because he mentions not one Argument brought by me at that time in favour to it but in stead thereof charges me with something that I never said Whereas if that Letter were the sum of the Conference as possibly he may make some believe why then did not he write the Arguments I brought for the proof of what I then said and his Answers to them which the Letter speaks nothing of And as touching the particulars charged in his Letter and so often repeated by him as though he wanted matter I shall first speak to the first and that is That I said a man might understand the Scriptures without the Spirit of God To this I answer and that as I then told him That though all the Mysteries of the Kingdom of God and Christ could not be understood without Gods Spirit which the Scripture saith shall lead into all truth yet much of the Scripture might be understood by men that had not the Spirit as Thou shalt not kill and Thou shalt not steal and the like and the Scribes and Priests Mat. 2.4 understood by the Scripture that Christ should be born in Bethlehem as it was written by the Prophet though they had not the Spirit and surely they understood that Scripture right for accordingly he was born in the same place This I did answer at that time though he hath left it out and yet omission of any thing that he saith is counted an evil The next thing is that I said The Faith by which a man is saved is not the gift of God To this I did answer then and so I do now That it is not so the gift of God as you imagine by your Enthusiastical dotages as That men should meet together and neither say nor do towards the work of Faith till they are immediately inspired with your quaking dotages in this sense I do still deny Faith to be Gods gift yet in the sense that all those Scriptures say Faith is the gift of God I do freely own it as my book doth declare page 37. wherein I have these words That men have nothing but what they have received especially any light or knowledge of Jesus Christ according to 1 Cor. 4.7 The next is that I said The obedience of Believers was not the gift of God To this I answer as before That we being at that time discoursing about the point of Baptism and I then asserting That God was to be obeyed in that as well as others of his Commands Thou didst answer That they must wait till obedience was given them To which I did reply That God did not give obedience to his people in the way that thou didst expect it as to sit still and do nothing till men were immediately inspired to it And in this sense I do still deny That obedience is the gift of God though I do believe and am generally known to teach that to him that hath improved his talent God will give more and that he that doth his will shall know of his Doctrine And in this sense I do believe obedience to be the gift of God according to those Scriptures by you alledged and yet I say None of those Scriptures prove your obedient actions which you so call to be Gods gift You go on and say that I said Whosoever speaks that which men understand not is a Fool and a Barbarian His 9. LYE These were not the words James but indeed when thou hadst spoke a great while to us and then at last when I made some Reply upon thy words thou didst answer That thou spakest in a language that I could not understand and so thou saidst upon the like occasion at our Meeting in Beech-lane before many witnesses as I have shewed in page 10. of my book call'd Quakers quaking Hereupon I did answer according to that of the Apostle That he that speaks in an unknown tongue is a Barbarian and if I said a Fool I think I might 〈◊〉 prove it Not but that I did then and do still believe That Christ spake many things and so did his Apostles that the world could not understand because of their hardness of heart You charge me further with saying That none was baptized with the holy Ghost but they wrought Miracles I said not so but that none were baptized with the holy Ghost but they COULD work Miracles His 10. LYE and so I do say still till thou canst prove it for not one Text by thee alledged proves the contrary You tell me that I said His 11. LYE All good was not of God This is another of thy Lyes and I leave it to thee to prove Though it may be I might say That All the good you glory in is not of God and so I say still For you are of the Generation that call good evil and evil good but otherwise I believe with all my heart that God is the Fountain of all good according to the Scriptures You go on and tell me that I said Christ was not a Minister of Circumcision And so I say still till thou canst prove it And though in thy Letter thou chargest this for an Error yet thou dost not bring one Text to prove he was a Minister of Circumcision See thy deceit Again thou chargest me with Error in thy Letter in saying The Law was not given by Christ and yet dost not give me one Text to prove that it was given by Christ for the Scripture saith The Law was given