Selected quad for the lemma: doctrine_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
doctrine_n scripture_n word_n write_a 2,223 5 10.7210 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A65389 A further discovery of that generation of men called Qvakers by way of reply to an answer of James Nayler to The perfect Pharisee : wherein is more fully layd open their blasphemies, notorious equivocations, lyings, wrestings of the Scripture, raylings and other detestable principles and practices ... / published for the building up of the perseverance of the saints till they come to the end of their faith, even the salvation of their soules. Weld, Thomas, 1590?-1662. 1654 (1654) Wing W1268; ESTC R27879 78,750 103

There are 9 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

which we reply That this is no consequence at all and shall demonstrately prove it from these severall arguments 1. To set the minde and will of the spirit in opposition to the spirit it selfe can be no Gospel argument For the Scriptures are the infallible will of the spirit layd downe as the rule of Saints beleeving judging and walking What a reproach had it been when the spirit of God sent the Prophets to reveale his will or when Jesus Christ sent the Iewes to search the Scriptures what a reproach had it been to the living God for them to have answered We will not be judged not will we judge of spirits or doctrines by that Word or Scripture we will stand to the judgement of the spirit it selfe opposing the spirit it selfe to its owne will How wicked a thing had it been in them and how ridiculous an answer is this in Nayler 2. How is this to undervalue the wisedome of the holy Ghost himselfe Bereans commended for trying spirits by Scriptures Acts 17.11 who judgeth and pronounceth the Bereans more Noble then those of Thessaloniea in that they searched the Scriptures dayly whether those things that were spoken by Paul and Silas were so or no in that they searched the Scriptures the Spirit prizeth them for trying the Doctrines of Paul and Silas by the Scrip●u●es the written Word And how wicked a thing is this in the Quakers to cry downe this trying of spirits and Doctrines of Scriptures which the spirit expressely ownes with such a signall testimony as speaking out in the soule such a spirituall noblenesse 3. It is confessed on all hands that the eternall Spirit is the originall of Scriptures and the tryer of Spirits who ever questioned that But our question is what the Saints are to try the spirits by not whether the spirit can try the Doctrines No. But we affirme that this eternall Spirit hath left the written Word as that which shall be the discovery touchstone and tryall of spirits and Doctrines by authority and divine warrant from himselfe See 2 Pet. 1.21 Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost 2 Tim. 3 16. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God c. John 5.99 Search the Scriptures Isay 8.20 c. So that our asserting the Scriptu●es to be tryall of spirits is but setting up the spirit in his owne authority and throne over the spirits and consciences of men and pleading with men that the spirit may rule in his owne way and that they will try Doctrines by that Scripture which the holy Ghost commands them to try the Doctrines by And he that refuseth that touchstone which the spirit hath layd d●wne for tryall doth destroy the authority of the holy Ghos ●et h●m speake fantastically of trying by the spirit what he will But this reasoning of Naylers is as if when the Lo●d Protector should declare what is treason by Law in publique Procl●mations a Justice of Peace should when a Person were proved before him guilty of treason according to that Law yet should say he is not to judge what is treason according to that Law but he would appeale from the Law to himselfe for what is treason though the Law had determined it before But in this case to exclude the Scriptures because the holy Ghost is the originall of them is to destroy that plaine truth Subordinate non pugnant things that act in a subordination though about the same thing doe not destroy one anothers usefulnesse or causality Nay the spirits being the Originall of all Scripture this being confessed doth necessarily confesse their divine authority for that trying of spirits for which they were given forth by the inspiration of God 2. As to that expression the spirituall man judgeth all things we have fully spoken before in pag. 79. We know there is a spirit of discerning which Beleevers have of Gospel mysteries but what absurdity is this to inferre therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures For that light which a spirituall man hath is a Scripture light 1 Cor. 5.4 opened 3. How ignorantly is that 1 Cor. 5.4 produced to prove this assertion when Paul sayes In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ when you are gathered together and my spirit to deliver such an one to Sathan c. Paul is not trying of spirits or judging of Doctrines but exhorting the Church to excommunicate the incestuous Person and tells them That his Apostolicall power shall goe along with them in that sentence The verse going before tells you what is the meaning of his spirit where he sayes I as absent in body but present in spirit have judged already as though I were present concerning him that hath done this deed that is I in this Epistle doe send you my mind and my judgement what you ought to doe with this man that hath committed Incest as fully as if I were present with you and so you may goe on at your meeting to excommunicate him having for so doing not onely the authority of the Lord Jesus but also the conse●t and iudgement of me his Apostle This is that in those words In the name of the Lord Jesus and my Spirit How doth this man heape up quotations without any understanding of the minde of the spirit in them and with what exceeding ignorance doth he apply such Texts to his absurdities as neither prove them nor speake a tittle concerning them Excep 2 By this spirits were the spirits tryed before the letter was therefore spirits are not to be tryed by Scriptures Reply What a miserable non sequitur is here There was a time when the spirit had not given forth the Written Word therefore when the spirit doth give forth a written Word it is not to be regarded There was a time when the Law was not engraven in Tables of Stone therefore when it was engraven the Israelites must not looke upon it as a rule of life or judgement There was a time when the will of God was not written was not Scripture therefore when Christ bids you search the Scriptures you need not heed them at all But we leave the Reader to laugh at this absurd consequence The Bereans judged by another light then James Nayler doth who though they knew there was a time when Scripture was not written yet they tryed the spirits and doctrines of Paul and Salas by the Scriptures And the Spirit it selfe inspired and moved holy men of God to write the Scriptures to leave them as a tryall and touchstone of spirits though once there was a time when there was no written word But oh how doth God infatuate men when they will not submit to the authority of his Word Excep 3 He falls a rayling exceedingly and sayes We have no guide but the letter because we assert the authority of Scripture and addes how many minds how many formes how many gods doe ye worship and all pretend Scripture If it be possible to
