to be the Effect or purchase of inward Righteousness and Holiness for its impossible but the free Love and Mercy of God yet without the Holy Sanctifying or Regenerating Work of God in the Heart by the Operation of his Eternal Spirit whereby to do the Will of God as it is in Heaven it is impossible to have Access into God's Tabernable and Holy Hill much less to be justified by him And indeed as true Repentance which is the beginning of the Work of Sanctfication opens the Way for the Remission of Sins that are past which I call the first part of Justification so is Regeneration or Sanctification throughout in Body Soul and Spirit as well the compleating of Justification as Sanctification consequently it is that second Part of Justification because it is a making Man just by Nature who was before Just but by Imputation that is he that was accounted just by not having Sin imputed through Repentance and Faith in the Love of God declared in and by Christ is now inwardly made more just because made Holy as God is Holy Levit. 20. 7. Perfect as his Heavenly Father is perfect Mat. 5. 48. Righteous even as God is Righteous 1 John 3. 7. through the effectual Working of the Holy Ghost There are Two Scriptures which prove this The one is 1 Cor. 1. 30. But of him are ye in Christ Jesus who of God is made unto us Wisdom and Righteousness and Sanctification and Redemption where the word Justification is left out and yet the Thing Justification doubtless included and implyed The other is Rom. 8. 30. Moreover whom he did predestinate them he also called and whom he called them he also justified and whom he justified them he also glorified where Sanctification is left out yet without Dispute the word Justification includes it Nor are we alone in this Judgment since both Ancient and Modern Writers avouch the same Irenaeus adv Heres lib. 4. cap. 30. Irenaeus Disciple to Polycarpus who was Disciple to John the Divine Apostle sayes Justiantem Patres virtute Decalogi conscriptam habentes in cordibus sâ—is legem The Patriarchs sayes he were justified by vertue of the Law written in their Hearts Again Lib. 3. cap. 4. He speaks of many Nations of the Barbarians of whom they that believe in Christ have Salvation written in their Hearts by the Spirit without Paper or Ink. Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. lib. 7. And sayes Clemens Alexandrinus who lived in the same Century Ye are made of him to be Righteous as he is Righteous and leavened of the Holy Ghost Orig. Epist ad Rom. L. 4. c. 4. And Origen also tells us Therefore Christ Justified them only who have betaken themselves to a New Life by the Example of his Resurrection and have cast away the Old Garments of Unrighteousness and Iniquity as the Cause of Death Thus far of Fathers Of the Reformers from Popery H. Bullenger Decad. 1. Serm. 6. de Justif H. Bullenger thus To justifie signifieth to remit Offences that is as I distinguisht the first part but hear what followeth to cleanse to sanctifie and to give utterance of Life Everlasting Again Justification is taken in this present Treatise for the Absolution and Remission of Sins for Sanctification and Adoption into the Number of the Sons of God D. Barns's Works p. 243 244 245. To him I will add D. Barnes Burnt in Henry the Eighth's Dayes who in his Discourse of the True Church against the Romish Bishops asserts in full and pathetical Expressions That what gives her Acceptance in the Sight of God is her being presented to God by Christ her Head without Spot through the Washing of Regeneration B. Downam of Justif chap. 1. So Bishop Downam of Justification distinguisheth and determineth this Point almost in the very same Terms I will conclude with some Passages out of J. Spirgg's Book entituled A Testimony to an Approaching Glory J. Sprig Test p. 81 82 83 84 85 88 89. We may be bold to say after Christ That Flesh profitteth nothing If you only know Christ's Dying and Rising without you it will profit you nothing except you have him Dying and Rising within you Error in this is the Root of the Dead Faith whereof the World is full Paul doth not say that the Hearing that Christ dyed for the Sins of Men doth make them free No there was the Spirit of Life in Christ Jesus Here is that which puts a Difference when the Spirit of Jesus Christ brings the Covenant to the Heart of a poor Creature when the Spirit of Adoption and Sonship revealing us God as our Father revealing God in Vnion with us our Righteousness and our Strength he doth indeed seal us to the Day of Redemption He sets apart Christ's Sheep this distinguisheth them from the other So that if you lay your Salvation upon an Historical Christ ye will be deceived If you will have that in which you may confide you must have Christ revealed in you in the Spirit This is the sum of all I desire to commend unto you that we are not justified we are not sanctified by Christ's dying by Christ's suffering in the Flesh only That is not the compleat Ministration of our Salvation There indeed we see our Salvation as in a Glass and it is transacted as in a Figure as in the History but then are we actually sanctified wher as God doth send that same Spirit of Adoption into our Hearts revealing unto us the Love of the Father and revealing unto us our Reconciliation that Reconciliation that was held forth to us on the Cross but which is dispensed unto us by our being offered up upon the Cross as Christ was All these Persons put great Value upon the Inward Work of God and Christ in the Heart and plainly determine Sanctification and Justification to be one and the same thing but if any one have the Preference the Scripture it self gives it to Sanctification 1 Cor. 6. 