by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ Joh. 1.17 and yet thou hast the face to call this one of my blasphemous Doctrines Thou tell'st me in thy Letter His 12. LYE that I said The wilderness where John preached was in Jerusalem James this is like thee and thy Father for what man in his right wits ever said a Wilderness was in 〈◊〉 unless there be one at the Bull and Mouth at Aldersgate which is the likest one of any place in a City that ever I heard of He further saith His 13. LYE That I said the River Jordan was in Jerusalem This is false for I know that Text well in Mat. 3. that saith Ierusalem went OUT to be baptized of John in Jordan therefore I could not think Jordan was in Jerusalem But however it is as reasonable to think that Jordan should be in Jerusalem as it is for you to teach That Jerusalem is IN YOU You go on and tell me that I said His 14. LYE I could foretell things to come without the Spirit This thou sayest is Witchery To this I answer That this is another of thy Lyes to say that this is Witchery for the Pharisees did foretel things to come and had not the Spirit when they said Matth. 16.2 Luk. 12.54 55. They knew when it would be heat and rain before it came to pass and Christ bare them witness that this was true and the Priests Scribes by the Scriptures did know that Christ
Hell when he was in the belly of the Whale and Paul was in the third Heaven 2 Cor. 12.2 4. Is not this thy Logick James viz. Jonah was in the Whales belly and Paul was in the third Heaven Ergo John Lawson was in Hell but is now in Heaven And you say This was not an Error in them that witnessed this nor in Lawson IF HE SAID TRUE Now see if this answers the charge For how hast thou proved he said true when he said so The twelfth Error I charge is That you say you are perfect and sin not This you tell me is a Lye and yet in the next words you say You own perfection and you say Perfection is not that that you never had as you say I falsly accuse you But James if thou hast perfection what Lye is it to say thou art perfect any more then it is a Lye to say one is rich when he saith he hath Riches The thirteenth Error that I charge is That James Nayler said None could come to God or Christ but they that come to perfection By this he saith it seems I deny perfection to be in God or Christ but saith he if that be granted then they that come to them come to perfection To this I answer That it is one thing for men to come to perfection and another thing for them to come before a God that is perfect for Paul was not come to persection when he himself saith Not as though I had ALREADY ATTAINED Now he had attained to come to God and Christ as I plainly shew in page 33. of my book and therefore this cunning evasion will not serve thy turn for who is there so sottish as to think that when they come to God or Christ that they come to a God or Christ that is imperfect and therefore if that should be thy meaning then thou wast but beating the air and fighting and contending where none opposed thee But by this the world may see how Janus-fac'd thy Oracles are that look two wayes at once Nay and doth not the latter end of thy answer to this particular in page 14. of thy book plainly shew that thou didst intend perfection in men rather then God or Christ inasmuch as thou sayest The children of God never pleaded for sin dwelling in them and so say I too The fourteenth Error I charge is that James Nayler said That whensoever they did eat or drink they could have communion with the Body and Blood of the Lord in eating and drinking though it were at the Gentiles Table This he denies not but saith It must needs be counted an Error with the Belly-gods of this world c. But what is this to prove That God doth anywhere require you to have communion with the Body and Blood of the Lord though it were at the GENTILES Table And if he do not require it how darest thou say thou canst do it and how darest thou blame me for calling this an Error when thou hast not brought one Text to prove it is a Truth And whereas thou sayest Thou CANST have communion with the Body and Blood of Christ at the Gentiles Table Doth not the Scripture say That the things which the Gentiles sacrifice it is to Devils And doth it not also say That we CANNOT partake of the Table of the Lord and the Table of Devils and yet this man saith He can have communion with the Body and Blood of Christ at the Gentiles Table The fifteenth Error I charge is That James Parnel did deny all Baptism but of the holy Ghost To this thou repliest That to own the Baptism of Christ and to deny all else is counted an Error by me and if so then the Apostles did erre also How doth this follow when they did assert pluralities of Baptisms and did nowhere deny as you do all Baptisms but that of the Spirit James now proceeds to tell me page 14. That I go about to prove Water-baptism by Questions and crooked Consequences and he saith that I cannot finde a Command for it after