Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
spirit_n	apostle_n	holy_a	scripture_n	6,970	5	5.7262	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A65883	The Quaker vindication against Francis Bugg's calumnies in his scandalous pamphlet stiled, Something in answer to the allegations of the Quakers (in their printed case presented to the House of Commons, December 1693) ... ; together with Francis Bugg's own vindication of the people called Quakers since he left them and turned to the Church of England.	Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.	1694 (1694)	Wing W1950; ESTC R35241	10,738	5

according to the Scriptures And that he humbled himself to the Death of the Cross and from Death did rise again And we believe that he is the Resurrection and the Life and gives Eternal Life to all that believe in him 6. Bugg's chief and most remarked Instance to prove the Quakers deny Jesus Christ is out of Saul's Errand pag. 32. which was James Nalyer's Answer viz. If I cannot witness Christ nearer than Jerusalem I shall have no benefit by him but I own NO OTHER Christ but that i. e. Christ who witnessed a good Confession before Pilate which Christ I witness suffering in me now pag. 6. Who but a Person blinded with Envy Malice and Folly would have rendred this a denyal of Jesus of Nazareth It appears holy Scripture Testimony is not free from his Reproach Bugg pag. 6. A Question to Professors pag. 33. Now the Scriptures do expresly distinguish between Christ and the Body or Flesh which he took saying he can never call the Bodily Garment or Vail Christ. But Bugg is very unfair in this in leaving out the Author 's own explication viz. We cannot call the Body which he took upon him CHIEFLY and in the FIRST place Christ. As also F. Bugg is quarrelsome in bringing this over again It having been answered before and to which he hath given no reply So he may see a little of it again viz. We readily grant the Names Jesus and Christ chiefly belong to him that took the Body or Flesh yet the names Jesus and Christ were given to both joyntly and severally it was Christ that dyed but how as concerning the Flesh 1 Pet. 3. 18. his divine Life never dyed nor did the Soul of the Messiah ever dye On the other hand the Apostle Heb. 10 20. calls his Flesh the VAIL Mat. 27. 28. The body of Jesus the Psalmist A Body hast thou prepared me And Dr. Barnes Jesus Christ took Flesh of the Virgin And thus often in Scripture is each expressed distinct To Bugg's Query 5. Whether was the Sufferings of Christ or the Sufferings of the Quakers greatest 1. In the first place we answer The Sufferings of Christ in the Nature of them both inward and outward in Agony of Soul and pains of Body ●y that most Cruel Death of the Cross following that of Scourging and Crowning with Thorns 2. It was both most unjustly and wickedly inflicted by his Persecutors the Jews and Heathen yet worse in the Jews because they might have known better and because they prosecuted him upon false witness And as Christ's Sufferings were most cruel and unjust both as to the Nature thereof and the dignity of him that suffered So he was a most acceptable Sacrifice and sweet smelling Savour to God and his Suffering and Sacrifice of universal advantage and benefit to mankind in that he died for all men and gave himself a Ransom for all that all might be capable of Redemption and Salvation through him VVe do not accept of what F. B. partially cites for Answer to his said Question which was not put unto Edward Burrough's nor made by him nor justly deducible from E. Burrough's intention in his Explanatory Reasons not cited by F Bugg nor the Year when his Reflection was made upon the Arbitrary and unjust proceedings of those then in Power being in 1657. too tedious here to recite His Reproach of Contempt of Scripture if he means the holy Scripture as he elsewhere saith we utterly deny his Charge herein as contrary to our Principle and to our Christian profession of the holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament as being given by Divine Inspiration And Bugg has been told That our Friends distinguishing between the Letter and the Spirit between the Ministry of the Letter and that of the Spirit as between the Shadow and the Substance the meer writing in outward Characters which will decay and wear out and the Holy divine Doctrines and Truths therein contained or holy Scriptures is so Scriptural that we know no true Christian will deny such distinction for the holy Apostle distinguished between the Letter and the Spirit 2 Cor. 3. 