Bason he pretended his Blood was shed and said that he Gave up the Ghost as Christ did Thus C. Wade And hence he Charges Milner with Luciferian Pride to Save Souls as Christ did To this G. Fox Answers in his Gr. Myst p. 246. And Repeats no more of the Charge but these words He Crys says Fox Oh Luciferian Pride to save Souls And thence falls upon Wade as if he were an Enemy to the Saving of Souls and asks him What good then doth all your Preaching do And Quotes the Apostles who watched to save Souls by turning People from their Sins Now wou'd not any one have suppos'd upon G. F.'s Quotation of C. W.'s words That C. W. had been against all Methods or Means to Save Mens Souls and that he had call'd it no less than a Luciferian Pride for any one to Attempt it either to Preach or Pray or do any other Office of Religion Who cou'd have Imagin'd from this Quotation as G. F. gives it That C. W. only spoke of Attempting to Save Souls as Christ did that is by Shedding of our Blood and Giving up the Ghost as an Atonement or Propitiation for the Sins of others I will spare my Pains to Exemplifie the Truth and Faithfulness of this Quotation And when Will. Penn can make a 〈◊〉 of G. F. for this by his own Rule I will Promise Twenty and Twenty more of the â—ike if need be out of that one Book the Gr. Mystery In which p. 298. And in his Saul's Errand p. 9. G. F. Justifies this Wretch Milner And notwithstanding that he cou'd not nor did Deny this Matter of Fact and much more of the Like Blasphemy as Giving forth Twelve several Prophesies in the Name of the Lord all of which prov'd False Pretending to Fast Forty Days as Christ did and other Madnesses of High Enthusiasm yet G. Fox Justifies Milner says Ther was a Pure seed in Him And that The Lord did open True Prophesies and Mighty things to Him And calls those Persecutors and Wicked Men who wou'd go tell the Nation as he words it of the Above mention'd and such like Infirmities of that Precious Quaker Prophet And now that I have given the Reader a Taste of Rich. Hubberthorn's G. Whitehead's and G. Fox's sincerity in Reciting the Answers of other Men out of the Fountain that is behind of the like Instances in their Works and those of the other Quakers Approved and Recommended by W. Penn And by his standing Rule before Mention'd He himself and all the Rest of that Herd turn'd out of the Pale of Christianity together to Graze in the Common with Deists Jews and Pagans Themselves the worst of the Company Let me for a Concluding stroke upon this Head Divert my self a little with Witty Ap-Pen from whom I have thus far Digress'd to his more Considerable Brethren Now then you shall see Ap-Pen shew his Parts in behalf of Himself and Partners at the End of the Preface he gives their Authority for their so Frequent calling the Author of the Sn. a Serpent a Viper a Snake Will. Penn has lately Improv'd it to a Rattle-Snake and they say it is A Title of his own Choosing As I said before it is not very Material what they call him He is neither the Better nor the Worse for that They have call'd others by the same and worse Names where they had not the Pretence for such a witty Pun as this But that which I take notice of this for is to shew them the Consequences which Themselves have laid down of Mistaking or Mis-Representing the words of other Men. Did the Author of the Sn. then mean that Title for Himself or for the Quakers How you can Turn it upon him is not the Point free Leave you have But to say That you wou'd not Abridge him a Title of his own Choosing and to give this as a Reason of your calling him so is Expresly to Mistake and that Wilfully his words And then out of Christianity with you according to Will. Penn. If you may call him a Snake by this Argument you may as well call Him the Devil and say that too his A Title of his own Choosing for another of is Books is Intitul'd Satan Dis-Rob'd Therefore both Will. and Ap-Pen cum Sociis must either Renounce their Christianity and then they will be just where they were or else Correct the above Mention'd Rule which W. P. has Infallibly laid down to Thrust others from thence Thus Justly in the same Trap which they set for others is their own Foot taken SECT III. The Quakers Clear'd from Contradiction in those Seeming Contrary Testimonies which are Produc'd in this Appendix to Defend them from the Heresies Charg'd upon them WHAT I have already said may be thought sufficient in Answer to this Appen wherein ther is nothing like an Argument but the Contrary Testimonies which are Produc'd against the Charges Exhibited And these are Reply'd to without