Christs sufferings and That we cannot finde a plain Scripture for that which we worship c. And he further saith That Moses in all his house did leave his Ordinances not to be proved after this manner and therefore he infers we are not to think that Christ will leave his Ordinances with such kinde of proof To all which I answer First that I have asserted proof for Water-baptism in the questions propounded by me upon that occasion See my book page 25 26. which thou canst not answer But secondly how canst thou reject Consequences and Questions when none have more Questions and conceited Consequences to prove what they hold then your selves As for instance to give the Reader a few among many 1 Quest Where have you a plain Text without a consequence that saith That the Light spoken of in Joh. 1. is IN every man that comes into the world which you confidently affirm 2. Where have you a plain Text that saith Christ was the Minister of Circumcision which thou saidst was one of my blasphemous Doctrines to deny pag. 5. of thy book 3. Where have you a plain Text that saith The Law was given by Christ the denyal of which thou sayest is another of my blasphemous Doctrines page 5. 4. Where have you a plain Text that saith God sent some immediately that could not work Miracles or to whose Ministery he did not witness from heaven since you boldly affirm that you are so sent though you can work none 5. Where hast thou a Text that saith One may have communion with the Body and Blood of the Lord at the Gentiles Table as you affirm 6. Where have you a plain Text that saith He that raifeth Spirit out of the Letter is a Conjurer 7. Where have you a plain Text that saith The Scriptures may not be call'd The Word of God 8. Where have you a plain Text that saith There is no Baptism but of the Spirit which you also affirm 9. Where have you a plain Text that saith John Lawson was in Hell but is now in Heaven 10. Where have you a plain Text that saith Christ was not born after the flesh but after the Spirit James either give me express Scriptures that do affirm these things in the words as thou layest them down or else be ashamed to accuse others for bringing Consequences when they bring the plain Text whereas thou haft neither Text nor Consequence for any of these thy fond conceits And now I cannot but give the Reader to take notice that thou sayest I have not found one Text that doth command Water-baptism after Christs sufferings His 22. LYE when whoever looketh over the 25 26 pages of my book shall finde several Texts to that purpose and nine several Questions upon that subject to which James makes no answer at all as any-body may perceive that reades the 14 page of his book where he answers all
it and saith nothing to several Texts alledged and nine Questions proposed but that I brought crooked Consequences and no plain Text c. The next work is he saith TO PROVE RESPECT OF PERSONS which are none of my words And he saith His 28. LYE I pervert that Text in Lev. 19.32 because I reade it as Beza renders it Thou shalt honour the PERSON of the old man But why is this a perversion of the Text when I have as good reason to follow his translation as any But 2. is not that which is done to the face of a man done to his person be it honour or dishonour And 3. are not these terms FACE and PERSON convertible as Isa 3.15 where it is said that The FACE of the poor was grinded was not this the person of the poor And whereas you charge me with lying in saying you deny respect due to Parents Masters Husbands Wives c. I cannot but wonder at you for I did not say so in any place of my book I say you did deny respect to persons which I prove ought to be because I am commanded to honour my Father and Mother c. I brought this to prove we ought to honour some more then others and you say I charge you with denying honour to Father and Mother c. But sure James thy Conscience is very guilty at this turn or else thou wouldst never have said because I brought those Scriptures to prove what I laid down that therefore I said you were guilty But hadst thou done fairly thou shouldst have spoke to the Scriptures and Arguments alledged and have shewed us in what sense the unjust Judge was blameable in not reverencing man and many other Texts which may be seen in page 39 40. To all which thou sayest nothing but quarrell'st about that I never said You go on and say That I Lye because I say Not one in ten shall give the same answer to a question if it be ask'd them severally and this thou sayest is a lye because thou sayest I never proved ten of you therein But James this is as true as the rest for I have proved twenty of you herein and to make it appear I will meet thee at any time and ask thee a question appertaining to the things of God and not one of ten shall give the same answer with thee the question being asked apart if they do I will be content to be call'd a Lyer but not before You say the next thing I would prove is That