to the Civil Governments Belief and Acceptance thereof thereby contradicting and consequently affronting the Government in its Belief and Charity towards us and to set Subjects at Variance and to raise Persecution against us again instead of being humbly thankful for their and our present Liberties The very Nature and Tendency of these their Bitter Lying Invectives being to bring Persecution upon us as a People not to be given any Credit unto in our Solemn Profession before Authority 3. When we have solemnly and sincerely declared to the Government That we believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are given by Divine Inspiration two or three Anabaptists so called divulge the contrary to the World in Print c. Unto which E. P. replies viz. to all which I answer 1. We did not know till our Book was published that you had professed this as your Faith before the Parliament The more Shame for you to be so precipitant in your Unjust and Censorious Attempts to the Contrary your Ignorance herein will not excuse your Rashness much less your Falshood in charging us as a People i. e. the Quakers in general with being great Enemies to Vilifyers and Contemners of the Holy Scriptures and now their chief Guides as E. P. terms them and our former Writings directly to oppose and evidently to contradict this Confession of Faith p. 3 4. which is our believing the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration Now I challenge E. Paye and his Abettors W. Allcot and H. L. 1. To produce plain Proof That the People called Quakers do Vilifie the Holy Scriptures This is Matter of Fact charged What Vilifying Terms or Characters hath that People put upon the Holy Scriptures We do in good Conscience still deny the Charge 2. What Expressions of Contempt hath that People put upon the Holy Scriptures it being contrary to our Consciences and Intentions either to Contemn or Vilifie them The Matter of Fact charged ought directly to be proved against us as a People or else retracted and for ever condemned 3. What former Writings of ours or our Ministers do directly Oppose and Contradict this our Profession That we believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were given by Divine Inspiration Where do we the said People or our Ministers declare That the Holy Scriptures were not given by Divine Inspiration or only given by Human Tradition We demand plain Proof of the Indictment or Matters herein charged against us and by us denied E. P. proceeds viz. 2. We must the more admire your Presumptuous Confidence herein that you should so affront the Government except you had at the same Time renounced your former Writings that so evidently contradict it p. 3 4. Both which are still to prove being sincerely denyed by us Our Confidence in what we professed to the Government was from an honest and good Confidence in the Truth of what we professed and not to affront but to answer and satisfie the Government in what was required of us as Christians and under a Christian Profession and therein to be allow'd our just Liberties both as Men and Christians as the Parliament then desired we might approve our selves which Christian Reputation you seek to deprive us of and like Persecuting Incendiaries falsly charge us with affronting the Government in our Profession which God knows was both Sincere and Christian both with respect to the Eternal Deity and the Holy Scriptures E. P. Which way could the Quakers expect to escape being defamed or discredited Why it 's like they did suppose That the Honourable Assembly of Parliament had Matters of greater Moment in Hand than to compare their former Writings with their new Faith So that if we had not concerned our selves to peep into their Writings and compare them with their newly-professed Faith and published this to the World namely That the Quakers former Writings and their late Profession of Faith are as really alike as an Apple to an Oyster and agree as directly as Light and Darkness it had not been known p. 7. Thus far E. P. 'T is very rare to find such a Piece of Presumptuous Proud and Fallacious Insinuation as this implying not only that we dissembled a Profession of our Belief in Words before the Parliament as directly contrary to our former Writing as Light is to Darkness but that the Parliament was drawn into a Mistake or deceived concerning us by such Dissimulation Wherefore to undeceive them and the World concerning us these Adversaries to make themselves wiser than the whole Parliament and every Member thereof have peeped into our former Writings to find out Matter to Defame and Discredit us in our Christian Profession before the Parliament Herein they have acted like Peepers in the Dark but they have peeped to little purpose for a Dark Lying Spirit has attended their Peeping as is clearly in this and our other short Treatise made manifest And that E. P. has but peeped indeed into some of our former Writings and not seriously or honestly read them with due Observation is apparent in his manifold Perversions Mincings and Curtalizings Concerning Primitive Errors and Corrupt Principles in Point of Faith unduly charged upon the Quakers p. 8 9. To the first I answer We never denyed the Scriptures to contain the Words and True Sayings of God whereas Christ is