath suffered and hath been grieved by Man's Transgressions And for this he cites Isa 63. 10. Amos 2. 13. Hos 11. 8 9. Psal 95. Gen. 6. 6. Psal 78. 40. Isa 1. 7 13. and Isa 43. 24 25. Note Here the State of the Controversie betwixt G. VV. and T. V. was not about a metaphorical suffering of God but a real which is here affirmed by G. VV. in Contradiction to what he has said in his Judgment fixed as above quoted And because G. VV. in his Judgment fixed p. 322. blames Jeffery Bullock for his dealing unfairly and fallaciously with charging it on the Quakers for preaching and printing That the Seed Spirit Word or God is both in Prison Bondage and Captivity and to be quickned raised c. withal adding That the said J. B. hath not produced any Book of ours or our Friends wherein this Doctrine is printed Surely G. VV. had a very treacherous Memory or writ this against his own Conscience seeing he had writ so expresly himself in his former Books as is above quoted out of his He-goats Horn his Brief Discovery and his Divinity of Christ all which were in print before J. B. gave this Charge against them And as to his Distinction betwixt God or Christ and a Seed of God or Christ that is oppressed and suffers in Men by their Sins as if it were not either God or Christ that thus suffers in Men by their Sins this is contradictory to G. W's own former Doctrine who brought Amos 2. 13. to prove that God suffers in Men by their Sins viz. not metaphorically by that Figure commonly called Anthropopathia but really which was the only State of the Controversie Behold I am pressed under you as a Cart that is full of Sheaves Now seeing this must be understood literally and strictly according to G. W. it must be a very great Suffering that he thinks God suffers in Men by their Sins that may be said to amount to an Oppression which yet he denies is applicable to God in his Judgment fixed And seeing the Seed within that is slain he would have it in his He-goats Horn to be the Lamb that was slain Rev. 5. 12. to whom the Angels gave divine Worship he must needs own that Seed to be Christ and that Christ to be God and consequently not only that God suffers in Men by their Sins but is slain in them or else confess Idolatry to be lawful But that the Seed that is within Men that W. Penn will have to be the promised Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Head of the Serpent is Christ and God over all blessed for ev̄er more Take his express Words in his Christian Quaker p. 97 98. The Seed of the Promise is an holy and spiritual Principle of Light Life and Power that being
our Life and Soul of our Soul he proceeds very regularly to tell That in this Soul of Man or in the Spirit or Mind of it as the highest Power when it is regenerated and resigned lives the great King manifested here he dwells as in Mount Sion here he delights to be as in his Temple And in this Soul of Man unenlightened and unrenewed Christ lies hid and is as one dead note he doth not say dead as the Quakers say but is as one dead and unsavory unto the Soul and so the Soul is in Darkness Weakness Sinfulness Sorrow Fear Bondage Thus we see Magnus Byne doth so clearly state the Subject of the Controversie betwixt him and the Quakers his Opponents which was the Soul of Man the created reasonable Soul that is neither God nor Christ though he owneth that God and Christ are in the Souls of Men both regenerate and unregenerate but after different Manners that he leaves no room for any of the least Capacity of Understanding to mistake the true Subject of the Controversie and therefore George Fox whom Joseph Wyeth magnifieth as the APOSTLE in this Age could not be such a Sot as not to understand the true Subject of the Dispute which was the Soul of Man the reasonable Soul that which thinks wills loves which dieth not when the Body dieth and which again and again he calleth a Creature and the created Soul distinguisheth it from Christ in the Soul which he saith is the Life of our Life and Soul of our Soul The same Expression used by George VVhitehead in his Truth and Innocency Yet notwithstanding all this clear stating the Subject of the Dispute which was the Soul of Man and not that divine Principle in the Soul George Fox doth make a great Difference with him and sets himself in great Opposition to him and will needs have it That the Soul to wit the Soul of Man which was the only Subject of the Dispute is without Beginning coming from God returning to God again Also he opposeth Magnus Byne's Saying There is a kind of Infiniteness in the Soul viz. with Respect to the Largeness of its Desires which the whole World cannot satisfie as he explained himself but it is not Infiniteness it self which George Fox wrongly quotes by adding the Word IN making him say It is not Infiniteness IN it self which mars the Sense But George Fox in Opposition to M. B. will have the Soul of Man which was the Subject of the Dispute to be Infiniteness it self without Beginning Note Here a Quaker Daniel Philips objected That Disputants might differ about the Subject of the Dispute so as the Opponent might mean one thing and the Respondent another But I answered They might so when the Matter is intricate and obscure by Ambiguities of Words but it could not be so here the Subject of the Dispute being so clearly proposed that none but a Sot or Cheat could or would mistake the Subject which the Quakers will not allow G. F. to be having so great an Esteem of his Wisdom as the Apostle in this Age. And the like is