had only opposed the Doctrine of the glorified Saints in Heaven not being perfect which is a most deceitful Evasion by mistating the Controversie R. Hub. here is not disputing against the Papists who maintain a Purgatory but against a Protestant Author who did hold That all the deceased Saints are perfect with a sinless perfection but it doth not therefore follow that they do not in that sinless state hope for the Resurrection of their Bodies which yet is R. Hubb.'s inference by which he doth plainly discover his and his Brethrens infidelity in that great Article of the Christian Faith viz. the Resurrection of the Body Again in Coll. p. 275. he gives us his sense of the Resurrection The Seeds he saith are but two in the whole World viz. the Seed of the Woman and the Seed of the Serpent having each Seed its own Body and in every one until the one be cast out and every one of these two Seeds in every Man shall arise in its own order the one shall rise unto everlasting Life the other unto Condemnation Christ the Seed made his Grave IN the Wicked and IN the Rich in his Death and out of that Grave shall rise with his Body unto everlasting Life if thou canst receive it thou may'st be satisfied Are not these Words horrid Perversions of Scripture and containing abominable Blasphemy Again G. F. in his Distinction betwixt the Two Suppers p. 20. saith And the Apostle said that there shall be a Resurrection of the Dead both of the Just and Unjust and for Preaching the Resurrection of the Dead namely Christ Jesus he was called in question Acts 24. 15 21. And in p. 21. quoting 2 Tim. 2. 17 18. he saith But Hymenaeus and Philetus concerning the Truth erred who said that the Resurrection was past already such overthrew People from the Faith that stands in Christ who is the Resurrection and the Life through which Faith they attained to the Resurrection and had their vile Bodies changed and made like unto his Glorious Body Note How he perverts the Scripture both in words and sense the Scripture words Who shall change our vile or low Bodies respecting the time to come at the Resurrection of the Dead but he saith they attained the Resurrection and had their vile Bodies changed as a thing already fulfilled Also he makes the Resurrection that Paul Preached in the Acts 17. 18 22. and 23. 6. to be Christ himself perverting our Saviour's words who called himself the Resurrection and the Life to a literal sense which as is obvious to all intelligent Persons contain a figurative sense to wit the metony my of the Cause getting the Name of the Effect as is frequent in Scripture and in all Authors as when God is call'd in Scripture the Saints Hope and Confidence and Salvation i. e. the Author and Cause of their Hope Confidence and Salvation Tenthly Concerning the Quakers Notion of the Light Within THE true Doctrine and Sense of the Light Within as a Divine and Supernatural Gift of God given to all faithful Christians of whom it is truly said as David said concerning himself The Lord is their Light and their Salvation and also that Christ the Eternal and Essential Word who was in the beginning with God and was and is God is that true Light that doth enlighten every Man that cometh into the World even Heathens and all Individuals of Mankind with a common and universal Illumination Discovery and Knowledge of certain moral Principles of Justice and Temperance and also of some general knowledge of God as the great Creator and Ruler of the World and of some general moral Duties towards him as such whether by certain innate impressions preventing the exercise and actings of the rational Faculty or by exciting and awakening the rational Faculty of the Soul as it is enlightned and assisted by God Almighty as the primary Cause and by the works of Creation and of general Providence as secondary Causes whether one or both of these ways is not so necessary at present to determine is a Doctrine well warranted by Scripture and consented unto by the generality of Professors of Christianity and which I not only consent unto but highly value as an excellent Principle labouring daily by the Grace of God practically to improve whatever true Light within I have both Common and Special and I hope ever I shall so do and so I pray that God may enable all and me to do the same But the Quakers Notion of the Light within held in general by them and authentickly received from their Principal Teachers particularly G. F. G. W. E. Bur. and others is extremely contrary to the Holy Scriptures and also to the best dictates of our rational Faculties to which no divine Light either within Men or without Men can contradict To show which hath been a principal part of my business in all the the three Meetings above-mention'd and is the same in all the three Parts of this Narrative the which contrariety I intend to show in a short Scheme of their absurd unscriptural as well as irrational Notions of what they call the Light within which upon due examination will be found to be Darkness and not Light within 1. It 's natural to Man to have a Supernatural Light W. P.'s Prin. Christ p. 15. 2. There is no natural Light in Men Prin. Christ p. 30. There are not two Lights in Men p. 31. Thus he allows no distinction betwixt natural Reason which is a good and true Light and Gift of God to Men and the Light of Faith given to all true Christians and the Light of prophetical Inspirations given to the holy Prophets and Apostles but confounds them by making them all to be one and the same thing whereas they are all very distinct tho' all coming from one Fountain and Author God the Father of Lights 3. Man at his coming into the World hath a Light from Christ which is more than Conscience G. F.'s G. M. p. 209. 4. And seeing the Light is but dim in Heathens and Christians and Prophets and Apostles by Prin. Christ as above-quoted no Man has or ever had any other Light but what he had at his coming into the World 5. The Light within not only true Christians but within all Men Heathens Turks Jews is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else G. W.'s Antid p. 28. Thus the Man Christ without us who is both God and Man and his Death and Sufferings and Blood outwardly shed and Mediation for us in Heaven are all excluded from being so much as concurring Causes of our Salvation 6. The Light within every Man litterally understood without any Metonymy is God Christ the Holy Ghost the Unction or Anointing is blinded in some by the God of this World G. F. News out of the North p. 19. is Crucified Imprisoned Slain in wicked Men and its Blood is shed in them and that is the Blood that they trod under feet see
on the Sea or flie in the Air to that remote Place The next thing in reference to their Infallibility is their Pretence to the infallible discerning of Mens Hearts without respect to their Works good or bad This is differently stated by them and wherein we shall find a real Contradiction among them G. F. in his Gr. Myst pag. 89. had said Here thou hast shewed that the Quakers have a Spirit given to them beyond all the Forefathers which we do witness since the Days of the Apostles in the Apostacy and they can discern who are Saints who are Devils and who are Apostates without speaking ever a VVord they that be in the Power and the Life of Truth This discerning of Mens Hearts G. VVhitehead had formerly placed upon outward Signs in the Countenances of wicked Men or Women which he still justifieth in his Antitode pag. 69. Proud and haughty Looks wanton and scornful Eyes envious and fallen Countenances are rendred in Scripture as outward Signs or Marks of such wicked Hearts which also the Gift of discerning perceiveth and gives to see many times through such outward mediums Note G. VV. here layeth a great Stress upon outward Signs in the Countenance which he owneth to be outward mediums through which the Spirit of discerning perceiveth and giveth to see Mens Hearts but yet he will not allow the Scriptures to be the medium of Faith so preferreth outward Signs in the Countenance to the Scriptures but then he much throweth down this sort of discerning by Mens Countenances by saying many times for this leaveth their discerning to be many times fallible and though the Scripture and common Experience proveth that the Countenances of some openly vicious and extreamly wicked are Signs of their wicked Hearts yet the Scripture giveth no universal Rule in the Case but giveth us the Command of Christ Isaiah 11. 3. John 7. 