last appears we may appear with him in glory Coll. 3. 4. c. at the last trump of God and voice of the Arch-Angel the dead shall be raised incorruptible The dead in Christ shall rise first 1. Thess 4. 16. c. Thus far G. W. And now again least they should as lately they have done still tell us we have learned this out of late or that vve have been of late forced to it by G. K. I shall therefore shew one or tvvo plain proofs to the contrary First from Edward Burrough who died in the year 1662. vvho in his Works p. 440. speaking concerning the Resurrection expresseth himself thus viz And vve believe even that he that vvas dead is alive and lives for evermore and that he cometh and shall come to judge the vvorld vvith righieousness and all people vvith equity and shall give every man according to his deeds at the day of judgment vvhen all shall rise to condemnation or justification he that hath done good shall receive life and he that hath done evil to everlasting condemnation In the next place I shall produce a quotation out of an antient book of Stephen Crisp's entituled A plain path way opened to the simple hearted for the answering all doubts and objections c. vvhere in his p. 12. he speaks thus concerning the Resurrection viz For he that knovvs a death and Resurrection after this manner to be dead to sin and to be risen vvith Christ Jesus in the nevv life even vvhile they are in this earthly tabernacle before it is dissolved such will never question their appearing at the Iudgment seat of God after it is dissolved but do believe it with joy and gladness and have a fervent hope concerning the Resurrection of the dead and have their expectation unto God in that matter that he will according to his promise raise them up at the last day and will give unto every Seed his own body even as pleaseth Him and the creature is not carefull then about such foolish questions and doubts as to inquire about what manner of body God wil give them but leave it to the Lord in full Faith that he will raise them up according to the Scriptures Thus far S. C. And now lastly what Authors shall I bring to convince these our new opposers that we do not deny but own the Resurrection according to the Scripture Surely none more fit than their great original Sect Master G. K who in Presbyterian and Independent visible Churches c. not yet retracted which was written but in the year 1689 p. 3. 4 in answer to Sam. Norton's charging us with denying the Resurrection of the dead saith thus viz That they deny the Resurrection of the dead this is also a most false charge which they can never prove but because we deny their carnal conceptions of the Resurrection and hold us to scripure words which is most safe therefore they have so belyed us And for the more satisfaction of the Reader saith he I refer him to a little book called Truth 's Principles published by some noted men of the Quakers In which book it is expressly affirmed That we to wit the Quakers believe that the same body which is laid down shall be raised up at the Resurrection of the dead as much as a natural body can be the same with a spiritual body or an earthly body can be the same with a havenly body according to the Scripure testimony It is sown natural but raised spiritual And the glory of the heavenly is one and the glory of the earthly is another And this may satisfy any sober enquirer c. Thus far G. K. To all which I say though this was so lately cited by G K out of a former book of our Friends and laid down by him as one of our principles which he courts might satisfy any that inquires in sobriety Yet it seems it will not satisfy him now for which I fear the chief reason is for that he himself is gone into Apostacy and bitter enmity Having a little digressed upon this occasion I now return to D L's 12 th Chapter where I find him in his p. 103 a Hedging against â— Dickenson and S. Jenings in particular as follows 〈◊〉 Where fore some preachers particularly â— Dickenson and S. Jenings have now found out a new argment to prove to their he nearers that they are indeed balyed viz in being accoused for denying Jesus of Nazareth c. as before mentioned and that is That their refusing to pay Tythes to fight and to swear are three proofs that they own Jesus to be Christ and therefore they are falsly accused Answ Though hereupon he vaunts at no small rate yet all proceeds from a grand mistake at best For neither they nor we do say that our refusing to pay Tythes to fight and to swear are proofs of our owning Jesus to be Christ but the reason for which we refuse to pay Tithes to fight and to swear and our suffering so deeply on those accounts is because weilest Christ was in the flesh he forâ—ade and at his offering up himself he put an end to these things and yet our thus refusing to comply with those things because of his commands and prohibitions then given is a good proof that we own Jesus to be Christ Did not Paul bring such manner of reasoning to prove his hope and expectation of the resurrection of the dead see 1 Cor. 15. 