Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n according_a father_n son_n 5,248 5 5.4119 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A65881 The Quakers plainness detecting fallacy in two short treatises : I. The first in answer to an abusive epistle, styl'd, The Quakers quibbles, and the comparison therein between the Muggletonians and the Quakers, proved absurd and unjust, II. The second, being a brief impeachment of the forger's compurgators (in their Quakers appeal answered) whose injustice, partiality and false glosses have given the chief occasion of these late contests / by George Whitehead. Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723. 1674 (1674) Wing W1949; ESTC R38608 33,527 88

There are 3 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the Old Fancies of Sabellius revived and new vampt not heard of till long after Christ and then quickly exploded the Church about 1400. Years ago pag. 36. I must needs say that as this Accuser's smiting at us is in the dark herein for he does not lay down these old exploded Fancies of Sabellius or tell us particularly what they are but thus in dark general Terms is smiting and squibbing at us and abusing his Readers as if they were all bound to believe his Accusations on his bare Word But what were those Fancies or Opinions of Sabellius and such others that were exploded as Heterodox or Heretical It 's reported That their Books contain many Blasphemies against the Almighty God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and withal much Incredulity touching his only-begotten Son and First begotten of all Creatures and the word Incarnate and senseless Ignorance of the Holy Ghost Euseb. lib. 7. fol. 125. ch 5. As also those that denyed Christ to have been God from Everlasting and affirm'd that by Nature he was but only a bare Man as it is said the Followers of Paulus Samosatenus did Such disapprov'd the Essence and Divinity of Christ which hath been before all Worlds and such as confound the Father the Son and Holy Ghost imagining Three Names in One Thing and in One Person Soc. Schol. l. 2. ch 15. But we are sure that we are clear from all such Opinions as Denying the Deity or Divinity of the Son of God or his being that Word that became Flesh and so from affirming him to be butonly a bare Man As also we never went about to confound the Father and Son truly con●●der'd according to Scripture-Testimony or to deny either the Property Relation Manifestation or Operation of Father or Son though the one Divine Being of Father Son and Holy Spirit from Everlasting we have and must confess Let it suffice that as we confess to the Father's bringing or sending forth the Son both from his own Being and Substance as also to his taking Flesh and the perfect Manhood upon him in due time and that we really believe his Sonship and all this according to Scripture so that he was and is the Christ of God the same yesterday to day and for ever And therefore to compare us with Sabellius or such as before mention'd is very Envious and Unjust But that Baptists have done no less then denyed the Deity of the Son of God or Divinity of Christ appears in what follows John Newman's Argument If Christ as Christ was not from the Beginning then Christ was not the Word from ●he Beginning But Christ as Christ was not from the Beginning Therefore Christ was not the Word from the Beginning pag. 52. of his Book entitul'd The Light Within Mark here Though he grants Christ and the Word to be one and the same yet this Argument denyes him to be either Christ or the Word from the Beginning What was he then He tells us not Doth not this oppose the Divinity of Christ or Deity of the Son of God to affirm that He was neither as Christ nor the Word from the Beginning for The Word was with God and the Word was God And T. Hicks among much more of his idle Quibbling and Opposition thus queries viz. I ask thee if Christ signifie Anointed and God be Christ as thou Quaker affirmest Whether God himself e anointed Dial. 3. pag. 32. Mark here who is the Quibbler irreverently reflecting upon Scripture-Language But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God! is for ever a Scepter of Righteousness is the Scepter of thy Kingdom Thou hast loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity Therefore God even thy God hath anointed thee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy Fellows Hebr. 1.8 9. Psal. 45.6 7. But these Baptists are willing to throw off God being Christ with as thou affirmest which is not as they affirm them I ask then If they own that Christ is God Or that as the Son who is God he be anointed as he is the Son And If He was the Son of God and so Christ before his Incarnation or assuming Flesh However these men appear Socinianized now and boggle at this Pre-Existence of Christ and seem to define or limit him only as a Person without us in Flesh yet formerly some of their Brethren have confessed That Christ is God That Christ is call'd the Spirit 2 Cor. 3.17 yea that The Father hath put his Name upon him Exod. 23.21 And that it is the Christ that is there spoaken of is manifest