Christ had two Bodies But James why couldst not thou as well lay down the Proposition in my words as thine own my words are That Christ had a Body besides his Church and to the Arguments and Texts alledged thou sayest nothing but tell'st us a few of your own Notions as That thou wilt not dispute with me but sayest It serveth thee to know he is thy head c. But why didst not thou answer my Arguments alledged to prove what I urged in the case You go on and say You do not deny Christ taking flesh c. James I did draw thy veil from before the face of the people which thou hadst cast upon them and made thee speak somewhat plainly at the Bull and Mouth and now thou wouldst fain speak somewhat to cover over thy vile sayings but to this I shall speak anon And as touching the next thing which is that one of them said Christ was but a figure This he saith is a Lye because of the PRINTERS Errata who put page 54 of Sauls Errand to Damascius in stead of page 8. in which page he hath the words I charge though he saith there is no such saying in the book for this very thing was objected against him and he answers That Christ in the flesh was a figure And whereas I shew you that you have affinity with Gnosticks Manichees and Familists c. you answer in page 24. that it is not worth answering a cunning shift indeed but if I should say so to your questions by and by you were well enough served You go on and tell me that I have perverted the Scriptures c. but hast not shewed one Text wherein unless it be that of Lev. 19. which I have already shewed to be no perverting of it He goes on and because I say in page 45 of my book that all that I have writ against you is either from your own Mouthes or Writings you say This is a Lye but James in the same page about the middle of it you might have found these words namely That the Errors I charge you with are either such as fell from your own Mouthes or else such as your selves being charged with could not deny Now put all this together and what untruth have I told for did you deny any of those things that I say you did not deny And though you say the men were bloody persecuting Priests c. that charged you the more shame for you that you should call your book an Answer to their Petition and withall print their Objections your selves pretending to answer them and when all comes to all never deny the charge in the particulars I mention but say somewhat else in stead thereof which is nothing to purpose as you have done by me as any may see that reades your Answer both to my book and the Westmerland Petition which is a thing I never saw any further then as your selves did transcribe and print it He now comes to the Postscript at the end of my book and saith that because some saw my murtherous minde they did write down what he said Though that which they have writ to cover thy Assertion was not spoken at that time as many can witness that came out with me whatever you spake after I was gone And though you seem to carry it by witness you must know That your Witnesses are Parties being of the same faith with thy self viz. That Christ was not born after the flesh and it doth behove them to make a cloak for thee lest thy deeds sayings should be made manifest But whatever they have said that matters not since you confess all that I charge which is That Christ was not born after the flesh And how have you answered the thing I charge in the Postscript which is That it is all one to be born after the flesh as it is to be born according to the flesh and though I prove it all one in the 52 53 pages of my book yet thou makest no kinde of answer which shews that thou hast pick'd up this Letter to keep thee from the lash of the Law because thou sayest Some saw I had a murtherous design or else thou wouldst have answered what I say in the Postscript but that you did fear the light You proceed and in page 26. say that I say The Scriptures make no such distinction as born after the flesh and after the Spirit His 29. LYE
This is another of thy Lyes Where do I say any such thing in all my book but this I said That the Scriptures made no distinction between a being born after the flesh and born according to the flesh And you say again That Christ as he was born of Mary was not born after the flesh but begotten and brought forth by Promise To this I answer First that this is nothing to the question for though he was begotten and brought forth by promise doth this prove that therefore he was not borne after the flesh for Isaac was borne according to the promise yet he was borne after the flesh likewise So Gods promise concerning Christs Birth doth not prove that therefore he was not borne according to the flesh And whereas thou say'st he that was borne after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit I say that though this be true in sinfull unregenerate men that have no other Birth and generation then what was after the flesh yet it is not true in Christ and