32 where he said If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus what advantageth 〈◊〉 if the dead rise not let us eat and drink for tomorrow we die Even so may we say If Jesus be not the Christ that offered himself up and put an end to the ceremonial law of Twthes Let us pay Tythes and keep our selves out of prisons and our goods from being spoiled Oh! but this we can not do because our souls are satisfied that Jesus is the Christ and hath put an end to these things In the next place he falls â—oul upon us about Government matters He begins first with West Iersey the Province he lives in but with what truth he relutes things as done there I refer to them selves to answer if they think it worth their while But since in his p. 104. 105 he pretends to give a relation with reflections upon some affairs relating to our Government of Pennsilvania I shall not pass over that but detect his abuses of us therein He hath it thus viz Next let us step over into the Government of Pensilvania where in the year 1695 we find Coll. Benjamin Fletcher then Governour of that Province pressing upo the Assembly to raise a fund for his Majesties service to wards securing the Province from the French and Indians but this they could not do No it was against their tender consciences contrary to their antient testimony and principle and so no fund was raised Answer This is not so for Governour Fletcher's power
him was life and the life was the light of men Iohn 1 4. Neither do we read of any whom Christ hath forever pefected but those who are sanctified Heb 10 14. Now thath this doctrine of Christ the seed's bruising the head of the serpent inwardly is owned by D. L's great Friend G K as wel as by W P is clear from his Way cast up p 99. not yet retracted thus expessed Though the outward coming of the man Christ was deferred according to his outward birth in the flesh for many years yet from the beginning this heavenly man the promised seed did inwardly mark inwardly come in to the heart and bruise the head of the serpent Come novv D L if thou art impartial as thou pretendest and art not blinded with partiality and prejudice lay this which thou idly callest a contradiction in VV P. and T E at G K's door also For here he owns the seed which bruises the serpents head to be inward as vvell as VV P and that he owns the very same passage of T E may appear by his bringing those two very quotations to prove his doctine consistent with Friends doctrine in his book called Heresy and Hatred p 9. His necxt lash is upon the matter answered by the foregoing For as Christ the light is the salvation of all that believe according to G F so we ascribe our salvation to him alone according to T E and this is no contradiction Alas poor Daniel How far is he gone in to prejudice and blindness to represent these things as unreconcilable For upon this he calls and cry's out Come let 's see if T Ellwood with al his sophistry and false glosses can reconcile these two assertions Alas poor man does he want to hâ—ve Sophistry and false glosses reconcile sound assertions while he with his pretended motion heavenly counts them contradictions But for the sake of some I shal a little illustrate this matter with this comparison Suppose a subject were sentenced by his Prince to be cast in to prison for some great misdemeanor committed against his person yet the Prince commiserating his pooâ— condition Finds out a way to save him but upon this condition that he humbly and thankfully receive the same and no more live in disobedience to him Now is not his Prince in this case by saving him from his deserved punishment his Saviour though he live for the future in all obedience to his Prince's commands Yet he can not ascribe his being saved from the punishment incurred to any thing but his Princes clemencey and goodness Eveâ— so VVe VVho VVere once dead in our sins and trespasses and had in curred the displeasur of God ascribe our being saved out of that state and from the punishment due thereto to the mercy of God alone through Jesus Christ but not to any of our own works And now I must needs say all this is more than D L's cevill deserved and is indeed more in respect to others than from any hopes I have of it's working much effect upon him I now follow him to his p 14 were he cites Chr Quaker by G VV p. 212 The man's mistaken if he suppose that we plead for the Righteousness of a creature i e Christ as man or man 's own Righteousess wich he himself is enabled to perform as the cause of our