justification by reason of the imputation of the obedience of him who is the Lord our righteousnesse This Reader is their great Idoll and Diana and therefore thou wilt pardon our tediousnesse and clearely see how blinde these men are as to Gospel righteousnesse Position 11. That every man in the world hath a light within him sufficient to guide him to salvation without the help of any outward light or discovery In his answer to this Position he denyes none of our proofs but addes his further profession of the same Principle in these words All the World shall witnesse against you that they have a light that lets them see when they sinne which if they did minde and obey would leade out of sinne unto Christ c. Except The maine part of his answer is by way of rayling all that he speaks to make good this Position is that Christ is the true light and that he enlightneth every man and that where he is there need no outward discovery Reply For the first that Christ is the true light is confessed on all hands but that Iesus Christ is in every man or gives a saving light to every man we utterly deny and we have plentifully proved in our answer to the fourth Position The first Text he proves it by is Iohn 1.9 He is the true light that lightneth every one We have fully opened this Text in our answer to the fourth Position and convincingly shewed it is not meant at all of any Gospel saving light where we desire the Reader to satisfie himselfe at large Io. 8.12 opened For his second Iohn 8.12 I am the light of the World he that followes me shall not walke in darkenesse This proves not that Christ doth give a saving light to the whole world no more then that Text 1 Iohn 2.2 doth prove that the whole world shall have the benefit of Christs propitiation Secondly the words immediately following might satisfie Nayler that he is thus a saving light onely to them that follow him who are Beleevers drawne by the power of the spirit of God Cant. 1.4 No man comes to me except the Father draw me Iohn 6.44.45 Every man that hath heard and learned of the Father commeth to me So that Christ is onely the light of those that have learned of the Father and have been drawne by the Father and follow him Here is a cleare restriction of Christs being a light onely to Beleevers to them that follow him c. Io. 1.4.5 opened The third Scripture Iohn 1.4 5. the light shined in darkenesse and the darkenesse comprehended it not is cleare against him For the Phrase of the light shined in darkenesse imports onely that Jesus Christ was Preached to them Christ came amongst them and Iohn Preached him to them Ver. 29. Behold the Lambe of God c. yet they were in darkenesse for want of light they could not so much as discover him nor receive him so farre were they from knowing Christ or the world from having Christ a light in them all that they could not apprehend him when he was Preached openly to them His fourth Text is Iohn 3.19 this is the condemnation that light is come into the world is as full against Nayler as the former for it speaks this that Jesus Christ is the true light was Preached to the World and discovered to them when he had before been a mistery hid from Ages and Generations Col. 1 28. yet they would not beleeve him but loved to continue in that darkenesse or ignorance of Christ which is in all by nature Now for the third branch of his answer that where this light of Christ is there need no outward discovery We answer 1. We have abundantly proved that Jesus Christ is not in all in out answer to his reply to the fourth Position 2. We have also proved That Iesus Christ neither is in all nor doth he enlighten all by giving every man a knowledge of the Gospel this we have done at large in the same place 3. We have fully proved that all men in the world doe need an outward light or discovery and that it is the way of Christ his making knowne himselfe by outward discovery and Preaching the Gospel in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 18.19 in six arguments to which Nayler answer nothing Necessity of outward reaching further proved All that he brings for it de novo in his answer is onely his bare word without either argument or text so that we need to say no more Yet ex abundanti we shal adde First It was the wisedome of the Father to have the Gospel Preached to every creature and therefore did he send men forth to publish it Marke 16.15 Mat. 28.19.30 2. It pleased the Father to owne Preaching of the Gospel with the conversion of soules Acts 2.41 1 Cor. 1.21 I● pleased God by the foolishnesse of Preaching to save them that beleeve 3. It pleased the Lord Iesus when he was ascended up to Heaven to give officers for the perfecting of the Saints Ephes 4.11.12 for the edifying of the body of Christ 4. It pleased him also to establish this as an everlasting Ordinance to continue till the end of all things Mat. 28 last Ephes 4 15. He that hath any sense of the wisedome of God and submission to it will not dare to say with Nayler that every man hath a light within him sufficient without the help of any outward discovery or to charge folly in doing all this upon him whose wisedome is admired infinite and acteth nothing needlessely and in vaine But what dare not these men doe who dare lift up themselves in their blasphemous pride to be as pure as God 2 Pet. 1.19 opence vindicated There is one Scripture 2 Peter 1.19 which is not brought by Nayler by way of proofe but is most ignorantly wrested by him to this their Idoll of light within We hinted how little the man had of any knowledge of Scripture by his so blinde and pittifull abusing this Text in that former Booke Perfect Pharisee p. 19. We see he is yet as confident as he was we shall onely say that which is there called the sure Word of Prophesie 2 Peter 1.19 is that word of Prophesie which in old time holy men of God spake c v. 21. and to this he bids them take heed viz. to the Doctrine of the Prophets where Peter doth not send them to the light within them but to the Bookes and Words of the Prophets as Christ sends the Iewes to the same Scriptures Iohn 3.39 Nay the Text is so farre from hinting any light within that the Apostle tells you these words of the Prophets were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a more sure Word then the voyce that came from Heaven ver 17. Thus the man hath still the weakenesse to produce Scripture that fully destroyes his owne Principle We shall adde no more but from these words of Naylers Where this light of Christ is
