Selected quad for the lemma: glory_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
glory_n	jesus_n	light_n	shine_v	6,139	5	9.4807	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47124	The arguments of the Quakers, more particularly, of George Whitehead, William Penn, Robert Barclay, John Gratton, George Fox, Humphry Norton, and my own arguments against baptism and the Supper, examined and refuted also, some clear proofs from Scripture, shewing that they are institutions of Christ under the Gospel : with an appendix containing some observations upon some passages in a book of W. Penn called A caveat against Popery, and on some passages of a book of John Pennington, caled The fig leaf covering discovered / by George Keith.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1698 (1698)	Wing K142; ESTC R7322	106,695	121

ye shall abide in me which Sense doth evidently agree with our Saviour's Words John 6.29 47. And indeed to Exclude Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to this place of Scripture as no way concerned in the Sense of these Words of it John 6.53 is plainly to Exclude Christ as he outwardly came in that outward Body from being the Object of our Christian Faith for seeing Eating here signifieth Believing by Agustine's Quotation approved by R.B. if this Spiritual Eating which is our Believing respects not the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain then Christ as he came and Suffered in that Body is no Object of the Christian Faith which is most absurb and none that is in the least acquainted with Augustin's Writings can say it ever was his meaning to deny the Body of Christ that was outwardly Slain to be any wise Concerned in the Christian Faith for Augustine was a most zealous Asserter of the Necessity of Faith in Christ as he came in that Body in order to our Salvation against the Heresie of Pelagius who denied it and Writ many Books against that Heresie now Revived by many of the Quakers Teachers tho what R.B. hath Writ here I impute to his Inadvertency and do not charge him with the Pelagian Heresie for the same because from other Places of his Writings I can prove that he made the Faith of Christ's giving his Body to be Slain for us necessary to our Salvation and a part of the Christian Belief SECT II. AND as Inadvertent and Mistaken as R.B. was in his Quotation of Augustine concerning Christ's Flesh and Blood no less hath W. Penn been p. 314. of his Rejoynder to J. F. in his Quotation of Bishop Jewel in his Sermon upon Jos 6.1 2 3. Who speaking of what Christ was to the Jews in the Wilderness says thus Christ had not yet taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did eat his Body he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood St. Paul saith all did eat the same Spiritual Meat that is the Body of Christ all did drink of the same Spiritual Drink that is the Blood of Christ and that as truly as we do now And whosoever did then so Eat lived for ever I think saith W. Penn a Pregnant and Apt Testimony to Christ's being the Christ of God before his coming in the Flesh Ans But this doth not prove that by Christ here B. Jewel meant only the Light within in these Jews and by his Body and Blood only that Light within or Seed or Principle as W. Penn would have it All that are in the least acquainted with the Doctrine of the Church of England of which B. Jewel was a Zealous Defender as in his Apologie for the same appeareth or with B. Jewel's Writings know well that the Sense which W. Penn hath here put on B. Jewel's Words never came into his Remotest Thoughts but it is no wonder that he should so misunderstand and misconstrue B. Jewel's Words when he doth so use the Scriptures themselves B. Jewel's Sense is Obvious Christ had not taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did Eat his Body viz. by Faith believing that in the time appointed of God he would take a Body and give up that Body to be Slain for their Sins he had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood viz. By faith believing that after he should take flesh and blood in the fulness of time he would give his blood to be shed for the remission of their sins and by this faith all the faithful among them had Christ dwelling in them by his spirit and did know and witness his spirit to regenerate and sanctifie them to quicken and refresh them and nourish them as meat and drink doth refresh and nourish the body of man As for his Quotations out of Joshua Sprig and others its no wonder he doth so Magnifie them seeing its but too evident the Quakers have sucked that Poisonous Milk out of the Breasts of such Men who have been in the same Errors before them But to return to R.B. his Arguments whereby he laboureth but to no purpose to prove that the Flesh there mentioned John 6.53 c. hath no Relation to his outward Flesh First saith he p. 63 because that it is said both that it came down from Heaven yea that it is he that came down from Heaven Now all Christians at present generally acknowledge that the outward Body of Christ came not down from Heaven neither was it that part of Christ which came down from Heaven Ans 1. By Himself that came down from Heaven who is called by Paul the second Adam the Lord from Heaven Heavenly the quickning Spirit cannot be meant the inward Principle of Light in Men abstractly considered from the Fountain of it which dwelt in the Man Christ but chiefly the Light as in him and consequentially that which Men receive out of his Fulness according to their several Measures And as our Regeneration and Salvation have a necessary Dependance on that fulness of Light Life and Grace that dwells in him out of which we receive our several Measures so they have a necessary respect to the Man Christ both Soul and Body in which that Fulness dwelleth because the Soul and Body of Christ even his outward and visible Body was concerned in that great Work of our Redemption in what he did and Suffered for us Therefore God hath Exalted the same Man Jesus Christ both in Soul and Body in Unity with his Godhead to be a Prince and Saviour to give Repentance and Remission of Sin Grace and Glory and all Spiritual Blessings to all that shall be saved This ancient Writers have explained by the Example of a red hot Iron exceedingly burning and shining the Fire and Light in the same answering to the Godhead and the Iron answering to the Manhood Now when this fired Iron burns or lightens any Stick of Wood that is applied to it it is not the Fire only without the Iron nor the Iron only without the Fire but both joyntly that have an Operation upon the Wood to Kindle and Lighten it even so it is the Godhead of Christ in Unity with his Manhood consisting of Soul and Body that wrought that outward Redemption for us and doth inwardly produce in us the blessed Effects of it by his Spirit in Renewing and Sanctifying us Justifying us and giving us Eternal Life and Glory Ans 2. Because Christ's outward Body of Flesh was Miraculously Conceived by the Power of the most High and in that respect had a Heavenly Original as well as that it was really the Woman's Seed and part of the Virgins Substance therefore it may be said to be from Heaven and to be Heavenly as well as Earthly as Wheat and Barly and other Grains that Grow in America which come Originally from England are called English Grain even in America though they are also American