Considering of them in Particular in Sect. ii N. 3.4 Whereby it appears First That tho' these Testimonies produc'd were Contrary to what is Charg'd from other Testimonies of the Quakers yet that this is no Justification but rather a further Argument of Contradictions against them Secondly That by the Contrary Meanings which they have these Testimonies tho' seemingly Contrary yet are not so and do not Contradict the Charges laid against the Quakers To make the which more fully Appear I will go over the Contrary Testimonies Produc'd And shew the Deep Deceit of these Quakers 1. These Testimonies begin Appen Sect. 2. p. 12. with this Title Some Testimonies to Christ Jesus as the Son of God and Come in the Flesh The first is of Rich. Farnsworth An. 1651. in his Confession and Profession of Faith where he Confesses to the Father Son and Holy Spirit but he calls them not 3 Persons so that this is no Contrary Testimony to the Quaker-Heresie concerning the Blessed Trinity which makes them to be only three Manifestations or Operations of the same Person as the Sabellians Socinians c. But then how is this a Testimony to the Son of God as Come in the Flesh if the Son be not Distinct from the Father as G. Fox affirms in so many words Great Mystery p. 142. and 293. c. if so then it was God the Father who took Flesh as Muggleton said Ay and Fox too Gr. Myst p. 246. where he falls upon Chr. Wade for offering to say That not God the Father but the Son said Wade took upon him Human Nature This Fox opposes and brings as an Argument against it that Christ is call'd The Everlasting Father Isa ix 6. The truth is these Quakers make no Distinction at all betwixt God and Christ they mean the same thing by Father Son Spirit Christ Light or Light within which they make to be God If otherwise let them tell us how the Son took Flesh and not the Father if the Son be only a Manifestation of the
Angels differ in their Natures and Glory Distinct from their Creator in their Persons And the Answer of the Quakers is That the Nature and Glory of the Elect differs not from the Nature and Glory of the Creator For the Elect are one with the Creator And thy word Distinct Essence I Deny For the Elect is not Distinct from the Creator The First Quaere Asks How God is Distinct from all Living Creatures And the Answer is He is not Distinct from Living Creatures for in Him Living Creatures Lives Moves and hath their Beings This shews how the Quakers and Ranters their Predecessors understand that Text. Act. xvii 28. Not as there Explain'd and ver 25. That God gives us all these things But that these things are Part of God's Essence and not any Distinct Essence from Him That ther is but one Essence or Being which is God Of which All Creatures do Partake in their several Degrees By which Hypothesis as Sebastian Frank one of this Horrid Gang in Germany did Impiously Blaspheme In Trunco Dcum esse Truncum in Porco Porcum in Diabolo Diabolum O Astonishment to Repeat it That In a Block God is a Block in a Swine a Swine and in a Devil He is a Devil These last Quotations I take from Mr. Farmer not having seen that Answer of Burrough and Howgil to Reeve But G. Fox in his Answer to this Book of Mr. Farmer do's not Deny them which ther is no Doubt he wou'd have done had they been False Nay on the Contrary he do's Justify the Doctrin and stand by it He Quotes the very Place in Farmer where these Quotations are viz. p. 60 61 62. In p. 61. is that Dreadful Blasphemy above Quoted of Sebast Frank there call'd one of the same Gang with the Quakers and in the same page and beginning of p. 62. it is Compar'd with what I have above Quoted out of Christopher Atkinson's Sword of the Lord c. where he Denies God to be a Distinct Being from All Creatures And G. Fox in his Gr. Myst p. 174. Quotes this same Page of Farmer viz. p. 62. and sets down this as one of Farmer 's False Principles which he Opposes He saith says Fox That God is Distinct in His Being and Blessedness from All Creatures and that God who is the Creator is Eternally Distinct from All Creatures He Quotes the same again from p. 53. of Farmer thus He saith That this God who is the Creator is Eternally Distinct from All Creatures And from p. 55. That Christ being God only in one Man's Person remains a Distinct Person from All Creatures and Angels And G. Fox's Answer is This is Contrary to Scripture And he Quotes some of the Scriptures which they use to wrest to this Blasphemous Purpose as That God is All in All. In Him we Live and move c. And he Disowns not Sebast Frank or his Blasphemy Thus they hold That Christ is God not only