rake up a reason out of a heape of rayling this it is Those that doe uphold the Scriptures to be the tryall of Doctrines doe yet differ amongst themselves therefore the Spirits or Doctrines are not to be tryed in Scriptures Reply Quakers Popish argument This as many other of their answers is a knowne thread-bare Popish argument they say You Protestants cannot agree in your Discipline and therefore the Scriptures are not to be the judge of Doctrines but the infallible spirit of the Pope We hope God will discover them ere lon● to be men meerely acted by the spirit of Anti-christ but we shall give you a full answer under these two considerations Difference in non-fundamentals no prejudice to the Scriptures being judge of spirits 1. First as it reflects upon our selves We say to differ in discipline is not to worship severall gods as Nayler rayles while it is knowne we hold the head the Lord Jesus but this we looke upon as the spitting of his venome When Peter was for Circumcision and Paul was against Circumcision Gal. 2.13.14 did they worship severall gods So those Acts 15. that contested in different judgements did they worship severall gods But this man cares not what he sayes so be may throw his dirt upon us though he bewray his excessive ignorance in it before the world 2. As it fights against the Scriptures being the judge and tryall of spirits we shall shew there is no strength in this exception at all For the Scripture loseth not its authority for the tryall of spirits by reason of the darkenesse and different apprehensions of spirits How darke were the Apostles in the Prophesies of Christs Resurrection Luke 24 25. Fooles and flow of heart to beleeve all that the Prophets have spoken c. yet the Scriptures lost not their touchstone authority upon the account of their darkenesse though Christ saw th●t truth of the Resurrection in the Scriptures spoken of which they could not apprehend ought not Christ ver 26. to have s●ffo●ed these things and to enter into his glory Doth not Peter say plainely that in the writings of Paul there are 2 Pet 3.10 difficult things and hard to be understood and such as the unstable and unlearned rest and yet those Writings and Epist es doe not lose their authority because of the diversities and darkenesse of Beleevers thoughts Scripture rightly understood will clearely discover every spirit and every Doctrine though the best of men knowing but in part 1 Cor. 13.9 and so not fully taking in the genuine sense of Scripture may have through their darkenesse difference of judgement in things lesse fundamentall But we may be weary in following such triviall arguments onely we would not have the saints entrapped in any of Satans snares nor the blessed word that 's sweeter then hony and the hony combe subjected to the delusions of evill men Thus we have given thee the strength of his answer onely he addes his false glosse upon that of Isay 8.20 Isay 8.20 vindicated by us objected against them in the Perfect Pharisee the glosse is this Whereas you quote that place To the Law and to the testimony it is true the Law of the new Covenant is written in the heart by God and the testimody of Jesus is the spirit of Prophesie and if any be not guided by and speake according to these it is because they have no light in them but without them But we answer As he plainly by this overturnes all Scripture and leaves no rule but the Law written upon mens hearts which we have confuted in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 25. so it is a grosse perverting of the text and truth for it is clearely spoken of the Written Word and the very next words expresseth it clearely If they speake not according to this Word the Hebrew is full beyond exception cedabar hazzeh according to this Word so that that text is no reference that God makes to the Law written upon mens hearts but to the Law written in Tables of stone which tables were called the testimony and the Arke thereof called the Arke of the testimony Exod. 25.22 because the Tables of stone in which the Law was written called Exod. 31.18 the tables of the testimony were layd up there We have fully showne in the Booke called the Perfect Pharisee pag. 26. the sad fruits of this Doctrine of denying the Scripture to be the rule of trying doctrines and spirits that it is to open a gap to all the delusions of Satan and we instanced sin the knowne case of Iohn Gilpin who was sometimes a Quaker to which Nayler replyes onely thus It is no more then if the chiefe priests should have cited Iudas to confute Christ c. as he consulted with the priests to betray the truth so Iohn Gilpin hath done now who shall receive his reward and you priests also as Nayler sayes To which rayling we thus answer Shaking off the S●ripture t●e ●●ler to Satans delusions 1. That Iohn Gilpin was thus acted by the Devill is a known truth beyond questioning 2. That he did verily beleeve he was acted by Christ when yet the Devill acted him is very apparant Nay Atkinson the boy that pretends to answer that re●ation of Gilpin doth all along confesse that he was acted by the Devill is plaine to any that reades that his childish ●nd non-sensicall piece of rayling 3. Iohn Gilpin himselfe ●●ee the Lord hath delivered him in mercy out of the snares of Satan hath fully confest that it was the spirit of Satan and not the Lord Iesus that then acted him 4 And that all this grew ●ut of his casting off the Scriptures searching to a light within Take his owne words pag. 15. of a Booke called The Quakers shaken It was most just with God to give me over to strong delusions to beleeve lyes c. as for other provocations s● especially for rejecting the revealed will of God in his Word and hea●kning onely to a Voyce within me nay not onely to l sten to the Devils suggestions but to embrace his Voyce for the Voyce of Christ Thou seest now Reader what reason we had to say this rejecting the Scriptures from being the tryer of Doctrines doth open an unavoydable gap to Satans delusions 2. But what reason hath the man to say in this both Iohn Gilpin and we have consulted against Christ Nay have we not been pleading for Christ against Iudas the desperate betrayen of his truth and Gospel while we have been discovering ●he subtilties of Satan in those that are acted by him and pleading for the authority of Christ in his word against all the delusions of the Devill And as we can thankefully and comfortably looke upon it that God hath engaged us in so good a work so we can looke for our reward not what Nayler we beleeve could wish us but how can he defie when God hath not defied but what Christ hath promised to them that can
denied truely he could not in so few words have spoken more untruely to prepossesse the Reader but we beg the Reader as to that to suspend his judgement till he have fully read the ensuing Discourse wherein whether any thing have been charged on them that is false and whether Nayler have done faithfully in owning what is truth will appeare at large In the Preface of James Nayler to his answer he tells you The Man of sin and his ●orkings in the last times Revealed That Christ now appearing in his Saints to discover the man of sinne with all his deceits and deceiveable workings now all the powers of darkenesse are gathered against him Gog and Magog As for those deceits and deceiveable workings truely these blasphemous Doctrines of these men with their Diabolicall delusions and quakings will make it appeare where the man of sin is now working To open this we shall stay the Reader a little Agreement betwixt Papists and Quakers 1. It is as claere as the noone day 2 Thes 2. chapter Rev. 12.3 Rev. 13. Rev. 17.4.5.9.10 that the Papall Apostacy and state is The Antichrist so often Prophesied of in Scripture Now it is as plain● that the very distinguishing Doctrines and practises of these men are such as are the maine principles of that man of sinne in opposition to Jesus Christ Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 7. 1. The Papists deny the imputed righteousnesse of Christ for justification and in scorne and derision call it A putative Righteousnesse Quak. These also from the same spirit deny the imputed Righteousnesse of Christ for justification And Nayler himselfe before the whole Court at Appleby discoursing with W. C. about justification by righteousnesse of Christ imputed not onely denyed it but in a sleighting way ended his discourse thereabout with this language That which is without is without So George Fox affirmed That he that is borne of God is justified by Christ alone without imputation Sauls Errand pag. 12. Papist Bell. l. 2. de justif cap. 3. 