his being borne after the flesh for he being without sin did not persecute him that was borne after the Spirit as sinfull men do And therefore James because thou say'st Christ was not borne after the flesh shew me a plain text for such a Doctrine without any of these conceited consequences or else take shame to thy self for finding fault with proofs that others bring when they do not give the express text Thou tellest me of my promise to repent if I should be better informed c. to this I answer that thou hast rather strengthened my former opinions of thee then any way better informed me except I will take thy bare saying I lye for a better information Thou now comest upon me with a pack of questions to which I shall answer His first question is whose Spirit that is which men understand the Scriptures with and try Spirits with who are without the Spirit of God Seeing thou affirms that a man may understand Scriptures without the Spirit of God or whether God hath set up such a tryer yea or no. Answ The greatest part of this question is grounded upon a false bottome viz. something that I said which is most part false for I did never say those words yet I have answered to them so far as I am concerned in my answer to thy letter which thou sent'st to me after our meeting at Gerard Roberts in the former part of this book but yet if by understanding the Scriptures thou doest mean all things contained in them I say this he cannot do without Gods Spirit and if by trying Spirits thou meanst to try between your Spirits and the Spirit of Christ I can say again that a man without the Spirit of God may by his own Spirit understand that you are not guided by the Spirit of truth that have told so many untruths His second Quest Seeing thou confesseth Christ to be the true light and that he lighteth every man that comes into the World but denyes that light to be within shew in plainness where he doth inlighten every man that comes into the World and not within and how they come by it and seeing thou say'st every man hath it how have they it and not within This is answered already in Page 51. of my book called Quakers quaking The later part of the question is a lye for I never said that every man hath the light of Christ though Christ hath used means to bring the World to the light that their deeds may be reproved But lest both my books should not come to the readers hand I do again answer that Christ is said to inlighten the World as he pardoneth their sins though none but them that believe shall receive remission of sins yet he pardoneth their sins by proposing a way for the pardon of them So Christ inlightens every man I and that within too if you will have it by giving them means to be inlightened within though thousands like your selves stumble because there is no light in them 3. Quest Seeing thou confessest that the heathen have a light that reproves them of sin but not within shew where it is and what it is whether the light of Christ or no and how they came by it Answ That the heathen may have a light among them that may not be in them I have already shewn in my former book Page 52. but further did not Christ tell the Pharisees Luke 17.2 that the Kingdome of God was within them when indeed it was but among them and so the margent reads it for they were far enough from having his Kingdome erected in their inward man In like manner may God send light among the heathen which may not be within every individial man of them And whereas you ask me what light it is I say it is the light of nature which taught them to do by nature the things contained in the Law And whereas you ask how they came by it I answer that that manifestation they have is from God for God hath shewed it to them Rom. 1.19 4. Quest Whether that which reproves the heathen when they sin be the same that reproves thee when thou sinnest and the rest who call your selves believers and whether it be in the same place and wherein doth it differ as to place nature and operation Answ To which I answer First that that which reproves the heathen of sin doth reprove us and you too And as touching the place I confess it is an odd term yet I answer that it is the conscience that must be reproved of sin according to Rom. 2. but yet this light may differ in the nature of it as the light of the Moon differs from the Sun and as a man may see further by the light of the Sun then he can by the light of the Moon even so may them that have the light of Christ have a further inspection into the things of Christ then the Gentiles who walk by the light of nature yet that light of nature we have together with the light of the Gospel which will convince us of sins against nature but for sins in the particular circumstances relating to Gods worship the light of nature will not convince and here these lights differ in operation also 5. Quest The fifth Question is whether your light who call your selves believers be within you and if within you how came you by it when you were in darkness as the moving cause and if without how doth it inlighten and not within and where doth it abide for you that is not in you Answ To this I answer that God which commanded the light to shine out of darkness is he which hath shined in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of God in the face of Jesus Christ 2 Cor. 4.6 this being answered there is no need of answering the later part of this quaere for the light that is in believers doth
