Christians Whatsoever is a command to me I must not receive from any man or thing without me nay not the Scripture it self And Edw. Burroughs in his Works p. 62. saith He that perswades people to let the Scriptures be the Rule of Faith and Practice would keep people in darkness Now I hope T. H. is no Forger But whereas my Author doth endeavour to cover their nakedness by some pitiful Evasions that covering of his is too narrow the Light in every man doth see their folly and is above them justly condemning them by the Light of the Holy Scriptures which they do wickedly reject And their great pretences to Light and Knowledg are seen to be the manifest effects of Darkness and Ignorance To the Law and to the Testimony because they speak against this Word there can be no Light in them Quest W. L. askes this Question What Scriptures do they disown for a Rule but such as relate to some external parts of Worship and do not we our selves do the same Answ I answer They deny the Scriptures yea as Geo. Whitehead phrases it as quoted by W. L. himself the BIBLE which contains all the Books of holy Scripture both in the Old and New-Testament to be a Rule and therefore t is idle for him to talk as if it were some part of it only that related to external Worship Quest But saith W. L. Do not we our selves do the same Answ There is one thing I would be satisfied in what W. L. means by saying WE VS and OVR in this Discourse I suppose he doth it on purpose to insinuate as if himself were a Baptist because he hath been so some years ago If that be his meaning then I must tell him it 's unbecoming a man professing Religion so to carry it for I do declare That he hath not had Communion with any Baptized Church in England nor been owned by them as worthy their Communion for several years unless he hath gone to any place where he is unknown and got it surreptitiously which I think the method used in such cases among our Churches will hardly admit him to do And to my knowledg they have refused long ago to admit him to preach among them because of his corrupt and dangerous Principles And yet the chief of the Quakers in a scurrilous Book of theirs in the Title-page call him a Sober Baptist Preacher signifying to the World that he is owned so now which is a most abominable untruth But they seem to have no regard to Truth and Honesty neither with their Tongues nor Penns For as Mr. Ives sheweth in his Questions for the Quakers That two of these Publishers i. e. William Mead and John Osgood have both of them with others took their Oaths in Chancery one before Sir William Beversham and the other before Sir William Child and yet it 's known to all that this is the Quakers avowed Principle That it is sinful to swear at all or in any case For as Geo. Fox saith in his Catechism quoted by Mr. Ives p. 107. All that swear are out of the Power of Jesus Christ and his Truth and the Doctrine of the Apostles c. AND ARE FALSE CHRISTIANS c. Now though they can rail against others at pleasure yet if we do but tell them of their faults though it be with the greatest mildness that may be they presently fall a raging and raving as if they were possest with and under the power of some unclean Spirit I will therefore leave them and return to W. L. whom I know to be a man that hath adhered to and contended for the Quakers Principles for divers years And I would say thus much to W. L. by way of advice That he would either be what he pretends to be or profess to be what he is Why dost thou halt between two Opinions Be in earnest and don 't trifle thus about Religion God is a jealous God and he is very angry with Lukewarm Professors but more with Apostates Take heed to thy self and to the Holy Scriptures for thereby thou mayest be made wise to Salvation through faith in Christ And if thou shalt reject the same know of a truth that Gods Word will certainly stand against thee for evil for I perceive thou hast drunk down too large a draught of their poysonous Doctrines as is manifest in this very instance under consideration besides many other for thou sayest There is as much truth in this Position That the Scriptures are no Rule of Faith and Practice unto Christians as thou desirest Where is then the difference between W. L. and a Quaker But we shall find much more of this in his Book There is some other rambling nonsensical Discourse under this head which I shall pass with this Observation upon it 1. That W. L. confesses T. H's Charges are matters of Opinions 2. W. L. saith We read of no punishment denounced against men nor rewards given for their Opinions at the last day 3. That if W. L. hath no reward from the Quakers for this service he hath done for them in contending about Opinions he is like to have none in the last day 4. That a man may hold and maintain the most wicked and abominable Opinions that are in the World though never so Atheistical and Antichristian and not be condemned for it at the last day But sure W. L. forgets The corrupt Principles lead to corrupt Practices as he will certainly find this corrupt Principle will do if prosecuted in denying the Scriptures to be a Rule of Faith and Practice Do but debauch a mans Conscience with wicked Principles and you will quickly see him a man of a debauched Conversation Why doth God appoint the Gospel to be preached Surely besides its Office in the revelation of himself and Son it is that by it we might come to have an evil opinion of the ways of sin and so forsake them And by presenting God therein as an Holy God and the Beauty Glory and Excellency of Holiness we might come to have our minds influenced thereby fall into a love and liking of it which begets holy Principles in us and so leads us to a holy Life And herein lies much of that difference betwixt the obedience of a man that is meerly Moral and one that is Evangelical The one being taught by the Law of Nature doth that which is good for the matter of it the other as he is farther enlightned doth not only obey in doing more but in all the parts of his obedience he acts from higher Principles and to a more noble end But whilest others are slighting good Principles I desire to prize and improve them for the honour of God and my own Salvation to believe and obey as God hath commanded in the Holy Scriptures 6. Pagan Principle THe sixth charge is That the speaking of the Spirit in any is of greater Authority than the Scriptures W. L. His Answer is There is no reason in my opinion
