Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	divine_a	humane_a	suffering_n	3,220	5	9.4553	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47759	Satan dis-rob'd from his disguise of light, or, The Quakers last shift to cover their monstrous heresies, laid fully open in a reply to Thomas Ellwood's answer (published the end of last month) to George Keith's Narrative of the proceedings at Turners-Hall, June 11, 1696, which also may serve for a reply (as to the main points of doctrine) to Geo. Whitehead's Answer to The snake in the grass, to be published the end of next month, if this prevent it not / by the author of The snake in the grass.	Leslie, Charles, 1650-1722.	1697 (1697)	Wing L1149A; ESTC R2123	80,446	76

but a wrangling Personal Dispute betwixt T. E. and G. Keith about some Papers Exhibited by the one against the other All which I pass over And come to G. Keiths Appendix to his Narrative which T. E. begins there to Consider SECT V. The several Charges in the Appendix THese are some further Instances upon the Four Heads which are the subject of the Narrative And a few other things which come in by the by and might have been spar'd But that this Reply may be Full I proceed to Examin them 1. A Quotation out of G W. is set down p. 198. Wherein he denies either the Soul or Body of Christ to be Human or that he had an Human Nature and he says that the Blood of God with which he purchased his Church Act. xx 28. Was not the Blood of the Human Nature And where doth the Scripture says he call the Blood of God Humane or Humane Nature To this T. E. Answers That Christ was not of a meer Earthly Extraction That there was more of Divinity even in that Body than in the Bodies of other Men. Which none hardly the Socinians will Deny But T. E's Inference is not Good That because Christ's Body had more Divinity in it than other Mens that therefore it was too Heavenly to he call'd Humane or Earthly For the Hypostatical or Personal Union of his Human with his Divine Nature did not Destroy or Swallow up his Humanity as the Eutychians held But his Human both Soul and Body are still and for ever Truly and Properly Humane else he were not Truly and Properly a Man And the not knowing of this has greatly Milled the Quakers Who if they had given themselves but a little to Humane Learning which they despis'd because they had it not and had known the Ancient Heresies which were Condemned by the Church in several Ages they wou'd not have fallen in with so many of them as they have Ignorantly done T. E. Wou'd not have given such an Answer as he do's here That Christ's making his Soul an offering for Sin was true and so it is says he in a Figurative Manner of Speaking Which was the very Words and Excuse of these Primitive Hereticks who said that Christ's Passion was not Real but onely in Appearance to Mens Eyes And if his Body was but a Vaile or Garment wherein he dwelt as the Quakers and Socinians do make it then indeed his sufferings were no other than Figurative or ●alse and he cou'd no more be said to have been Cruci●y'd then a Man would be Crucify'd if his Cloak or Garment was Crucify'd And thus it must be if Christ's Humane Nature was not Hypostatically united to his Divine Nature so as both to make but one Person as Soul and Body is in Man For otherwise the Soul cou'd feel nothing or be said to suffer for whatever was done to the Body And T. E's Argument and G. W's which he Recites is most Ridiculous that Christ's Soul was Immortal and cou'd not be put to Death So is every Mans. And when we Kill a Man no body says that we Kill his Soul But as the Separation of Body and Soul is Death to us So it was and us Really to Christ And not onely In a Figurative ma●ner of speaking as T. E. with the Ancient Hereticks do's contend II. Page 202. There is a Quotation of G. W's brought wherein he denies That there is continual need of Repentance And T. E. Justifies it by supposing that the Quakers are free from all Sin Else there must be Continual need of Repentance I will not Enter now upon their most Exploded Title to a Sinless Perfection having done it sufficiently elsewhere I onely mention this now to shew their Infallible Hardiness in pretending still to it after it has been Expos'd even to Laughter and as many Failings shewn of these Perfect Sinless Creatures as wou'd make any of the Prophane to appear Ridiculous And this Pretence to a Sinless Perfection is not the least Gross of their Imperfections And shews the Excess of their Spirituall Pride For which they may Read their Sentence 1 John 1.8 If we say that we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the Truth is not in us For as Solomon says Prov. xx 9. Who can say I have made my Heart clean I and Pure from Sin III. The next Quotation is p. 202. Where G. W's Perversion of Isa ix 6. Is set down He turns that most Express Prophesy of Christ Viz. Vnto us a Child is ●orn c. To an Allegorical sense of Christ within and his being Born in our Hearts And says that he was thus Born