24. Judge not according to Appearance but judge righteous Judgment and it was said of Christ He shall not judge after the Sight of his Eyes nor reprove after the hearing of his Ears But G. VV. will not take Christ in the case for his Example but he pleads further That the Gift of discerning of Spirits is given to some Members especially and still is continued in the true Church and from which discerning Satan cannot be hid however he transforms himself Here is another minching of their Infallibility of discerning that it 's given to some Members especially but he doth not allow it to all Members however he seems to plead for all the Ministers having it Truth and Inn. p. 12. for he makes it an Evidence of great Darkness in his Opponents to hold that a Minister that is fallible is in the Spirit a Minister of Christ and yet cannot discern another Man's State or Condition so as to give an infallible Character of him And he contends so earnestly for this infallible discerning in the Church that he saith If there must be no discerning of Spirits no infallible or certain Character to be given of other Men's States or Conditions by an inward Sense or discerning of Spirits then Christ's Sheep may follow Strangers VVolves Dogs c. and so be devoured contrary to his own Doctrine and below the Sense and Instinct of the very Sheep which leads them to shun Dogs and VVolves when they make at them whether they bark or howl or be mute Note By this manner of G. VV's arguing not only the Teachers but all and every one of the People if they be Sheep must have this infallible discerning whereas he pleads for the Ministers having it or some Members so it seems the People must rely on the Ministers discerning by an implicit Faith or if not be in danger of perishing But in plain Contradiction to this Doctrine of G.VV. who pleads for the infallible discerning of Men's Hearts to every Minister let us hear Jos VVyeth who saith Switch p. 95. But though this holy Spirit can discover unto one the Heart and Thoughts of another as of Ananias to Peter Acts 5. yet as that is not usual so neither is it necessary nor is it that which we pretend to nor hath G.F. in the fore-quoted Places pretended to it referring to the above-quoted Passage where he makes this Observation Switch p. 90. VVhich does very plainly shew that G. F. did not attribute this Knowledge or Discerning to the Quakers or any Man but to the Power and Life of Truth where it is manifested This Gloss as it is directly contradictory to G. Fox's Words which say They i.e. the Quakers that be in the Power and Life of Truth can discern so to the Words of G. W. who doth affirm That some of the Members especially have it But both G. F. and G. VV. hath carried this discerning farther than by the outward medium of Men's Looks and Glances so that they can know the inward States of their Hearers without looking to their Faces yea though their Backs be toward them and not only what they are at present but what they have been and shall be from Eternity to Eternity For Proof of this G. F. Gr. M. quotes his Opponents G. M. p. 229. saying VVill a discerning of the Gospel Mysteries prove a Power to discern the State and Condition of Souls what it shall be to all Eternity And after some Words he answers And so who are come into the Bishop Christ they are one Soul they know the Hand of God which the Soul lives in which is the Power and so knows it from Eternity to Eternity And so ye Priests which do not discern the Soul and its State to Eternity and from Eternity ye are not in the Mystery of the Gospel which gives Liberty to it neither have ye it And you five Priests have shamed your selves that do not know the Soul from Eternity to Eternity and on this horrid Presumption that they knew the State of Men's Souls from Eternity to Eternity Rich. Hubberth passes this severe Sentence on his Opponent Truth 's def pag. 92. Thou art ordained of old for Condemnation and for Perdition among the ungodly ones and art a Reprobate And p. 93. So here thou art cursed and cast out eternally Note this was only for his asking What is original Sin And here he speaks of the several States of the Soul as when the Soul is in Death and when it liveth and God hath Pleasure in it By which Soul he must needs understand the Soul of Man for of the Souls of Men his Opponents did speak Next G. VV. in his Truth defending the Quakers hath gone as far as G. F. with respect to his Infallibility in knowing Men's Hearts The Question being put to him in Truth def p. 24. qu. 54. Do not you G. W. blasphemously take to your self an Attribute of God while you pretend ordinarily to know the Hearts of Men. And tell Mr. Townsend of Norwich in the second Page of your Ishmael That the Light of God is
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
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
Part of God Their Inferences are weak as That Christ is the Bishop of the Soul The Soul is in Transgression in Death The Soul redeemed rejoyceth in God All this doth not prove that George Fox did hold that the Soul of Man in all these Considerations was not a Part of God For according to him the Soul being a Part of God this part rejoyceth in God the Fulness and God or Christ considered as the Fulness is the Bishop of the Soul that is a Part of him the Soul being like a Drop of Water returning into the Ocean so taught the Ranters and that all Creatures were Parts of God who was the Substance of all things and so saith George Fox expresly Great Mistery page 99. and Edward Burrough see the Collection of his Works pag. 827 828. And George Fox denieth That either Christ or Men have a Humane Soul or that Christ hath either a Humane Soul or Body Great Mistery pag. 99 100. His Objection is idle against Humane as signifying Earthly from Humus the Ground which is but a Cloak to cover his gross Eerror None of his Opponents said the Soul was from the Earth He might as much object against the Language of Scripture that calleth Christ the second Adam the Word Adam signifying Red Earth That the Soul is in Transgression in Death proves not that George Fox did not hold it to be a Part of God for he and other Teachers among the Quakers teach That what they call the Seed Christ is crucified in the wicked and is held in Satans Chains and what are these Chains but Sins as is above proved out of Truth 's Def. p. 49. But for a full and clear Evidence that George Fox did hold the Soul of Man to be a Part of God in answer to Magnus Byne his Book called The scornful Quakers answered Great Mistery p. 90. Is not the Soul without Beginning coming from God returning into God again who hath it in his Hand And in Answer to Jonathan Clapham his Book called A Discovery of the Quakers Doctrine Great Mistery page 100. Is not this that cometh out from God which is in God's Hand part of God of God and from God and to God again which Soul Christ is the Bishop of It is to be noted and well observed that this Opposition that George Fox made to those Men and his other Opponents as Richard Baxter and the five Ministers of New Castle about the Soul which they denied to be a Part of God or without Beginning and he affirmed it was By Opposition to them was not about any divine Soul in the Soul that was the Life or Soul of it as George VVhitehead would have it by which he means God or the Holy Ghost for in all Disputes the Subject of the Dispute is one betwixt the Opponent and the Respondent and though sometimes where the Matter is intricate and nice the Subject is hard to find out and the Opponent may mean one thing and the Respondent another yet in a Case that is clear and easie to be understood as this Case is there can be no Difficulty about the Subject of the Dispute as indeed here there is none which Subject of Dispute betwixt George Fox and his Opponents above mentioned was purely and simply the Soul of Man and not any divine Principle in the Soul As to instance from Magnus Byne the Beginning of this Controversie betwixt Magnus Byne and George Fox about the Soul was by a Question that Magnus Byne put to Thomas Lawson a Quaker which was this see in Magnus Byne The scornful Quaker answered page 103. VVhat is the Soul of Man and the Preciousness of it seeing Christ says It is more worth than all the VVorld To this Thomas Lawson the Quaker answers The Ministers of Jesus who come by the Will of God such know the Soul and watch for the Soul Heb. 13. 17. But thy watching is for the Fliece and art querying what the Soul is which lies in Death and State and Condemnation so long as it lives and the false Accuser lives and it the First-born knows not nor the Preciousness of it who prefers the World and obeys it before the Light of Christ and so sells the Soul for the World as thou dost who professest him in thy Lip-talk but denies him in Practice Ways and Conversation though Christ saith The Soul is more worth than all the World To which Magnus Byne his Opponent thus replieth In all this Answer there is not a Tittle unto-the Question here it appears thy perfect knowledge fails thee Here thou guessest that the Soul is Christ for he is the First-born the Scripture mentions and so according to thy Blasphemy Christ it seems may be damned and cast into Hell for so it is said of the Soul Fear him who is able to cast Body and Soul into Hell See how dark thou art in making no Difference between the Soul and Christ the Soul is indeed a precious thing there is a kind of Infiniteness in it which all the World cannot satisfie and therefore the Man was a Fool that said Soul take thine Ease because thy Barns are full and yet notwithstanding this kind of Infiniteness in the Soul as being restless till it return to God yet it cannot be Infiniteness it self it cannot be the First-born for of whole Man it is said whereof the Soul is the more noble Part VVhat is Man that thou art mindful of him Heb. 2. 6 7. Man you see is inferior unto the Angels much more inferior to the Son of God And farther saith he though the Soul be the Seat of Christ and Christ be hid there as a Treasure in a Field even in the innermost Room of the Soul yet the Soul cannot comprehend the infinite Majesty so Christ in his diviner Essence or Being much less can it be Christ who is God over all blessed for evermore And though there be indeed a blessed Union and Fellowship between Christ and an holy Soul yet still there is a vast Difference between the Essence or being of the Soul and Christ the one being still a Creature and the other the Creator of it Next he comes to give his own Definition of it The Soul saith Magnus Byne is a most noble Power a living Being an Essence that quickens the Body and yet dies not sleeps not when the Body dies and sleeps but returns unto God who gave it This Soul is a little Map of the great World and makes Man a little World for in his Soul is comprehended the Life of Plants the Sense of Beasts the Reason of Men and Angels This Soul quickens and makes Man a living Creature a sensitive Creature a rational Creature After he has described the Soul of Man which he expresly calls a Creature as above quoted in its several Powers and Faculties of the Mind Reason Judgment Will Memory Fancy Appetite and Affections to wit the created Soul of Man He saith God is the Life of