for this Charge for the saying brought to prove it is thus That which was spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and greater Geo. Whitehead's Serious Apol. p. 49. Reply A man may see how dark the eyes of this mans understanding are become that he should acknowledg that G. W. speaks the very words that T. H. charges upon them and yet can see no reason for this Charge But I hope he can see that this proves T. H to be no Forger W. L. Having confessed the Charge he goes to excuse it by saying That the addition of these words and greater will easily make any moderate man to believe G. W. means in some cases it may be greater Answ The Question that was put will inform us of his meaning i. e. Do you esteem of your speakings to be of as great Authority as any Chapter in the BIBLE Now both these words are in the Quakers Answer Of as great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and greater though W. L. hath the civility to leave out and chapters are I know not for what cause unless it were to introduce that instance he gives on purpose to evade the force of T. H. his evidence But I will not let it slip W. L. saith And that we cannot deny for if one of T. H. or I. G ' s. Sermons should at any time make a greater impression upon you or I than ever any Scripture did may we not lawfully say That the Spirit of Truth speaking in either of these men was of greater Authority to us that is wrought more powerfully upon us by them than by the Scriptures Answ To this I would make this answer 1. That W. L. mistakes the Question exceedingly for it 's not about the influence but the Authority which the Scripture hath over us as a Rule 2. That W. L. supposes by these expressions that T. H. and I. G. do not expound the Holy Scriptures in their Sermons Which is a false Supposition 3. And from thence he concludes That the influences their Sermons have upon the Consciences of their Auditors is not from the Power and Authority of God's Word but of their own sayings 4. Whereas he supposes the Spirit of Truth speaks by these men I readily grant it but not exclusive of but in conjunction with the Doctrine they preach agreeable to the Holy Scriptures 5. Therefore I conclude That whatever good effect their Doctrine hath upon the Souls of men for their Conversion and Salvation it is wrought by those words they deliver unto us not as they are the words of men taken abstractedly for as such they can have no such Efficacie but as they are indeed the Word of God which effectually worketh in them that believe Thus all men may see this instance serves not to the purpose for which he intended it Quest But saith W. L. What need we fear any dangerous Consequences attending this saying so long as they agree with us in this That every Spirit speaking contrary to plain Scripture is false Answ This man is very apt in drawing fale sSuppositions Do the Quakers that deny the Scriptures to be a Rule of Faith and Practice make it the Standard to try Spirits by and conclude all to be false that speak contrary thereunto No if they had done that or would yet do it they would see themselves to be false Teachers no Christians but Impostors Their Principles and Practices being contrary to Holy Scripture and the Rule of Christianity therein contained 7. Pagan Principle THe Seventh Charge is That is no Command from God to me which God hath given by way of Command to another Neither did any of the Saints act by the Command which was to another Every one obeyed their own Command W. L. He saith There is no great difficulty nor danger in this for it 's very true in one sense and as false in another and Charity will always take the best Reply There is so great danger in it that it leaves all men without a Rule for their Faith and Practice For if I am to obey none of those Commands given by God to others and recorded in Scripture for our Instruction and there be no new Revelation for the Rule of my Faith and Practice then are all men wholly destitute of a Rule and yet this is the very case And whereas he would salve it by distinguishing between one Command and another and allowing the Quakers a liberty to pick and chuse obey what they list and leave the rest undone This may not be allowed by the Quakers themselves for they confess that the Scriptures were all given forth by the same Spirit and therefore must needs be of equal Authority in those Commands they enjoyn upon us as our duty Object I know no Objection lies against this but the Quakers affirming They have immediate Revelation for the Rule of their Faith and Practice Answ I answer It 's easie to affirm any thing But that they cannot prove it is evident not only from the want of sufficient Testimony at all times when they have been desired to prove it but particularly for that at the late Dispute in their own Meeting-house in Wheelers-street they were not able to give any other Demonstration of it but what a Turk or Impostor might give or pretend too equal with them But if they think they can do it when they have further consulted one another about it I will give them a longer time that they may fetch in what other Auxiliaries they have for I perceive the Light within them cannot supply them with sufficient Demonstration for if it could they had that to have been Geo Keith's Dictator in Wheelers-street In the mean time I would ask W. L. a few Questions upon his Distinction 1. Why he should say That the Quakers except against some particular Commands as not belonging to them as that Command to the Jews To anoint their heads when they fasted that to the young man To sell all and give to the poor and that to Paul To go to Rome Whereas it 's manifest the Quakers say That not any one of the Commands in Scripture concern them That the Scripture is no Rule to them 2. Why he should say That no Quaker will say these Commands Swear not at all Love your Enemies Quench not the Spirit c. concerns not them because they were spoken to others Whereas he knows they do so confidently affirm That those are no Commands to them that were given by God to others and recorded in the Scriptures 3. If the Scripture be no Rule how comes the Quaker to know that it is a sin to Swear and a vertue not to Swear at all He must not say Because 't is written in Matth. 5. Swear not at all for that Command was given to those that lived 1600 years ago and therefore that can be no Command to them For Edw. Burroughs saith in his