That the Father hath put his Name upon him so far as He is call'd the Father Isa. 9.6 See their Book entitul'd A Way to Zion p. 102. I pass by several Falshoods traducing and canting Language in the said Qu. Quibbles and grant that at length that the Author hath shewn himself more ingenious then in all the Book besides where he concludes thus viz. If I have mistaken thee or any of thy Friends it is not willingly and if thou shewst me honestly wherein I will beg thy Excuse I not pretending to Infallibility my Opinion being still so long as we are men in this Condition Humanum est errare But he should have consider'd this at the Beginning of his Book and have been more submissive and gentle in his Work beeing so subject to Mistake THE Second Treatise Wherein the Forgers Compurgators Are IMPEACHED In a strict Examination of divers Citations and Doctrinal Matters in their Book entituled The Quakers Appeal answered or a full Relation of the Occasion Progress and Issue of a Meeting held in Barbican the 28th of August last past as their Style is Which Meeting was held by the Baptists to clear T. Hicks to charge and insult over the Quakers in their Absence as the Mannagement and Issue thereof hath manifested This is published not only for want of Justice from them but because of the Injustice of those Baptists so deeply concerned for their Brother Tho. Hicks against the People of God called Quakers George Whitehead He looked for Iudgment but behold Oppression for Righteousness but behold a Cry Under Falshood have they hid themselves THE Second Treatise Wherein the Forger's Compurgators are Impeached A Brief Introduction THat these Men who have undertaken to answer our Appeal against Tho. Hicks have pretended very fair in Words is undeniable but how they have performed and answered is already manifest and will further appear in divers Particulars wherein I do complain against them both of their Injustice Partiality and false Testimony and affirm that they have neither approv'd themselves Just Judges nor faithful Witnesses in matters plain and obvious nor yet clear'd T. Hicks In their Title-Page they say Wherein the Allegations of William Penn in two Books lately published by him against T. Hicks were answer'd and disproved This is a manifest Vntruth as any Impartial Eye may see who is willing but to compare this their Barbican Relation styl'd The Quakers Appeal
as many did against Christ the Apostles and Primitive Church of old However it is very Uncharitable for them to conclude us No Christians Either because They will not see us to be such or because that at their faithless Demands We do not produce such mighty Signs as they call for in their own Wills and Times But a Foolish Adulterous Generation seeks a Sign being in the Unbelief not acknowledging the Sufficiency of the Spirit 's Teaching and Evidence in that they own not the SPIRIT to be their RULE Sect. IV. The Quakers clear from L. Muggleton's Principles and the Baptists Agent 's comparing them together proved Scandalous and Wicked c. TOuching the Comparison that is made between the Quakers and Muggletonians it 's both Idle Quibbling and Envious Canting to traduce and scandalize us what if W. P. does not pretend to more then Muggleton does nor to so much in some things does it therefore follow the Quakers are Impostors or like him who holds apparent Blasphemies in many Things wherein W. P. and others of us have given publick Testimonies against him The Baptists may be ashamed of such gross and abusive Insinuations as this comparing the Quakers and Muggletonians yea and that in some Things wherein the Baptists and Muggletonians might as well yea and more truly be compared As where it is said Muggleton sayes He is one of the two Witnesses spoaken of in Rev. 11. that God hath given Power to prophesie and the Quakers say they are the true VVitnesses to the Light and have received Power to preach the Everlasting Gospel c. And I may as well add do not the Baptists profess themselves both to be true Witnesses of the Christ of God and Preachers of him too Muggleton hath several Disciples and Followers that believe him and so have the Baptists Muggleton curses and damns the Quakers and what do Baptists less to Quakers and all others that will not be dipt by them or do oppose them But 1. Muggleton sayes He has received Commission from Heaven 2. That he had it by divine Revelation 3. That he is inspired by the Spirit of God 4. That he pretends to Infallibility And what if Quakers pretend to these as led by the Spirit of Truth The Apostles and true Church did not only pretend to but experience the same does it therefore follow that they must be compared with the Muggletonians and be deemed Impostors And the Baptists the true Ministry and Church and yet have no Commission from Heaven either to dip or damn People but deny divine Revelation immediate Inspiration and Infallibility Let them answer for themselves It 's said Muggleton denyes that the Father and Son are two distinct Persons And have not the Baptists done as much in these Words Jesus Christ God Man a Person without you See Dial. 1. p. 9. wherein