in Isaiah himself who wrote these Words Who had also been as with Child Says he i. e. Of Christ T. F. In Defence of this says p. 203. That this was meant of Both Viz. Of Christ's Outward and his Inward Birth but this is false for the Prophecy was only of his Outward Birth And if it can be turned to the Inward how shall we thereby convince the Jews as to the Outward Christ This Liberty of Interpretation will confound all the Prophesies of Christ in the Old Testament And it is Remarkable that Isaac Penington a Quaker having wrote a Book Intituled Some Queries and Answers of deep Concernment to the Jews and Design'd purposely for Their Conversion do's not through the whole once Name the outward Christ But bids them onely look to their Light within T. E. Quotes a Book of G. Keith's call'd The Rector Corrected p. 30. In Justification of this Exposition of his of Isa ix 6. To mean both the Outward and the Inward Birth of Christ And tho my business is not here to Vindicate G. Keith yet I had the Curiosity to look into that Book of his and find that this Text was not so much as under Consideration or once Nam'd in that place but he was treating there wholly of another Subject and which is no ways Applicable to this IV. The next Quotation is p. 203. G. W. in his Book call'd The He Goats Horn Broken by way of Wittieism upon John Horn whom he Answers p. 33. 34. Charges this among others as an Error in J. Horn Viz. That when Paul saith Christ was seen of him Last 1 Cor. xv 8. He must needs mean it of his Body seen and seen by Bodily sight Which is contrary says G. W. to Gal. 1.16 To this says T. E. that if G. W. had denied that Christ was Bodily seen of Paul that had not Allegorized a-away Christ's Resurrection And this is all he says to it But if Christ was not Bodily seen of Paul then was Paul a false Witness of Christ For in that Place 1 Cor. xv He Names himself among other Witnesses to Christ's outward Resurrection He was seen says St. Paul v. 5. Of Cephas then of the Twelve After that he was seen of above 500 Brethren at once after that he was seeen of James then of all the Apostles and last of all

Spiritual as the Spiritual Meat and Spiritual Drink and Spiritual Rock in the Wilderness 1 Cor x. 2.3 Will this if there be no more in it makes His Blood to be the Blood of God And what is this to G. W's Argument That a Spirit cannot have Material Blood and therefore That if the Blood of the New Covenant be the Blood of God it cannot be Material Blood i. e. That the Material Blood of Christ was not the Blood of God otherwise than as the Spiritual Meat and Spiritual Drink and All things are His. This lets us into the Heart of the Quaker Divinity VII G. W. says in a Book of his call'd The Voice of Wisdom p. 36. That the Righteousness which God effects in us is not Finit but Infinit T. E. says p. 113. That these Words are an Inference from a Position of his Adversaries one Thomas Danson viz. That the Righteousness whereof Christ is the Subject and that whereof He is the Efficient are of one Species or Kind 'T is true that G. W. mentions this But not as finding any Fault with it For he says the same and more himself in the same page viz. That Righteousness which God works in us by His Spirit it s of the same Kind and Nature with that which worketh it for the Saints are made Partakers of the Divine Nature 2 Pet. 1.4 T. Danson made the Righteousness of the Man Christ of the same Species or Kind with ours as His Human Nature is But G. W. makes the Righteousness of God to be of the same Kind and Nature with ours which is Blasphemy and far beyond what T. Danson had said with which G. W. found no Fault unless that he had said too little of the Oneness of the Righteousness of God and ours But he brings this former saying of Danson's to Confront that Position of his which G. W. sets down viz. That the Righteousness which God works in us is but Finite as well as other Effects This G. W. opposes and brings the above-quoted saying of Danson's as a Contradiction to this and then Proves against Danson according to his skill that the Righteousness which God effects in us is not Finit but Infinit This is in opposition to the above saying of Danson's That it was but Finit And if G. W. thought it but Finit why did he oppose Danson in this But he not only says that it is Infinit but goes on to Prove it For says he Christ is Gods Righteousness and Christ is formed in us Gal. iv 19. Thus miserably Perverting the Scripture But they are Desir'd to tell us how Infinity can be Formed 2dly How formed in that which is Finit G. W. in the same place Exclaims against those who would make that Righteousness in them the Saints but Finit When as says he Christ His Infinit Righteousness and the Saints are in one another Here he makes the Righteousness of Christ and of the Saints to be the same and corrupts that Text Heb. ii 11. to Prove it which he Repeats thus He that Sanctifieth and they that are Sanctified are one Whereas the Text is are all of