2. The Papists in their controversies with us doe positively affirme that justification is by inherent Righteousnesse Hence Bellermine Stapleton c. with the rest doe positively affirme that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is onely justum facere per inherentem justitiam that to justifie is onely to make righteous by inherent righteousnesse Quak. So these men doe as confidently affirme that they are onely justified by inherent righteousnesse or that righteousnesse within which Christ within them enableth them to performe See our proofe Perfect Pharisee pag. 10. Papist Bell. de ju●tif l. 4. c. 11. 12. 13. 14 3. The Papists againe doe confidently conclude that a man may perfectly keep the whole Law Hence their neglect of the righteousnesse of Christ their workes of supererogation and the like Quak So the Quakers their great assertion as a challenge to all is that e●ery Saint is perfect that it is p●ssible to be perfectly holy and without sinne Perfect obedience to the Law of God is their great Principle which they confidently cry up more then any Papist Bell. l. 3. de verbo Dei c 4. 4. The Papists affirme that the Scriptures or the Written Word of God are not the supreame Iudge of sp rits Quak So these people that the spirits are not to be c●yed by Scripture So A. P. in the Booke he but forth called Severall Papers p 19. The Wo●lds touchstone is without them and they try the spirit by the letter c. but the Saints touchstone is within So that though they agree not what shall be yet both of them consent in denying the Scripture to be the judge of spirits Papist 5 The Papists call the Scripture a●● ad letter a nose of wax a sc●bbard without a sword Co●erus in Euchir pag. 44 Pighius lib. 1. cap. 4. So Melchior Canus sayes It is most certaine the Written Word is onely for Babes and is no way necessary for those that are grow●e as is more fu l Melchior Canus defens each fid contra confess Wor●berg cap. 36. Quak. So these men also not onely c●y downe the necessity of the written word see the perfect Pharisee pag. 20. but also call it a dead letter a carnall letter that they are but a declaration of them that spake it So Melchior Canus againe saith the Gospel is not the Scripture as Farnworth in his Booke Discovery of Faith scoffes at our saying the foure Bookes of Matthew Marke Luke and John are the Gospel pag. 1● Papist 6. The great argument by which the Papists doe goe about to establish the truth of their way is Immediate revelations and pretended miracles the want of which they upbrayd the Protestant Ministers and charge us to be no Church Quak So the Quakers doe in their pretence to an immediate call and their supposed miracle of quaking So A. P. the Word of the Lord came to me saying So Audland the Word of the Lord came to me but of that more hereafter Papist 7. The Papists doe place much of their holinesse in their Eastings beggerly apparell and forsaking the World as they call it as their l●●ing mewed up in convents and cloysters their wandring up and downe as Hermits and begging Fryers c. Quak. So these men is knowne to place abundance of their holinesse in Fasting beggarly apparell wandring up and downe the World c. we might adde much more but here you may see how the man of sinne in these men in their compliance with the principles and practises of the Romish way breaks out in his deceit and deceive●ble workings 2. He is a st●anger in the Booke of God as to the discovery of Antichrist The spirit of errour the spirit of Anti-Christ who doth not observe the spirit of God mightily unvailing Antichrist by the revealing of the spirit of errour in him for 1 Iohn 2.18 there it plainly appeares that horrid errors are of that affinity with the Antichrist that when he would describe that man of sinne in the last time he calls the Heretiques by that very name Now are there many Antichrists whereby we know it is the last time c. Now besides those which we have named the Reader will easily observe such a masse and heape of Arminian Socinian Familisticall errors in their Doctrines layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee that he may c●earely observe where the spirit of Antichrist works in all deceiveablenesse in this last time 3. Lastly It is the Saints bulwarke against the Papists while they call for our miracles that the spirit of God clearely holds forth that the comming of the man of sinne is after the working of Satan with all power and signes and lying wonders 2 Thes 2.9 So Rev. 16.13 the three uncleane spirits ver 14. are the spirits of Devils working miracles to gather together c. Now this further evidenceth the spirit of the man of sinne
he know them for they are discerned spiritually There the Apostle gives the reason why no light implanted in our natures in the creation can discerne the things of the spirit of God because they are spiritually discerned where he makes an opposition betwixt naturall and spirituall light and puts an impossibility upon discovering Christ by the light of Nature We may adde that ver 9.10 Eye hath not seene Eare hath not heard neither hath it entred into the heart of man to conceive c. but God hath revealed them unto us by his spirit 3. That that light which by Christ in the creating of the world is implanted in the soule is not a knowledge of Christ as a Mediator will appeare by undenyable examples for there are multitudes of men and women without contradiction never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator though it must be confessed they had a rationall or naturall light Those thousands of Saints that went over into new England fully experienced it that there is not the least hint of a Christ implanted in those Indians one of us having often conversed amongst them can also fully witnesse it as is more fully also evident by the confessions of many of them in Print who have been converted by the Ministry of Mr. Eliot of which we spake in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 19. But may not these Scriptures fully confound these mens pervertings of that Scripture Reade Psal 143.19 He shewd his Word unto Iacob his statutes and judgements unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any people and as for his judgements they have not knowne them Psal 79.6 Powre out thy wrath vpon the Heathen that have not knowne thee Col. 1.26 the disponsation of God is given to fulfill the Word of God even that mystery which hath been hid from ages and generations But let Paul determine the contrary to whose judgement we shall desire to stand 2 Thes 3.2 All men have not Faith Light in all not sufficient to save 3. That this light which by Christ in creating of the world is implanted in man is not sufficient to bring to a Gospel salvation is also plaine from what we have convincingly proved that this naturall light may be in thousands that never knew the Lord Iesus as a Mediator and Iohn 17.3 this is life eternall to know thee the very God and Iesus Christ whom thou hast sent So that there is an utter insufficiency and incapacity in this light to bring to salvation So that though A. P. hath lately expressed his abhorring the distinction betwixt naturall and spirituall light yet our Lord Iesus and the Apostles are so full in it that they are of more authority with us then the novell opinion of A. P. Thus you see this