works page 47. That is no Command from God to me which he commands to another Neither did any of the Saints we read of in Scripture act by the Command which was to another c. They obeyed every one their own Command 4. If it be a sin as the Quaker saith To take any Oath how comes it then to pass that the Quakers do frequently go to Law with their Neighbours and employ men yea give them money to come in and swear for them And also when others cannot be accepted in their stead Why do some of the chief Quakers in London take Oaths themselves Surely if your Principle be true both these Practices are Abomination to the Lord. Now with what face of Truth or Honesty can these men censure others and do the same things themselves 5. How can the Quakers tell what Spirit it is they must receive must not quench the motions of must be taught and instructed by and that those things it teaches them are true What Rule is there to distinguish it from all false Spirits that so all men may know what Spirit they are to follow and what to reject If these things be not discovered by the Light of the Holy Scriptures how can they be known If they must be examined by the Light thereof then the Scriptures must be acknowledged to be our Rule and the Commands therein binding to us notwithstanding all that the Quakers say to the contrary 8. Pagan Principle THe Eighth Charge is That Justification by that Righteousness which Christ fulfilled for us wholly without us is a Doctrine of Devils W. P's Answer is thus And indeed this we deny viz. Justification by the Righteousness which Christ fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us And boldly affirm it in the name of the Lord to be a Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which doth now Deluge the World Will. Penn. Serious Apol. p. 148. Will. Lud. saith This makes a great noise surely somewhat more than ordinary moved W. P. to write at this rate Herein he confesses the Charge so that T. H. is no Forger But first saith W. L. let us calmly consider the terms whereupon he doth express himself in favour of W. P. W. L. This one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves for Justification and Righteousness all along the New-Testament so that when we are said to be justified it is all one in my understanding as to be made just or righteous Reply I will speak something to this before I proceed any further And first whereas he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves for Justification and Righteousness all along the New-Testament I hope he doth not intend that there is no other words used to express it by for I think that word is but seldom used in the New-Testament upon that occasion but most frequently other words to express the Spirits meaning by as in Rom. 5. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore being justified by faith vers 16. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the free gift is of many offences unto Justification v. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto Justification of life And Mr. Leigh in his Critica Sacra p. 69. saith thus upon that very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justitia i. e. Justice in which sense he saith the word is often used and brings in Cornelius à Lapide speaking thus Justitia ea quae est in nobis and a little after Est ipsa animi integritas sanctitas innocentia per quam sancti vivimus placemus Deo vel bonis viris So that it must be understood to respect that Integrity Holiness and Innocency of the souls of good men by which they live a holy life and please God But this cannot be done without their persons be first acquitted of their former sins by the Justification they receive from Christ through believing 1. But here I do distinguish between a Legal Righteousness so as to obey perfectly all that God requires at all times both in thought word and deed 2. An Evangelical Righteousness which is a sincere endeavour of the Soul to do all that God requires although by reason of the pravity of his nature he cannot attain it which is accepted with God for Christs sake as if he had perfectly done it 3. And that Righteousness which Christ fulfilled for us in his own Person wholly without us which was his keeping the Law perfectly in our stead and his suffering death for our sins 1 Cor. 15. 3. Christ died for OVR sins according to the Scriptures Now this is imputed to us if we believe Rom. 4. 5 6 7 8. 22 23 24 25. And Christ is made unto us Righteousness 1 Cor. 1. 30. And in this sense he is called The Lord OVR Righteousness Jer. 23. 6. And therefore it 's said Christ was made sin for VS who knew no sin that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5. ult He bare OVR sins in his own body on the tree 1 Pet. 2. 24. The truth is if Legal Righteousness and Justification THROVGH Christ according to the Gospel be the same thing then the Quaker is right in denying Justification by that Righteousness Christ fulfilled for us both Actively and Passively in his own Person wholly without us But then the Apostle Paul was mistaken who saith A man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ Even we have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified for if Righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 16 21. But by this I perceive That the Quakers rather than they will own Justification by that Righteousness Christ fulfilled for us wholly without us they will avoid that absurdity laid upon that Opinion by the Apostle i. e. That then Christ died in vain by affirming That Christ in respect of himself never died But why I may not from hence conclude The Quakers professing Christianity to be vain I know not If W. P. can demonstrate the contrary I desire he would But let us hear what W. L. hath to say further touching this thing W. L. Now that no man can make himself so or that he can be so without Christs Righteousness and also that this act of justifying us or making us just is of the free Grace of God through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ I believe it is granted by us and them Answ If by Vs W. L. mean according to his former false Insinuation the Baptists and himself though indeed he is not one of that number neither can he be so accounted Then I answer That those words expressed by him if as honestly intended as plainly exprest is that the Baptists and other Protestants own But as I know the Quakers do not own it