In the 4th Article of that Paper sign'd by G. W. I quoted these words The Divinity and Humanity i. e. Manhood of Christ Jesus that as he is true God and he is most glorious Man our Mediator and Advocate we livingly believe and have often sincerely confessed in our Publick Testimonies and Writings On this I noted That whatever seeming Confessions they have given in their publick Testimonies to this and other Doctrines yet seeing they have contradicted them most evidently in their printed Books and will not allow that they are chang'd in any one of their Principles they do Fallaciously and put a Cheat upon the Members of Parliament and the whole Nation A Quaker reply'd Dost thou think that the Members of Parliament are not more Wise than to suffer themselves to be cheated by the Quakers I answer'd It is one thing for the Quakers to put a Cheat upon them it is another thing for them to be cheated by them a Cheat may be put on Men and yet they not receive it I hope they are so wise as not to be deceived by them Some of the Quakers objecting That this tended to Persecution so to represent them I answered it tended to no Persecution being to rescue such from those Errors who were corrupted by them and prevent their further spreading and would they take my advice I would shew them a way to secure the Toleration unto them and that is by a free and plain Retractation of their gross Errors And for an evidence of their fallacious way of Speaking and Writing besides what was quoted and proved at the former Meeting to prove them grosly Erroneous concerning Christ his Humanity and Incarnation his Soul Body Flesh and Blood I brought a Quotation out of that call'd A Testimony for the true Christ printed 1668 and given forth as in the Title-Page from some of them call'd Quakers In page 4. As he speaks of Humane with relation to Nature and Body it hath relation to the Earth or Humus the Ground of which Man was made which the first Man is of not the second tho' he was really Man too but Humane or Humanity in the other sence with relation to Gentleness Mercifulness and the like this we know was and is in the Image of God in which Man was made and his Gentleness Kindness Mercifulness c. is manifested in Christ who is the Image of the invisible God and First-Born of every Creature which Image is not earthly for that must be put off but heavenly and so to be put on by all that come to know the Glory of the terrestrial in its place and the true and real Humanity as oppos'd to that Cruelty Envy and Inhumanity which is got up in Man since the Fall so that Humanity and the Unreasonableness of Beasts are two things Note Thus we see how they own Christ's Humanity not in the sence of Scripture and of all sound Christians viz. That the Word did take the real Nature of Man consisting of Soul and Body into a Personal Union with himself his Divinity and Humanity being two Natures distinguished in him but not divided and that he took a Body of Flesh and Blood the same in Nature with ours even our earthly Nature like to us in all things but without Sin but this they plainly deny That Christ had Humanity as it signifies Earthly but they tell in what sence they mean his Humanity viz. as it signifies Gentleness Mercifulness as oppos'd to Cruelty Envy and the unreasonableness of Beasts in which sence they may affirm all this of Christ's Divinity and Godhead That his Godhead is Humane i. e. Gentle Merciful Kind and yet believe not one tittle of Christ's Humanity as the Scripture holds it forth that is that he was really made of a Woman and had his Flesh of her Substance but this they not only here deny but G. F. expresly denyeth That Christ's Body was Earthly or of the Earth G. M. p. 322. He quotes his Opponent saying That Christ had and hath a Carnal Body A Carnal and Humane Body united to his Divinity In opposition to which he saith And Carnal Humane is from the Ground Humane Earthly the first Adam's Body and Christ was not from the Ground let all People read what thou say'st but he was from Heaven his Flesh came down from above his Flesh which was the Meat his Flesh came down from Heaven Again He quotes his Opponent saying That the Flesh of Christ is not in them he answers The Saints eat his Flesh and they that eat his Flesh hath it within them Again He quotes his Opponent That there is as much difference between a Body and a Spirit as there is between Light and Darkness he Answers Christ's Body is Spiritual and that which is Spiritual does not differ from the Spirit and so there is a spiritual Body and there is a natural Body and there is a spiritual Man and there is a natural Man and each hath their Body Note He plainly here denies a difference or distinction between Christ's Body of Flesh and his Spirit for he saith The Saints eat his Flesh and they that eat his Flesh hath it in them Now what Flesh can they have of Christ in them but what is merely Spirit whereas his Opponent and all Christians when they speak of Christs Flesh they meant a real Body as real as the Body of any other Man And whereas G. F. saith Christ's Flesh was not from the Ground or Earth the Scripture saith no such thing but the contrary that he did partake of the same Flesh and Blood with the Children wherefore he is not asham'd to call them Brethren * Heb. 2. 11 14. G. F. doth both Ignorantly and Fallaciously play and quible about the Word Carnal against his Opponent who said Christ had a Carnal Body he Answers Carnal indeed is Death saith the Scripture but here he belyes the Scripture it saith not the Carnal Body is Death but to be Carnally-minded is Death Could G. F. be so sottish as not to distinguish between a Carnal Body and a Carnal Mind His Opponents who said Christ had a Carnal Body united to the Divinity they meant not Carnal as it signifies Vicious or Corrupted but as it signifies Material i. e. a real Body as real a Bodily Substance as any other Man hath and tho' Christ's Body now in Heaven is a Spiritual Body yet it is a Body still and the same Body in Substance it was on Earth And when it was on Earth it was both a Material Body and yet in a sense a Spiritual i. e. a pure immaculate Body without all stain of Sin a most holy Body and in the like sense it might be said even when on Earth it was a heavenly Body to wit as opposed to sinful corrupt and tainted with Sin and not only so but in respect of its miraculous Conception by the Holy Ghost and the holy and heavenly Virtues it was endued with above the
Body of Adam in Innocency And thus the comparison is made betwixt the First Adam and the Second the first Man even as he was in Innocency is of the Earth Earthly his Body was Created or Made by God Almighty but was neither so wonderfully framed nor endued with such excellent Virtues as our Lord's Body was Tho' the Substance of both was the same in Specie or Kind yet the difference was great both in the manner of Production and the Virtues and Properties wherewith Christ's Body was endued above Adam's Body and chiefly in respect of the Hypostatical and Personal Union betwixt Christ's Body or Flesh and the Eternal Word Eternally Begotten of the Father It was an old Heresie of the Manicheans That Christ's Body that was Born of the Virgin had no part of her Body but did penetrate her Body as the Beams of the Sun penetrate Christal and did entirely come from Heaven which Heresie was reviv'd by Meno a Dutch-man but is effectually and solidly refuted by Calvin in his Institutions lib. 2. c. 13. And as to the Quakers arguing from 1 Cor. 15 47. The first man of the earth earthly the second Man the Lord from heaven that therefore his Body had not an earthly Substance which is the same Argument Manicheus used of old Calvin answereth solidly thus Manicheus aereum fabricatur Corpus quia vocetur Christus secundus Adam de Coelo Coelestis at neque illic essentiam corporis Coelestem inducit Apostolus sed vim spiritualem quaed Christo diffusa nos vivificat Sect. 2. i.e. Manicheus maketh him viz. Christ to have a Body of Air because he is call'd the Second Adam from heaven heavenly But neither doth the Apostle there infer that the Essence of his Body is heavenly but that there is a spiritual Virtue which being diffused from Christ doth quicken us Again Whereas G. W. saith Art 7. of that Paper Our really Believing and Confessing the Lord Jesus Christ his Passion Sufferings Death Atonement and Reconciliation made for us and his Resurrection Ascention and Glorification as without us according to Scripture cannot be to allegorize these away as if only transacted within us as we have been unduly accused for they were really done and transacted without us by our Blessed Lord Jesus Christ tho' our true knowledge of the Power and Effect of his Resurrection and Fellowship of his Sufferings and our being conformable to his Death must be experienc'd within us if ever we live and reign with him And in their Paper annexed Art 2. they say we sincerely Believe and Confess that Jesus of Nazareth who was Born of the Virgin Mary is the true Messiah the very Christ the Son of the Living God to whom all his Prophets gave Witness And we do highly value his Death Sufferings Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind together with his Laws Doctrine and Ministry Note That all this seemingly fair Confession cannot but be judged extremely Fallacious seeing they will not Retract any of their former assertions expresly contradictory to the same as is in great part already proved out of the above-given Quotations How do they sincerely Confess that Jesus of Nazareth who was Born of the Virgin Mary was the very Christ the Son of the Living God seeing they profess to be of one Faith with W. P. who saith That that