the Word his Name is called the Word of God Rev. 19.9 13. Exod. 20.1 But that they are the Rule that is the only Rule of Faith Life and Practice as he terms them p. 8 17 33. In that we cannot so call them he must excuse us herein until he produce us Plain Scripture that SO calls them though the Holy Scriptures be a Rule of Doctrine subordinate to that Spirit from whence they first came But seeing it is an Article of his Faith That the Scriptures are the only Rule of Faith c. He had need to produce plain Scripture that SO saith otherwise his Failure therein will be an Indication That the Scriptures are not the only Rule of his Faith because there wants Scripture Proof of this great Article of his Faith and then where 's his Faith 2. Truly I never knew the Quakers affirm the Scriptures to be of NO Use in order to the true Knowledg of God but that the Holy Scriptures are very useful with the help of the Spirit of God 3. I never knew the Quakers hold it a Sin much less of Idolatry to take the Practices of the Saints Recorded Commanded and Continuing Commands in Force in the Scriptures for our Examples and Rules because the Spirit of Truth which is our chief Guide and Rule does not lead to Reject but to Own and Follow its own Precepts and Commands which are in Force in Scripture 4. I have not known it asserted by our Friends That whatever is commanded in Scripture is no Duty to us except we receive the Command by immediate Inspiration as
following are left out viz. as received and proceeding immediately from that Spirit and spoken in the Sense thereof as Christ's Words were of greater Authority or Power when he spake than the Pharisees reading the Letter and them in whom that Spirit speaks not and their Speaking we deny whereby I did prefer the Spirit in it's Living and Powerful Ministry above the Letter but not a Word of preferring any Pamphlets to the Holy Scriptures God knows it never entred into my Heart to prefer any Pamphlets or Books extant in the World much less Lying Ones before the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament but do prefer and esteem them before all other Books or Writings extant whatsoever When Humphry Smith 's True and Everlasting Rule came in date the Scriptures became no better than an Old Almanack this from a Story of Tho. Hicks against one Tho. Holbrow though we know no such Person Dialogue p. 27. to which Edward Paye c. addeth these Words viz. These are the Men that in their Pamphlets profess so high an Esteem for the Holy Scriptures Antichrist in Spirit p. 13. Pray observe here These Men here accused with esteeming the Scriptures no better than an Old Almanack are therein most wickedly belied and scandaliz'd being those of us who publisht the Paper in Print entituled The Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers asserted wherein we sincerely declare the quite contrary to what 's here implicitly charged by E. P. c. against us namely That we do believe and own the Holy Scriptures contained in the Books of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration c. Tho. Hicks in his Dialogue I. p. 24 25. and Edward Paye c. on his Credit Falsly and Wickedly Personate the Quaker thus viz. When we make use of Scripture it is only to Quiet and Stop their Clamours that plead for it as their Rule but for us had the Scriptures never been we could have known what is therein contained I hope quoth Edward Paye the Reader by this may perceive the Reason why the Quakers talk so much of Scripture in their Paper Observe we own not the Scripture we seemingly allow it but our End in this is only to stop their Clamours that plead for it as their Rule You see here quoth E. P. the condescending Spirits of these Men c. Antichrist p. 15. We do in the Name of our Lord Jesus Christ utterly deny this Passage and Declaration as laid down in the Quakers Name and Person as no Declaration or Speech made or thus declarable by the Quakers on their Principle but a Horrid Abusive Forgery of Thomas Hicks long since detected and which you Baptists now may be horribly ashamed to bring forth or suffer to be renewed in Print The Names they i. e. the Quakers give the Holy Scriptures viz. No better than an Old Almanack a Dead Carnal Letter p. 18. But on second Consideration E. P. deems it a difficulty to prove that the Quakers do now in the present Tense say The Holy Scriptures are but a Dead or Carnal Letter as his other Pamphlet Raylings p. 23 24. and yet chargeth them in the present Tense with giving such Names to the Holy Scriptures but now 't is a Difficulty to prove his own Charge Among the Names which E. P. falsly chargeth the Quakers to give the Holy Scriptures viz. That they are the Precepts and Traditions of Men p. 18. That Obedience to the Scriptures is the Harlot's Child p. ibid. These are both utterly denyed by us the said People and the pretended Proof of the first is hereafter examined and proved false The latter I really believe could never be so said nor ever was held by the Quakers so to term sincere Obedience to the Holy Scripture but rather to reflect upon an Hypocritical Profession and Imitation of some Shadows and outwardward Things and neglecting the Substance of the New Covenant Dispensation That the Heaven they i. e. the Quakers intend wherein the three