Scripture fully vindicated from their wrestings for hence it is apparent that though Iesus Christ by whom the Father made the world Heb. 1.2 in his creation of man did enlighten and create a principle of light and naturall reason and understanding in the soule which we have proved is eminently there understood yet this proves nothing for the Quakers that either therefore every man that hath a reasonable soule Christ dwells in him or that he knowes Christ or that his naturall light can possibly suffice to bring to Gospel salvation Excep 4 Naylers next defence is this ridiculous argument If Christ be not in the most vile in the world c how shall he judge every one according to their thoughts as well as according to what they doe must he proceed as carnall Iudges doe by proofe or confession and no further Reply We need say no more to shew the simplicity of this argument then to aske them these questions Doth the Scripture say that Christ is in the Devills and yet he sees and knowes and judgeth them Or doth the Scripture say that the damned in Hell Christ is in them Nay but doth not Scripture speake in this language Christ in you the hope of glory Col 1 27. so that Scripture speaking of Christ in you speaks of him as being the hope of glory where he dwells And is Christ in Devils and damned soules the hope of glory For ge●●●er the Quakers nor we are in this controversie at all disposin● concerning the abiquity of the Divine Nature by reason of which he is above all and through all and 〈◊〉 all But of Christ in us in that sense the Gospel useth the expression viz. as a saving light and principle the hope of glory 2. How ridiculous is it from Christs knowing all things to inferre that he dwells in all can he not know things unlesse he dwell in them Doth he not know the inward motions of Brutes Horses Fishes c. and is it Scripture Language from thence to inferre his dwelling in them Oh! the vainenesse and frothinesse of such a spirit and how are these men given up to blasphemy We shall conclude with that of David Psal 11.4 The Lord is in his holy temple the Lords throne is in Heaven his eyes behold his eye-lids try the children of men He hath another argument that Christ dwells in the Saints which we know in its Gospel sense but not in Naylers that Christ as man dwells in them but how absurdly and un-scripturally doth this conclusion follow therefore Christ doth dwell in all Thus you see our proofes fully confirmed his lyes confuted his perverted Scriptures cleared and answered and the folly of his arguments fully opened though he hath not answered one of our arguments and many Scriptures against that Doctrine Position 5. That Christ in the Flesh with all he did and suffered therein was but a Figure and nothing but an Example Excep 1 O deceitfull spirits c. are those words expressely found in Sauls Errand to Damascus as you say they are let that Booke be witnesse against you and your lying slanders to all that reade it Reply Surely this man pretends neither to conscience nor modesty that doth challenge us here for a lye for saying that Doctrine was expressely found in Sauls Errand He that shal● but looke upon that Booke pag. 2. pag 8. pag. 14. shall begin to know the impudence of Iames Nayler pag. 2. 9. line last in the schedule annaxed to the Lancashire Petition to the Councell of State you have this charge Richard Hubbethorn wrote that Christs comming in the Flesh was but a Figure Now are we lyars in affirming those words are expressely found there Nay further in pag. 8. where Hubbethorne answers to that charge we will give you his owne words Christ in his people is the substance of all figures types and shadowes fulfilling them in them but as he is held forth in the Scripture-letter without them and in the flesh without them he is their example or figure which is both one that the same things might be fulfilled in them that was in Christ Iesus Could a man have spoken more plainely to affirme what we asserted of him And doe we adde our
matter of justification but the time 2. For Nayler cannot but know that the question is not at all concerning the time when Iesus Christ becomes actual y my justification but concerning what is the matter of our justification whether the righteousnesse which Christ in his Person did performe or the holinesse which he worketh in us be the matter of our justification when we are justified Now notstithstanding Naylers shuffling its cleare their sense is that whensoever the soule is justified for we speake not of the time the matter of its justification is not that righteousnesse which Iesus Christ in his owne Per on did performe without us N yler himselfe at Appleby in discourse asserted He was justified by Christ in him and being there told by one of us that justification is an act of God for Christs sake absolving me from the guilt of sinne not done in me but without me in the Court of Heaven Nayler said nothing to this but that which is wi hout is without See Mr. Higginsons Booke pag. 78. Further proof that Christs righteousnes is the matter of our justification Now that the righteousnesse of Christ performed without us is the matter of our justification whensoever we are justified hesides what we have layd downe undeniably from the Scriptures in the Perfect Pharisce pag. 10. will further appeare by these testimonies Rom 3.24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Iesus Christ whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation c. Isay 53. He was wounded for our transgressions and through his stripes we are healed Ver. 5.6 he layd on him the iniquities of us all ver 11. he shall beare their iniquities where Christs merit or righteousnesse is the reason of the non-imputation of sinne to the soule But what need we adde more in a case which is so full a Principle of the Gospel But of this enough we shall adde more in the next Position As for reckoning Drunkards and Swearers to have as much right to what Christ did and suffered at Ierusalem as we we looke upon it as one of his reviling fits and passions and leave him to the Lord to rebuke him But this is all the answer he gives to the many Scriptures against his Doctrine layd downe by us Position 7. That men are justified by that Righteousnesse which Christ wi●hin us enahled us to performe or which is in effect and some of them have expressed by inherent holinesse We proved this to be their Doctrine by fix testimonies None of which are denyed onely he quarrels at one expression in one of them viz. the third which Nayler layes downe viz. We are not reconciled to God till we be perfectly holy and able to stand so in our owne power he quarrels at the last clause of this of which we shall give you an account in the next Position whether it properly is to be referred but the first branch of it viz. we are not reconciled to God till we be perfectly holy this he denyeth not but asserts againe in his answer thus No imperfect thing can be reconciled to God so that the charge stands cleare against them notwithstanding the heresie of the Tenet and the loud out-cryes of Nayler as if we slandered him And to put it further out of question we shall adde these besides Naylers confession in the present answer New proof that quakers justificution is by inherent righteousnesse Iohn W●lkinson of Hutton in the hearing of Mr. T W. Minister at Kendall and Mr. G. affirmed that the light within men would not onely discover sinne but also redeeme from it and justifie Capt. Robert