sometimes lay down such sayings that are to be understood chiefly and eminently and not exclusively as Labour NOT for the meat that perisheth doth this therefore prove that believers are not to labour for earthly bread at all but eat the bread of idleness as you do in like manner is this saying of Pauls to be understood who though he was not chiefly and eminently sent to baptize but to preach the Gospel yet he also did baptize as the same place 2 Cor. 1.14 16. doth declare Now if Paul did baptize it was either in the Name of God and Christ or his own Name but it was not in his own Name for this he denies ver 13. when he saith Either were you baptized in the Name of Paul Well then if he did baptize in the Name of Christ then I quaere Whether it be not great wickedness to do a thing in the Name of God or Christ that Christ never commanded and therefore I say Pauls saying he was not sent to baptize doth not prove that therefore John was decreasing if by decreasing you mean that the things that John was a Preacher of should decrease for John was a Preacher of Repentance as well as Water-baptism And may you not as well say That he decreased in one thing as well as another And to the last branch of the quaere I say That in the sense Paul was a Minister of Christ and was not sent to baptize a man may be a Minister of Christ now But did you ever finde a Minister of Christ in all the New Testament that did not baptize at all or that said as you do That Baptism with water is not Gods Command 15 Quest Your next question is seeing the last of Matthew is your strength for Water-baptism I ask Whether one may not be baptized into the Name of Father Son Holy Ghost without being dipt in carnal water also whether all you dip in water you baptize into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost if the first of these be Yea and the later No then I conclude that carnal dipping is not the thing Answ As for thy word carnal water it is a word of thy own and therefore I have nothing to say to it But as touching the rest of the question I say That the former is Nay and the latter Yea to use your own phrases for none were ever baptized into the Name of Father Son and Holy Ghost that were not baptized with water and do thou prove it if thou canst without a crooked Consequence and I will believe all you say and the latter is Yea for we do not baptize any but we do it in the Name of Father Son and holy Ghost 16 Quest Doth every one that reades the Bible hear the Word of God or hath every one the Word that hath a Bible and what difference is there between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time BOTH denying the Faith which is the gift of God and will that save now more without the ministration of the Spirit then in their dayes Answ First every one that reads the Bible READS the VVord though it is true that many can reade that do not hear Again 2. every one that hath the Bible hath the VVord if by VVord you mean the written Commands of God and his Promises to them that obey and his Threatnings to them that obey not And whereas you ask me what difference is between the ministration of the letter now and that in the Jews time since both denied the Faith which is the gift of God c. I wonder at thy ignorance James doth not Paul say 2 Cor. 3.7 that the ministration written with Letters was glorious and was not that to the Jews in the Jews time and yet thou hast the face to say That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time did deny the Faith of God and so thou sayest now But where hast thou a text for this that proves the ministration of the letter to deny the Faith of God at any time is not this one of thy brain-sick Notions And whereas you ask if it would save now without the Spirit more then in their dayes I say That question is needless for neither then nor now can men be saved without Gods Spirit But what 's this to thy purpose who saith That the ministration of the letter in the Jews time and now do both deny the Light and Faith which is the gift of God For shame man leave off thy talking of God without thou couldst speak more to purpose and less to his dishonour 17 Quest VVhether that righteousness that a man reades in the letter sets him to do the like without Faith which is the gift of God or the leadings of the Light of Christ the ministration of the Spirit be the righteousness of Faith or Self-righteousness Answ The letter no where sets men to do the righteousness which