in One Man's Person i. e. in the Person of our Lord Jesus of Nazareth but in Every one of their Persons and as much Incarnat in Them as in Jesus Nay as much in Every other Man ay and Beast too by this Principle which Degrades God into a Stock to a Swine to a Devil O Horror who by this Means wou'd Maintain His Equality with God And has Taught it to the Quakers Who from his Inspiration think Themselves to be Infinit and Eternal as God is Thus says G. Fox in the Introduction to his Battle-doore for Teachers and Professors c. All Languages are to me says he no More than Dust who was before Languages were And p. 214. Next follow a few words by George Fox Who is before Confusion or Many Languages were In the same Strain says James Parnell in his Book Intituled The Watchers c. p. 37. To the End of all Disputes and Arguments I am come for before they was I AM. And thus it must be if their Soul be not a Creature and have no Beginning as before has been Quoted out of their Books It will not now seem Strange That they Allow no Created that is no Human Soul to Christ Since they Deny it to themselves This you may see in George Whitehead his Answer to Thomas Danson his Synopsis of Quakerism Printed An. 1669. p. 18. There he says As to T. Dansons telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the Creation of his Body and Soul the Parts of that Nature he Subsisted in c. To this I say if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both Created doth not this render him a Fourth Person for Creation was in Time Where doth the Scripture say That his Soul was Created The Consequences of this Horrid Opinion Engages the Quakers to believe That God may Grow and Encrease be Born and Suffer because they find it so with Themselves They Suppose that what they call the Seed in their Hearts do's Grow from a Seed to become a New-Born Child Thence to be a Son that is in the Perfection of a Man And thence by Degrees to Encrease till it be God! This is the Climax of the Quaker-Perfection for they Cannot say that they were Perfect at first Thus Will. Penn gives it Us in his Christian Quaker An. 1674. p. 98. When says he what was but in the Condition of a SEED or NEW-BORN CHILD shou'd become the ONLY SON the WONDERFVL COVNCELLOR the MIGHTY GOD the EVERLASTING FATHER This is the same Language with Will. Bayly in his Works p. 291. CHRIST is known says he to be first a Holy thing then a CHILD given and a SON Born Which is EMANVEL God with Vs a Saviour a Wonderful Councellor the MIGHTY GOD the PRINCE OF PEACE c. And this is not said of Our Blessed Lord Jesus of Nazareth his Conception in the Womb of the Virgin MARY and being Born of her Body But the Quakers Mean it as all fulfill'd Within Themselves viz. The SEED Sown or Conceiv'd in their VIRGIN Hearts which at the first in Embrio is only a Holy thing But Encreasing it becomes a Child in the Womb of the Heart thence Repening it has a Spiritual BIRTH and is a SON Born Which SON Grows up to be at last the MIGHTY GOD the EVERLASTING EATHER Nor do they Suppose that Christ was any otherwise Born of the Blessed Virgin than as He is thus Born in Themselves They Allegorize all the History of His Incarnation into this Spiritual Birth of the Light which they Call CHRIST in their Hearts The Virgin MOTHER of God is a Virgin HEART wherein God is Conceiv'd and Born They have Spiritual Shepherds too heeping their Flocks by Night A Spiritual STAR in the EAST Spiritual WISE MEN who follow'd it to a Spiritual BABE in a Spiritual INN MANGER c. And all this Perform'd Within them Now at this Day Awake therefore NOW says Will. Bayly p. 292. of his Works Ye Shepherds who have been keeping your Flocks by Night and Look
last Authority I shall Produce is of the Great Fox Himself in his Book call'd Several Papers given forth for the Spreading of Truth c. Printed 1671. There p. 54. is a Chapter which bears this Title Concerning Christ's Flesh which was Offered c. And this Flesh he makes not to be That which He took of the B. Virgin but That which he had from the Beginning and which he supposes was Crucify'd when Adam Fell And in That Crucifixion to Consist the Atonement and Satisfaction made for Sin And he takes that Text The Lamb slain from the Foundation of the world not as then Decreed and Purposed by God but Literally as then Actually Fulfill'd Thus he Begins that Chapter Christ the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the world when it began its Foundation then the Lamb was slain And Christ according to the Flesh Crucified the Lamb slain that Flesh of His which is a Mysterie when the first Adam's and