Divine Witnesses bear Record is No where else but within their Mortal Corrupt Bodies they intend no other Heaven than what is within them Antichrist in Spirit p. 20 21. This is expressly contrary to our known professed Principle of the omnipresence of God and his Spirit both in Heaven above and in Earth beneath and whom the Heaven of Heavens cannot contain And I take the Charge to be but E. P's own Consequence which he himself has drrawn from some Words he has partially and mincingly taken up against James Parnell Thomas Lawson Edward Burroughs c. First For a Pretext quoting James Parnell's Book as he calls it Satan's Design Discovered But I know no Bok of James Parnell's so entituled upon the Reviewing the Titles of his Books nor any of the rest quoted that oppose or disown God's Omnipresence much less that the People called Quakers are guilty of any such Charge I would desire E. P. if he will still be so injurious as to reassume this Charge against the People called Quakers that he would yet be so ingenious as fairly and fully to cite the whole Passages of the Authors quoted by him relating to the Matter intended and for Proof of his Charge without his own Consequences and Perversions That if it shall appear that any of them have opposed or denyed the Omnipresence of God or his Eternal Spirit we may shew our dislike thereof But I believe there 's enough in our Friends Books to clear them if honestly viewed and cited and we have great cause to Question and detect his unfair Citations as I have this following Instance against my self for Proof of his said Charge 8. Quoting Dipper plung'd Christ without us is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians Antichrist in Spirit p. 22. But E. P. in his other Pamphlet Railings p. 29. varies in his Repetition of his Charge thus viz. G. W. Dipper plung'd Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scripture-Language c. Observe here in the one it is Christ without us where after Christ E. P. leaves out God-Man a Person i. e. without us which I said is not Scripture-Language c. In the other it is Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scriture-Language where after Christ he leaves out God-man again and yet both charged by the same Credulous Person E. P. though both be falsly cited and unjustly charged upon me as mine For to Tho. Hick's strange Phrase viz. Jesus Christ God-man a Person without thee Dial. p. 9. My Answer was This is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians who profess a personal God denying him to be an Infinite Spirit Dipper plung'd p 13. Wherein my Objection was not against the Words Jesus Christ without us for he is both without us and within us but my Question was of the Words God-man a Person without us including God as well as the Man Christ Jesus as
I do not therefore conclude that the Divine Doctrin therein contain'd may be no means of our knowing God for in Christ's hand and by his opening it to us and our understandings therein it may be and is A Means of Divine knowledge to us Christ being the Way and the Means original of Divine and Saving-Knowledge Obj. against G. W. again viz. Who also affirmeth that Faith grounded on the Scriptures is but an empty implicit Faith and bespeaks such persons void of the knowledge of God and Christ and Salvation and that such Men walk by their own Fancies and Imaginations Quoting Christ ascended p. 11. Observ. This Baptist has again apparently miscited and wrong'd my Answer 't was none of my affirmation or words That Faith grounded on the Scripture is but an empty implicit Faith c. I affirm they are not my words but E. P.'s fallacious abuse put upon me The Case was this viz. John Newman in his Book stiled The Light within c. having affirm'd p. 45. That without the Scriptures to be the Rule we know not that there is any God or Christ or Salvation c. all Men are left in the dark and no man knoweth how to enjoy Life Eternal neither do we know what God counteth unclean and what holy without the Scriptures we know not any Promise c. It leaves men to walk by Fancy and Imaginations Thus far he My Answer was Poor Men You have shewn your selves sufficiently herein and what an empty implicit Faith you are in and how void both of the Knowledge of God Christ and Salvation you are and how yet in your sins having denied Christ and his Light within to be your Rule Way and Foundation as he is to his Followers And so you are walking by your Fancies and Imaginations who set the Scriptures in the place of Christ as your only and absolute Rule and Ground of your Faith and Knowledge c. So that I did not own nor grant that their Faith was really grounded on the Scriptures herein but on their own unscriptural Fancies and Imaginations vid. Christ ascend p. 12. contrary to Scripture-Testimony of Christ. And I further oppose their Ignorance of God and Christ thus viz. And then what a sad Sentence of no less than condemnation doth this pass upon all People and Nations who have not the Scriptures as being all void of knowledge that there is either God Christ Salvation Good or Evil without the Scriptures whereas there is a Living Evidence throughout the Creation or Works of God therein of the Eternal Power or Maker thereof See Ps. 19. Rom. 1. Job 12. and many do know and have