Outward Person that Suffered at Jerusalem was properly the Son of God we utterly deny as above-quoted And to be of E. B.'s Faith who denyeth that Christ is in Heaven in our Nature And of G. F.'s Faith who denyeth That Christ's Body was from the Earth But yet more fully to detect their Fallacies Whereas G. W. saith Their really Believing and Confessing Christ's Passion Sufferings Death Atonement and Reconciliation made for us c. cannot be to allegorize these away as if only tranfacted within us as we have been unduly accused To detect his Fallacy here Note I know none that accuse them for holding that Christ's Birth and Death was only transacted within them they grant that a Man call'd Jesus of Nazareth was outwardly Born and Suffered Death but some of the chief of them have said That that Man was not properly the Christ nor Son of God but was by the metonymy of the thing Containing for the thing Contained so called so W. P. as above-quoted Next they make his being outwardly Slain and his Blood outwardly Shed and what was outwardly transacted by him both Actively and Passively a Figure of what he was to do and suffer in Men of his inward Crucifying his Blood inwardly Shed his Burial Resurrection and Ascension within them These outward transactions saith W. P. are so many facile representations of what was to be accomplished in Men as above-quoted and G. W. beside the Proofs already given out of his Books to that Effect he hath lately affirmed in his * Antidote p. 39. Antidote against the Venom of the Snake Printed in the Year 1697 That that Blood of his viz. Christ's outward Blood as well as the Water that came out of his Side with it had an ALLEGORICAL and MYSTERIOUS SIGNIFICATION as well as an Outward and Literal even of the Spiritual Blood and Water of Life which Christ our High Priest Sprinkleth and really Washeth our Hearts and Consciences withal which we hope no sensible Soul will say is an Outward or Literal Sprinkling or Washing but an Inward and Spiritual Note When we charge G. W. and his Brethren with Allegorizing away Christ's Birth Passion Death Burial Resurrection Blood Atonement and Reconciliation made for us c. the sense is obvious which is this That tho' they grant that a Man called Christ was outwardly Born Dyed had his Blood shed c. yet all this was an Allegory and had an Allegorical Signification of Christ truly and really without an Allegory Born within them Crucified and Dead within them his Blood shed within them Buried Risen Ascended within them Atonement Reconciliation made within them Now that this is so we have G. W.'s plain Confession in the Words just now quoted So that according to him Christ's Sufferings without his Blood shed without is the Allegory or Allegorical Signification of Christ's Sufferings within of his Blood shed within the Atonement made within as Hagar and Sarah who were real Women yet as Paul hath declar'd they are an Allegory of the Two Covenants and Types or Figures of them and as far short of the things signified by them as the Type is short of the Substance or thing signified for that is the true definition of an Allegory Where one thing is expressed and another thing is understood Now if Christ's Birth Sufferings Blood c. without Men be an Allegory or Allegorical Signification of Christ's Birth Sufferings Blood shed and sprinkled within Men that Within must be the Reality or Excellent thing signified or typified by the outward but both cannot be the Allegory as to say that as Christ's Blood
and Christ calleth himself the Vine and Believers in him the Branches yet by no means can the Spirit or influence thereof in Men be call'd the Blood shed for remission of Sin the Blood of Atonement that by way of Merit and Satisfaction to Divine Justice removes the guilt of Sin and makes Peace betwixt God and Men for whatever Sacrifice makes Atonement for Sin must be Slain and the Blood of the Sacrifice shed or poured forth as the Beasts that were offered for Sin under the Law behoved to be Slain and their Blood to be shed which were Types of Christ who was outwardly to be slain and his Blood outwardly shed for without shedding of Blood there is no remission as the Scripture testifieth the which sheding of Blood must be by the Death of that whose Body was to be Slain Now the pouring and shedding of the Spirit of Christ and his Graces and Gracious influences into the Hearts of the Faithful is the effect of Christ's Death without us as he was outwardly Slain and offered up for us by way of Merit and Purchase as it is also the effect of his Mediation and Intercession for us now in Heaven by way of impetration and actual dispensation having received power to give those gifts to Men as he is now at Gods Right Hand in Heaven in his glorified Humanity which he procured and purchased for them when he was upon Earth in his state of Humiliation by the proper Merit of his Obedience both Active and Passive who humbled himself and became obedient unto Death even the Death of the Cross wherefore God hath exalted him to be a Prince and a Saviour And therefore it is Coloss 1. 20. that the Blood of Christ by which he made peace for us is called the Blood of the Cross because it was shed and poured forth on the Cross and he is said to have reconciled us in his Body of Flesh through Death all which bespeaks that our Redemption and Reconciliation by way of Purchase and Merit was wholly done and transacted by Christ without us and could not be done within us by way of Sacrifice and Atonement for that required the Sacrifice to be Slain and the Blood thereof to be shed and poured forth But the Authors of this abominable Heresie which teacheth that Christ in Man by his Blood shed in them is the offering for Sin and the Blood thus shed in them is the Blood of Atonement yea the Blood of the Cross within them to make things seemingly consist and hang together they have invented an Inward Crucifixion and Killing of Christ in Men as well as an inward shedding of his Blood in them to answer by way of Analogy to the outward Killing of the Sacrifices under the old Testament But when this Crucifying or Killing of Christ in Men was beside many other questions about the manner of it they are put hard to it to resolve and indeed the resolution of it is impossible for it implys not only manifest contradictions to Scripture but to all true and right Reason as much as the Popish Transubstantiation doth For as nothing can be properly said to have been Killed but what was formerly alive If Christ has been Killed suppose in every Quaker he behoved to be first alive in them and as Christ in the Figure or Type as some of them call him was Born long before he was outwardly crucified for though when he was a Child Herod sought his Life yet by his being taken by his Mother into Egypt he was preserved and this very passage of Christ's being persecuted by Herod soon after he was Born the Quakers have made an Allegory not that the inward is the Allegory of the outward which were somewhat tolerable as some of the Ancients have so Allegorized though some went too far even so but the outward is the Allegory of the inward and as then there passed some considerable space of time betwixt Christ's typical Birth in the outward and his typical Crucifixion so that being about Twelve Years of Age he disputed with the Doctors and about Thirty he began his Ministry wherein he continued for about three Years and a half and then was Crucified after he was Betrayed by Judas denyed by Peter and Sentenced to Death by Pontius Pilate falsly Accused and cruelly Mocked by the Jews all which according to W. P. are so many Facile representations of what is to be accomplished in Men. And I have heard since the difference betwixt the Quakers and me began about Preaching Christ without some of their Preachers in their Publick Meetings Preach a great deal of the History of Christ's Birth Persecution by Herod and the Jews Betrayed by Judas denyed by Peter Sentenced to Death by Pilate and made it all an Allegory of what was to be witnessed within with an Exhortation to Friends to wait to have it all fulfilled and witnessed within them And particularly I heard Jacob Talner the Dutch-man above-mention'd Preach at a Publick Meeting in Philadelphia about the time our differences began there about Christ That Christ must be first Born in us and after that must be Crucified in us c. On which I asked some of their Preachers Were it not better after Christ is Born in Men using their Phrase that Men would not Crucifie him in them but rather that he might live in them For who can Crucifie Christ in Men but they themselves on supposition that he can be Crucified For the Devil cannot do it by himself without Men's consent and concurrence and being the main Actors But G. F. whom J. Wyeth calls the Apostle in this Age hath resolved this Question but whether effectually so as either consistent with Scripture or true and right Reason to which no true Revelation can contradict I leave to the intelligent Christian to judge in a Treatise of his call'd Several Papers given forth for the spreading of Truth one of them bearing this Title Concerning Christ's Flesh which was Offered p. 54. Christ the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World when it began its Foundation then the Lamb was slain then the World was set up in Man's Heart that he did not see the beginning nor the ending of the Works of God Then came their Understandings to be darken'd and Christ ACCORDING TO THE FLESH CRUCIFIED the Lamb Slain that FLESH of his which is a Mystery and when the Jews did transgress the Law of God the Prophets told them they OPPRESSED the Seed as a Cart with Sheaves Note the word Oppressed tho' G. W. is so impudent in his Judgment Fixed p. 322. as to deny that the Seed is Christ and God that is Oppressed That they may come to a thing that 's lower and under and higher and over all and before all that is the Righteousness it self so in this lies the Belief so then in the Life and in the SUBSTANCE and in the end of all Types so through this Flesh he doth reconcile and by the