11. Know ye not that the Vnrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God Be not deceived neither Fornicators nor Idolaters nor Adulterers nor Effeminate nor Abusers of themselves with Mankind nor Thieves nor Covetous nor Drunkards nor Revilers nor Extortioners shall inherit the Kingdom of God and such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ye are justified in the Name of the Lord Jesus and the Spirit of our God H. Grotius expounds the word sanctified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 accepistis spiritum sanctum ye have received the Holy Ghost and the word Justified majores quotidie in justitia fecistis progressus ye have made daily greater progress in Righteousness And D. Hammond in his Annotations upon the fifth Chapter of the second Epistle to the Corinthians interprets 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Righteousness a being first sanctified and then justified To end this Chapter serious Reader It is our Faith that Christ to conform us to his Heavenly Image who have
making the meer Body only to have dyed which not being the intire Christ of God it was not He but his Body only that dyed So that either J. Faldo holds the meer Body to be the Christ or else that something more dyed then the meer Body But because he acknowledgeth the Deity could not dye nor that the Soul did dye it must follow that the Body only dyed And since he will strictly have it that the Christ of God dyed the meer Body must be the Christ of God His second Exception is very trivial and what in it can be thought to deserve an Answer is included in what was said before for whom might be attributed to the Body as it represented the whole or intire Christ that is Metonymically spoaken the Thing containing for the Thing contained which is very frequent in Scripture for many times that is ascribed to the Body of Jesus which belongs to the whole Christ This with abundance more of pertinent Answer he takes no more notice of then if it had never been written But a little to give J. F. his Humor and to see if the Upshot rises higher then which What doth he understand by the Person slain according to J. F's own distinctions Was it the Godhead That he denyes first Book part 2. p. 73. Was it the Man's Soul No Reply p. 78. Must it not be the Body then And if so What Corrupting of Scripture is it to say which ye slew instead of whom ye slew 'T is at this slender trifling rate he hath dealt with us throughout the Controversie Two Passages more before we conclude this Chapter Upon my recollecting the whole of this Argumentation and concluding thus Since the Divinity could not dye and the Man's Soul was not Mortal much less could be hanged on a Tree or put into a Sepulchre it follows That it was the visible Body only that dyed c. and that it is therefore the intire Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ in J. F's as well as Blasphemous L. Muggleton's Sense he makes this Reply word for word Reply p. 78. But if it follows upon my Sense it follows upon the words and scope of the Scripture which saith the same in so many words and in sense a Hundred Times But there is no such abâ—urdity follows upon either The Soul can't dye cannot therefore the Man dye If not there is no such thing as killing of Men or mortal Men. Rejoynder Man cannot properly be said to dye whilst his Soul lives but he may be said to cease to be in this Visible World or to depart out of it and to lay down his mortal Body so that the Body dyes but not the Man I know it is a common Phrase but synecdochically spoken where that is ascribed to the whole Man which only belongeth to the Mortal part of Man This brings the Business no nearer then it was before for if I understand any thing the Comparison makes the Death of Christ to be the Death of his Body only and that it is call'd the Death of Christ instead of the Death of the Body of Christ from that familiar usage in Speech the Thing contained for the Thing containing that is Christ instead of the Body of Christ In short Because such Murderers who are said to kill Men kill only the Bodies of Men those Jews who crucified Christ properly crucified the Body of Christ only though in a more mysuical Sense they may be also said in that very Action to have murdered the Prince of Life and Glory 1 Cor. 2. His other Passage containeth a Reflection upon my saying that Souls could not be hanged on a Tree