is will be as hard a Task as it was to one Simonides to tell what God was but still we are as wise as before Ans Truly I don't expect to be made wiser by this discourse of thine about the Soul but give me leave to ask thee a few questions about it notwithstanding thy considence in saying It 's strange we should differ about we know not what 1. Dost thou believe the Soul of Man was Created 2. Dost thou not believe God to be Increated to subsist of and from himself and from no other 3. Dost thou believe it possible for the Blessed Creator of all things to become a Creature or for a Creature to be made God Blessed for evermore and to be without beginning and infinite He that can believe this may easily believe Transubstantiation I would have W. P. and W. L. consult together once more and see if they can invent some Answer that may Reconcile these 2 Propositions 1. That the Soul of Man was Created 2. That the Soul is God himself without beginning and infinite The first is asserted by God himself Esay 57. 16. The Souls which I have made The latter is asserted by themselves for they say the Soul is a part of God's Being c. and in this case that known Maxim will stand good Quidquid est in Deo est Deus Whatsoever is in God is God Now if they cannot Reconcile them if I come to be put to my choyce whether I will Believe God's Word or Their's I shall not only believe what God hath spoken but also that his Word will certainly stand against them for Evil. Jer. 44. ult For they have rejected the Word of the Lord and what Wisdom is in them Now I hope W. L. may see notwithstanding all that he hath said That though the Soul of Man be made Immortal and can never Die yet it had not always a Being it is not without beginning there being a time when it was not and that it is not infinite and God himself But I wonder W. L. should say that it is so hard to know what the Soul is he forgets sure that the Quakers have a light in them that they say can teach them all things if they cannot know what it is now the Scripture hath so plainly told them that Man hath a Soul surely they would have been hard put to it to have told us that and all other things Recorded in Scripture concerning God the Man Christ Jesus the Holy Spirit and the Souls of Men if they had not been written there Notwithstanding they have often told us That they could have known all those things contained in the Bible if they had never been written But I am glad we are not forced to be beholding to them for the knowledg thereof for if we were I have ground to conclude we must go without it for I have often asked What some of those things were that our Saviour did when he was upon the Earth that are not written But they could never tell me one of them Pagan Principle the 3d. THe Third Opinion charged on the Quakers is That Jesus Christ is not a distinct Person without us W. L. His Answer is These Expressions being not in Scripture are not owned by them and why we should impose them I know not Reader here is a plain confession that the Quakers do not own Jesus Christ to be a Distinct Person without us therefore T. H. is no Forger But I will examine his Reason why they do not own it It is saith he Because it is not expressed in the Scripture Now in case that supposition were true that cannot be the Reason why the Quakers do deny it 1. For first They deny the Scriptures to be a Rule of Faith and Practice unto Christians and therefore though they may sometimes make use of them against those that own them Argumentum ad hominem as I may make use of the saying of a Heathen Poet against a Heathen yet it 's shameful for a Quaker having exploded them in print from being a Rule of Faith to bring this as a Reason why they do not own it because as they say it is not written in Scripture and as W. P. doth in calling this Doctrine of T. H. Vnscriptural seeing all the real ground a Quaker can have to own any Doctrine is Because he is Taught it by the Light within and the pretence of any other proof to himself is but vain for that 's the Question Whether the Quakers themselves do believe Christ to be a Distinct Person without them 2. But Secondly These Expressions of T. H. are no more in effect than if I should say in other words That Christ is a Man without us and is he not called in Scripture the MAN Christ Jesus 1 Tim. 2. 5. For surely to say he is a MAN is to suppose him both to be distinct and a Person without us Obj. But Christ is said to be in his People and to dwell in them Ans I grant it but the Scripture saith it is by the Spirit 1 John 4. 13. Hereby know we that we dwell in him and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit Chap. 3. 24. And hereby we know that he abideth in us by the Spirit which he hath given us neither is this to be understood of the Essence but of the Gifts and Graces of the Spirit therefore it 's said so Ephes 3. 16 17. where the Apostle prayes that they might be strengthened with Might by his Spirit in the inner Man That Christ may dwell in your Hearts by FAITH 3. But thirdly I will prove that Christ is called a PERSON in Scripture Matt. 27. 24. Pilate saith I am innocent of the Blood of this JUST PERSON If they say he was a wicked man that said so then it seems a wicked Man did own more concerning Christ than a Quaker is willing to do But I can prove that the Apostle Paul useth that very Expression 2 Cor. 2. 10. For your sakes forgave I it in the PERSON of CHRIST and this doth not only prove Christ to be a PERSON but also that he is a DISTINCT PERSON without us Because Paul doth here tell the Church that in that Act he did Represent the PERSON of Christ he being in respect of his HUMANE NATURE absent and in Heaven and that he acted in his stead But surely the Opposition the Quakers make against the PERSON of Christ is wholly Vnscriptural Never any true Minister or Christian mentioned in Scripture did ever oppose this Doctrine of Christ's being a Distinct PERSON without us if they did let them shew it us in their Next 4. But Fourthly Seeing Syllogizing which they formerly condemned is now grown into Fashion among them I will give them one Argument to prove Christ Jesus to be a REAL and True MAN If all the Properties of a Humane Person were found in Christ then he was a Real and True Man But all the