G. W. so to charge W. B. and mistate the Controversie between W. B. and him nothing but deceit it self could invent such a forgery in G. W. as this to charge it on W. B. as if he had either said or thought that the Meritorious cause of Man's Justification was laid by him upon the Act of the Soldier that thrust the Spear into our Saviour's Side for neither did he say it nor can it be gathered from his Words by the least shadow of any just Consequence his Words being thus as G. W. cites them The shedding of the Blood upon the Cross that was let out by the Virtue of the Spear being thrust into his Side was the Meritorious cause of Man's Justification See Light and Life p. 64. The shedding of the Blood c. is the true English of the Latin Words Effasio Sanguinis which being A Noun Verbal hath a Passive as well as Active signification and that W. B. meant it in the Passive signification and not in the Active as with respect to the Soldiers Act is evident from the Words both of Jer. Ives and also of W. B. quoted by G. W. Light and Life p. 64. he quotes Jer. Ives saying My Brother Burnet meant Christ's Passion and not the Act of wicked Men. And again G. W. quotes W. B. saying Yes Brother it is proper to say It was Christ's Act to shed his Blood His meaning is obvious to any impartial Reader that it was Christ's Act freely to give his Blood to be shed for the remission of our Sins as he said himself no Man taketh my Life from me I lay down my Life and I take it up again Without all doubt though Christ was not Active to Kill himself by any Bodily Act of violence that he did to himself yet his giving up his Blood to be shed and his Life to be taken away was a most noble act of his Soul and Will who by a most noble act of Obedience and Resignation to the Will of God for the Salvation of Men gave up his Blood to be shed for that the shedding of Christ's Blood was necessary for remission of Men's Sins and their Justification before God is clear from his own words This Cup is the New Testament in my Blood shed for the remission of the Sins of many and as the Scripture saith Without shedding of Blood is no remission so that had not Christ's Blood been shed Men's Sins could not be forgiven and yet what but deceit it self can infer from this That the merit or stress of remission of Sin or Justification is laid upon the act of the wicked Soldier that thrust his Spear into our Saviour's Side Note again Seeing G. W. hath imposed such a Forgery upon W. B. without any just ground as if he had placed the Merit of Men's Justification upon the act of the wicked Man that thrust the Spear into our Saviour's Side By the like forgery he may charge the Church of England with the same absurdity though most unjustly for in the Prayer immediately before Baptism in the Office of Baptism for those of Riper Years she thus Prays Almighty everliving God whose most dearly beloved Son Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of our Sins DID SHED OUT of his most precious Side both Water and Blood and gave Commandment c. Here we see it 's said that Christ SHED OUT of his most precious Side both Water and Blood Can therefore G. W. from thence infer that the Church of England believeth that she layeth the Merit of remission of Sin and Justification upon the act of the Soldier or that Christ by any act of Violence killed himself or commanded others to do it and if no just consequence as this can be gathered out of the Church of England's Words nor can they from the Words of W. B. that are of the same importance But it 's no wonder that G. W. will have the shedding of that Blood which came out of Christ's Side when it was pierced to be only the Soldiers act when T. Elwood in his Truth Defended p. 99. denyeth the Blood that came out of Christ's Side and its shedding after he was Dead to have been to compleat the Offering for this he saith and again repeats the same Words and justifies them in his pretended Answer to my first Narrative p 220 221. This offering up himself and giving himself a ransom for all included all his sufferings both inward and outward and made it a compleat and perfect Sacrifice in which his Blood was comprehended and concerned as well as his Flesh before his Side was pierced by the Spear for he had pronounced that great Word Consummatum est it is finished had bowed his Head and given up the Ghost before his Side was pierced with the Spear This is not only contrary to the Doctrine of the Church of England as above quoted in the Office of Baptism but of all Orthodox Christians throughout the World who teach according to Scripture That the Water and Blood that came out of our Lord's Side after his Death was a special part of the Offering as well as his Death and the wounds in his Hands and Feet and the Blood that came out of them before his Death which gross Error of T. Elwood is the Error of the Second Days meeting at London who approved his Book and of G. W. who professeth the same Faith with them is deservedly censured and refuted in Satan disrob'd p. 47. His Body pierced and his Blood shed after his Death were truly and properly a part of the Sacrifice as much as what he suffered before he expired As the legal Sacrifice was not compleated by the Death of the Beast but by the Burning of it and offering the Blood afterwards that was shed and those who reject that Blood do mutilate his Sacrifice and render it ineffectual to themselves Note again How neither G. W. nor the Colchester Quakers in their Some Account c. give any answer to what was objected against him out of his Light and Life p. 61. Though quoted by them p. 15. Where he positively asserts That to seek our Saviour above the Clouds and Firmanent i. e. to pray to him as he is in Heaven without us above the Clouds and Firmament is contrary to the Righteousness of Faith Rom. 10. 6. And to look to the Blood that was shed at Jerusalem for Justification is contrary to Deut. 30. 13 14. and Rom. 10. which seeking or looking to Christ and his Blood as is above-quoted and proved was not by any outward or bodily act but by Faith and yet even such seeking or looking is denyed and opposed by G. W. and his Colchester Quaker Brethren But whereas G. W. doth argue so much and so frequently against that Blood that was outwardly shed by the Spear its being the meritorious Cause of Justification because that Blood is not to be found at Jerusalem for it 's not in being says W. B. as G. W. quotes him
Suppose W. B. had positively said as if they had been his words originally That Blood is not in being yet he was far from inferring thence that we are not justified by that Blood this was G. W.'s consequence and not W. B.'s for W. B. did strongly assert that Men are justified by the Blood that was then shed tho' it was not now in being but said he the Efficacy of it is still in being but G. W. did draw a quite contradictory Conclusion to that of W. B. as thus That Blood that was shed by the Spear is not in being saith W. B. therefore G. W. concludes Men are not justified by it which Argument of G. W.'s has equal force against Christ's Death and Bodily pains as well as his Souls Dolours and Griefs they are not now in being therefore Men are not justified by them And his Argument has the like force against Men's being justified or having their Sins pardoned by the Merit of Christ's Blood before Christ came in the Flesh for example David had not the remission of his Sins by the Merit of Christ's Blood because G. W.'s Logick in David's time the Blood was not in being But as I shewed in the Meeting the Words that Blood is not in being were not originally W B's but some Quakers Words or some other that held the like false notions with them which W. B. calls a Cavillation Capital Principles p. 40. Of late saith he I have frequently met with a Query by way of Cavillation Which is whether that Blood spilt upon the Cross run not on the ground c. If so how then can Man be justified by that which is not in being Thus we see W. B. censures the consequence of that Argument to be invalid but G. W. again and again I know not how frequently makes use of it and thinks the Conclusion to be good and I said in the Meeting had G. W. been present I would have asked him what was his Answer to that Question Is the Blood that was shed on the Cross now in being If he happen to reply to this 4th Narative I desire him to give a positive answer to it seeing he makes it the Foundation of his Conclusion that Men are not justified by the Merit of that Blood because that Blood is not in being but seeing I had not G. W. there I asked Dan. Philip who was present and sat near where I stood and is one of the Quakers in the Unity whither that Blood was in being He replied he knew not whither I meant the Blood that was without Christ's Body or within it I told him the Blood that went out of his Body whether that Blood was in being but he gave no reply I asked him again whether he believed that the Blood that was outwardly shed was Meritorious to Justification and that true Believers were justified by it he said he knew not what I meant by the Word Merit or Meritorious I told him it was a shame for him to pretend to be so Ignorant of the signification of the Word that an ordinary School Boy did know seeing he was a Scholar and did not long ago commence Dr. of Physick at Leiden and had there a Latin Oration However I gave him the signification of it that Merit signified that it was of that Worth and Value by way of Atonement and Expiation to make satisfaction to God for the guilt