deny And yet with the same Breath as it were he denyeth it for if the Man Christ is to be Prayed unto being the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow unto our Souls surely as such he is the Object of our Faith for how can we Pray to an Object in whom we believe not But seeing he will not allow me that I then owned the Man Christ without us to be the Object of Faith wherein he is most unjust unto me and that I Writ then as a Quaker and my Doctrin was the Quakers Doctrin It is evident that according to him it was not the Quakers Doctrin that the Man Christ without us is in any Part or Respect the Object of our Faith why then doth he and many others Accuse me that I Bely them for saying they hold it not necessary to our Salvation that we believe in the Man Christ without us And it is either great Ignorance or Insincerity in him to say that none of them deny that the Man Christ without us in Heaven is to be Prayed unto Seeing a Quaker of great Note among them William Shewen hath Printed it in his Book of Thoughts p. 37. Not to Jesus the Son of Abraham David and Mary Saint or Angel but to God the Father all Worship Honour and Glory is to be given through Jesus Christ c. This c. cannot be Jesus the Son of Abraham but some other Jesus as suppose the Light within otherwise there would be a Contradiction in his Words so here he Asserts two Jesus's with a witness what saith J. Pennington to this Page 41. In Opposition to my Christian Assertion that the believing Jews before Christ came in the Flesh did believe in Christ as he was to be Born Suffer Death Rise and Ascend and so the Man Christ even before he was Conceived Born c. was the Object of their Faith He thus most Ignorantly and Erroneously Argueth Could that be the Object of theirs viz. The believing Gentiles or of the Jews Faith which our Lord had not yet received of the Virgin which was not Conceived nor Born much less Ascended Ans Yes That can be an Object of Faith and Hope which has not a present Existence but is quid ' futurum something to come though nothing can be an Object of our Bodily Sight or other Bodily Senses but what is in Being and hath a real Existence in the present Time But so Stupid and Gross is he that he cannot understand this that the Faith of the Saints could have a future Object in any Part or Respect this is to make Faith as low and weak a thing as Bodily Sense Is it not generally acknowledged through all Christendom that the Saints of old as Abraham Moses David believed in Christ the Promised Seed as he was to come and be Born and Suffer Death for the Sins of the World according to our Saviours Words Abraham saw my Day and was glad which is generally understood by Expositors that as he saw Christ inwardly in Spirit so he saw that he was to come ' outwardly and be his Son according to the Flesh and by what Eye did he see this but by the Eye of Faith And that Eye of Faith had Christ to come in the Flesh to be Born c. for its Object as a thing to come And in the same Page 41. He Quoteth me falsly saying Immed Rev. p. 132. agreeing with both Papists and Protestants That God speaking in Men is the Formal Object of Faith This Quotation is False in Matter of Fact as well as his Inference from it is False and Ignorant I said in that p. 132. That both Papists and Protestants agree in this That the Formal Object of Faith is God speaking but quoth the Papist it is the Speaking in the Church of Rome no quoth the Protestant God Speaking in the Scriptures is the Formal Object of Faith Here I plainly shew the difference of Papists and Protestants about the Formal Object of Faith though they agree in one Part that it is God Speaking yet in the other Part they differ the Papists making it God Speaking in the Church that is not in every Believer but in the Pope and his Counsel And there in that and some following Pages I Plead for Internal Revelation of the Spirit not only Subjectively but Objectively Working in the Souls of Believers to which Testimony I still Adhere But what then Doth this prove that Christ without us is no Object of our Faith Will he meddle with School Terms and yet understand them no more than a Fool Doth neither he nor his quondam Tutor T. Ellwood understand that the res credendae i. e. The things to be believed are Ingredients in the Material Object of Faith as not only that Christ came in the Flesh was Born of a Virgin but all the Doctrins and Doctrinal Propositions set forth in Scripture concerning God and Christ and all the Articles of Faith are the Material Object of our Faith but the Formal Object of Faith is the inward Testimony of the Spirit moving our Understandings and Hearts to believe and close with the Truth of them All which are well consistent and owned by me Page 43. He Rejects my Exposition of the Parable concerning the lost piece of Money in my late Retractation of my former Mistake p. 15. Sect. 1. p. 10. That by the lost piece of Money is to be understood the Souls of Men as by the lost Sheep and the lost Prodigal To this he most Ignorantly and Falsly opposeth by saying First The Lord can find the Soul without lighting a Candle in it I Answer By finding here is meant Converting the Soul thus the Father of the Prodigal found him when he Converted him to himself this my Son was lost and is found i. e. was departed from God but now is Converted Luke 15.32 And ver 6. I have found the Sheep that was lost Now can this be wrought or doth God Work this Work of Conversion in a lost Soul without his Lighting a Candle in it Secondly He saith the very design of the Parable was to set forth not what God had lost but what Man had lost the Candle being used by Man who needed it not by God and Christ who needed it not How Ignorantly and Stupidly doth he here Argue How can Man use the Candle unless God light it in his Heart and doth not God use it in order to bring or Convert Man to himself It 's true though there were no Candle lighted in Man's Heart God seeth where the Soul is even when it is involved in the greatest Darkness but in order to the Souls Conversion which is principally God's Act it is God that lights the Candle in it and causes his Light to Shine in it And whereas I have said they who Expound the lost Piece of Money to be the Light within will find difficulty to shew what the nine Pieces are which are not lost His Answer to