Lucas of Kellot in Lancashire attesteth under hand that Robert Wither said that men are saved by the workes of Christ which he worketh in them and maketh them to worke 〈◊〉 Cham affirmed to Mr. T. and Mr. Gr. that holy and 〈◊〉 walking with God was a Saints covering from the wrath of 〈◊〉 so that this Principle stands cleare notwithstanding his evasions Excep 1 He chargeth us with wresting truth to slander by saying that his affirming that the light within men will bring to fe●re God and so leade to iustification doth hold forth justification by inherent righteousnesse Reply 1 To this we answer that it is evident to as it is the sense of his words for let any sober spirited Christian consider his words the light within by bringing a man to exercise a pure conscience in the feare of God towards God and man in uprightnesse will so leade up to justification and peace what doth this but plainely speake that we are justified by obedience to this light in the exercise of a good conscience towards God and man for saith he it doth so leade to justification c. Excep 2 But what saith he againe that no imperfect th●ng can be reconciled to God is plaine in Scripture This he layes downe to prove if it would serve the truth of that Position that no are justified by i●herent righteousnesse Reply Justification consistent vvith the Saints infirmities We answer That Paul was reconciled to God is plaine and that he was justified which are the same Rom. 5.1.9 10.11 but that Paul was imperfect when yet he was ●e●●nciled to God Rom. 7. will abundantly evidence He that ●●yes I am carnall and sold under sinne ver 14 was not he t●en imperfect What I doe I allow not what I would that I doe not but what I hate that doe I ver 15. he that was in this condition was he not imperfect He that had a Law i● his members warring against the Law of his minde and leading him i●to captivity to the Law of sinne ver 23. was not he imperfect He that in the sense of his body of death cryed out Wretched man that I am c. was not he imperfect How ignorant doth Nayler discover himselfe to be of the conditions of the Saints of God Was not Peter imperfect when he cursed and denyed his Master Mat. 26.72 but that then he was in a justified state we know none that ever questioned But this grosse fancy of his owne perfections and ignorance of the mistery of justification runs him upon such bold assertions and desperate rocke as these What an uncomfortable Doctrine had this been to Paul when he was complaining of the body af his sinne to have told him therefore he was not justified nor reconciled to God with what a glorious Gospel spirit would Paul have challenged such a man as he doth Angels Principalities and Powers Rom. 8.37.38 It is God that justifieth who shall condemne me It is Christ that died fetching out a pardon and justification from the blood of Iesus notwithstanding his owne imperfection in the worke of holinesse Excep 3 To your Position of being justified by our owne workes we deny for it is he that worketh in us to will and to doe c. and herein we deny selfe-workes c. Reply Ce●●e●t of
Papists and qu●ke●s about justification This is the old thread bare sh●f●lle of the Papists when they are prest by the Protestants and their justification by workes or inherent holinesse is confuted by Scripture they constantly answer as Nayler doth they deny their being justified by their owne workes which flow from a Princip e o● their owne power but say that the workes by which they are justified are such as flow from grace or the workings of God within their soules They say that by the first Bell. de justif l. 1. c. 19 ne hominem justificare p●sse men cannot be justified but per opera qua ex fide Christi gratiâ fluunt homines justificari by the workes which flow from Christ All this while both Papists and Quakers all●●● justification by inherent holinesse not by the righteousnesse of Christ imputed onely they pretend it is not by their owne power The full confutation of which Pop●sh and Anti-christian Doctrine we have layd downe in the Perfect Pharisee at large pag. 11. and to which Nayler according to his wonted presumptuous confidence answers nothing Position 8. That God and man cannot be wholly reconciled till he brought into the state of the first Adam and able in his owne power to stand perfect Excep 1 Nayler first excepts against this assertion that the Booke shall witnesse against us and sayes mans being able to stand in his owne power was never spoken by him nor thought by him and sayes that though the word be twice repeated to stand in Gods power yet they are not ashamed to wrest it to their owne power c. Reply 1 1. To this we answer that the Booke which he saith shall witnesse against us hath not so much as once the words to stand in Gods power though Nayler say those words are twice repeated for the quaere is in these words Whether God created Man and Woman perfect without sinne and able in his power to have stood if they had not forsaken his power and consented to the wisedome of the Serpent The nature of the power of the first Adam considered 2. From these words We considering the nature of the state of the fi st Adam to which Nayler sayes man must be brought before he be reconciled could not but gather that standing in mens owne power must be the sense of those words Our reason is plaine For That power which Adam had to stand in his state of perfection was given to him as the Prodigals portion into his owne hand but the power that the Saints now are to stand by is a power in the hand of the Lord Iesus given to him as a feoffee in trust for in this lyes the difference of the power in the sons of men in the first and second Adam our standing in the second Adam being by a power and support in the hands and dispose of the Lord Iesus by reason of which it is alone that none can plucke us out of the Fathers hands Ioh. 10. And the standing of the first Adam being by that portion of power which was intrusted in his owne hands without any promise of assistance or perseverance from God So that it is apparent that when Nayler saies Man must be brought into the state of the first Adam before he be reconciled he must meane he must be able to stand in his owne power without any engagement of support from God for tha● was undeniably the state of Adams power Let Nayler shew us a tittle out of Scripture where Adam had any thing of promise or assistance for his standing more then the power he had in his own hands which was his owne power 3. If yet Nayler will shuffle that this is not one of the Doctrines of the Quakers we shall further convincingly cleare it from the very words of George Fox in a Booke entituled To all that would know the way to the Kingdome pag. 10. he profanely and like a perfect Atheist scoffes at the grace of God saying thus And to you that tempt God and say Lord give us a sight of our sins c. this light within you lets you see it so you need not tempt God to give you a sight of your sins Foxes horrible ●eering at the gra●e of God for ye know enough c. and give over tempting of God to give you a sight of your sins And to all yee that say God give us grace and we shall refraine from our sins there yee have got a tempting customary word for the free grace of God hath appeared unto all men c. Hence thou seest Fox most wretchedly asserting these two things 1. That to pray for sight of sinne and for power from sinne is a tempting of God 2. That to pray for light and power for the discovery