Eve's Flesh was Defiled This he calls a Mystery And it is the true Mystery of Quakerism It is upon this account That the Quakers think all the Christian world to Lie in Darkness but Themselves That other Christians know of no other Flesh and Blood of Christ but that outward Flesh which He took in Time of the B. Virgin Hence it is common in their Discourse and in their Books to tell others That the Flesh of Christ is a Mysterie That they understand nothing of it As Solomon Eccles wrote That the Pope Sn. Sect. x. p. 138. the Episcopal the Presbyterian Independants and Baptists understand the Blood of Jesus Christ no more than a Brute Beast Therefore the Quaker's Confessing to the Blood of Christ in General Terms can be no Justification of them while they mean another Manhood Flesh Blood and Bones of Christ than any Christian ever Dreamt of But it Argues their Deep Deceit and Hypocricy to seem to Justifie themselves to the world by their General Confessions But Conceal their secret Meaning whereby they know that they Differ most Widely from those with whom they make this False Appearance of Agreeing Exactly Therefore their Answer to the Queres is no Answer while they Refuse to Renounce this Distinction that they have of Different Manhoods in Christ or otherwise to Explain themselves and tell us which of the Manhoods they mean The words of their Answer to the Queres upon this Head are these We sincerely believe in Jesus Christ the only begotten Son of the Living God both as he is true God and Perfect Man But what they mean by Man here they do not Declare Whether that Eternal or Heavenly Manhood before spoke of or the Outward and Terrestrial Manhood which he took of our Earth But Tho. Ellwood we thank him has told us and Discover'd the secret in his Answer to G. Keiths first Narrative p. 205. where he Recites a Quotation G. K. had brought out of G. Whiteheads Book The Malice of the Independent Agent p. 17. That Christ's Body now in Heaven is the same in substance He had on Earth which wou'd seem a Fair Confession to the Humanity of Christ But hold a little crys T. E. Did G. Whitehead ever call or own Christ's Body now in Heaven or while it was on Earth to be Terrestrial or of the Earth Here we see how to Understand their words and how to Interpret this their Answer to the Quaeres not of the outward or Terrestrial Manhood which Christ took of our Nature but of their Secret and Heavenly Manhood which they Madly Fancie He had from Eternity And thus G. Whitehead Explains himself in his Part of The Christian Quaker Printed An. 1674. p. 140. where he says That he was not at all against Jesus Christ being God and Man take Man says he as Christ is the Heavenly Spiritual and Glorify'd Man But he Confesses that he was against this viz. That Jesus Christ consisteth of Human Flesh and Bone Here he Distinguishes betwixt the Heavenly and the Human Manhood The first he Ascribes to Christ but Denies the Latter that Christ has any Human Manhood And the Reason he gives for it is Seeing Christ says he was from Everlasting which is the same we have heard before from Thom. Ellwood where he takes upon him to Explain Will. Penn's sense in this Matter viz. That Christ as Christ always had a Manhood And seeing He had it from Everlasting therefore it cou'd not be the Human but the Heavenly Manhood Flesh Blood and Bone What then was that Flesh and Blood which he took of the B. Virgin wherein He suffer'd and Rose again And of which he said Behold my Hands and my Feet Luk. xxiv 39. Handle me and see for a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see Me have To this says G. W. ibid. p. 139. 140. yes Christ Had such Flesh and Bones but he did not Consist of them I distinguish between Consisting and Having Says he i. e. A man Hath anything that he Possesses or wears I Have a Cloak but I do not Consist of that Cloak that is It is no Part of my Nature and I may Put it on or Throw it off without any Change of my Nature And no otherwise do the Quakers reckon of the Body and Blood which Jesus our B. Lord took in Time in the Womb of the Virgin Not that He took it into His Person so as to Consist of it as a Man do's Consist of Both Natures of his Body and Soul But only that He Had it that is Made Vse of it and wore it for a Time as a Vail or Garment which He has now laid aside and subsists in Heaven only in that Heavenly and Eternal Manhood Flesh Blood and Bones which He had as Christ from Eternity And they make it a Contradiction to say That Christ do's Consist of any other Flesh and Bone that is of Human Flesh and Bone they think this to be a