they imply the Father and the Son or God and the Man Christ to be but one Person without us whereas we tell them 't is not a Scripture-Phrase But seeing Muggleton pretends some Things that both the Baptists and Quakers hold would the Baptists be therefore included in the Comparison with the Muggletonians Might they not at this rate as well make all Protestants to be Papists yea Jews Mahometans c. because all agree in some Truths But the Comparison-Maker was not so honest as to shew wherein the Quakers differ with and oppose Muggleton as a Blasphemer and Impostor As Muggleton holds these false and Blasphemous Doctrines which the Quakers utterly deny 1. That the Breath of Life God breathed into Adam which made his Soul to live is mortal and doth dye 2. That Adam ' s Soul did dye viz. with the Body 3. That the Soul of Man is mortal Do not some of the Baptists hold the same 4. That to say the Soul departs from or slips out of the Body when it dyes is an ignorant dark Opinion of most People contrary to Sense Reason or Faith 5. That Death took Christ's Soul into it 6. That Lazarus his Soul was dead in the Grave where his Body was those four Dayes 7. That not only Adam ' s Soul did dye but also that the Soul of Christ did dye 8. That all mens Souls ever since are dead being mortal Thus far all the Baptists who hold the Mortality of the Soul agree with Muggleton 9. That Solomon was ignorant in this Point in saying the Body to the Dust and the Spirit returns to God that gave it 10. That God was born of Mary 11. That God is not an Infinite Spirit filling all Places 12. That the Godhead Life dyed that when Christ dyed God dyed 13. That Christ being God embodyed with Flesh and Bone one Person without us cannot be in the Quakers 14. That there are many vast Places in the Earth where God is not at all 15. That God himself is a single Person in Form of a Man and no bigger in Compass and Bulk and was so from Eternity then a Man even of the same Stature as the first Adam was 16. That Reason is the Devil 17. That all Men have received the Seed or Spirit of Reason from the Devil or raprobate Angel 18. That the Devil became Flesh Blood and Bone 19. That Cain was none of Adam ' s Son or Begetting but the first Devil in Flesh. 20. That Eve was with Child of Cain by the Serpent-Angel before Adam knew her 21. That then the Condition of Eve was much like the Condition of Mary the Virgin being with Child by the Holy Ghost before Joseph knew her 22. That the Devil that tempted Christ was a Man Thus far of Muggleton in his Looking-Glass for G. Fox and other Books of his and John Reeve's are replenisht with such absurd and blasphemous Stuff which we never were guilty of but alwayes abhorred and often testified against as we have had Occasion therefore let the World judge how grosly and wickedly we are dealt with and scandalized in the Baptists or their Abettors comparing us with Muggleton between whom there is as much Distance and Opposition as betwixt Heaven and Hell Light and Darkness Sect. V. The Quakers furher unjustly compared and Baptists proved to Deny the Divinity of Christ. Pag. 36. BUt we are further catechised If our Ministers ought to be believed on easier Terms then Christ and ●is Ministers were that is on such Signs and Wonders and Miracles and Gifts of the Holy Ghost as God did bear them witness with Acts 2.22 Heb. 2.3 4. And why must we be put upon this Proof or else be judg'd not only No Christians but Impostors but because we bring New Doctrines and New Revelations as we are accused But what these New ones are and wherein contrary to the ancient Christian Apostolical Doctrines we are not yet convinc'd by all the Oppositions we have met withal It is further added That some of which are not such New Discoveries from Heaven manifest by the Light within as pretended being in Truth but
of his principal Allegations for Proof is that their Opinion is That the Soul is God or part of God and of God's Being without Beginning and Infinite which perversly and darkly he hath drawn from G. F's meer Question as plainly appears before we had need to look the more strictly into the matter Upon which I ask If to put this Question Is not THAT of God and of his Being which came out from God by which Man became a living Soul be an Opinion sufficient to prove Us No Christians Then Whether or no they are Christians who say that the Soul of Man is a Spirit of the NATURE of God which returns to God that gave it And whether this be not as high an Assertion of the Soul of Man as can be supposed G. F. ever asserted And that some Baptists have thus asserted of the Soul see what they say in their own Instances and Words viz. That this is a known Truth that every thing at its Dissolution dissolveth into its first Principles 1. The Springs Rivers run into the Sea from whence they came out Eccles. 1.7 2. The Ice Snow Hail that are congeal'd of Water dissolve into Water and out of Water they are congeal'd again 3. The Light centereth into the Sun which is the Fountain of Light therefore in the Night time it is dark and Moon and Stars give Light as they are aspected to the Sun 4. For Man at his Dissolution 1. The SOUL being a Spirit of the NATURE of God is said to return to him that gave it and the Body being made of the Dust returns to the Dust again Eccle. 