them to say when he was upon the Cross If thou be the Son of God come down from the Cross Matt. 27. 40. and in vers 42. The Chief Priests Elders and Scribes mocked him saying HE saved others Himself he cannot save If he be the King of Israel let him now come down from the Cross and we will believe him That the Quakers do also deny Christ's Death and say That he never did Dye I and many others have been Ear-Witnesses to the great grief and trouble of our Souls But though these Men can so easily part with their Saviour I hope when they or others tempt me so to do I shall say and so I hope will many thousands that fear God as the Apostle Peter did LORD to whom shall we go thou hast the Words of Eternal Life And we believe and are sure that thou art THAT Christ the Son of the Living God John 6. 68 69. Reader I would not have detained thee so long upon this subject but to let thee see That the design of such insinuations is to make void plain and most necessary Truths that they may the better introduce their own corrupt Principles For it is not only in this but about many other the most Important Truths of Christianity which they endeavour to evade by raising Difficulties about the MODE of things when we enquire not into the Manner how it shall be but TRUTH of the Matter whether it is or shall ever be and I will give thee one instance in the room of many more which I could give upon my own knowledg if there were occasion I have asked many of the Quakers Whether they did believe that the same Body which doth now consist of Flesh Blood and Bones and is buried shall be raised again out of the Grave and made Spiritual and Glorious The Answer they used to give me was Thou art one of them Fools that Paul speaks of that art inquiring about the manner how what Body it shall have c. thinking thereby to have evaded and dropt the Question But at length when I have prest them for a plain and full Answer and desired them to tell me not how it should be raised or with what a Body in respect of Form But whether the same Body that dies shall Rise again respecting the Matter of which it doth Consist And they have often told me That that Body which Dies shall not Rise again But to return from whence I have digressed W. L. saith Nevertheless we and they agree That he is unworthy to be called a Christian that denies the Divinity of Christ and brings divers Scriptures to prove it But saith he When from other Texts more dark we are taught to understand our Lord Jesus to be that very Jehovah Creator or Father of whom and to whom he himself speaks when he saith My Father is greater than I. And Father I will that whom thou hast given me c. with many more of that kind then I say Are not our Apprehensions so darkned and bewildered that we are apt to read Psalm 110. 1. thus The Lord said unto himself sit thou at my Right Hand And John 3. 16. God so loved the World that he sent himself and many others would come under the like Absurdities Rep. This is such a confused heap of Words that I know not well where to begin First If by Divinity of Christ he mean as I do i. e. That though he were a Man yet he was also Truly God by Nature then I am of his Mind But then he doth not truly represent the Quakers Notion for they say he is only God and not Man at all 2. If he means as they do That he is only God then I wonder at his confidence to throw that absurdity upon others which lies only at the door of the Quakers Ranters Muggletonians c. and how he and they conjoyned can remove it I do not understand but am of Opinion That if W. L. and W. P. had one of them the Strength of Sampson and the other the Wisdom of Solomon they might imploy themselves all their life-time and yet find it a difficulty too hard for them to resolve But however I know they are Men of confidence and will venture upon hard things I will therefore try their strength and skill in this Matter 1. W. L. tells us We being taught that Christ is the very Jehovah Creator or Father c. it doth so bewilder our Apprehensions that we are apt to read Psalm 110. 1. The Lord said unto himself c. and John 3. 16. God so loved the World that he sent himself which he saith is an Absurdity And I think a great one too But that it lies not at our doors but at the Quakers I think it no hard thing to prove and in order thereunto I would ask these few Questions 1. Whether W. L. ever heard any Man of T. H's Opinion about Christ i. e. That he is both God and Man and a Distinct Person without us affirm That in respect of his Person he was only Jehovah Creator or Father as he is pleased to word it and whether it be sayable from their own Principles when at the same time they also affirm That he is truly Man 2. Whether the Quakers do not deny that the same Body which Christ had when he was upon the Earth and is now ascended with into Heaven is a Part of that Christ and affirm it to be only a Body in which he was and acted in for a time here upon Earth 3. Whether the Quakers do not believe That it is only the Light or Spirit which was in that Man which is the Christ which Spirit they say is now in them and all Men 4. Whether it will not thence follow that the Quakers believe Christ to be only God if they deny it I am able to prove it against them 5. Whether the Quakers do not deny all Personal Distinction between the Father and the Son and say that the Son is the Father and the Father is a Son to himself If the Quakers should deny this and say There is a Distinction of Persons in the Divine Essence Will. Penn may remember what himself hath written in opposition to such a Distinction in his Book Entituled The Sandy Foundation shaken where among many other sayings of that import he lays down this Argument to prove that Doctrine Absurd and Ridiculous If each Person be God and God subsists in three Persons then in each Person there are three Persons or Gods and so from three they would encrease to nine and so in infinitum from whence it is plain the Quakers deny all Distinction of Persons in the Divine Essence 6. Having gained thus far upon them I therefore query Whether according to their own Opinion this absurdity will not necessarily fall upon them to read those Scriptures as W. L. hath done That the Lord said to himself sit thou on my Right Hand and that he so