Contradiction to Christ's being the Eternal Word because they hold that He cou'd not be the Word or Christ without Consisting of Flesh Blood and Bone And therefore That if He had None but the Flesh c. of the Human Nature which was Created in Time it must follow That He was not the Word or Christ from Everlasting Thus says G. W. ibid. p. 139. Is there not a Plain Contradiction between Jesus Christ Consisting of Flesh and Bone Human Nature And that the Lord Jesus Christ is the Eternal word from Everlasting c. Therefore you see it is Necessary for us in order to Oblige these Quakers to Discover their Meaning that we Insist upon the word Human And that they will Answer whether they Allow Christ to have Now in Heaven any Human Body Or whether He do's Consist Now of that Body or did Consist of it while He was upon Earth But will the Word Human hold them Have they no Dodge nor Shift whereby to use even that word Plainly in a sense in which they know that
Jesus which was not a Fantastical but a Real Body Here is putting in things they are not Accused of that they may seem to vindicate themselves in something They are not Accused for saying that the Body of Jesus was a Fantastical or not a Real Body but that it was not Truly that is Hypostatically the Body of Christ only a Vail or Garment wherein He Dwelt And in that sense it was His Body as a Man's Cloak or Garment is his Garment and so it was that as G. W. says which Christ owned as his own Body being also adds he called the Body of Jesus i. e. in some other sense than it was the Body of Christ That is It was the True Proper and Natural Body of the Man Jesus But it was the Body of Christ only as He Dwelt in it in the Body of that man Jesus as G. W. thinks He do's in the Body of George Whitehead Otherwise it cou'd not be call'd the Body of Christ and also as G. W. here the Body of Jesus This must make Jesus and Christ to be Two Persons For Example if I shou'd say the Body of George which is also the Body of Whitehead this wou'd either be Non-sense or else it must Divide George from Whitehead and make the Body to belong to George in one sense and to Whitehead in another It is told before p. 17 18. How nicely G. W. do's Distinguish between Consisting and Having and tho' he Allow'd that Christ once Had a Body that is in His Possession as a man Hath an House or a Cloak yet G. W. positively Denies That Christ did Consist of Human Flesh and Blood And if so Then He was never Truly and Really a Man only such in Appearance and False-shew Which overthrows the whole Foundation of the Christian Faith And is an Abominable Heresie long since Condemn'd by the Catholick Church as I have elsewhere shewn And that the Quakers have Lick'd it up as they wou'd Pretend by Inspiration which if so was most Certainly from the Devil the Father of Lies But let us see more of them Richard Hubberthorn in his works Printed 1663. among several Queres which he puts against Christ's being a Creature or having any Created Nature in Him do's Demand p. 49. and 50. When was that Christ Created which you say must as a Creature Judge the World And if in Mary 's time who was Judge of the World till then Was not the Person of Christ Jesus before the World was And when had the Man Christ Jesus his Beginning if you can Declare it How is Christ the only begotten Son of God if He be a Creature or how can God beget a Creature And if the whole Person of Christ was not before the Earthly Adam how was the Creation made by Him Or how can He be of the Nature of fallen Adam and not Earthly and Defiled And is the Flesh of Christ Heavenly or Earthly Or is He Christ without His Flesh i. e. He had always an Heavenly Flesh and that He has still But never took Flesh of Adam's Nature for then they think He must have been Defil'd As if He cou'd not take the Nature without the Defilement which was but Accidental to it George Fox in his Great Mystery p. 99. sets down this Principle of the Professors as he calls them That Christ hath a Humane Reasonable Soul And he Disputes against it and Battels it as a Gross Error For says he Is not a Human Soul Earthly for you say that Christ had a Human Soul and is not Human Earthly And hath a Human Body and is not a Human Body an Earthly Body was not the first man of the Earth Earthly and had an Human Body the Second man the Lord from Heaven This is the Heavenly Body and Flesh which they suppose Christ had from Eternity But here and in many other Places they Deny Christ to have either Human Body or Soul or to be a Man otherwise than as they say He was Man before the Creation This being Urg'd against them