Selected quad for the lemma: lord_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
lord_n	word_n	work_n	year_n	708	4	4.3046	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A48937	Quakerism no paganism: or, A friendly reply to W.R. his unfriendly discourse intituled, Quakerism is paganism Shewing the insufficiency of what he hath written to unchristian the Quakers, and to render them as heathens and pagans to the people By W.L. a lover of peace more than of parties.	Loddington, William, 1626?-1711.	1674 (1674)	Wing L2805; ESTC R216893	25,726	71

like they were not very far from him Nothing is more common now a days than to jeer with a Question Our Saviour himself was so served Mat 26.68 Prophesie unto us thou Christ who is he that smote thee The Third Charge That Jesus Christ is not a distinct Person without us To this I said as a Motive to Moderation That because this Definition of a Distinct Person without us is not in Scripture why should we impose it on them especially considering what Reason they give for their tenderness in refusing such Expressions because they occasion people to retain mean and dark Apprehensions of God and Christ and his place of Residence W. P. Count. Christ p. 79. If W. R. fears no such Consequences let him use them without Unchristning others that do not And whereas he saith It is shameful for a Quaker to refuse those Expressions because not in Scripture while he owns not the Scripture for a Rule I say it 's much more shameful for those that own the Scripture for a Rule to impose such expressions upon others which are not in Scripture they have reason to keep you to what you call the Rule But W. R. will prove the word Person yea and a distinct Person too from 2 Cor. 2.10 where the Apostle saith for your sakes forgave I it in the Person of Christ Here a grain of his Greek might have been useful For that which the Translators according to their Judgment have rendered Person of Christ whether it may not as well be read in the sight of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in conspectu Christi or in Christs steed I leave to more able men than W. R. or I am to determine There is sixteen more pages spent in this Charg which I can account no other than a vain florish to let W. P. see what W. R. can do if he be not constant to what he has spoken For these pages are chiefly spent laying aside the quibbles about the Ass in proving the Humanity of Christ which I told him the Quakers did not deny and brought W. P. his Confession at the Barbican Meeting to prove it viz. that we do faithfully believe the holy Manhood to be a Member of the Christ of God and a little after We believe the Man Christ Jesus to be glorified in Heaven This though VV. R. cannot dislike yet he will distrust and therefore says that when W. P. has given us some infallible Demonstration that he did not speak equivocally then and not till then do his words deserve my Cognizance What Unbelief is here Nay what a strange Demand is this for one that is an utter Enemy to Infalibility in the Quakers to demand an Infallible Demonstration from them Now that must be visible or else he cannot judg of it And what visible Demostration any Christian can give which may not be counterfeted by an Hypocrite I never yet knew The truth is W. R. doth ignobly to apply Aug. words to Mr. Penn viz. They speak it with their lips they believe it not with their hearts What is this in plain English but to tell the world W. P. is a dissembling Hypocrite and his word how sincerely soever given not to be taken for truly I will not believe that mans word in Civil Affairs whose solemn publick word I cannot believe in Spiritual But that you may know this is not such a new Article of their Faith as to hear date from that Barbican Meeting hear what Edward Burrowes some years ago said in his 138 and 281. pages of his works We prize the Lord Jesus Christ as God Man and own him alone to be the Foundation God hath laid Now if this be not ground enough for Christian Charity towards them the thing I aim at God deliver me from such Judges for I know not what can be farther urged in this partiticular to induce them to it The Fourth Charge is That Christ Redeemed himself This I said was but T. H. his Consequence and I believe he thinks it natural from some of the Quakers sayings But if they disown it as we see they do and call it a gross perversion of their words why must we not believe one as well as the other and give them leave to take those words of J. N. and G. F. in a Figurative fence as well as W. R. takes liberty to expound Isa 59.16 and 63.4 by a Figure For so VV. P. saith p. 63. of R. against R. they are to be taken and there he treats at large of the Redemption of the Seed and in what fence they hold it wherein there is nothing sounds like Heathenism or unworthy of Toleration in my understanding to be sure it cannot be called their Principle that is but his Inference But I think we need say no more of their Consequencing Charge for it is so harsh and sour there 's no fear that any sober man will drink it The Fifth Charge against the Quakers is That they deny the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith and Practice unto Christians The first thing necessary in this Charge is to resolve VV. R. what I mean by VVe Vs and Our in this Discourse I Answer that now we are Charging them with denying the Scriptures I understand all of us that do own the Scriptures for our Rule And at other turns in my former book I understand all such ridged Opposers of the Quakers as for these Twelve Opinions render them as Pagans and Heathens and yet I would hope they do it from a zeal only to promote as they think the Glory of God and the Authority of the Scriptures And therefore my hearts desire and prayer for them is that they may see that this Zeal of theirs is not according to knowledge for the Nature of it is such as will directly lead them to joyn with those who when Opportunities are offered will fall to killing Christians upon a Principle of doing Christ good service Joh. 16.2 And I put my self among them though thanks be to God not inclinable to that Zeal because the Purport of the Book represents me as standing among them pleading as well as I could for a little Moderation towards the poor Quakers and not the Quakers Cause any farther than as it might admit of favourable Constructions for that End Neither can you say I am any otherwise guilty of Uncharitableness when I say let us be Charitable than the Apostle was of Cursing when he said therewith curse we men Jam. 3.9 But you 'l say the Apostle and they were Brethren but I am not in fellowship with these that now oppose the Quakers For your satisfaction in this Particular I refer you to my Narrative in Answer to the Reading Letter in the conclusion hereof and proceed to tell you that I perceive you cannot escape my Covering as you call it as narrow as it is I see it wraps you so fast that it makes you angry and call their book of the Barbican Meeting Scurrilous and