of sinne and refraining from it are needlesse for so he saith yee need not tempt God to give you a sight of sinne and cease from saying God give us grace for the grace of God hath appeared to all men so that he plainely affirmes that all men have both a light and power also that they need not be beholding to God to give them nor to aske them of him for he addes the reason Why you need not aske it of God for you have a light within you and you know enough c. Begging of l●ght and power the Saints duty What a wretched Principle is this and how c●●trary to plaine Scripture If any man lack Wisedome let him ask● it of God Iames 1.5 where the Apostle bids the poore creature to beg wisedome of God though Fox scoffe at it Open tha● my eyes that I may see Psal 119.18 Give me understanding 〈◊〉 34.31.32 Surely it is meet to be s●●d unto God that which I see not teach thou me 1 Peter 5.10 where Peter prayer the God of all grace m●ke you pe fect stab● sh strengthen settle 〈◊〉 Ephes 3 14.16 for this cause I bow my k●e●s 〈◊〉 the Fathe● 〈◊〉 our Lord Iesus that he would grant you to be strengthned 〈◊〉 might by his spirit Every good and every perfect gif● 〈◊〉 downe from above from the Father of lights Iames 1. ●er 17 Now here you may see the practice of the Sain s and the wickednesse of Foxes profane jeering at the grace of God with sending men to thei● owne light and power in oppositi●● to the grace of God and how all the lyes that Nayler chargeth on us while he denyes this Position doe fully fall up●● his owne head while it is as confiden●ly affe●ted by the g●● 〈◊〉 Master of this Babylonish mystery The second exception is this You that say that Adam 〈◊〉 the state of innocency was under a covenant of workes make it appear● to all that know Adams state that you never knew it for the Law wherein is the covenant of workes was added after c. Reply Adam in innocence under a covenant of vvorkes What we have said at large about Adams being
under a covenant of workes and how much better a state the Saints are in by interest in Christ then the soule of the first Adem was the Reader way finde at large in the Perfect Pharisee pag. 12. 13. to which he hath answered nothing as his manner is but we shall further adde First Adam was under a covenant of living by doing or by obedience to the Law which is plainely a covenant of works who knowes not this In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye Gen 2.17 2. Adam was under such a Covenant as had no Mediator upon his breach of the command there was none by that Covenant to enterpose betwixt him and death which is a distinguishing consideration betwixt the two Covenants made with the first and second Adam 3. And for Naylers reason He was not under the Covenant of Workes because the Law was given after we may laugh at his ignorance Was the Law never knowne before it was written upon Tables of stone Did God make Adam a rationall creature wholly ignorant of his will Doth the ingraving of the Law in Tables of stone inferre that Adam had not the engraving of that Law upon his heart or that he was not under the command or covenant of that Law but that we have proved from those expresse words of covenant in the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely dye We know not whether to thinke the ignorance of this man or his impudence greater in answering nothing to what we have fully layd downe against his Doctrines Position 9. That no man that commits sin or that is not perfectly holy can ever enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory Excep 1 Nayler thus excepts There is not a word to that purpose as you have set downe Reply This is strange Doth not he confesse there is this Quaere in it Whether any imperfect one shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not then how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and cleane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory yea or no this he confesseth to be his words And is there not a word as he chargeth us there to that purpose 〈◊〉 qu●r●es 〈◊〉 to a●●●●● us 2. But the Reader must know that what he there in that Booke layes downe by way of quaery must be looked upon as his positive assertions as thou wilt see by the adjoyning quaeries in the same page where challenging those that are so much offended at perfection he puts these quaeries 1. Whether any imperfect one committing sinne be the Im●ge of God yea or no where a man may plainely see he meanes such an one is not the Image of God 2. Whether any can witnesse the worke of Redemption compleat in them by Christ while they commit sinne where it is evident he intends the negative So in this quaere to resolve it into a proposition we appeale to his conscience or the judicious Reader that whilest he puts ●his quaere as a challenge to those that deny perfection in this life Whether any imperfect and uncleave one that lives in sinne shall enter into the Kingdome of Heaven yea or no and if not how shall one dying in sinne and where shall he be made perfect and cl●ane seeing the tree must lye as it falls and whether you owne a Purgatory or no we dare appeale to them we say if it runne not thus by way of assertion That no uncleane or imperfect man can enter into the Kingdome of Heaven unlesse there be a Purgatory to wash away his sins that dyes imperfect And now thou wilt see how unjustly this man rayles with open mouth as if we were the most wicked lyars in the world when the assertion is so evidently his owne and will so appeare to any that hath but halfe an eye of common understanding Excep 2 He tells us They charge me to say that no man that hath sinned can enter into the Kingdome and as though I owned a Purgatory Reply N●y●e●s shuffling Hath sinned what a miserable shuffle is this and what a pittifull conscience hath this man thy owne eyes Reader will informe thee that we have not such a tittle in our Booke we charge him to say No man that doth commit sinne and is not perfectly holy can enter into the Kingdome but who chargeth him to have said that no man that hath sinned c. For charging him as if he owned a Purgatory it s like the former surely the man was put to a pinch when he falls a doubling and shuffling so apparently We say this must be his argument Either there must be a Purgatory to wash away the sinne of him that dyes imperfect or else he can never enter into the Kingdome of God It seems Nayler knowes no other way but a Purgatory to wash away his sinne that dyes imperfect But we looke upon that clause as the absurdity which Nayler thinks to run us upon if we will pleade that a man may dye imperfect and yet be saved then we must owne a Purgatory And so because he knew no other way to wash away mens sins Quakers Popery but either by perfect holinesse here or by a Purgatory we found him out a medium even the blood of the Lord Iesus which cleanseth the soule otherwise as to its personall actings very guilty from all sinne Excep 3 Against this he objects that Text 1 Iohn 1.7 Doth it say any are cleansed from sinne while they personally act sinne or the quite contrary Reply Naylers jugling vvith Scripture How falsely doth Nayler deale with the Scripture and imitate the Father of lyes when Satan tempted Christ Mat 4 6 to cast himselfe downe from the Temple he takes that of Scripture that would be thought serve his purpose and leaves out the rest as may be seene by comparing it with Psal 91.11.12 Just so deales Nayler with the Scripture and us leaving out from that Scripture that which immediately followes If we say that we have no sinne we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us which would fully have made out the mystery of perfect justification consisting with imperfect sanctification it s spoken of Saints that are actually cleansed by the blood of Christ and yet are told there is no truth in them they make God a lyar if they say we have no sinne That Text beyond exception also Rom. 4.5 To him that worketh not but beleeveth in him that justifieth the ungodly c. he is silent unto according to his custome Position 10. No reall Saint but he that is perfect and perfectly holy in this life and doth not sinne Our severall proofes that this is their Principle are not denyed but we are reviled for manifesting this to be an errour from Scripture though he hath not answered one of the many Scriptures we gave against this Doctrine Excep 1 The first reviling is this