by John Bunyan Minister of Bedford who in his Gospel-Truths Opened Sect. 18. takes pains to prove that the Christ who was Born of the Virgin was the true Saviour and then Infers p. 652 of his works in these words How are they then Deceived who own Christ no otherwise than as He was before the world began For in their owning of Him thus and no otherwise they do directly Deny Him to be come in the Flesh and are of that Anti-Christian Party which John Speaks of 1. Joh. iv 3. Edw. Burrough Answers this Book of Bunyan's and coming to this Passage p. 142. of his works he Repeats Bunyan's words thus How are they Deceived who own Christ no otherwise than as He was before the world began c. And instead of Clearing the Quakers from this Objection or Disowning it to be a Principle of the Quakers he stands by it and pretends to give Reasons for it as Christ the same Yesterday to Day and for Ever And that Christ was before Abraham c. And falls upon Bunyan for his Grievous Ignorance in not Apprehending this Quaker-Mystery as he words it thus To own Him Christ as He was before the world was for Salvation But that was not the Question Bunyan's words even as Repeated by Burrough are not against owning Christ as He was before the World was for that Bunyan and all Christians own but against owning Him so And No otherwise i. e. Not as having taken Flesh in time of the B. Virgin having Suffer'd and Dy'd for us for in that Respect and not only as He was before the World was Bunyan Contends that He was our Saviour And Burrough opposing him in this shews plainly what they mean viz. That Christ has now no other Flesh or Manhood than what He had before the World was and that He is not our Saviour upon account of that Flesh of Jesus which He Borrow'd as a Vail to shrowd Himself in for a time or for what that Body suffer'd but that He is our Saviour only as He was before the World was and as they say that He is Inwardly now in their Hearts in His Heavenly Flesh and Blood which he had from Eternity And the whole Merit and Atonement for Sin they place in the Inward Shedding of this Spiritual Blood in their Hearts which they call the Sufferings of Christ yes and of His Manhood too of His Body and His Flesh thus Bantering Mankind while they Mean nothing of this of that Visible Body in which He Appear'd in the Days of Pontius Pilat and which was Nail'd to the Cross but of the Invisible Body Flesh Blood and Bones of the Godhead The Arch-Enemy having Taught them this Damnable Heresie and thereby put the Grossest of Darkness for Light and Defrauded them of whole Christianity the Faith in the outward Jesus and what He did and suffer'd outwardly for Us tho' it be Inwardly Apprehended and Apply'd by Faith which is
within G. K. met with several the like Instances in that Journey Which I will not here Repeat because we may have them perhaps in Reasonable time from himself And these which I have mention'd are sufficient to shew that however some at London wou'd Gloss it the Quaker Faith is not Grounded upon our Lord Jesus of Nazareth but upon their Light within which they will sometimes so call to Elude the world And as they Believe not that Christ took our Nature Truly and Really into His own Person while He was upon the Earth but only as a Cloak or Vaile to put about Him for a time so they think that He has now ever since His Ascension quite laid aside and thrown off that Vaile of our Nature and that He has nothing at all of it now in Heaven But that He subsists there only in that Heavenly Humanity Flesh Blood and Bones which they suppose He had from Eternity And this being their Faith they must needs think the Common Christ of all Christians as a True and Real Man subsisting in our Nature now and for ever to come in Heaven to be False and a Lye and consequently to be an Idol and our Worship of Him to be Idolatry And as a necessary Consequence of this they must Hate and Detest our Christ they must Curse Him and Renounce Him as they have done which I come next to shew And yet at the same time they Pretend to Worship the same Christ with us And produce their Testimonies to Christ thereby Intending to make us Believe as if they were true Christians because they use the word Christ and Jesus as we do but not in the same Sense which they know right well in their own Consciences Yet in their Quaker Plainess and Sincerity they wou'd thus Put upon us They Differ from us in the Object of our Faith and not only in the Manner of our Worship which Difference ther may be and ther is among Christians they Worship not the same Christ with us For otherwise if they only