to be said of all the Disputes betwixt George Fox and his other Opponents about the Soul which were only about the Soul of Man and not at all about God or Christ in the Soul for they all did contend there was a real Distinction betwixt the Soul and God or Christ who was in it But George Fox would allow none but still contended That the Soul concerning which they and he disputed was a Part of God without Beginning c. And in his Great Mistery page 91. he blames Magnus Byne for calling the Soul a Creature and saith he is in Babylon and Confusion And in his Dispute with the five Ministers of New Castle Great Mistery pag. 227 228. he saith The Soul whereof Christ is the Bishop is divine and immortal also he most grosly wrongs the five Ministers of New Castle and charges them with holding it to be their own Principle Great Mistery page 227. That the Soul is a Part of the divine Essence And in his Great Mistery page 29. he saith to them And so you five have judged your selves to be Blasphemers who said The Soul was Part of the divine Essence and yet it is Blasphemy to say so This he most unjustly chargeth in them quoting their Book called A Discovery of that Generation of Men called Quakers but in that very Book which was produced and the Words quoted as they are in that Book page 5. the five Ministers deliver it not as any Position of theirs but as one of the Quakers Positions having this Title on the Top Quakers Positions being the third in Number and in all being seventeen That the Soul is a Part of the divine Essence What Excuse can George VVhitehead or any of his Brethren find for this palpable Injustice in George Fox Could he be so sottish as not to distinguish betwixt the five Ministers Positions and what they call the Quakers Positions and which they expresly blame and disown and give their Arguments against And if he was not so ignoratly sottish in the Case what can it be construed but a wilful Lie thus for him to charge them And for a further Confirmation that George Fox did hold That that very Soul of Man which George VVhitehead calls the reasonable and rational Soul Truth and Innocency pag. 7 8 9. and which George VVhitehead confesseth hath sinned doth not sin and is not at any time a sinful Soul consequently is according to him a Part of God I bring a Quotation out of his Great Mistery page 337. George Fox quotes his Opponent saying The Soul of Man is a reasonable sinful Substance To this George Fox answers How can that which is sinful be reasonable And if that which is unsinful be reasonable and sinful be reasonable both then they are one in Vnity The Lord will take the Soul for an Offering for Sin Isa 5. 3. See how thou and the Prophet agrees here But what is that Soul that the wicked is not able to kill Is it not that which God hath in his Hand And this is a Lye to say That which is reasonable is sinful Note how grosly he perverts that Place in Isa 53. 10. When thou shall make his Soul an Offering for Sin This is understood of the Soul of the Man Christ who suffered without us and not of any Soul within us which yet is George Fox's Notion and this very Soul in Men this reasonable Soul George Fox will have it to be the Odering for Sin And because it is so therefore he concludes it is not sinful not capable of sinning yet George Whitehead saith The reasonable Soul is capable of sinning and hath sinned in Men though it never sinned in Christ See how these two Apostles do now contradict one anoother and yet none of them fallible Note again how George Fox thought he put a very puzzling Query to his Opponent to
upon the Souls of Men But what then Must they therefore none of them that have sinned be saved Had not the Ephesians been great Sinners yea and they were dead in their Sins and Trespasses yet these very same Men having the same Souls were quickened and made alive by Christ Ephes 2. 3. And you hath he quickened who were dead in Trespasses and Sins And George Whitehead himself is guilty of the same absurd Doctrine with G. F. and Edward Burrough who in his He-goats Horn pag. 11 12. denieth that Christ hath our Nature in Heaven and that it is one and the same Nature in Men by which the Gentiles sinned aud by which they did the things contained in the Law And in his Voice of Wisdom page 20. he holdeth That Christ is both the Efficient and Subject of the good Works that are wrought in Men which is in effect to say it is not Men or the Souls of Men that repent believe obey God but Christ in them or else he must say The Soul that believes repents obeys is Christ and though in his later Books he seems to deny this yet will retract nothing for that would reflect on his Infallibility But his common Salve for this Sore is That he may see cause otherwise to word the Matter and yet mean the same thing as he has of late exprest in some of his Books Note Whereas in the Close of the third Meeting a Letter of John Audland a Preacher among the Quakers to George Fox was read wherein is contained gross Idolatry which confirms in matter of Fact what George Fox said of himself That he was equal to God and that he was Christ and upon this Notion John Audland addressed himself to George Fox as to God and Christ in his said Letter the which for its Affinity with the Doctrine of George Fox discovered in the first and second Part of this Narrative I think fit here to insert John Audland's Blasphemous Letter to George Fox Spelt and Pointed according to the Original DEare and presious one in whome my life is bound up and my strenth