it calls for without the Faith of God and Christ 2. To the latter part of your question I answer That the righteousness of Faith which men have by the Light of Christ and the ministration of the Spirit is not self-righteousness Thus have I plainly and faithfully transcribed thy questions and answered them which in reason thou couldst not expect since thou hast left mine unanswered And were it not but that thou wouldst have been wise in thy own conceit I should scarce have taken the pains and if thou shouldst joy in the strength of thy Quaeres know That the joy of the hypocrite will be but for a moment till my Answer can overtake them Postscript READER SOme passages thou hast for which there is but his Yea and my Nay and therefore that you may know on which side the truth lieth examine my former book and his Answer and see if that he hath not accused that book of many things that were neither in the book nor the Authors heart and by that thou wilt perceive that he that will not stick to belye me in a matter so publickly made known as my book is will not matter to do the like and worse concerning what I spake more private And also compare this Reply with his Answer and see if I have falsly related or perverted any saying in his book but have faithfully and impartially transcribed them and see if I have omitted replying to any thing that is of weight or indeed to the lightest thing that doth but look like an Argument and see also if he hath not left out many Arguments and many Pages to which he saith nothing and whether he hath not added to and taken from most things that he mentions of my book and then attempts to answer it And whereas he would excuse his Error of denying Christ born after the flesh by saying That that which is born after the flesh is flesh and that which is born after the Spirit is Spirit Whether by the rule of Contraries it doth not undeniably follow That that which is NOT born after the flesh is not flesh and then what doth he less then deny Christ to be made flesh by the perverting those Scriptures Joh. 3. and Gal. 4. whatever he saith to the contrary Consider and weigh things aright and the Lord give you understanding in all things VALE Reader thou art desired to correct these two mistakes and all others thou meetest with of this or any other kinde Page 30. lin 21. for fifteenth reade seventeenth p. 35. l. 14. for page 14. reade page 19. FINIS REader These may certifie That Jer Ives did not utter any such thing as James Nayler falsly charges upon him viz. As that all good was not of God neither did he deny Faith and obedience to be Gods gift but in the sense mentioned in this Reply Neither did he say any of those things as That the Wilderness where John baptized was in Jerusalem c. And we do further certifie That the account he hath given of that Conference at Gerard Roberts in this Reply to James Nayler is true we being there all the time and heard none of those things save what Jer Ives hath here acknowledged and given an Account of in this his Answer to that lying Letter Witness our Hands John Fry Rich. Cleiveland William Nash REader Whereas James Nayler denies that ever he knew of the fetching the last Letter mentioned in this book which Letter was to prove he had writ some things that was false concerning Jer Ives Now these may certifie That it was publickly declared to his face That the Letter should be fetch'd for to prove him a Lyer and accordingly it was and when the Letter came he was gone though it was told him If he would stay the Letter should be produced to prove his false speaking though in his book he denies he knew of the fetching of it Witness my Hand this 21 of July 1656. John Fry
should be born in Bethlehem though they had not the Spirit Was not this to foretel a thing to come and yet this is not Witchcraft though thou art pleased to call it so The rest of your Letter consists of Baptism For answer thereto I shall refer the Reader to my book call'd Quakers quaking pag. 25 26 and 38. Thus much as touching thy Letter and thy Charge going before it which is the same with the Letter except some things which thou chargest me for omitting which were spoken at our Conference at the Bull and Mouth near Aldersgate and them thou sayest are First His 15. LYE That I should say Christ lighteth every one that comes into the world and yet deny that this Light was within every one that comes into the world This thou sayest I have omitted to cover Lyes But let me tell thee James That if this Light spoken of in Joh. 1. had been in thee thou wouldst have been ashamed to tell thy Reader That I did diminish this from the Discourse to make my self a cover with a Lye when these very words are once and again repeated as page 49. of my book call'd Quakers quaking and page 51. in page 49. I have these words viz. That I did not oppose the saying of Joh. 1. which is that Christ inlightens every one that comes into the world but your saying which is that