known these things written of which concern Salvation by the Light of God and Christ in them that never could read nor had the Scriptures outwardly as those Gentiles which had not the Law yet did those things contained in it and shewed the Effects of the Law written in their Hearts Rom. 2. Tho' the Scriptures are profitable to the Man of God who hath them being led by his Spirit which opens them Christ ascend p. 11 12. And now E. P. to prove thy Brethren W. Allcot and H. Loader's false Charge That the Quakers contemn and vilifie the Holy Scriptures in their Epistles and thy own horrid Slanders also that they are great Enemies to and Contemners of Holy Scriptures p. 20. of thy Antichrist in Spirit Thou summest up thy Argument with divers If 's but assumest no Assumption pursuant to thy general Charge as in thy 33 and 34 Pages of thy Railings and Slanders detected thus viz. Now if the Scriptures be a dead carnal Letter Ink and Paper saith Parnel If they are the Precepts and Traditions of Men saith Naylor in his Love to the Lost. If they are no better than an old Almanack as Holbrow said Hick 's Dial. p. 29. If to say an Ass hath as much Authority essentially in himself to teach and rebuke as the Scriptures c. be not to Contemn and Vilifie them I am yet to seek what is Ans. The Assumption or Minor Proposition intended i. e. but the Quakers say all these of the Holy Scriptures is here wanting and the Argument is lame and fallacious as well as falsly stated also in the first Proposition being not in the terms of the Charge For 1 st The Charge is general against the Quakers That they are great Enemies to and Contemners of the Holy Scriptures yet the word Holy not mentioned in the particular Instances fallaciously alledged for proof though it be in the general Charge 2. If some of the Instances were true yet to charge them upon the People called Quakers in general is an absurd and unjust way of arguing a particulare ad universale and no better than to argue thus If Edw. Paye the Baptist has raked up and charged divers of Hicks's Lies and Forgeries upon the Quakers and added many more of his own to them then the Baptists are all Forgers But Edw. Paye hath so done is apparent Ergo They may justly deny the Major though the Assumption or Charge alone stands good being plentifully proved against E. Paye in particular 3. Neither are the particular Instances true in fact the Holy Scriptures are not a dead Letter in the Quakers esteem tho' none of us ascribe Holiness to Ink and Paper or the dead Characters but to the living Divine Precepts and Doctrine therein contained nor did we ever think the Holy Scriptures to be but the Precepts and Traditions of Men or much less no better than an Old Almanack as the People called Quakers are most unjustly accused by these Adversaries Antichrist in Spirit p. 18. And 't is far from J. N. or any of us either to say or think that an Ass hath as much Authority essentially in himself to teach and rebuke as the Holy Scriptures For shame E. P. retract and leave off such foul gross and horrid Lies and Reproaches against the People called Quakers To prove that we name or call the Holy Scriptures the Precepts and Traditions of Men charged against the Quakers in general Antichrist in Spirit p. 18. Thou E. P. hast repeated this again in thy Railings p. 33. and quotest James Nayler's Love to the Lost for it but not in what Page and therefore I have been at the pains to view over that Book to see if I could find any such words but find nothing like them but the contrary namely 1 st That the words of the Scripture were given forth from the Light which he calls the Eternal Light Love to the Lost p. 4 20 21. And that the Ministers of Christ who have the Word who are begotten by the Word through such came the Scriptures which came not by the Will of Man but by the Spirit and so are of no private Interpretation Love to the Lost p. 73. which Spirit is the Eternal Spirit the Spirit of Light and Truth p. 13 18. Thus J. N. All which is far enough from calling or
esteeming the Holy Scriptures but the Precepts and Traditions of Men as most unjustly is charged upon the Quakers by E. P. and consequently by his approvers William Allcott and Henry Loader who had need to retract this and the rest of their Charges which are notoriously false in fact And E. P. thou hast no cause to boast or insult over us touching the Writings and Sayings of our ancient Authors which thou hast so foully wrong'd and perverted and when thou hast made Lies upon them then falsly to say they directly contradict the Quakers new Faith when by deceitful Perversions false Citations base and falacious Forgeries thou hast attempted such Contradiction as thy self and abettors may for ever be ashamed of and hast great cause to renounce and explode the same rather than we our ancient Friends Writings And to evince thy contempt and scorn thou shalt take no notice at all of the confused Profession of Faith that G. W. makes p. 34. No thou art too big too great too high in thy own proud Conceit to take notice of what such a mean contemptible person as G.W. or any of us testifies of our Belief how sincere soever But I must tell thee if thou goest on in this thy wicked Course of Defaming and Scandalizing us I hope we shall take further