Reply pag. 79. I had thought that the Soul being Vnited with the Body till Death where-ever the Body was disposed the Soul was also and therefore the Body so long as it liveth hanging on a Tree the Soul hangs there too also many a poor Wretch can tell him at the Torment of Execution that his Doctrine is False for were but their Souls separated from their Bodies they would feel no Pain nor cry out of their Torment Rejoynder A very Shuffie and nothing to the Purpose The Soul is in the Body so long as the Body is alive upon the Tree and yet it self not strictly hanged on the Tree for if it were then would it be as impossible for the Soul as Body to free it self whilst the Soul by his own Allowance is incomparable and impossible because immaterial whereas Nales Ropes or any other Instruments of Cruelty can only fasten upon material things for if the Soul could be properly hanged she could as well be burnt and laid into a Sepulchre A Man might as well say if J. Faldo were hanged on a Tree his Watch in his Pocket would be hanged or if he were put in the Stocks his Understanding would be in the Stocks Nor hath any poor Wretch reason to complain of my Doctrine at their Executions for I never denyed that Pain was a Sign of the Soul 's not being separated since it is an undeniable Reason why it is not separated however it is not the Soul but the Body through that sensibility the Soul while unseparated continues in it which feels that Pain But I could tell J. Faldo of many Blessed Martyrs that in the midst of Flames were carryed above the Sense of Pain not because their Souls were not in their Bodies at the Stake but from the exceeding Joy of the Holy Spirit which by the way may as well be said to be tyed to the Stake as the Soul because in the Soul for that is the Conclusion of J. F's Argument The Soul is in the Body therefore the Soul is as well tyed as the Body the Holy Spirit and his Comforts are in the Soul therefore tyed as well to the Stake as either Body or Soul In short Souls may be hanged upon Trees as Souls in Scripture are said to dye or be slain an Hebrew Phrase not that Souls really did dye or were slain but that Man is called many times by his nobler Part. I shall conclude this Chapter with a few Reasons for the Hope that is in us concerning the Subject Matter of this Chapter and two or Three Testimonies in Confirmation of them which I offer with all Tenderness of Conscience unto my serious Reader First This Opinion of our Adversary's renders Christ not to have been the Saviour of the World from Abel's Day contrary to Scripture which teacheth us to believe That there was never another Name or Power by which Men could be saved then the Name and Power of Jesus Christ Acts 4. 12. Secondly It makes Christ's Words either an Equivocation or a Contradiction when he said unto the Jews Before Abraham was I am since it makes him that was before Abraham and him that said so not the same Person or Being rather Thirdly Because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Anointed hath a Relation to his being King Priest and Prophet which are both of a
which are Heavenly and as we have born the Image of the Earthy we shall also bear the Image of the Heavenly v. 44 45 46 47 48 49. I say this doth not concern the Resurrection of carnal Bodies but the two States of Men under the first and second Adam Men are sown into the World natural and so they are the Sons of the first Adam but they are raised spiritually through him who is the Resurrection and the Life so they are the Sons of the second Adam the Lord from Heaven the quickning Spirit The very Words of the Apostle undeniably prove this to be the Scope how else could the first Adam's being made a living Soul and the second Adam a Quickning Spirit be a pertinent Instance to prove Natural and spiritual Bodies upon which follows that the Natural was first that is the first Adam and then that which is spiritual which is the second Adam the quickning Spirit the Lord from Heaven who came to raise up the Sons of the first Adam from their Dead to his Living their Natural to his Spiritual Estate But perhaps it will be objected that the 47th Verse The first Man is of the Earth Earthy and part of the 9th Verse We shall also bear the Image of the Heavenly seem to imply a bodily Resurrection But let the whole Verses be considered and we shall find no such thing The first Man is of the Earth Earthy The second Man is the Lord from Heaven who sees not that this is rather spoken of the Earthy-Mindedness then the Earthy Body of Adam It was mentioned to show the great Disparity that is between the Nature and Qualification of the first and second Adam the following Verse puts this Interpretaion out of Doubt as is the Earthy such are they that are Earthy and as is the Heavenly such are they also that are Heavenly For those Words We shall also bear the Image of the Heavenly I cannot see how they should relate to the Resurrection of the Carnal Bodies of Men for the Image of the Heavenly is a renewed State to God through the Operation of