one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And concludes thus Then God's Righteousness in us is not Finit but Infinit Yet T. E. would make us believe that he said no such thing But this is no Novelty with him VIII Again p. 134. he justifies this saying of G. Ws That Blood and Water that 's said to Cleanse is not of another Kind but agrees in one with the Spirit And Demands in great assurance Is not that True No. Mr. E. it is not True but far from Truth That the Blood and Water are not of another Kind from the Spirit They are Material and outward Blood and Water which through the operation of the Blessed Spirit do cleanse But this makes them not of the same Kind with the Spirit more than Christ's Human Nature is of the same Kind with His Divine Nature or than a Man's Body is of the same Kind or Natu●● with his Soul And this still shews more and more your Contempt and Denyal of the outward and Material Body and Blood of Christ for your Justification IX T. E. p. 136. brings in W. Penn justifying this saying of Isaac Penington viz. Can outward Blood Cleanse the Conscience And W. P. says We do Deny that outward Blood can be brought into the Conscience to Perform that Inward Work which they themselves i. e. the Professors as the Quakers call'd their Opponents Dare not nay do not hold Yet T. E. says p. 135. that Isaac Pennington put this Question Can outward Blood cleanse the Conscience to the Professors who place ALL upon the OVTWARD You must Excuse him he Began and was Resolv'd to go Quite through with this Topick in every Case to Misrepresent his Adversaries Meaning and if he cannot Find Faults to Make them But here he stands fairly Corrected by the more Ingenious W. P. whose Authority he Pretends to Maintain who says that the Professors Dare not nay Do not hold this G. Keith as quoted by T. E. p. 137. has given a clear Answer to this poor Subterfuge of Supposing that any did think the outward and Material Blood of Christ was to be brought into the Conscience and there Materially Apply'd which none sure in this World ever Imagin'd G. K. says The way that Blood has been brought into my Conscience is by the Application of a Living Faith in Christ whose Blood it was the Spirit of God working that Faith in me This is Full and Orthodox But says T. E. in answer to this Why do's he say The way that Blood has been brought into my Conscience as if it had been Really and Materially brought in there This is Intolerable and shews that they either can not or will nor take an Answer T. E. p. 136. tells of a Distinction which W.P. made betwixt the Pardon of Past Sin and the Present Sanctification of any Person and applys it to this Purpose as if the outward Blood of Christ could have no Tendency but only to the Former But this instead of Solving the Matter serves only to Discover the strange Confusion and Ignorance of these Men in the Mystery of the Gospel as if Christ's Blood outwardly shed were not as Effectual to our Sanctification as to our Justification to Procure for us the Graces of the Holy Spirit towards Living acceptably to God for the Future as the Pardon of Sins that are Past. SECT 3. Concerning the Resurrection of the Body I. T. E. is in Great Confusion upon this Head making Tedious Repetitio● and long Digressions about the Bush not knowing what to say and yet that he might appear to say something But I will Reduce his Immethodical Ramblement into this Order 1st To shew his weak and Fallacious Excuse for that Great Opposition which the Quakers have given to this Article of our Faith 2dly That T. E. instead of Vindicating others has himself down-right

by God in some Extraordinary manner and in some other way than the strong Impulse of his own Imagination But he was carry'd into this by the Common Track of the Quakers whose constant custom it was and seen in all their Writings to Publish all their Conceits as the Immediate word of the Ever-Living God And as W. P. here to Pawn the very Being of God for the Truth of their Delusions That As sure as the Lord Liveth what they deliver'd shou'd so come to pass And tho such of their Predictions have 1000 times been Defeated and Prov'd False yet this is no Mortification to them But they Persist still in the assurance of their own Infallibility Can such an Instance of strong Delusion be given ever since the World began Pray God to open their Eyes that they may at last Consider of it as they ought And recover themselves out of this Snare of the Devil wherein they are taken Captive by him at his will XIV Page 218. 219. Some Contradictions of W. P. are Disputed which I pass by in this place because their Doctrines is the subject which I now Pursue And wou'd not Interrupt. What follows of T. E's Answer is in Vindication of himself from Charges laid against him by G. Keith Which are for the most part upon the same Heads which have been already Consider'd And his Defence of himself is after the same fashion as he has defended W. P. and G. W. by always Perverting the Question and Imposing False Positions upon his opponents that he may seem to Confute them and hide his own Principles the while Of which method having seen so much before I will to save Repetition but offer you a Taste here to verify the Character I have given of him And to ease the Reader who if he be not already Tyred I am sure I am therefore I shall beg leave to Contract XV. Page 220. 