notice of thee and thy base malicious Work to thy own and abettors perpetual shame to keep your Infamy in remembrance and when we have fully cleared our Consciences I doubt not but the Righteous Judge of all whose People thou hast evilly entreated and reproach'd will meet with thee and rebuke thy Envious Spirit To extenuate thy notorious Lie and Forgery against Geo. Fox of taking the Name of the Eternal Judge of quick and dead to himself quoting p. 6 7. of Saul's Errand Now thou art fain to beg the Question viz. Why may not G. F. take the Name to himself as well as approve of those blasphemous Titles given him by Jos. Coal in his Letters from Barbadoes p. 35. cited in Antichrist in Spirit p. 43 44. Ans. The Charge here of approving and giving blasphemous Titles is very high against two persons deceased who we believe ended their days in peace and my present Answer is 1 st I have cause to question whether the said Letter be truly and intirely copied or cited from the Original by thee E. P. 2 dly I do not believe 't is an intire Copy 3 dly Whence hadst thou thy Copy and Credit thereof And what Persons that are no Parties nor Adversaries to us will attest thine to be true and an intire Copy according to Jo. Cole's original Letter 4 thly If thou canst not produce the Original then what validity is thy Charge of if the Credit of all the Copies thou canst produce be called in question for want of impartial Witnesses or the Original to compare them with For I do really question the truth of thine and when thou givest an unquestionable Copy thereof probably I may give a further Answer for I doubt not but I can clear that honest Man Jos. Cole from giving any blasphemous Titles and that from his own printed Testimonies and G. F. also from receiving by his known publick Christian Profession unto Christ Jesus both as God and Man according to the Holy Scriptures And where and when did G. F. say in a Meeting I have power to bind and to loose whom I please p. 36. What Meeting and who are Witnesses of this Story I do not believe it To prove E. P.'s false Charge That they i. e. the Quakers say that Christ hath no Body but his Church Antichrist in Spirit p. 29. This being shewn not to be the Quakers Saying but something like it objected against One Person by some persecuting Priests as in Saul's Errand p. 2. Now E. P. again is fain to beg the Question and shuffle viz. And why may not G. F. deny Christ to have a personal Body besides or distinct from his Church as well as G. Whitehead Dip. pl. p. 13. Ans. I am the Person here falsly accused again they are none of my words or negation nor so much as mention'd in the place quoted in Dipper plung'd p. 13. but the terms God-man a person without thee question'd as not Scripture-Language answered before which was not on the Question Whether Christ hath a Body distinct from his Church Also answer'd presently Whereas E. P. objects against what I said in answer to Tho. Jenner's saying Christ sitteth at the right-hand of God in Heaven with a Natural Body And accusing us with saying Christ hath but one Body E. P. should have been so ingenuous as to have recited my whole Answer in that case in our Apology p. 33. quoted by him p. 37. and that will clear me from his impertinent Objection against the words viz. They should produce Scripture that say Christ hath two Bodies Here E. P. leaves out a Natural and a Spiritual which is very unfairly done And in the Question Where doth the Scripture say that Christ's glorified Body in Heaven is of Human Nature After Is he leaves out a Natural Body and as his terms are whereby I grant that Christ hath a Spiritual Glorious Body of his own Also E. P. takes no notice of my Explication in these words viz. If T. Jenner supposeth that we intend the Natural Bodies of Men to be the Body of Christ without distinguishing between them he is mistaken for the Natural Body and Spiritual Body are two And if Christ's Body in Heaven be Natural whose Body is it that is Spiritual Glorious c is it Christ's yea or nay And I further add in my Answer Apol. p. 34. If so be Christ's Body in Heaven be Natural then where the Apostle said he shall change the Body of our lowness that it may be fashion'd like unto his glorious Body Phil. 3. This were all one in Jenner's sense as to say he shall change and fashion our Body which is Natural like unto his Natural Body c. By all which I grant Christ's own glorious Body in Heaven distinct from those natural Bodies of Men on Earth though I must own a Spiritual Vnion or Oneness between that and his Church so as his Body in its Fulness is but One Body And in my Appendix to reason against Railing p. 23. I plainly confess I believe he hath a Spiritual glorious Body distinct from all these earthly sublunary Bodies and that the Heaven that must receive him is above and larger than the Hearts of Men Append. p. 24. To E. P.'s repeating that J. Parnell calls Water-Baptism a formal Imitation and Invention of Men and now addeth that He J. P. saith so p. 37. whereas it was plainly shewn him that he did speak this of Sprinkling Infants which E. P. calls Baptism and yet saith the Name Anabaptists belongs not to them p. 13. And why so If Sprinkling Infants be Baptism are you not Anabaptists when you Re-baptize them or Baptize them again