the Spirit and Power of Christ the first Part of the Verse clears it and as we have born the Image of the Earthy we shall or rather let us bear the Image of the Heavenly as Ambrose and Theophilact read it and six or seven Copies besides have it which is as much as to say That as we having born the Image of the God of this World by becoming his Children so may we bear the Image of the True and Living God by being redeemed from a vain Conversation having our Consciences sprinkled from dead Works and being born again of the incorruptible Seed by the Word of God which lives and abides forever Had this concerned the Resurrection in our Adversary's Sense the Image would be changed wholy Accidents would not serve his Turn therefore not the same Image unless the Earthy could be the Heavenly Image which were Impossible for we should loose our Earthly Bodies at what time we become the Image of the Heavenly in this World if this conceit had any Truth in it and if of the other they to be sure must never enter for another takes Place But as it was never understood so by any that I know of but evermore of that Earthly Image which came by transgression and the Heavenly Image that comes in obeying the Truth by the Spirit according to what the Apostle saith Col. 3. 8 9 10. But now you also put off all these Anger Wrath Blasphemy filthy Fornication out of your mouths lye not one to another seeing that you have put off the old Man with his Deeds and have put on the new Man which is renewed in Knowledge after the Image of him that created him So till the natural Man that is sown comes to dye to his own Image Will and Affections he can never be quickned into this Glorious Image of the second Adam the quickning Spirit who is the Lord from Heaven But suppose it were to be understood rather of Bodies then Souls the Text may be as well translated a Living as a Natural Body is sown yea rather so for the Word is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Animale that imports as much as a Soulâ—-Body and such an one I dare say J. Faldo would not be willing to sow except he had a Mind to be buried alive So Clarius both translates it and interprets it Corpus animale accipiendum est cui anima vitam prestat ne intereat i. e. A Souly or Living Body is that to whom the Soul gives Life that it doth not dye But to go farther suppose the Apostle treated of a natural Change and not only of the spiritual State of the Soul in this Life yet can it be extended no farther then this when good Men lay down this Earthly House or Tabernacle of Clay the Image that came to us from Adam's Loyns we shall be cloathed upon of Immortality received into the Building that is Eternal in the Heavens and be made like unto his glorious Body 2 Cor. 5. 1. Philip. 3. 21. We sow a natural we reap a spiritual and we sow not that Body which shall be but God giveth a Body as pleaseth him 1 Cor. 15. 37 38. I also parralelled my Adversary's Change yet Sameness of Bodies with the Popish Transubstantiation showing that the Absurdity Protestants Charge upon this is equally chargeable upon that only with this Distinction that the Papists deny it to continue a Wafer after Consecration but J. Faldo asserts the spiritual Body to be the same carnal Body after Mutation which is a Kind of Consubstantiation and far more ridiculous But of this he took no notice and his Silence is prudent Things unanswerable are better unmedled with then cited and not confuted He knows who pasâ— for wise Men by holding their Tongues I wish that were his greatest Fault I will conclude this Head with a few Testimonies in Defence of what we have said against J. Faldo's Carnal Resurrection referring my Reader to my Chapters of the Resurrection both against him in my Answer and my Book against T. Hicks entituled Reason against Railing and particularly the second Part of a Discourse that we hope will suddenly be publisht call'd The Christian-Quaker for his fuller Satisfaction of our Scriptural Judgment and our Adversary's fleshly Apprehension concerning the Resurrection H. More Myst God p. 221 224 225. Dr. H. More the Cantabridgian Philosopher begins his Discourse of the Resurrection with this Censure of J. Faldo's We come now to the second particular propounded the Resurrection of the Dead which I dare say the Atheist will listen to with more then ordinary Attention and greedily suck in the Doctrine provided it be stated with the most curious Circumstances that the RIDGIDEST OF THEOLOGERS will describe it by that we shall have the same NUMERICAL Bodies in which we lived here on