justification c To which D L opposes VV P 's Serious Apology p 148. Death came by actual sin not imputative therefore justifcation unto life came by actual Righteousnes not imputative Upon which D L makes this Note whether is the errour of both these â—â— the contradiction greater Answer Whether in this matter the palpable Forgery or ignorance of D L be the greater is not hard to demonstrate for my part I cannot think he can be so ignorant and therefore can count him no less rhan a base Forger thus to foist in words of his own thereby to misrepresent the words of G VV as if when he Speaks of the Righteousness of a creature he meant the Righteousness of Christ as man Which words Christ as man D L hath added for as they are not G VV's words So neither are they coherent vvith the rest of the matter Novv vvhat is this less than forgery and a contrivance to render G W erronious as vvell as inconsistent vvith VV P But to shevv that he is neither I shall transcribe the passage as it is laid dovvn in the book it self that thereby it may be seen Whether G W's errour or D. L's forgery be the greater G W's vvords are thus 4thly The man's mistaken if he suppose that vve plead either-the Righteousness of a creature or mans ovvn Righteousness vvich he himself is inabled to perform as the cause of our justification for Christ that strengthens us or enables us by his povver and spirit dvvelling in us to do the Fathers vvill he is the ground and cause of our justification and in him vvho is the beloved are vve accepted not meerly for our ovvn vvorks or obedience but for his sake vvho vvorketh in us and enables us to do those things vvhich are vvell pleasing in his sight Novv is it not strange that D L should be so infatuated as to abuse and find fault vvith such sound doctrine and so at present I shall leave it as such but the forgery at Daniel Leeds's door and come next to examine vvhether it contradicts W P or not for as he hath not shevvn us vvherein so I cannot see hovv he can find out his pretended contadiction For as G W ovvns not mans ovvn Righteousness vvhich he is able to perform of himself to be the cause of our Justification so neither doth W P. say or ovvn that a man of himself is able to perform that actual Righteousness vvhich is necessary to justification therefore no contradiction But is it not as sound doctrine to say justification comes by actual richteousness as it is to say that Abraham our Father was justified by works when he offered up Isaac his Son James 2 21. Now was not this his offering up his Son an actual work and is not Faith without works dead v 26 And surely a man is not justified by a dead faith Now although a man is said and that in a schriptural sence to be justified by works yet it is not for his works sake who worketh all our good works in us and for us I now must again call upon D L. to be impartial for if W P. be guilty of errour here how can his Friend G K. be sound For it is one of the false doctrins he charges the New England Professours with That justification is only by Christ's righteousness without us imputed to us and received by faith alone and not by any righteousness of god and Christ infused into us or wrought in us see Presbyterian and Independent c. p 204 not yet retracted and in his Looking glass to the Protestants p 31 he saith this
whole paragraph that it may be seen whether any such thing be so much as deducible from what VV. P. there saith And now let me tell him there needs no carious wire drawing mincing nor mangling as he in p 43. insinuates we should be forced to in our answer to him to manifest his abuse to W. P. in this matter Neither was there any occasion for D. L. to talk of our agreeing upon a consistent Creed but if he write again let it be what is agreeable with honesty and consistent with truth that honest men may stand by him in it In p 4 it should be 7 DL saith v In Dirinity of Christ by G. W. and G. Fox they begin in the Epistle with commanding and charging Professours to bring express scripture for their Doctrine saying Whether do the scriptures speak of three persons in the Godhead in these express words And where doth the scripture speak of a humane nature of Christ in heaven c. A little lower D. L. saith Now may not the Professours say Come G. W. Come Quakers where doth the scripture say the distinction of Father and Son is not only nominal but real He having in p. 4. cited these as G. W 's words Answ We know that those Professors would have tyed our friends up to those very terms of three persons and also human nature of Christ in heaven c. And yet at the same time blamed them for not calling the scriptures the only rule of faith So that since they would needs tye our Friends up to those very words 't was but reasonable they should be