6. Which hath made us able Ministers of the New Testament not of the Letter but of the Spirit for the Letter killeth but the Spirit giveth Life This could be no Contempt of holy Scripture Note That in the very Book News out of the North quoted against us in this point there 's frequent reference had to holy Scripture Testimonies both of the Old and New Testament and accordingly abundantly quoted in the Margents which does not bespeak a Contempt thereof but the contrary as we think is undeniable In the said News out of the North the Scripture is plainly own'd that the Lord hath spoken it by his former Prophets c. p. 5. As for Baptism and the Lords Supper Scripturally considered in their several Dispensations both as in the Figure and in the Substance in the Type and Antitype we confess and own but the Substance is more excellent and permanent than the Shadow as the Inward and Spiritual Grace is more excellent than the outward and visible Signs About this point Bugg is very partial and unjust in his citation out of E. Burrough's Works p. 518. both in varying his Words leaving out his explanatory Part and representing him as writing thus at first viz. About Water-Baptism and the Sacrament we do utterly deny and do say it is no Ordinance of God but an Institution of the Whore of Rome and England received it by a Popish Institution and your practice of it is Idolatry and no part of the Worship of God Thus Bugg cites This is very partially and unjustly cited and in the first Words falsly E. Burrough's Answer in the very place is thus viz. As for Baptism and the Supper of the Lord we do own it and it is practised of us in the Life and Power of God But as for your Baptism that is to say Sprinkling of Infants calling it the Baptism into the Faith and that they are made Members of the Church thereby and that it is a Seal of Regeneration as you say these foregoing Words Bugg leaves out that we do utterly deny and do say it is no Ordinance of God neither was it ever commanded by him or practised by his Saints c. Thus F. Bugg Note Here he did not say that Water Baptism is a Popish Institution but Sprinkling Infants calling it the Baptism into the Faith c. For he knew that Water Baptism was practised by John Baptist and in the Apostles time long before the Pope was And now F. Bugg if E. B. was in an Error herein we Query 1. Why didst thou not disprove the same by Scripture 2. Dost thou in thy Conscience believe Sprinkling Infants to be of divine Institution 3. Dost thou believe it was practised by the Saints or Primitive Christians in the Apostles d●ys 4. Dost thou believe that it is the Baptism into the Faith Church and Kingdom

THE QUAKERS VINDICATION AGAINST FRANCIS BUGG'S CALUMNIES In his Scandalous Pamphlet stiled Something in Answer to the Allegations of the Quakers in their Printed Case Presented to the House of Commons December 1693. But his second Edition Stiled The Converted Quakers Answer Together with Francis Bugg's own Vindication of the People called Quakers since he left them and turned to the Church of England Conveniet nulli qui secum dissidet ipse First IT 's not unknown unto you that we are Dissenters from the Church of England and as such we injoy our Liberty by Law under you who are in Authority which we have and do thankfully acknowledge and consequently not to be reputed Criminal for being such 2. That Francis Bugg himself did not account us Criminal for our Principles two Years after he had left our Communion and joyned himself unto the Church of England see his Book The Quakers detected c. printed 1686. The first point under Consideration is how I came to be a Member of their Society In the beginning they taught that all Men were Inlightned according to John 1. 9. And that this Light wherewith Christ had enlightned them was sufficient if obeyed to lead to Salvation and that it was the work of the Ministers of Christ to turn the Peoples minds from Darkness to Light and from the Power of Satan to God Affirming that this Light was a sufficient Teacher Leader Guide to every Believer without the help of outward Prescriptions Forms Orders and Decrees of Men upon these and the like Notions I became perswaded to make tryal of their Doctrine And when I came to see and observe their Practice Conversations and Deportments in the beginning and what Simplicity and Plainness attended their Ministry I was still more confirmed that it was a Dispensation of the Love of God sent as a Visitation to Mankind and being thus perswaded I was resolved to bear the Cross and did utterly despise the Shame that attended them and their Message and was not behind any of my Equals both in doing and suffering for the