of our Sins He also pretended he knew not what I meant by the Word Atonement I told him it signified reconciling and bringing Men into savour with God I asked again were Believers justified by the Merit of the Blood that was outwardly shed he answered it was a part of the Offering but I asked were Believers justified by it He said that Blood will justifie none that are not Sanctified I replied that was not the question nor is it any part of the Controversie I further asked him what did he mean by the Offering whether Christ only as without us or as within us or both without and within and both by Christ's Blood without us as outwardly shed and by the Blood of his God-Head as inwardly shed in Men as G. W. will have it now at last but to this he gave no positive answer and though in all his answers he gave on this or other heads he greatly foiled himself He is as I am informed so confident that he tells in private how he foiled me But seeing neither he nor any of the Quakers there present offered any answer to that question Is that Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed in being I told them I believed the substance of it was still in being for not the least atome of any Bodily substance was ever annihilated but to enquire where that Blood now was or whether Christ did take it back again into his Body which no doubt he was able to do having all power was a curious and unnecessary question to be resolved And here I brought a saying of B. Burnet whose Name I mentioned with due respect to the same effect in his Exposition on the xxxix Articles of the Church of England and also sometime afterwards at the same Meeting I quoted him in the same Book to show my Agreement with him as I do with all sound Christian Teachers that our Lord has the same Body in substance he had on Earth and that his Body is not changed in substance but in the different Contexture of parts And on this Head also I queried Dan. Philips Whither Christ's Body was the same in Substance now in Heaven that it was on Earth and whether it was when on Earth a terrestrial Body he said He did not know what I meant by Substance I told him the same that others meant who had any true skill in Natural Philosophy and it was a shame to a Dr. of Physick to profess his being ignorant to define a Substance however I told him that a Substance understanding a created Substance was a Being or Thing that did only depend on God Almighty the first Cause and was the subject of certain Accidents that did depend on it and could not be without it He asked whether a Substance could be without Accidents I answer'd him it could be without Accidents of this or that kind and could be wonderfully changed in Accidents and yet remain the same Substance I asked him again Was our Lord's Body earthly when it was on earth He answered it was like ours in all things Sin excepted I again asked but was it earthly when on earth Here he demurred and would not give a positive Answer a Minister that stood by said by his confessing it was like ours he has confessed it was an earthly Body I said to them that are sound in the Faith it is so but not to the Quakers for they will not allow that an earthly Body and an heavenly Body can be the same Body in Substance or that a natural Body and a spiritual Body are the
Now in Ver. 15. it 's said That we which are alive and remain unto the Coming of the Lord. Now I ask saith he if they did live and remain to a personal Coming of Christ in the Clouds yea or nay Or can it be reasonably thought to be a Coming that is not yet that they lived and remained unto Note How G. W. here most weakly but very plainly to discover his Infidelity argues against Christ's Coming at the latter end of the World and whereas in my First Narrative I did show That when Paul said We which are alive and remain to the Coming of the Lord he spoke by an Enallage Personae We for They we which remain i.e. such of our Brethren who shall be found alive at Christ's last Coming c. To this T. E. Answers in his pretended Answer to my First Narrative p. 162. Why might not the Apostle speak in the first Person We as supposing that great and extraordinary Appearance and Coming of Christ the certain time of which no Man knew Matth. 24. 36. was so near at hand that it might probably fall out in his Life-time and for this sense he quotes Heb. 1. 2 9 26. 1 Pet. 1. 20. 1 Joh. 2. 18. 1 Cor. 10. 11. 1 Pet. 4. 7. as because the times after Christ came in the Flesh are called the last times that therefore the Apostles thought the end of the World was not far off i. e. in his sense That Paul and the other Apostles thought that Christ would come to Judge the Quick and the Dead before they dyed This gross and absurd sense as it is contrary to G. W.'s words so it renders Paul to have spoke an untruth even by Divine Inspiration for said Paul This we say unto you by the word of the Lord. J. Wyeth in his Switch p. 297 298. and his Brethren their common excuse here and elsewhere that these were but Queries signifie nothing to defend them the very import of these Queries implying a positive denyal See this Fallacy of T. E. more fully detected in Satan Disrob'd being a Reply to his pretended Answer to my First Narrative Again G. W. in Light and Life p. 41. saith But Three Comings of Christ not only that in the Flesh at Jerusalem and that in the Spirit but also another Coming in the Flesh yet to be expected we do not read of but of a Second Coming without Sin unto Salvation which in the Apostles days was looked for And these words of Paul The dead in Christ shall rise first he expounds of an inward Death To this G. W. Answers very fallaciously in his Truth and Innoc. p. 61. But is this to deny or oppose Christ's coming to Judge the Quick and the Dead 'T was never so intended And questioning some Men's carnal Expectations of a fleshly coming of Christ to be seen with their carnal Eyes was this to deny his coming in the Glory of his Father with his Angels to reward every Man according to his works quoting Matth 16. 27. Luke 9. 6. no sure for that 's confessed and undeniable Note His and his Brethren's common evasion to hide their Infidelity is to quibble about the Word FLESH as if their meaning were only to deny That Christ is to Come in a fleshly Body subject to the like Passions it had in his state of Humiliation when upon Earth as Hunger Thirst Pain Death c. But this is no part of the Controversie betwixt the Quakers and their Opponents But why may not Glorified Flesh be taken to signifie Spiritual Flesh as distinct from Mortal Flesh as well as Glorified Body signifies Spiritual Body without any change of Substance But it is evident that G. W. not only denyed that Christ would Come to Judge the World in a Body of natural and passible Flesh but that he would not Come in the same Substance of that Body he had on Earth which was a mortal and passible Body of the same Nature with ours for he makes it most absurd That an earthly Body and an heavenly Body can be the same Substance as above-quoted Now That he denyeth that Christ was in Heaven in a bodily Existence or would come to Judgment as the Son of Mary in a bodily Existence to wit having any thing of that Body which he had on Earth is evident from his Nature of Christianity p. 29. Dâ—st thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou dost thou may'st look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him Note To excuse his great Infidelity he useth a gross Fallacy in his Truth and Innoc. p. 61. and giving a lame Quotation of his own words This is true in Fact saith he for those very Eyes decay and perish But this was no part of the Controversie betwixt G. W. and his Opponent who did not presume to say or think That Christ's coming to Judge the World in that bodily Existence would be before his Death but the thing earnestly asserted was That Christ as he was now really in Heaven in a bodily Existence at God's Right Hand so he would come in that very bodily Existence to Judge the World for which G. W. doth evidently oppose him as above-quoted The Phrase Thy Eyes will drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance is equivalent to this Thou wilt never see such an Appearance nor any other Man sor thee as that common Phrase at the Greek Calends And whereas he adds And Christ's last Coming in Power and great Glory in his Glorious Body accompanied with his mighty Angels at the Resurrection must be seen with stronger clearer and more celestial Eyes than perishing Eyes Here he still hides his vile Error What are these more celestial Eyes seeing he will not have Christ's Coming to be without Men in a bodily Existence For in his Light and Life he quotes Matth. 16. 27 28. and Luke 9. 26 27. in plain opposition to Christ's outward Coming saying When was that Coming to be Is it now to be looked for outwardly and seeing he is not to Come outwardly but inwardly these celestial Eyes in his sense must be inward Eyes But then how shall the Wicked see him for the Scripture saith Every Eye shall see him even they who have pierced him must they have celestial Eyes wherewith to see him And tho' the Wicked shall not see him in the same manner that the Godly shall see him yet certainly according to Scripture and the Faith of all true Christians all that ever lived as well as they that shall be found alive in the Body at his Coming both good and bad shall see him as an object without them yea Christ told the Chief Priest and the Jews Mat. 26. 64. Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven At which saying the High Priest rent