12.7 Gen. 3.19 saith God Thou shalt return to the Ground for out of it thou wast taken Thus far Dan. King in his Book entitul'd A way to Sion p. 92. printed at London reprinted at Edenburgh Anno 1656. and highly approved and commended by T. Patient J. Spilsbury W. Kiffin and J. Pierson who in their Epistle dedicatory give this Commendation viz. It hath pleased God to stir up the Spirit of our Brother Dan. King whom we judge a faithful and painful Minister of Jesus Christ to take this Work in hand before us and we judge that he hath been much assisted of God in the Work in which he hath been very painful Observe here how it is affirmed that the Soul is of the NATURE of God and that according to the Instances before of these things that return into their first Principles See now Baptists your own Doctrine about the Soul or Spirit of Man Were you well advised to suffer your Brother so highly to charge and taunt at us about the Soul because of G. F s Question which concern'd the Breath or Spirit of Life from God by which Man became a Living Soul when you tell us plainly that the Soul is a Spirit of the NATURE OF GOD You would take it ill if any should scornfully Dialogue upon you for this as your Brother Hicks hath done upon us for G. F's Question Is not That of God which came out from God c. to wit the Breath or Spirit of Life with whose Words also about the Soul agreeth Wisd. 15.11 Forasmuch as he knew not his Maker and him that ●NSPIRED unto him an active Soul and BREATHED in a Living Spirit See also VAVASOR POWEL'S Concordance about the Soul viz. The Soul is put for the whole Person Acts 2.41 7.14 it is put for Life Isa. 53.12 it is put for Breath Acts 20.10 marg it is put for a Reasonable Creature Gen. 2.7 it is put for GOD HIMSELF Prov. 6.16 marg Hebr. 10.38 I suppose these men are not ignorant both how this Concordance is approved and the Author of it esteemed by them Sect. I. About the Person of Christ. WHereas T.H. to prove the Quakers deny Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without us quotes these words viz. Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scripture Language for it quotes Dip. Pl. p. 13. Whereas the Words there are Jesus Christ God-man a Person without thee as in his Dia. 1. p. 9. is not Scripture-Language c. Mark he hath left out the Words GOD MAN in the Citation and in his two last Dialogues likewise Dial. 2. p. 10. Dial. 3. p. 7. So that it appears these Witnesses have either taken this defective Citation upon trust from T. H. and not from their own Sight and Knowledge or else they have knowingly born Witness to this Abuse owned this defective false Citation for a Blind But how comes his Charge now to be so Low against us as only denying Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without us and he so hard put to it to prove this when before he charged us in these Words viz You reprobate the Scriptures and the Person of Jesus Christ without you Dial. 1. p. 62. O wonderful Impudence and Falshood The Reason of my Answer in this Case before to T.H. as also my owning the Man Christ Jesus as to his Being without us as well as within us is plainly shewn in my Appendix to Reas. against Rail p. 17. my Words being thus viz. Jesus Christ God-man a PERSON without thee which Phrase I did and do say is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites who profess a Personal God denying him to be an Infinite Spirit doth it therefore follow that I deny the Man Christ Jesus in his being either without or within us But T. H's Words God-man a Person without thee equally excluding God under the Limitation of Man and Person without us he is pleased now to leave out the word God-man to accuse us of denying the Person of Christ without us He should have explained what he means by the Word Person for though we are not satisfied with the Words before being unscriptural this is no denying of Jesus Christ in his being either as without us or within us we confessing that he is ascended into Glory far above all Heavens and that he is at the Father's right Hand of Power in his Glorious Being which yet doth not exclude or limit him from being within us And its false that we deny Christ to be a Man His Exaltation and Glory into which he is ascended not only into the Heavens but far above all Heavens transcends that Degree attained in these suffering earthly Tabernacles his inaccessible Glory is above Men and Angels c. Again T. H. hath very unfairly cited but the Beginning of a Sentence of mine leaving out the latter and chief Part thereof viz. at 'T is a Design of Satan to keep Men in carnal Imaginations and dark Thoughts of a Human Personal Christ And here they break off leaving out the following Words of the same Sentence which are Consisting either of Flesh Blood and Bones LIKE THEIRS or of Flesh and Bones without Blood and so of God's right Hand as limited to that Remoteness That they neglect to wait for Christ's inward and spiritual