thought us Faulty in the Manner of our Worship why wouâ—d they for that Curse and Damn our Christ Himself call Him an Imagined God and Vtterly Deny Him But to the Proof Their Blasphemous Contempt of Christ 3. The Quakers having thus Transfer'd the whole Merit towards our Salvation from the outward Christ to their Light within They have set up these Two as Inconsistancies as Utter Enemies to one another Which they must be upon the Quaker Notion For Both cannot be the Object of Faith And since Both are made so the one by All Christians the other by the Quakers one of them must be a False God by the same Necessity that the other is the True God Therefore the Quakers tho' in Gross Dissimulation with the World they wou'd seem to speak Honourably of our Blessed Lord yet they mean it not of Him but of what they call their Light-within as has been Sufficiently shewn But on the other hand when they speak Plainly of Him They Deny Him they Renounce Him Nay they Curse and Damn Him as a False Christ a False God They send the whole Three Persons of the Holy and Ever B. Trinity into the Lake and the Pit as shewn in the Second Part p. 38. c. And Boldly and Blasphemously say That the Lord Jesus whom we Profess is Accursed ibid. p. Edward Burrough p. 101. of his works calls that Christ to whom we Pray an Idol God and a Dead God Josiah Coale of High Renown among the Quakers in his Works Collected and Reprinted An. 1671. opposing one John Newman for saying If ther be no Personal being of Christ then ther is no Christ to Exercise Faith in Answers p. 336. By this kind of Arguments of J. N. if Faith be Exercis'd in a Personal Being of Christ it 's Exercis'd upon Fancie and Imagination Which is very True for a Personal Being of Christ is not Scripture Here he makes a Personal Being of Christ to be nothing else but Fancie and Imagination and consequently no Object of Faith These works of Jos Coale have Prefix'd High Testimonies and Elogiums from George Fox G. Whithead and from Will. Penn. Wherein ther are Multitudes of the like Blasphemies Having thus made a Personal Being of Christ now in Heaven to be nothing else but an Imagination of Christians it follows That the Quakers do think Him to be an Imagined God as they say Expresly in The Sword of the Lord drawn p. 5. And here say they Sottish Minds your Imagined God beyond the Stars and your Carnal Christ is utterly Deny'd and Testify'd against by the Light which comes from Christ So that by this the Personal Christ of Christians in Heaven is an Imagined God and a Carnal Christ who is Vtterly Deny'd and Testify'd against by the Quakers Christ I have before Quoted G. W. in his Light and Life p. 54. Ridiculing of the Christians for your Boasting says he of your God and Christ at a Distance above the Clouds Stars and Firmament I Repeat it here to shew the Harmony of the Quakers in the same Stile and Sense In the same page of The Sword before Quoted the Quakers add That this Christ the man of God is God and Man in one Person it is a Lye And as for this Position That Christ being the only God and Man in one Person Remains for Ever a Distinct Person from all Saints and Angels notwithstanding their Vnion and Communion with Him the Quaker Answer is your words are Vtterly Deny'd and Detested and your Distinctions are Abominable The Spiritual Vnion and Communion with Christ was Allow'd to the Quakers But that will not serve They will have no such Person as Christ but only the Light within which is not a Person And G. Fox as before Quoted says The Devil is in them who Expect to be Saved by a Christ without them tho' they Acknowledge That it cannot be without the Operation of His H. Spirit within them as the Person fully own'd whom he oppos'd But no Matter for that They will have no outward Christ at all And they make it a Mark of False Ministers to Preach of Faith in an outward Christ Will. Penn Says of which I have often Minded him That the Person who suffer'd upon the Cross was Properly the Son of God we Vtterly Deny And in his Sandy Foundation p. 20. he calls Him a Finit and Impotent Creature Will. Bayly in his works p. 307. says what was his Christ 's Person being mean and Contemptible to them His Diciples more than another Person And p. 600. c. He vehemently opposes the Outward and Visible Christ to be the Saviour He says The Apostles did not Preach a Visible Christ with Flesh and Bones And he asks who was Enoch's Saviour and the Prophets who were before that Visible Flesh and Bones was Then he Ridicules those in the Quaker-Language before Mention'd who Preach a Visible Man with Flesh and Bones at a