221. The Charge against T. E. is That he deny'd the Blood of Christ which was shed after his Death by the Spear to be any Part of the Sacrifice from this Reason because he said upon the Cross Consummatum est It is finished Whence G. Keith Infer'd That Christ's Death must be excluded by the same Rule because that was after he had said It is Finished No says T. E. That cannot be charg'd upon me because I said that Christ had pronounced It is finished had Bow'd his Head and given up the Ghost before his side was Pierced by the Spear This was onely too free himself from the Consequence of Excluding Christ's Death from being a Part of the Sacrifice which it does not For if It is Finished was meant of the whole Sacrifice then it was Finished before his Death But however T. E. says nothing in Excuse of his Excluding the Blood shed after his Death Therefore that stands still Excluded by him without any Defence And this does exclude the Whole and Intire Sacrifice to which Christ's last Words It is finished are not Extended but only to All that he was to do and suffer before his Death For as the Bodies of the Legal Sacrifices were Burned that is sacrificed and their Blood offered After the Death of the Beasts which were Sacrificed so was it in Christ whom they Frae-figured 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 And as the Legal Sacrifice was not compleated by the Death of the Beast but by the Burning of it and offering of the Blood afterwards shed And those who Reject That Blood do mutilate his Sacrifice and render it ineffectual to themselves XVI Page 223. T. P. is charg'd with these Words I deny that Christ came by Generation of and from the Properties of Man in Mary This takes away the Hunane Nature of Christ T. E. says p. 225. he meant this only as to Christ's Divine Nature Which is Non-sense And none ever said That his Divinity was Generated of the Properties of Man in Mary XVII G. Keith brought a Quotation out of T. E's Truth defended p. 138. wherein he said That Jesus the Saviour was not Created T. E Answers here p. 226. That this Arose from hence that he G. K. wou'd make the Manhood onely to be Christ without the Godhead Which G. K. was far from saying Nay but the page before Viz. p. 225. T. E. owns that G. K. ●ad Confessed not to the Manhood onely but the Godhead and Manhood Vnited Therefore it is plain that T. E. meant to exclude the outward or Created Christ And places all upon the Inward Christ or Light within which he says was not Created i. e. upon Christ as God onely but not Man XVIII This will appear further in what follows T. E. said in the same Book That Christ is the Great Cause of Regeneration and Sanctification Chiefly as he is Manifested Inwardly in the Heart This is to Prefer his Inward to his outward Appearance and to his outward Birth Death c. And This is as Absurd says G. Keith As to say the Beams of the Sun that Descend on the Earth are the Chief Cause of the Earths Fruitfulness and not the Sun it self that is in the Firmament T. E. Answers p. 229. As if Christ says he were no otherwise in the Saints than the Sun is on the Earth Viz. by its Beams This shews us the Heart of the Quakers who a●● not satisfied with the Influences and Inspiration of Christ But will have the very Person of Christ within them And acknowledge no other Christ now in being It is the True and Real Heat and Light of the Sun which is convey'd to us in its Beams And it is the True and Real Virtue and Light of Christ which from him in Heaven is convey'd into our Hearts And what more wou'd the Quakers have Nothing less than the very Body and Person of Christ within them This is the Foundation of all the Quakers Errors Whereby they pass over the outward Birth and Sufferings of Christ as so many Facile Representations and Historical Transactions But place all the Merit and Salvation in their own Light within which they think to be the onely True Real Substantia and Personal Christ and that there is none other XIX What follows in the 3 next pages which are the last of T. E's Answer is nothing but some Personal Reflections and Vapourings wherein none but themselves are Concern'd Therefore I leave them Having omitted nothing I think that is Material in T. E's Answer which Concerns the Principles of the Christian Religion which onely are my Concern in this matter otherwise I had neither put the Reader nor my self to any Part of this Trouble Pray God it may Answer the End for which it was Intended that is to Perswade those who wield their Pens amongst the Quakers to Contend no longe● for vain Victory or to Buoy up their own Reputations That they wou'd not mis-spend their