held to their Rule to prove them by But as foâ— G. VV.'s saying the distinction of the Father and Son is not only nominal but real I question not if the Father Word and Spirit be owned to be one God but G. VV. will rest satisfied without disiring to impose the words nominal and real on any man though he might use them to satisfie the enquirer But since D. L. would make us beleive he is impartial in relation to G. K why must the Quakers be thus struck at and G. K. passed by in this matter For doth not he in his book called Presbyterian and Independent visible Churches c. p 87 say of the scripture That it is not safe to leave the scripture words and go to words of mans wisdom and thereby declare our faith of Christian doctrine And yet doth not the same G. K make abundant use of other words in managing of Controversy and plead for it too as in his book called Antichrists and Sadducees detected c. in p. 19 Where he saith I see not why I should be so confined to exspres scripture words ' in things that I require no man to own or believe as Articles of faith but leave them to their liberty c. And now I dare say G. VV. and all sensible Friends will say as much The next quotation of D. L.'s I take notice of is out of G. F's Great Mistery p 264 c. cited by him in his p 10 thus Priest sayes A man by his own power cannot get into regeneration for they are dead in sins and trespasses G. F. replies some are sanctified from the womb and some children are holy so all are not dead in sins and trespasses c. Now to this he opposes G VV.'s Divinity of Christ in answer to T. D. p 20 thus G. VV. saies Condemnation â—ame upon all men Death passed upon all men for that all have sinned p 24 Again Christ died for all so all were dead in sins and trespasses c. Answ That some are sanctified from the womb according to G F is but according to scripture see Jerem 1 5 Luke 1 15 and 1 Cor 7 15 And also that condemnation and death came upon all men according to G VV is also according to scripture see Rom 12 18 and so according to D L. may not the scripture be charged with contradiction in that respect as well as G F and G VV Then whereas G F said all are not mark are not which is in the present tense dead in sins and trespasses it doth not at all contradict what D. L produceth as G. VV's that all were dead in sins and trespasses were being the time past tho by the way let the Reader take notice that I can find no such words in the place cited by D. L as G. VV's though I have searched for them For those words of scripture being taken in the strictest sense viz If one died for all then were all dead 2 Cor. 5 14 yet it doth not follow that those which were sanctified from their Mothers womb nor those which were passed from death to life are still dead For as G F's following words are hwich D. L. hath left out and hwich had he inserted them would have better explained G F.'s meaning They that are so are but unbeleivers And where as it is said death passed upon all men it this be to be understood strictly and without any 〈◊〉 how is it said of Enoch That he was translated tha◠〈…〉 not see death Hebr. 11 5. 〈…〉 12 he quotes W P.'s Christian Quaker thus Now nothing can bruise the head of the Serpent but something that is also internal as the Serpent is but if the body oâ— Christ were the seed then could he not bruise the serpents head in all because the body of Christ is not so much as in any one c Whom he would make T. Ellwood to oppose in Foundation of Tythes c p. 2â—8 240 thus Nor do the Quakers ascribe salvation to the following the light within but to Christ Jesus to whom the light leads If any one expect Remission of sins by any other way than by the death of Christ renders the death of Christ useless Answ I do affirm if D L or any other comes to know the serpents head bruised in any measure it must be by some thing internal neither doth what T E. hath said as above any waies contradict it For though we ascribe not our salvation to our own following of Christ who is the â—â—ght of the world according to Tho. Ellwood yet that follows not but thath Christ the Light of the world is he thath bruises the Serpents head and to ascribe our salvation to Christ the light of the world who appears internally in order there to is one thing and to ascribe it to our works which Tho. Ellwood and all sound Friends deny is another thing For allthough the Apostle know nothing by him self which is a large degree of growth yet there by he was not justified 1 Cor 4 4. Nevertheless the same Apostle saith By grace ye are saved and thath not of Your selves it is the gift of God Eph 2 8. Yet this is no contradiction And though the Apostle saith We are reconciled by his death yet he also saith we are saved by his life Rom 5 10 which life is internal For in