comming to her house she went to meet him and when Abigail saw David she hasted and lighted off the Asse and fell before David on her face and bowed her selfe by the ground Thus you see the practice of the saints in high-way salutes 3. Nay it was not onely the custome of the saints to salute by bodily gestures 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Salutes of Primitive times but by words also and words equivalent to what are used by the people of God in England in their salutations See 2 Iohn 10. where Iohn forbiddeth them to give the least countenance to the hereticall venters of false Doctrines commands them not so much as to bid them God-speed which clearely proves that that high-way salutation was a common thing in the Apostles dayes and not to be denyed to any but such wicked persons as the Apostle there speaks of in carrying on their wicked Principles If any man bring not this Doctrine receive him not into your house neither bid him God speed Hence Naylers colour of taking the name of God in vaine we fully declare against peoples using that Phrase without any sense of God upon their soules Yet looke upon salutes as a command of Christ and so wish all such as doe use the name of the blessed God in their salutes either to keep a due regard of that Majesty upon their spirits when they use his glorious name or else to use some other expression Excep 2 His next cavill is against that plaine Text Mat. 5.47 If yee salute your Brethren onely what doe you more then doe others doe not even the Publicans so Where in stead of submitting to the authority of the commands of Christ He sayes thus It is no command to them to salute all but a warning to them of their partiality Reply 1. He that hath but looked upon that Text Mat. 5.46.47 but with halfe an eye will clearely see that he must as well except that Christ doth not command to love all as to say that Christ doth not command to salute all when its apparant that the very phrase and reason in both commands is the very same 2. Sure this man doth not understand himselfe when he affirmes that this is a command against partiality in saluting and yet is not a command to salute all for what is partiality in saluting but this saluting some and not saluting all What a ridiculous cavill is this even to the contradicting of himselfe 3. As to his endeavouring by this ridiculous and selfe contradicting exposition to charge us with partiality as that we salute onely those whom we love and who are rich c. we say it is a malitious slander for t is sufficiently knowne we salute strangers whose face we never saw before and the poore of the people as well as the richest of them nay the very Quakers themselves also But how doth this againe fly in their Fa●es who for the most part carry with so much incivility to all but to people of their owne way Excep 3 3. There is a third exception which we must not passe over without serious observation it being a more then ordinary discovery of the spirit of the Quakers Where when we charge them for picking and choosing at the command of Christ such things in Scripture as doe most agree with their humors and fancies thus though they are forbid in the same place Luke 7.4 to carrie mony in their purses or to weare shooes on their feet as well as to salute any by the way yet we charge them in this because they stand upon the one command and not upon any of the rest and doe evidently bring themselves within the curse Rev. 22. Nayler thus replyes to it pag. 21. l. 4. c What we doe is not from the command that was to others ☞ but from command of the same power by which we are sent forth and if we were commanded to forbeare wearing shooes as well as we are commanded to forbeare your Heathenish customes c. we should be made willing to obey as some have done who have been commanded to goe naked c. Reply Now thou mayst see the mystery of iniquity that lyes in the Quakers layd open we can blesse the Lord that hath made them thus unvayle themselves and discover the rottennesse of their hearts as to the authority of the Scriptures which they have so long by their jugling endeavoured to conceale For here thou wi●t clearely see that the Quakers looke upon the commands of Christ in Scripture as having no soveraigne or binding authority over their consciences and practises further then agrees with their owne Principles and fancies For what means that expression What we doe is not from the command that was to others This without controversie is utterly to shake off the authority of the the Word For 1. Was not the whole Word written to others Did any now alive live in those dayes when the Prophets or Apostles writ their severall Bookes Were we of the Church of Corinth or Philippi Were we of the seven Churches of Asia or did we live in these dayes Alas there is no command in Scripture but was given to others long before the dayes of our Fathers and shall no command given to others be binding to us Let them Reade these convincing Texts Rom. 15.4 Whatsoever things were Written before time were Written for our learning where Paul makes the Books of the Old Testament binding to those who were not alive when they were Written for the Romans to whom he then Wrote were borne many hundred yeares after the writing of those Scriptures 1 Cor. 10 11. All these things happened unto them for examples and they were Written for our admonition upon whom the ends of the world are come 2 Tim. 3.16 All Scripture to whomsoever Written or to what man soever the command was given before time yet all Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for Doctrine reproofe correction instruction in righteousnesse So the 2 Peter 1.19 speaking of the Scriptures that sure Word of Prophesie sayes they doe well to take heed to them as to a light in a darke place though they were Prophesies and command● given forth to other persons many hundred yeares before Thus you see that commands in Scripture that were given forth to others are yet of universall concernment unto all to those that lived not in those dayes even such upon whom the ends of the world are come For that other expression of Naylers If we were commanded to forbeare to weare shooes c. what a wretched casting off is this of the yoke of Christ and a desperate picking and choosing in his commands onely what is agreeing to their owne fancies I● not this to breake his bonds asunder and cast his cords from them Psal 2.3 If we were commanded Is not the revealed will of Christ a command Is one part of the same verse a command see Luke 10.4 and not the other part Is