every one in the world hath the Light within him spoken of in that Text. Again in page 51. I have these words In like manner he viz. Christ lighteth every one that comes into the world inasmuch as he useth means for the bringing the world to the Light THOUGH ALL HAVE NOT THIS LIGHT WITHIN THEM James I have put it into Capital Letters that thou mayest without a Pair of Spectacles see thy self a Capital Lyer for thou art so impudent as to tell me If I had been honest I would have published the whole Truth and this fore-mentioned passage is one of the sayings thou lyingly tell'st thy Reader that I did diminish to make a cover for a Lye when I printed it word for word See his Answer to my book page 5. The next Lye he tells his Reader is That I omitted to print another passage that I spake in the Conference His 16. LYE which was That the Heathen had a Light that convinced them of sin but this Light was not within them James surely thou canst not forbear lying for do not I say page 52. that they might have a Light among them that might not be within them What is this less then what thou sayest I omitted and is this false Doctrine may not God use means and send his Light among people to convince them of sin that they may reject and not receive into their hearts Was not the great Light Jesus Christ among many who did not receive him within them by believing And yet thou art so ignorant and shameless as to call this a deceit and false Doctrine The next thing thou chargest me with is That I did omit the printing of that saying which thou sayest His 17. LYE I spake at the Bull and Mouth viz. That Christ pardoneth the sins of every one that comes into the world Now James thou hast fearfully diminished the Truth to make thee a cover for thy Lye for thou leavest out these words that I said namely That Christ was said to be the Light of the world or to lighten every one that came into it as he was said to take away the sin of the world inasmuch as he did graciously afford meanes for the pardoning the sins of the world though every man should not have his sins pardoned This indeed I said and to this purpose I spake in page 51. of my book which is just contrary to what thou chargest for I say He doth not pardon the sins of every one thou sayest that I said Christ did pardon the sins of every one He now proceeds in his 10 page to attempt an answer to the fourth Error I charge upon them and saith His 18. LYE I count it an Error that they bear Testimony to the Light of Christ which lighteth every one that comes into the world and That I count it an Error in them for holding That the Spiritual Light of Christ is sufficient to teach in all the wayes of God c. and That their Error is for saying the light of Christ is Spiritual and within To all this I answer 1. That the Reader may see that in thy fore-going Letter thou hast laid to my charge things that I never said for thou that wilt adde to and diminish from my words that are published in print wilt not stick to do the like unto words that were spoken more privately For where do I charge any of the fore mentioned things upon you for Error I challenge thee to shew it me in any page of my book or else confess thy wickedness before God and men and that thy sin may appear at this turn I shall desire the Reader to peruse the fourth Error I charge upon you in page 18. of my book where I do not charge it as Error That you testifie to the Light of Christ that is spoken of Joh. 1. but the words are that you say Every man hath a Light within him that will teach him to worship God rightly And thereupon it is that I do ground my twelve Quaeres page 19 20 21. of my book and not whether it be an Error to testifie to the Light of Christ as thou falsly suggestest for though it be a Truth as I often declare in my book That Christ is the Light of the world yet it is an Error and an unwritten Conceit to say That EVERY MAN hath a Light within him that will teach him to worship God aright without any other means vouchsafed And in what page of my book do I count it an Error in you for saying The Spiritual Light of Christ is sufficient to teach in all the wayes of God as thou falsly saith I have His 19. LYE Nay do not I say and doest not thou confess in page 10. of thy book that I say It is sufficient c. And where canst thou shew me that I charge it upon you as Error for saying The Light of Christ is sufficient as thou falsly hast declared Again where do I charge it upon you as Error for saying His 20. LYE The Light of Christ is spiritual and within as you say I do Do I say any such thing in my whole book No no I have not so learned Christ and yet this you say is the Error I charge upon you For shame James leave off lying and speak truth from thy heart for my charge is not That you say the Light of Christ is Spiritual and within but that you say it is WITHIN EVERY MAN that comes into the world that 's the Error I charge and in stead of answering that which I object