Testimony thereof as some amongst them can still bear me witness And in this manner we went on for many Years and loved one another with Love unfeigned and doubtless God blessed our Meetings with the comfortable enjoyment of his presence Thus far Francis Bugg which plainly shews himself very Inconsistent with himself and renders his late Work abusive malicious and not to deserve any Credit against us And although this is enough to Clear us from his Calumnies from what he now pretends or alledgeth against our Doctrine and Conversation with all Impartial Men. Yet as F. Bugg hath vindicated our Doctrine and Ministry as aforesaid we shall herewith give a general Account by many credible Witnesses of our Belief and Innocency in opposition to Bugg's great Scandals So we beseech you to peruse the following particular Examination of his Calumnies Partialities and Perversions of our Friends Writings Which Writings be pleased to note were extant in Print many Years before he left us or gave the aforesaid ample Vindication of our Doctrine and Ministry and although he confesseth he was more than 25 Years a Member of our Society Yet in all that time and some time after he left us found no fault with our Doctrine or Testimony but own'd and confest the same as aforesaid And he himself must needs then know that neither he nor we held any such Doctrines as he would now represent Upon which we query 1. Didst thou Francis Bugg when a Quaker deny Jesus of Nazareth 2. Didst thou Francis Bugg when a Quaker 25 Years account that the Quakers denyed Jesus of Nazareth 3. Didst thou F. Bugg contemn the holy Scriptures 4. Didst thou F. Bugg when a Quaker account the Quakers contemned the holy Scriptures 5. Didst thou F. Bugg disown Magistracy 6. Didst thou F. Bugg when a Quaker account the Quakers disown'd Magistracy Bugg pag. 5. Concerning his Charge of our denying Jesus of Nazareth We utterly deny it How proves he it 1. Observe some of his Instances viz. pag. 5. Thou must wait to know something of God in thee which in thy own Conscience he makes manifest 2. That of God within us is so viz. the Foundation for we know it is Christ we know Christ in us c. 3. We believe that Christ in us doth interceed the Father on our behalf 4. The very Christ of God is within us We dare not deny him By these four Instances of his he endeavours to prove that The Quakers deny Jesus of Nazareth but doth not he himself hereby deny the Mystery of Christ in Spirit and implicity accuse the holy Apostles with denying Jesus of Nazareth for the same Testimony 1. Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them Rom. 1. 19. 2. Examine your selves whether ye be in the Faith prove your own selves know ye not your own selves how that Jesus Christ is IN you except ye be Reprobates see 2 Cor. 13. 5. Query 1. Was this another Jesus Christ than Jesus of Nazareth No sure there was but one Lord Jesus Christ 1 Cor. 8. 6. 3. Query 2. And was it not Jesus of Nazareth whom Saul persecuted in the Primitive Christians Yea sure see Acts 22. 8. I am Jesus of Nazareth whom thou persecutest And tho' Bugg cannot conceive this Mystery of Christ IN us and WITHOUT us also yet the Apostle says It was manifest to his Saints 4. To whom God would make known what is the Riches of the glory of this Mystery amongst the Gentiles which is Christ IN you the hope of Glory Col. 1. 27. 5. God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your Hearts crying Abba Father Gal. 4. 6. Another of his Instances to prove we deny Jesus of Nazareth Is out of W. Smith's Primmer or demonstration of the New and Living Way viz. They that are false preach Christ without and bid People believe in him as he is in Heaven above but they that are Christ's Ministers preach Christ within We confess there is one Edition in Octavo reads it as he quotes it But the other Edition in Folio bound up with his Works The Paragraph runs expresly thus in the fourth Leaf of his said Demonstration viz. Why they that are false preach Christ without ONLY and bid People believe in him as he is in Heaven above in opposition to his being within but they that are true Ministers they preach Christ within and direct People to wait to feel him in themselves and so to believe in him as he makes himself manifest in them whereby they truly confess his being without also Thus far W. Smith And this said Author W. S. is yet more full and express in this point and that too in the very Edition quoted by Bugg in his confessing the same Christ both WITHOUT and WITHIN viz. We believe all things which are spoken by the holy Prophets and Apostles concerning Jesus Christ are true