should say he seems yet to deny him Could I perswade him he should not write a Line more upon this Subject for I know the Spirit of Curiosity and Jelousie will never be satisfied but call whatever he says Masks of evasive Pretences Clouds of Impertinences c. Nay in all probability if he should write much more about it he would soon have others as loudly calling upon him to own the Divinity as now W. R. and many more do to own the Humanity for so it happened after his writing the Sandy Foundation c. 2. The next thing remarkable are the Reasons why he presents his Book to Mr. Penn. In the first he insinuates such an intimacy betwixt us as if he had a hand in Composing the Pagan Principles which in a word is false In his Second and Third Reasons see how plainly he contradicts himself in saying I have espoused W. P. his Quarrel and yet have layed nothing to Mr. Hicks his Charge when as Mr. Penns Charge is the only Quarrel as W. R. calls it and I never heard of any other betwixt them Neither have I espoused this any farther than in a moderating way betwixt them in Love to both which I believe is a Duty more incumbent upon many others for neglect whereof I desire they may not be accountable at the Great Day W. R. might plainly perceive that my design was not to Charge for in p. 4. I said My Intent is only to shew how small a quantity of Christian Charitable Construction might make these Charges passable among us all Again what a strange Inference doth VV. R. draw from my calling T. H. my Friend that therefore W. P. ought not to call him Forger may not one of my Friends wrong another of them and no necessity lie upon me to fall out with either or to interpose unless for the Reason aforenamed T. Hicks his Conversation has been reputed honest for many years and being willing to hope that in general it is so still I call'd him Friend and desire not to carry it otherwise towards him though I am no Friend to his Dialogues And if in them he has wronged VV. P. or others either by adding to or substracting any thing from their writings or by putting down any Answers for theirs which are not theirs which is to be feared he would do very well to follow that Counsel W. R. gives W. P. viz. retract and count it no dishonour to him It 's a difficult thing to turn Religious Controversies into a Dialogue without consent of both Parties for if he change but a letter he is liable to a lash unless he has been so careful to preserve the sence of his Antagonist that he cannot object against it and then no man can be angry You nay see by what I have done that the Quakers are not so curious of their words but that they will give us leave to put in such as may help us to a right understanding of their Principles when their own expressions seem dark unto us The remainder of what W. R. hath writ worth noting before he comes to the Charges contains a bad Comparison and a far-fetcht Conclusion First He compares me to him that intending to kill his Enemy with a stab let out the Imposthume But let him remember the Proverb mala mens malus animus The Imposthume indeed is somewhat proh dolor to the purpose For it 's greatly to be feared that there are too many inward Swellings of Pride Covetousness Evil Surmizings and Malice among many sorts of Professors this day And O how happy would those Pens be that by the blessing of the Almighty Physitian should be made Spiritual Love Lances to let them out But as for the other Part of the Similitude which represents me as an Enemy to the Baptists he does thereby eminently signifie his Ignorance and adds that which his last seven years Certificate will not countenance Secondly W. R. draws such a Conclusion from my Title Page as I think Zoilus himself would not have done Because I say these are Twelve Opinions for which T. H. has published the Quakers to be no Christians that therefore I confess they hold them If this be not a Quibble I never heard one And the root of it is this Particle for But is it not a common and plain form of Speech among us to say Such a man was posted for a Coward or accused for a Jesuite and does it follow then that he was so I doubt W. R. minds the Idioms of Greek and Hebrew so much that he forgets the Propriety of his Mother Tongue But what need all this when in p. 4. I say to prevent mistakes Think not I plead for them as if I my self or they owned them for both in their Books and Conferences they deny at least ten of them as they are layed down and construed by T. H. Alas poor Quakers Now I pity you more than ever no marvel if you complain so sadly of wrong Constructions Forgeries and Lyes when such plain words as these will not free me from a Confession I never thought of Poor Flock of Slaughter Zac. 11.4 I see your own Country men must not speak a word for you unless they resolve to be your Companions in Tribulation All words that can be bended against you shall and those that cannot shall be rejected as Whimsies and Impertinencies However I shall proceed to make some brief Reply But here I am in a streight for I see my brevity is liable to be fille● up with Words to make it speak Absurdities or contrary Sences And if I us● many words then I shall be counted 〈◊〉 man of words wanting Wisdome o● good Argument Well do as the Lord directs O my Soul and leave the issu● to himself 1. The first Charge against the Quakers is That the light in every Man is God Now because this Charge as it lies seem to fix many foolish and improbable Absurdities upon them as that when they pray they only pray to a God within them and that they make as many Gods as there are men in the world therefore said I to moderate the Charge prevent mistakes and render it more intelligable to every man put in but of and all is well And this W. P. himself do●s in p. 8 of R. against R. Where we have him thus answering T. H. about this very Charge and saying That the Light within present with us every where is to us the great proof of Gods omnipresence and therefore of God And in page 7 he blames T. H. for insinuating from G. W. his words that every Illumination is whole God And as much he said to John Faldo page 10th of Quakerism a new nick name Far be it from us to assert every such illumination to be the only Lord and Saviour and very God and more to the same purpose in that page And indeed in these places W. R. should have looked for W. P. his sence and not have