47. pag. 101. T. Ienner a Presbyter-Independent Priest of Ireland writ a Book against us for Gain for he went from House to House of many sufficient and some great Men to present them some gave him a Crown some two Crowns some a Piece Among others he had the Confidence and Avarice to give one to the Lord Lt. of that Kingdom His Secretary carryed it to him he turning it over observed many black Charges of foulest and most pernicious Errors to Religion and Civil Government The Parson still stayed The Secr. thought he had favored him sufficiently but not understanding the Priests Aim that is Lucre the Old Priests Sin was prest to tell his Lord that he waited for his Excellencies Answer The Secretary was so civil as to answer his Desire But when the Lord Lt. understood his Drifâ— he returned the Book to the Parson with this Account That be was sorry to bear that the Quakers held such ill Principles but the Tares and the Wheat must grow together till the Day of ludgment So the Parson was corrected for his Baseness and disappointed of the great Bone he crept thither for Leg. alledg l. 1. Admonâ— ad Gent. Strom. l. 5. pag. 48. See Dr. Bilsons and the Heads and Doctors of Oxford against the Brownists Gifford against H. Barrow R. Bernard against Brownism answered by I. Robinson and Ball against I. Cann c. Rob. Nor. his Ans to Syd Sym. Excomm pag. 8. * An odd unsound Phrase Acts 1. 2 Tim. 3. 16. Job 23. 8 1. Cor. 2. Ephes 1 T. C Works page 249. I. John 1 To call any Day of the Week a Christian-Sabbath is not Christian but Iewish give us one Scripture for it I will give two against it Gal. 4. 9 10 11 12. where the Apostle makes their Observation or Preference of Dayes to be no less then a Token of their Turning from the Gospel Also Col. 2. 16. An outward Sabbath or keeping of a Day to be but a Shadow and that Christians ought not to be judged for rejecting such Customs for this very Reason the Protestant-Churches beyond the Seas generally deny the Morality of the First Day counting all Dayes alike in themselves only they have Respect to the First Day as an Apostolical Custom and think it convenient to give one Day of Rest from Labour to Man and Beast each Week Of this Mind several Learned Protestants of our own Country have declared themselves to be So that neither our English Episcopalians nor French Presbyterians can escape Iohn Faldo's Consequence any more then the Quakers for if those that deny the Supper Baptism and the first day of the Week to be the Christian Sabbath deny Gospel-Ordinances then those who deny the First Day of the Week J. F's Christian-Sabbath to be the Christian-Sabbath must needs deny a Gospel-Ordinances but that doth many English Episcopalians and most French Presbyterians therefore both several English Episcopalians and the generallity of the French Presbyter and are Denyers of a Gospel-Ordinance Consequently J. F. told an Untruth in his Preface when he assured both Episcopalian and Presbyterian that they were no further concerned in his Discourse then vindicated In short Though we assert but one Christian-Sabbath and believe that to be the Everlasting Day of Rest from all our own Works to Worship and Enjoy God in the Newness of the Spirit yet 't is well known that we both meet upon the First Day in the Week and behave our selves with as In-offensive a Conversation as any of our Sabbatherian Adversaries The Honour is God's by whom we are what we are but this Testimony I record for God His Gopel and Right-begotten Children that the Meats Drinks Washings and Dayes observing Christians are not come so far as those foolish Galatians for â—hom the Apostle travelled again until Christ were formed in them Gal. 4. 19. being yet Stranger to the Life Power Spirit and the Substance of the Gospel * See Iudas and the Iews comb again Chri. * See Iudas and the Iews comb against Christ c. John 14. 10. Mat. 10. 20. See my Answ pag. 133. Rom. 8. 13. 14. Math. 7. 27. 23. Heb. 12. 14. John 3. 3. 5. Gal. 6 7 8 9. Dan. 9. 24. A. Sadeel Oper. pag. 37. Rom. 3. 25. 2 Cor. 5. 19 20. Psal 16. 11. * What sayes J. F. to this Is it not beyond what E. B. said of a Report of Christ H. Grot. in Epist 1 Cor. Phil. 2. 8. Christ was the Eternal Light before Iohn testified of him See Book called Annotations of certain learned Divines in the Year 1645 on Ioh. 1. verse 9. Gen. 45. 8. Plat. Pol. 1. Isa 2. 3. Clem. Al. Admo ad Gent. p. 2. Strom. l. 2. See Rom. 8. 9 10 11. where the Spirit of Christ and Christ are equivâ—â—ently taken E. B.'s Works p. 144. Homo rationabilis factus irrationabiliter vivens amisit rationem tradidit se terraâ—o spiritui Psalm 48. 21. vide Irraeneus P. 336. i. e. A Man who is made reasonable living unreasonably hath lost his Reason having given himself up to an Earthly Spirit * If it be objected that Adam is not mentioned as degenerated but as created and therefore this Interpretation will not do I answer 't is true he is said to be made a living Soul but first this makes not for the Resurrection of dead Bodies and so far our Adversary gets no Strength 2ly Though the Apostle beings with the first Adam's Creation yet he orderly comes to the Earthly Image that the living Soul put on by Disobedience which introduceth the Necessity of the coming of the second Adam and his Quickning Spirit to create a new bring into the Image of God So there is Adam as sown and his Posterity representatively in him and his and their Laps and then the Restoration by him that is the Resurrection and the Life the second Adam the Lord from Heaven however Annot. cert Divin anno 1645. * Note Reader that our Translation is erroneous Iob 19. 