in thee stands by thy breathings I am nurished and refreshed and by thee my strenth is renewed blessed art thow for Ever more and blessed are all they that Enjoy thee life and strenth comes from thee holy one and thow art the blessed of the lord for Ever more dear dear reach unto mee that I may be strenthened to stand in the mighty power and dread of the lord for the sarvisse is very great my travell and burthen was never soe as now since I saw thee but dayly doe I find thy Presence with me which doth exceedingly Preserve mee for I cannot reane but in thy presence and power pray for me that I may stand in thy dread for Ever more deare my deare brother John Cam hath been Exceeding sicke and he is very weake I can say little of his Recovery as yet his wife is with him she is deare and preciously keept their deare love is to thee chreach through all in thy mighty power to him this bearer can declare to thee of the work this way Jo Willkinson and Jo Storey is heare their love is dearly to thee deare harte there is one thinge that lies upon mee I shall lay it before thee as tuching my coming into Wiltshire I was there at Justice Stoks house and his famaley is all prety loveing and convinced and he is a sober wise man and there is honesty in him which will stand and there is a pretey people that way it hath laid exceeddingly upon me these 3 days of thy beeing at that place I know not such another place in all the Counterey for thee dear I was much wounded to know that thow was in such a rude place and suffers soe amongst them and this was I moved to lay before thee and great is my disere that it may be soe the Place is about 20 miles from brestol in wiltshire one mile from chipenam a markete towne Justice stoks house Jo Cam tould me that the Justice he was with was a very Loving and prety man this bearer was there he can declare to thee more but oh that thou weare but at that place I mention it is free and suteable for frends coming to thee it lies much upon mee and if thow find movings strike over thither I shall say no more of it the worke is great heare away pray for us all that in thy Power we may abide for Evermore I am thyne begoten and nurished by thee and in thy Power am I preserved glory unto thee holy one for Ever John Audland The Letter being read the Auditory was struck with Admiration and generally signified their great Abhorrency of the Blasphemy and Idolatry contained in it to G. Fox I told them the Quakers had two Excuses as to this Letter one was that it was feigned because as it was once printed it had a wrong Date viz. 1665. which was some Years after John Audland was dead But that was the Fault or Mistake of the Publisher of that Letter that proves not the Letter to be feigned for the original Manuscript was read in the Meeting that had no date and was handed about to several Ministers and others together with another Letter of the same John Audland in Manuscript to another Person who did unanimously judge it was the same hand that writ both the Letters Their next Excuse is That these Words in John Audland's Letter were not intended to G. Fox but to Christ or the Life in G. Fox And the like Excuse G. F. made in a Letter writ with his own Hand which was produced and read in the Meeting and is ready to be produced before any that shall call for it for a Woman Quaker that in a Quakers Meeting said to George Fox Thou art the King of Israel That she spoke her Words to Christ viz. in G. Fox But I told This did not hinder it to be Idolatry nor was any just Excuse in the Case for it was the same Excuse that the Heathens gave for their worshiping Idols because it was not the Idol but the divine Power that was in it which they worshiped The like Excuse gave those Quakers that sung Hosanna to James Nailer at his Procession into Bristol and the same Excuse he made for them PART III. Containing the Proofs on the 7th Head concerning Justification and on the other following Heads contained in the Printed Advertisement Read at Turner's-Hall the 23d of January 1699. Concerning Justification by the Blood Merits and Righteousness of Christ. I Produced a Printed Paper in the Meeting call'd A few Positions of the sincere Belief and Christian Doctrine of the People call'd Quakers Sign'd by G. Whitehead to which is adjoined another printed Paper Sign'd by Thirty two Quakers which they say was given to the Members of Parliament in the Year 1693 In which Paper I noted divers gross Fallacies and gross Equivocations such as follow
the Light within is not sufficient to Salvation or not sufficient without something else the which Proposition seeing he blames as false he must hold the contradictory to be true That the Light within is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else yea G. W. hath granted in his Antidote p. 28. That Christ as outwardly considered is that something else which G. K. meant This is an evident proof beside many others above-given That it is G. W.'s and his Brethren's Principle That the Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed on the Cross is not a meritorious Cause of our Salvation nay not so much as in part and that Faith in that Blood is not necessary for our Justification expresly contrary to Scripture Rom. 3. 