upon his Offices with the holy Spirit As the Priests Prophets and Kings under the Law were anointed with Oyl when they entred upon Theirs see Matth. 3. 16 17. And Jesus when he was baptized went up straightway out of the water And lo the Heavens were opened unto him and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a Dove and lighting upon him And lo a voice from Heaven saying This is my beloved Son in whom I am well pleased Heb. 1. 9. Therefore God even thy God hath Anointed thee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy fellows Luke 4. 17 18 21. And there was delivered unto him the Book of Esaias the Prophet and when he had opened the Book he found the place where it is written The Spirit of the Lord is upon me because he hath anointed me to preach the Gospel c. And applied this to his own Person as being then fulfilled Then he began to say unto them This day is this Scripture fulfilled in your ears The word which God sent unto the Children of Israel was this That God had Anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with Power who went about doing good and healing all that were oppressed of the Devil for God was with him Acts 10. 38. Now by this we may see that as his Name is so is the Person to whom it is given for he being Anointed with the Holy Spirit above his fellows he is properly and truly the Lord 's Christ Thirdly That this Name cannot be properly and really applied to the Divine Nature taken Abstractively And my Reason for it is this Because some of those things which were done by the Man Christ Jesus could not have been performed by the Divine Nature in the sense before defined 1. Because if they could there had then been no need for him to have been a man made of a woman to be made flesh and dwell among men to have been exposed to all those sufferings and sorrows which befel him in the days of his flesh while he was upon the earth 2. Because Christ died for our sins according to the Scripture 1 Cor. 15. 3. But the Divine Nature taken Abstractively cannot die For besides this Consideration viz. That the Nature of the Divine Essence cannot possibly admit of it and it 's horrid Blasphemy to assert it So on the contrary it is positively affirmed That God lives for ever If I lift up my hand to Heaven and say I live for ever Deut. 32. 40. yea he swears by himself As I live saith the Lord Isa 49. 18. The name of the Lord the Everlasting God Gen. 21. 33. For thus saith the High and Losty One that inhabiteth Eternity Isa 57. 15. whos 's goings forth have been from of old from everlasting Micah 5. 2. Lord thou hast been our dwelling-place in all Generations Before the Mountains were brought forth or ever thou hadst formed the Earth and the World even from everlasting to everlasting thou art God Psal 90. 1 2. And God said unto Moses I AM that I AM Thus shalt thou say unto the Children of Israel I AM hath sent me unto you This is my name for ever And this is my Memorial unto all Generations Exod. 3. 14 15. The Certainty Perpetuity and Eternity of Gods Being assures Believers of the Certainty and Accomplishment of all his Promises seeing they know he is faithful and cannot lie nor cease to be For if he could do either it would take away all the Foundation of our Faith and Hope in God his Word and Promises But there are some Objections urged by the Quakers in print against this Truth in these words W. P. Askes this Question Was he the Christ of God before he was manifested in the flesh Mr. Ives answers He was the Son of God Quest W. P. But was he the Lords Christ And turns this Answer to it himself Answ W. P. saith I will prove him to have been the Lords Christ as well before as after 1. From the Apostle Paul's words to the Corinthians That Rock was Christ 2. Next from Jude where some Greek Copies have it thus That Jesus brought the people of Israel out of Egypt See The Quakers Account of the Barbican-Meeting p. 24. Reply I will answer to the last first If W. P. have seen any such Greek Copies he should have cited them and told us what they are Till which time I shall account it as the effect of passion stirred up in the defence of a bad cause But surely W. P. forgot himself to bring this Allegation for if this be brought to prove any thing it is That he as Jesus was before he was manifested in the flesh Which name was never given to him till he came in the flesh And she shall bring forth a Son and thou shalt call his name Jesus And she brought forth her first-born Son and he called his name Jesus Matth. 1. 21 25. Besides our English Translation doth very well agree with the Greek for in Jude v. 5. which is the place he refers to the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in our Translation Lord which is the express signification of the word and so rendred in multitudes of places in the New-Testament And this can be brought by W. P. for no better purpose than to undervalue the Scripture by quarrelling with the Translation though there be no cause Secondly As for those words in 1 Cor. 10. 4. That Rock was Christ I answer It 's meant not really but figuratively as appears by the precedent words vers 3 4. And did all eat the same spiritual meat and did all drink the same spiritual drink for they drank of the spiritual Rock that followed them and that Rock was Christ For it 's evident 1. That there was a Real and True Rock which Moses smote with his Rod and out of which the water gushed 2. That the people of Israel drunk of this Water to quench their thirst 3. That this was Real and True Water because their Cattel also drank thereof Numb 20. 11. He smote the Rock twice and the Water came out abundantly and the Congregation drank and their Beasts also 4. That the Water which came out of that Rock became Rivers and followed them in the Wilderness He brought streams also out of the Rock and caused waters to run down like Rivers Psal 78. 16. Behold he smote the Rock that the waters gushed out and the streams overflowed ver 20. And they thirsted not when he led them through the Deserts And in the next words you have an Account how they were supplied in this their journey through the Deserts He caused the waters to flow out of the Rock for them He clave the Rock also and the water gushed out Isa 48. 21. He opened the Rock and the waters gushed out they ran in the dry places like a River Psal 105. 41. And therefore it 's said The Rock followed them Which by a Metonymie is meant the water that