32. whom mine Eyes shall behold In the Hebrew thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. mine Eyes have seen the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vidit doth see as Drusius and Cadurcus observe * Oh the Angry Countenances the Wicked will have on that Day Oh the Angry Speeches It may be from Words they fall to Blows and tear one another Hair and spurn at one anothers Bellies bite one anothers Flesh and even claw out one anothers Eyes Dr. Barnea I. Brad. I. Calv. B. Iew. VV. Perk. VV. Green I. Car D. Owen with a Hundred more of this Mind admir'd by such as I. F. yet that Doctrine derided by him in us particularly I. de VVessalia No Man can know the Mind of Christ which he holds forth in his words but he alone Paradox in Fasc Rer. p. 163. Book 1. Part 3. pag. 50. Balaam's Ass shall rise up in Judgment against J. F. B. 1. P. 1. p. 107. p. 39 80 107. p. 109. P. 2. p. 20. B. 1. P. 1. p. 8. P. 2. p. 21. p. 22. p. 126. P. 3. p. 37. Book 1. Part 1. pag. 31 32 33 34 35 36. Part 3. from p. 62. to 90. Psalm 85 9 10.
David no Christian who was a Man after God's own Heart Neither can I believe with him that the Apostle's Exhortation Phil. 4. Whatsoever things are True Honest Just Pure Lovely of Good Report if there be any Praise think on these things is no Part of Christianity or that a Man may be a Saint and not a Christian or that a Child of God is not a Good Christian or that James was mistaken who said That the Pure and Vndefiled Religion was to keep our selves unspotted of the World which strange kind of Consequences unavoidably follow from J. Faldo's Assertion and Definition For our Parts As we think it no Wrong to Christianity so no Discredit to our Cause that it should be reported that we believe the Word nigh in the Heart the Apostle Paul calls the Word of Faith and Reconciliation to have been preached by Moses that Chist the Promised Seed bruised the Serpent's Head as well before as at and since his Visible Appearance That Enoch when he walked with God walked in the Light in which he felt the Blood of Christ cleansing from all Sin That the Spirit of God strove with Men as well before Christ's Coming as since and that some were led by it before as well as since and therefore Children of God and if Children then Heirs Heirs of God and Joynt-Heirs with Christ Not that we deny a Preheminence to Christ's Visible Coming â—nd the greater Benefits that came into the World thereby we would not be thought so to mean at no hand only this that something of that Divine Life Power Wisdom and Righteousness that then so super-excellently appeared and broak forth was revealed in all former Ages as Mankind was in a Capacity to receive it wherefore the Difference lay in the Manifestations of the One Thing necessary and not in several things So that the Law is as it were the Gospel begun and the Gospel the Law finished or as Augustine expresses it Lex est Evangelium absconditum et Evangelium est lex revelata The Law is the Gospel obscured the Gospel the Law revealed That is suited to the Capacity of Ages But J. Faldo is Angry that in my Recital of these words out of his former Discourse But the Thing Christianity might well be before the Name Christian that I left out these following words so short a space Saying I am a Man of a seared Conscience and that it is pitty any Reader should be so tame to be thus imposed on Rejoyn I know not what he means by these last words unless he would have every Man that reads me beat me I have alwayes thought it becoming a Minister of the Gospel to make People Tame and not Wild Sufferers not Hectors but such Expressions very well suit with John Faldo's Religion For my Conscience it is not so seared but I can feel and resent John Faldo's Injustice God knows I left out no words designedly nor could the Insertion of them have disappointed me For if the Thing Christianity may be before the Name a Day then a Year and so an Age till we shall come to the first Man that ever God saved All Men must be saved by either Law or Gospel Now the Law strictly considered could never save it gives Life to none So imports the Scripture and so asserts B. Vsher B. Sanderson Allen and others then it must have been by the Gospel which is by the Apostle called the Power of God unto Salvation and if all Men that were ever saved were saved by the Gospel then True Christians unless Men may believe the Gospel be saved by the Life and Power of it and yet be no Christians that is not the Men the term Christians given first at Antioch doth fignifie I shall offer this short Argument to the Reader 's consideration If He that is born again be a Christian and such as enter into the Kingdom of God be born again then because Abraham Isaac Jacob Samuel David c. entered into God's Kingdom it follows that they were born again and consequently Christians How pernicious is that Principle which denyes the New Birth to be so much as any part of Christianity when indeed the greatest