but they have turned altogether to his inward Coming which they say they witness already fulfilled in them and they look for no other Coming Ninthly Concerning the Resurrection of the Body that Dyeth G. W. instead of answering to the Quotations brought out of his and his Brethren's Books against the Resurrection of the Body that Dyeth has not so much as produced them or any part of them they are so broad-fac'd Proofs to evidence his and his Brethren's Infidelity in that great Article of Faith that he seems asham'd so much as to mention them And whereas he saith their Arguments not being answer'd by their Opposers he shall need say the less to them and concludes That he would have them so Charitable that they would not condemn them as Blasphemers for believing that their Resurection-Bodies shall be Spiritual and Glorious far excelling these natural carnal and earthly Bodies for else how should the Saints Bodies be like unto Christ's Glorious Body Note here again He seeks to cloak his and his Brethren's Infidelity by perverting the true state of the Question which is not That the Resurrection-Bodies of the Saints shall not be wonderfully changed and far excelling these natural carnal and earthly Bodies and made Spiritual and Glorious like to Christ's Glorious Body for that is acknowledged But the true Question is Whether the Saints Bodies at the Resurrection shall be so changed that they shall not be the same in Substance or Essence of Bodies and consequently in no respect the same for if the Substance be not the same to be sure the Accidents are not and consequently nothing of that Body that dyeth either in Matter or Manner in Substance or Modification riseth again for our Lord's Body tho' it was wonderfully changed in Manner and Qualities at his Glorification yet it remained the same in Substance or Essence of a Body And yet more fully to detect their Fallacy the following Quotations will prove That they look for no Resurrection of the Body out of the Grave at the end of the World but all the Resurrection they look for is The New Birth or what they expect as some of them say immediately after Death which to be sure is no part of the Body that is laid in the Grave But whereas he saith that W. P.'s and T. Elwood's Arguments about the Resurrection have not been answer'd by their Opposers is false they have been sufficiently Answer'd again and again as The Snake in the Grass Satan Disrob'd and in my First Second and Third Narratives G. Whitehead in Christian Quaker p. 353. brings T. Danson saying The happiness of the Soul is not perfect without the Body its dear and beloved Companion the Soul having a strong desire and inclination to a re-union to the Body as the Schools not without ground determine c. To this G. W. Answers Both Calvin T. Danson the Schools and divers Anabaptists are mistaken in this very matter and see not with the Eye of true Faith either that the happiness of the Soul is not perfect without the Body or that the Soul hath a strong desire to a re-union to the Body while they intend the terrestrial elementary Bodies for this implies the Soul to be in a kind of Purgatory or disquietness till the supposed Resumption of the Body To the same effect doth W. P. argue against T. Hicks Reason against Railing p. 137. He quotes T. Hicks arguing for the Resurrection of the Body the Joy's of Heaven imperfect else To this W. Penn opposeth I Answer Is the Joy of the Ancients now in Glory imperfect Or are they in Heaven but by halves If it be so unequitable that the Body which hath suffer'd should not partake of the Joys Celestial is it not in measure unequal that the Soul should be rewarded so long before the Body This Principle brings to the Mortality of the Soul held by many Baptists or I am mistaken But why must the Felicity of the Soul depend upon that of the Body Is it not to make the Soul a kind of Widow and so in a state of Mourning and Disconsolateness which state is but a better sort of Purgatory Note We see from both their Reasonings they would infer divers absurdities that would follow upon that Doctrine that the Souls of the deceased Saints now in Glory do look for a re-union to their Bodies which they put off at the Bodily Death So that by their manner of Reasoning as well as their express Words they declare themselves in their own behalf and in the Name of the Quakers whose Faith they pretend to give an account of to be positive Unbelievers as concerning any Resurrection of the Body that Dyeth or any re-union of that Body to the Soul to which it was formerly united before the Bodily Death But still G. W. as his manner is perverts the true state of the question by his saying While they intend the terrestrial elementary Bodies For if he mean that the Bodies after they are raised shall have the same terrestrial elementary Qualities Passions and Accidents that they had before Death he wrongs his Opponents for none of them have so affirmed But if he mean the same Substance or Essence of Bodies under more excellent Qualities and Endowments as far excelling the former as Spiritual excells Natural or Animal and Carnal Immortal and Incorruptible excells Mortal and Corruptible and Heavenly excells Earthly they are the same For in all changes that Bodies are capable of as well as Souls or Spirits from worse to better the subject of these changes must remain the same and that is what is justly called the Substance as when the Soul or Mind of Man is converted and changed from Earthly affections to Heavenly the Subject or Substance which is the Soul or Mind is the same and by as good Reason when a Body is changed from Earthly qualities to Heavenly the Body is still the same Substance or Subject tho' changed in Qualities and Conditions For further proofs out of both G. W. and W. P. I refer to my Third Narrative p. 26 27 28. Again Rich. Hubbertborne a great Author among the Quakers in his Coll. p. 121. proceedeth at the same rate against the deceased Saints looking for the Resurrection of their Bodies And these are they saith he that plead for a Life in Sin while they are here and that say that the Saints glorified in Heaven do yet hope For the Resurrection of their Bodies and so not come to the end of their hope tho' in Heaven when as the Saints upon Earth witnessed the end of their hope the Salvation of their Souls Now these may well deny perfection on Earth who deny it in Heaven which the Saints we and the Scriptures do witness it in both and against all such who are not fit to speak of the things of God See further in my Third Narrative p. 29. Note Here again G. W.'s gross Fallacy and Sophistry Truth and Innoc. p. 59. as if Rich. Hubberthorne
Ministers have most justly charged them concerning God Christ and the holy Scriptures 11thly and 12thly Concerning Baptism and the Lord's-Supper IN a Book call'd Some Principles of the Elect People of God in Scorn call'd Quakers p. 75. The Baptism we own which is the Baptism of Christ with the Holy Ghost and with Fire but we deny all other for there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all add they who would have one Baptism outward and another inward would have two Baptisms when the Scripture saith the Baptism is but one and whosoever hath the Baptism outward are the same they were before but the Baptism of Christ makes a new Creature And now I see the other to be formal Imitation and the invention of Man and so a meer Delusion and all are Heathens and no Christians who cannot witness this Baptism Matth 15. 4. who can witness this DENIES ALL OTHER for the Scripture saith the Baptism is but one And in p. 76. And are without feeding upon the Husk and Shadow which is carnal for the Bread which the World breaks is Carnal and Natural and only feeds the outward carnal Body and goeth into the Belly and so passeth out into the Dunghil and so likewise the Cup which they drink and so the Communion and Fellewship of the World passeth away but this is no nourishment to the Soul but still the Soul lies in Death and here is no Commnnion but natural outward and carnal of several Minds and Hearts full of Filthiness and Uncleanness which IS THE TABLE OF DEVILS Eating and Drinking their own Damnation not discerning the Lord's Body which is Spiritual which the natural Man discerns not W. P. in his Reason against Railing p. 108. I affirm by that one Scripture Heb. 9. 10. Circumcision is as much in force as Water-Baptism and the Paschal Lamb as Bread and Wine they were both Shadows and both elementary and perishable And we can testifie FROM THE SAME SPIRIT by which Paul renounced Circumcision that they are to be rejected as not now required neither have they since the false Church espoused and exalted them ever been taken up afresh by God's Command or in the leading of his Eternal Spirit and the Lord will appear to gather his People out of them but never to establish or keep People in them Note Notwithstanding the severe Censure that the Quakers have passed on the outward Administration of Baptism and the Lord's-Supper in the former Quotation and W. Penn in this latter Quotation in the one they say Baptism with Water and the Lord's-Supper with Bread and Wine are to BE DENYED WE DENY say they ALL OTHER and in the other W. P. saith they are to be REJECTED and this he saith they can testifie from the same Spirit by which Paul renounced Circumcision yet W. Penn in his Key Printed at London 1699. saith Hence it is that the People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them viz. the outward Administration of Baptism and the Supper that is saith he too hard a Word But they leave them off as fulfilled in Christ who is in them their hope of Glory Is there not here a palpable contradiction betwixt W. Penn and his Brethren He saith in his Key p. 28. The People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them that 's too hard and yet in the former Quotation they have used that very same Word WE DENY ALL OTHER say they and call it the Invention of Man and so a meer Delusion But it is fearful Delusion in them to call these so