came out of the Rock 5. It 's called A spiritual Rock because it was Typical of Christ and that the Believers among them did as truly partake of Christ by Faith spiritually as They the rest of the Multitude and their Cattel did drink of the water of the Rock literally And in the same sense that the MANNA is called Spiritual Meat vers 3. They did all eat the same spiritual Meat so is the water of the Rock called spiritual Drink They did all drink the same spiritual Drink Now we may not conclude from hence That that Rock was really Christ or that he was called Christ with respect to what he was before he was manifested in the flesh But on the contrary it 's to be understood of the Faith they had in the promised Messias that was to come whereof that Rock was a Type So that this manner of speaking agrees with that saying of our Saviour Abraham rejoyced to see my day and he saw it and was glad John 8. 56. which was not really by an Ocular view of his Person as being then present but by the Faith he had in the Promise that he should be revealed in the fulness of Time for it is said of Abraham and the rest of the Faithful mentioned Heb. 11. 13. These all died in Faith not having received the Promises but having seen them afar off and were perswaded of them The principal of which was The promise of the Messias that was to come Object But it may be objected That in Psal 2. 2. in the Latin Bible translated by Beza it is said Et contra Christum ejus And against his Christ And the like in Dan. 9. Therefore he is called Christ before he was manifested in the flesh I answer 1. It 's true he is called Christ Messiah and the Anointed in those places And if we will believe a very Learned Author of our time he saith The name of Messiah is but twice or thrice at most used in the Old-Testament directly and immediately to denote the promised Seed namely Dan. 9. 25 26. whereunto Psal 2. 2. may be added J. Owen D. D. Exercit. 9. on the Epistle to the Hebrews p. 95. So that these are all the places in the Old-Testament wherein he is so called 2. That it is also true That the word in the Hebrew is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mashiach both in Psal 2. and Dan. 9. which signifies Anointed and is applied to our Saviour the Lord Jesus Christ So that I grant all that is in the Objection But it doth not thence follow That because he is is called so before that it doth not respect what he was to be when and after he was manifested in the flesh but the contrary is manifest by the scope of those Texts to any considering person For in Psal 2. it is said The Kings of the Earth have set themselves and the Rulers take counsel together against the Lord and against his Christ Now in Acts 4. 25 26 27 28 29. upon the Threatnings they had from the Rulers Chief Priests and Elders c. they apply these very words upon that occasion Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said The Kings of the Earth stood up and the Rulers were gathered together against the Lord and against his Christ for of a truth against thy Holy Child Jesus whom thou hast Anointed both Herod and Pontius Pilate with the Gentiles and the People of Israel were gathered together for to do whatsoever thy hand and thy counsel determined before to be done And now Lord behold their Threatnings and grant unto thy servants that with all boldness they may speak thy Word By stretching forth thy hand to heal and that signs and wonders may be done by the Name of thy Holy Child Jesus So that you may see that this opposition in the Kings against Christ was upon the account of his being manifest in the flesh and introducing a new Doctrine and Religion in the World which set them in a rage against him and his Disciples And this is the plain meaning of this Text. And in Dan. 9. it 's said Know therefore and understand That from the going forth of the Commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off but not for himself And the People of the Prince that shall come shall destroy the City and the Sanctuary and the end thereof shall be with a flood and unto the end of the War desolations are determined All these things were yet to come when this was spoken and not fulfilled till the days of his flesh For here is his own death expresly prophesied of the destruction of Jerusalem and of the Temple and the Desolation of that Nation Object But it is objected by Geo. Keith But I prove that he was Jesus Christ before he took flesh Eph. 3. 9. Who created all things by Jesus Christ Reply 1. I grant That God did Create all things by Jesus Christ But it was as he was God and not as he is a man in the flesh And yet as such he was the Christ of God being Anointed with the Spirit as is shewed above 2. If this be true that G. K. saith That he was both Anointed and a Saviour before the World was 3. I would then know 1. How he came to be in a capacity to receive that Anointing seeing then he was only God 2. Who Anointed him seeing you say There is no distinction of Persons in the Divine Essence 3. What sinners were there for him to save before any thing was created For he is called Jesus because he came to save his People from their sins Matth. 1. 21. But I take this to be the genuine sense of that Text Ephes 3. 9. That he being then best known by the names of Jesus and Christ and known to be a real and true Man the Apostle would let them know that he was also truly God seeing he did Create all things But was so far from being Jesus Christ then that he saith the knowledg of his Revelation according to the Gospel was so great a Mystery and so little known that from the beginning of the World it hath been hid in God and was now revealed according to the Eternal purpose of God which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord Which in other Ages was not made known to the Sons of Men as it is now revealed unto his holy Apostles and Prophets by the Spirit as you may see at large in this Chapter So that he intends not by these words that he was then the Saviour Anointed any more than the Scripture doth intend he was really slain from the Foundation of the World and yet it is said so Rev. 13. 8. by him who calls things that are not as though they were because he hath decreed it and his Decrees shall be accomplished But by the same Rule G. K. might as