as Christ's own Saying proves The Truth of the Matter is The very Life Power and Spirit of the Gospel or Christianity which to other exteriour Performances is as the Soul to the Body John Faldo would fain exclude from any Share in Christianity and for our preferring and pressing That as the most important Matter he over-runs us with all the Vilifying Scornful Epithetes a Lucian could bestow upon a Christian Indeed his Frothiness is such that were it not for their sakes who may yet be ensnared by his Adventrous and Imperious Assertions and Reflections I should not think his Vindication worth one Minute of my Time But he proceeds Rep. I undertook to prove Quakerism No Christianity from the confessed Newness of it by their own Party Penn tells us p. 21. the first Letters of the Names of some the bare Names of others whose words I quoted but dare not transscribe their words being so fair to my Purpose only a part of Penington's who saith of the Quakers Dispensation that it swallowed up that of Christ and the Apostles which Penn would take off by telling me I have no Candor in so Construing the words as if Penington who was a Schollar could not express his Mind congruously but must have Penn to be his Interpreter Rejoyn Now what any can make of this Cloudy Paragraph that has not read our former Books indeed of the greatest part of his Vindication if then I know not but sure I am he ignorantly or willingly puts the Lye upon himself and greatly berayes his own Weakness Is this your Combatant you that blow him with Pride and Rage that he may only have Wind to Crack out against the Quakers What Reply is this wretched disingenuous Section to my Answer If I quoted not E. Burroughs's and J. Whitehead's words at length and but a few they were I quoted that for which the rest left out were quoted He would fix the beginning of Quakerism about the Year 1651. this was the Drift of his Quotations from whence he concluded Quakerism No Christianity Hear my Answer and by that it will appear how suitable or sufficient his Reply is Well But when came this Quakerism into the World He tells us about the year 1651. quoting E. B's Epistle before G. F's Great Mystery also a small Treatise writ by John Whitehead Isaac Penington from whence he infers that Quakerism is a late Dispensation therefore not that of Christianity But certainly this Man hath taken a very Quick Course to Vnchristian himself and all the Presbyterians Independents and Anabaptists in the World as well as the Quakers For I would ask him if there was not a Time since the Primitive Age wherein Darkness hath overspread the Earth the Beast did Reign and the pure Religion was
on this Passage in Job But there is a Spirit in Man and the Inspiration of the Almighty giveth him Understanding There is no man saith he that doth not partake of the Spirit and from Almighty God and his Spirit Vnderstanding and Wisdom is to be sought Adds Clarius there is no Vnderstanding in men nisi ab altissimo afflentur unless they be inspired from the Most High Drusius is yet clearer Our Eternal Help is from God who illuminates our Minds without whom we are unable to understand any thing in Divine Matters and that inspires men with that Vnderstanding which neither Age nor Industry nor Doctrine of any man can possibly give Cradock a famous Independent-Preacher tells us That if men had all the Sermons that ever they heard recorded in their Memory though some may think them very knowing yet truly they might be miserable confused and blind For that it is the Spirit of God alone in the Heart clears orders assures and settles things yea that the Scripture is a dead and speechless thing without the Spirit of God This sayes he is the exceeding Greatness of the Power of the Spirit of God And it is a wonderful thing to see how quickly the Spirit of God will make a Schollar ripe In short as to him he greatly extolls the Dispensation of the Spirit and pag. 210. ventures at a kind of Prophecy That in these latter times God will exalt his Spirit and throw down every thing that exalts it self against the Spirit and stands in his Light He affirms the Spirit to be within that the Children of God are taught by it for sayes he If thou be a Saint thou hast the Spirit of God as truly dwelling in thee as in the Lord Jesus Christ now Blasphemy and that the Way to know this Spirit to be in us is from its own Evidence and that it is the Way to know it in others too from whence he draws such kind of Conclusions That the Lord Jesus is anointed and so are they we have the same Vnction with Christ we have the same Offices with Christ we have the same Love of God the same Spirit and the same Kingdom with Christ The Church is the Fulness of Jesus Christ It is said of the Oyl that was poured on Aaron It ran upon the Skirts of his Garments so Christ being anointed that Oyl runs on us Nay the least Saint is as real a Prophet Priest and King as the Lord Jesus was for he dwells in him only in all things he must have the Preheminence William Dell no small man in the Account of many