solemn Institutions of our Blessed Saviour expresly enjoyn'd to the end of the World and his coming to Judgment by such Names yea and the like contradiction is found betwixt W. P. in his Reason against Railing in the Year 1673. and the same W. P. in his Key Printed 1699. In the former he saith We can testifie from the same Spirit by which Paul rejected Circumcision that they are to be rejected In the latter he saith The People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them that 's too hard a Word yet we see they have denyed them both by Practise and verbal Confession yea and rejected them and with no less pretended Authority than the same Spirit by which Paul rejected Circumcision Where is now the Unity they boast of seeing in this as well as in divers other things of great weight they are so contradictory and unconstant to themselves and yet without all change if we will believe them And notwithstanding the severe Censure that the Quakers in general and G. W. in particular have passed on Baptism and the Lord's-Supper outwardly Administred calling them the Invention of Man a meer Delusion and Idolatry and the Lord's-Supper The Table of Devils and the Cup of Devils yet G. W. in his Antidote p. 114. Printed 1697 pretends a great deal of Moderation and Charity to some who practise them but without any change in him And tho' too many now are very Formal and Superstitious in those outward Observations and Shadows laying so much stress for Salvation upon them that they neglect the Substance yet others being more conscientiously tender in the observation thereof we are the more tender to these so as not to censure or condemn them meerly for practising that which they believe is their Duty either in breaking of Bread or Water Baptism yet desire they may see further Note What can this smooth Language of W. P. and G. W. concerning Baptism and the Supper now of late Years import or signifie to all impartial Persons but that thereby they seek to deceive the weak and simple seeing they will not acknowledge that they are changed in any respect from what they were in the beginning either in point of Perswasion or Charity They mean the same now as when they called them universally and without exception beggarly Elements worldly Rudiments Idolatry Invention of Man and meer Delusion But seeing they are not changed in their Faith and Perswasion concerning Water Baptism and the Supper they cannot with any good Conscience be changed in their being more charitable now then formerly so that G. W.'s saying they do not censure or condemn them who are more conscentiously tender in the observation thereof meerly for practising that which they believe is their duty is a meer fallacy Do they not condemn all visible Christian Societies but their own and call them Apostates the World Idolaters Worshippers of Baal and the Preachers belonging to those Societies Priests of Baal c. Do they not censure them who practise Idolatry and Man's Invention and meer Delusion as they have past Judgment on those outward practises to be such And if People's practising what they believe is their Duty being misled by an erring Conscience and Ignorance of Mind as the Quakers think all are so misled who practise the outward Baptism and Supper can excuse them from censure according to G. W.'s way of Argument they may extend
convince him that the reasonable Soul in Men did not sin What is that Soul that the wicked cannot kill Surely by this Query George Fox meant the Soul that the wicked cannot kill was not the Soul that could sin wherein he sheweth his great Ignorance for though the wicked cannot kill the sinful Souls of Men yet as Christ said in the following Words He is to be feared to wit God that can cast both Soul and Body into Hell Fire Now what Soul can be cast into Hell Fire but the Soul that sinneth But lastly By George Fox's Argument That if the sinful Soul be reasonable and the unsinful Soul be reasonable also then they are one in Unity which he would have to be a great Absurdity thus he hath plainly disclosed the Mistery of his profound Doctrine that is a Branch of Ranterism viz. that there are but two Principles one good in Man that never sinneth or doth evil the other bad that sinneth and never doeth good the one is God or a Part of God the other the Devil or a Part of the Devil And his denying that one and the same Soul doth sin at one Time and doth well at another Time clearly proveth that according to him there is not any Soul of Man but what is either a Part of God or of the Devil And he discovereth his great Ignorance in denying that the reasonable Soul is sinful the contrary whereof is true that no Soul but a reasonable Soul is or can be sinful for what is it that makes the Beasts uncapable of sinning but that they are not reasonable And whereas his Opponent had very well argued that the evil Spirits are both sinful and reasonable George Fox answereth This is a Lie for reasonable is not sinful unreasonable is sinful quoting 2 Thess 3. 2. And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked Men for all Men have not Faith But this doth nothing favour his Manichean Notion he was so ignorant as not to distinguish betwixt the Faculty of Reason and the Act of Reason when Men that are reasonable and have reasonable Souls act contrary to Reason they are said to be unreasonable to wit in Act but still the Soul that sinneth is reasonable with respect to the rational Faculty nor could evil Spirits sin if they were not reasonable i. e. indued with rational Faculties Besides the Greek Word in 2 Thess 3. 2. is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is not so properly translated Unreasonable but as it is on the Margin Absurd i. e. such who though they have Reason yet will not give place to Reason but act contrary to it and George Fox had he had the right Use of his Reason might have seen that it is no more an Argument against the Soul of Man being reasonable that it acts unreasonably than it is an Argument that the Soul is not enlightened by the Light within because it often acts contrary to the Dictates of it Again for a further Confirmation of George Fox's Doctrine That the Soul that sinneth is not the Soul that is to be saved and that therefore the Soul that is saved or is to be saved is only Christ the Seed within Men Hear what George Fox saith Great Mistery page 324. he quotes his Opponent saying That the Seed to whom the Promise of Salvation is made is or hath been Sinners This he opposeth saying The Promise of God is to the Seed which hath been laden as a Cart with Shaves by the Sinner which Seed is the Hope Christ that purifies even as God is pure So this Promise is not to Seeds as many but to one the Seed which is Christ Note In the same Paragraph he saith So here is the Creature come to know its Liberty amongst the Sons of God and the Seed Christ never sinned in the Male nor in the Female Note what he means by the Creature that comes to know its Liberty which hath not sinned and hath the Promise of Salvation seems not intelligible for he denieth that the Seed is a Creature and yet it is that to which the Promise of Salvation is to wit the Seed Christ in the Male and in the Female that never sinned but he grosly perverts that Place in Gal. 3. 16. for by the Seed Christ is there meant Christ as he came outwardly according to the Flesh out of Abraham's Loins to whom the Promise was that in him all Nations of the Earth should be blessed but this was not to a Seed within that needed Salvation Like to this is what he saith in Great Mistery p. 15. having quoted his Opponent saying There is nothing in Man to be spoken to but Man To this he thus opposeth How then Ministred the Apostle to the Spirit and Christ spake to the Spirits in Prison and Timothy was to stir up the Gift that was in him and the Spirit of the Father speaks within them and the Light it shines in the Heart Here the Scriptures are for Correction of thee and Reproof of thee who said there is nothing to speak to in Man but Man Again In Great Mystery p. 187 he quotes his Opponent saying It would be good News if the Quakers should go and preach to the Spirits in Hell To this he answers The Quakers have been among the Prisoners that be in Hell and ministred to that and the CORRUPTIONS shall go into the Fire that hath no End and they that do wickedly and forget God shall go into Hell and Death and Hell shall go into the Lake of Fire and there is more in these Words yet than thou canst receive for God is the Salvation of all Men but specially them that believe Note thus we see he is very charitable and the Quakers Ministers are very charitable that they have been among the Prisoners in Hell and preached to that But how is this great Charity consistent with his saying That that which sinneth is not saved unless he mean that Sin is not saved though the Creature is The very same Doctrine concerning the Soul I find asserted by Edward Burrough in his Works Coll. page 27. Thou sayest one of us told thee That that which sinned could not be saved I answer saith Edward Burrough It is out of the Reach of the Wisdom and thy vulturous Eye shall never see it I say as the Scripture saith The Soul that sinneth must die and every Man must die for his own Iniquity If thou hast an Ear thou mayst hear Thus we see the Agreement of these two great Teachers of the Quakers about the Souls that sin that they shall not be saved nor can be saved But how grosly doth Edward Burrough pervert those Scriptures to prove his most corrupt Doctrine that is plain Ranterism Because the Scripture saith The Soul that sinneth must die doth it therefore follow That it cannot afterwards be saved both from Death and Sin that is the Cause of it Indeed Sin hath brought a Spiritual Death
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