as it is by him applied to that Sacred Person before defined His words are these Messias doth solely and singularly betoken Christ as it is interpreted John 1. 41. and 4. 25. For though the word Mashiach in Hebrew in the Scripture signifieth any Anointed one whatsoever yet in this Greek form Messias it never signifieth but only Christ Nor is the Hebrew word used in Hebrew Authors but in the same sense and so it is used infinitely among them Sometimes set single without any other addition and very often with this addition Melech Hamashiach the King Messias In this propriety the word is used Dan. 9. 25 26. Psal 2. 2. and so it was confessed by the ancient Jews Mr. Lightfoots 2 d Part of his Harmony Critica Sacra p. 136. Now seeing Christ is thus exalted at the Fathers Right-hand to be a Prince and a Saviour to give us Grace here to enable us to do his will and Glory hereafter far surpassing all our Obedience let us therefore believe in him for the pardon of our sins as he is a Priest receive his Doctrine as he is a Prophet and submit to his Laws as he is a King For whosoever shall be found so doing and continue therein faithful unto death they shall certainly receive that Crown of Life and Glory which God hath promised to them that love him I shall conclude in the words of the Apostle Grace be with all them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity Amen Quakerism is Popery Revived OR Some of their Old Opinions put into a New Dress and Asserted by the Quakers to be New Discoveries of the Light within them THere are two General Principles must be received by every one that will be either a Quaker or Papist 1. That the Scriptures of the Old and New-Testament are not the Rule of Faith and Practice 2. That there is some other Rule of Faith which is Infallible To prove this I shall quote their own sayings that you may know I do not wrong them The Quaker saith thus Will. Penn in Reas ag Rail p. 48. We deny the Scriptures to be the Rule of Faith and Practice in honor to that Divine Light that was the Author of them Edw. Burrough's Works p. 62. He that perswades people to let the Scripture be the Rule of Faith and Practice would keep people in darkness Geo. Whitehead Dip. pl. p. 13. It 's Idolatry to call the Bible the means of our knowing God And in his Book entituled Christ Ascended p. 11. You are walking by your fancies and imaginations who set the Scriptures in the place of Christ as your only absolute Rule and Ground of your Faith and Knowledg G. W. in Enthusiasm above Atheism p. 20. saith As for W. Penn's saying That our Belief concerning the Scriptures is that inward Testimony that we have received from the Holy Light within us to the truth of those sayings He concludes thus Wherefore the Scriptures are so far from being the great Rule of Faith and Practice that the Light of Christ within is both our Warrant and Rule for Faith in and Obedience to them And in p. 27. he blames his Antagonist for saying The Doctrine contained in the Scriptures is the Rule of Faith and Practice telling him He should rather have said A Rule subordinate to the great Rule of Faith and Practice to wit That Divine Light And yet saith p. 49. But if he pretend the Spirit to be his Rule then the Scriptures are not Having heard what the Chief Men in the Quakers Ministry have said be pleased to hear what some eminent Popish Priests have said and you will see that this is no new Doctrine The Papist saith thus Eckius Luthers Antagonist in his Book of Faith and Justification The end that moved the Evangelists to write was not because they would have their Writings to rule over Religion and Faith but rather that they should be subject unto it Coster saith the same in his Enchiridion of Controversies And in Chap. 71. The Scriptures are as a Nose of Wax that suffers it self to be turned this way and that way Turrianus p. 250. If Christ had left no other Rule of our Faith than the Scriptures we should have had nothing else but a Delphian Sword Bellarm. de verbo Dei non Scripto Lib. 2. saith The way to keep men sound and undeceived about Religion is to forbid to the Laity or worldly men the reading of the holy Scripture as being the occasion of many Heresies Lib. 4. For although the Scriptures is God's Word nevertheless it can have no Authority without the Churches Approbation being an imperfect broken and lame Rule for there is not comprehended in it all things that are necessary for God's Honour and our Salvation but what is wanting must be supplied by unwritten Tradition Lib. 4. cap. 12. The proper and principal end of the Scripture was not that it should be a Rule of Faith but a profitable Admonition to make men entertain the Doctrine of Preaching Secondly There is some other Rule of Faith which they both say is Infallible 1. The Quaker saith It 's the Light in the Body immediate Inspiration or Enthusiasm by the Light within them which is the Infallible Rule George Keith saith That Will. Penn hath immediate Inspiration as the primary Rule of his Faith and Practice See the Quakers own Account of the Wheeler-street-Meeting p. 56 57. And in answer to Mr. Ives 's Demand To give one evidence that they had Divine Inspiration for the Rule of their Faith and Practice he saith p. 62. It is sufficient that we have the witness in our selves Page 65. We profess and experience Immediate and Divine Revelation as the Ground of our Faith and Testimony And in his Looking-Glass for Protestants p. 29. he saith And this is our Faith in all these particulars who witness unto the Immediate Teachings of God by his Spirit in our hearts Geo. Whitehead Enthus above Atheis saith p. 19. But Enthusiasm taken simply as a Divine Inspiration or breathing into by a Deity we do assert and contend for in the best Acceptation I never thought the Quakers would have owned themselves to be Enthusiasts in Print But what may they not come to in time Page 22 23. he saith We do therefore assert the sufficiency of this Divine Illumination as being of it self able to shew and reveal to us what we ought to believe and do in all things And p. 24. he saith By their Preaching and Writing they proclaim the sufficiency thereof And p. 52. to shew that they are free from Error and Incongruity he saith It is true that we affirm the light of Christ within to be an Absolute Rule teaching men that follow it what they ought to know believe and do And in the same page he saith That he viz. his Antagonist falsly supposeth a defect in the Light and in our Ministry directing thereto Then they must be both of them sufficient and infallible if