25. Hence it is that neither in their Books nor Preachings is any thing generally of this Doctrine Preached That Christ God-Man as without us as he Died for us c. is the object and foundation of our Faith for remission of Sin and for our Justification and eternal Salvation but there is much to be both read in their Books and heard in their daily Preachings against the necessity of any such Faith The farthest that they go at this day is to Preach a little of him Historically and as an Example but to Preach him as without us in the true nature of Man to be the great Object of our Faith Love and Adoration they think is hurtful as above-proved yea W. Smith in his Primmer gives it as a mark of distinction whereby to know true Ministers from false They that are false Preach Christ without and bid People believe in him as he is in Heaven above Jos Wyeth's excuse of this in his Switch p. 220. is extreamly fallacious he thinks he may supply the defect in W. Smith's Words by an Ellipsis telling us The Church hath given abundant encouragement to supply Elliptick defects by her example and practise in the holy Scriptures and what is so familiarly done with holy Writ surely me may do with our Friends Books But to detect this fallacy what Elliptical defects the Church has supplied in some places of the holy Scripture she had ground so to do from other places of Scripture more full that taught her to make that supply but the case is far otherwise here it being so far from being the Quakers way generally to preach Faith in Christ without Men for Salvation that they oppose it and call them Reprobates who profess any such Faith and this their great Apostle G. F. has taught them by his Example so to do in his G. M. p. 248. he saith to C. Wade The Devil was in thee and thou saith thou art saved by Christ without thee and so hath recorded thy self to be a Reprobate and ignorant of the Mystery of Christ within thee for without that thou dost not know Salvation And yet this same C. Wade hath fully owned the Mystery of Christ within Switch p. 205. as above-quoted Jos Wyeth's excuse for G. F.'s saying to C. VVade The Devil was in him He saith Was for his stuffing his Book with Lyes but of this he gives not one Proof though I have given several evident Proofs That G. F. did grosly bely him To the other part of G. F.'s charge Thou art saved by Christ without thee Jos VVyeth Answereth It doth plainly contradict the Doctrine of the Apostle Thus we see what value he and all his Brethren have in whose Name he writes for Christ without us that he saith it plainly contradicts the Doctrine of the Apostle but by his so saying he palpably bewrays his and his Brethrens Infidelity and Heathenism and hath prepared a Rod for his own Back instead of a Switch for the Author of the Snake To suppose that C. VVade meant that he was saved by Christ without him without the inward Operation of Christ by the holy Spirit to Sanctifie him is great injustice done to him for he hath sufficiently cleared himself of that charge as I have above-quoted him But that Faith in Christ without us as he Died for our Sins c. is no part of the Quakers Faith or Systeme of Doctrine is evident from Jos VVâ—â—h's plain confession as above-noted it is none of the Systeme of Principles truly Orthodox or Substance of the Doctrine which the Light within has taught them for he wholly passeth it by p. 38. and yet tells us he has given us the Substance of what the Light within has taught them Besides who will consider W. Smith's Primer out of which the above given Quotation is taken will find that his Words wanted no Ellipsis to explain his sense for he gives it very fully to be his sense that the Light within is the only Foundation and that there is not another see this more largely quoted in my Third Narrative p. 11. Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the following Heads viz. Christ's Coming to Judgment The Resurrection of the Body The Light Within Baptism and the Lord's Supper Eighthly Concerning Christ's last Coming to Judgment G. F. in his G. M. p. 9. quotes J. Bunyan saying That the Place where Christ shall come to Judgment is at the Mount of Olives at the East-side of Jerusalem to this he Answers Thou hast put him far enough off from thee and hast not yet judged thy self and Christ is come to Judgment and so art one of the false Prophets who bids People look for him beyond the Sea lo here lo there but who are come to Christ the Light the Life they need not go forth who abide here are sealed by the Spirit puts not off the good and evil Day Note Waving that Question over what place on Earth Christ shall appear at his last Coming we see here That G. F. opposeth not only to the place of his Coming but to any outward and personal Coming yet to be and chargeth J. B. to be one of the false Prophets for asserting it and saith Christ is come to Judgment as if there were no other for that 's the true state of the Controversie betwixt J. B. and him J. B. did not deny that Christ was inwardly Come to reprove and judge for Sin but he asserted his Coming personally to Judgment without us also G. W. in his Light and Life p. 40. 41. Disputing with W. B. about Christ's outward Coming in his Glorified Body to Judge the Quick and the Dead answereth to the several Scriptures that W. B. brought for Christ's outward Coming at the end of the World and carries them all to his inward Coming already fulfilled such as 1 Thess 4. 15 17. and Acts 1. 9 10 11. Acts 2 32 33 34. Matth. 24. 30. and Verse 26. 14. and opposeth W. B. in his understanding them of his outward Coming in Glory at the end of the World And as to that 1 Thess 4. 17. saith G. W. which W. B. brings to prove that Christ shall come in the latter end of the World from Heaven above the Clouds