who profess not themselves to be Quakers positively saith in Answer to this Objection That men now are not to receive the Spirit in that immediate way to understand the Scriptures in which it was given to them who wrote the Scriptures â—he very Point depending between J. Faldo and me Surely Mr. Simpson will not deny that the Spirit is given to that whole Church which is the Body of Christ seeing Paul saith If any man have not Christ's Spirit he is none of his he is no Member of his Now the Spirit is alwayes given to whomsoever it is given by the Father and the Son as Christ taught his Disciples promising them that the Father would send the Spirit to them in his Name And also that he himself would send it to them from the Father and was this Promise only made to them and not to all the Faithful also Doth not Paul say Rom. 12. 13. of the whole Church that by one Spirit we are all baptized into one Body and are all made to drink into one Spirit because ye are Sons God hath sent the Spirit of his Son into your Hearts crying Abba Father Gal. cap. 4. And do they not receive it alike immediatetly from God Who can give the Spirit of God to Man but God himself When God promised to pour out his Spirit in the last dayes upon all Flesh did he name any Difference in the pouring of it out saying some shall receive it immediately and some mediately No But all who receive it receive it alike immediately from him And by this Spirit saith W. Dell did Holy Men speak the Scripture and by this onely do Holy Men of God understand the Scripture To this Objection that Men now are to get Knowledge to wit of the Scripture by Studies and humane Learning and not by Inspiration still the very matter betwixt us he boldly briefly and smartly answers This Doctrine carryes the visible Mark of Antichrist upon it For it is only the Inspiration of God that enables a man to know the things of God and not a man's Study or humane Learning It is not in this case in him that wills and runs but in God that sheweth Mercy Wherefore Christ hath said No man knoweth the Son but the Father and he to whomsoever the Father will reveal him Wherefore Paul prayes for the Ephesians that God would give them the Spirit of Wisdom and Revelation in the Knowledge of Christ without which Spirit of Revelation Christ and the Father can never be known Wherefore to deny the Inspiration of God's Spirit now is the most gross and palpable Doctrine of Antichrist and his Prophets To confirm what he writes He brings several Testimonies out of Chrisostom Wickliff Tindall 〈◊〉 Luther Latimer and Calvin I will transscribe but two of them Of the Knowledge of the Gospel Zwinglius speaks thus We must needs be taught of God not of Men for this is the Saying of the eternal Truth which knows not how to Lye John 6. Luther gives us his Mind thus The Scriptures are not to be understood but by that very Spirit by which they were writ No man sees one jot or tittle in the Scriptures but he that hath the Spirit of God For all men have a darkened Heart in such sort that if they could speak and know how to bring forth all things of the Scripture yet have they not any true Sense or right Knowledge of them For saith Luther The Spirit is required to the Vnderstanding of the whole Scripture and of every part thereof To this I am willing to add the Testimony of a Famous English Godly and Learned Martyr John Philpot in a Conference with Bishop Bonner in his eleaventh Examination before him and several other Bishops B. Bonner asking what meanest thou by writing in the beginning of thy Bible Spiritus est vicarius Christi in terris The Spirit is Christ's Vicar on Earth Philpot gave him Answer after this manner That Christ since his Ascension worketh all things in us by his Spirit and by his Spirit doth dwell in us Again in Answer to one Morgan who mockingly queried Have you alone the Spirit of God and not we he thus answered I say not that I alone had the Spirit of God But as many as abide in the true Faith of Christ have the Spirit of God as well as I.
Fool in answering of him as he begs Excuse for in Replying to me We affirm with the Scripture that God tabernacles in his Children that Christ dwells in 〈◊〉 People and that the holy Spirit Temples in his Saints He was full of all Grace and Truth and of his Fulness have we received a measure of Grace and Truth and he that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of one After this Way that he calls Heresie know we worship we and enjoy we the God of our Fathers But what was the second Argument by which he endeavoureth to prove we prefer our Writings and Sayings above the Scriptures Rep. My second is their Characters they give of them concerning the Scriptures Feeding Death with Death the Letter which killeth Of their own Sayings The Voice of the Son of God was utter'd forth by him c. Rejoyn I told him before That Death is a State without the living experimental Knowledg of God and his Work in the Heart And that State I said will talk of the Fame of ◠Wisdom as saith the Scripture At this he Scoffs and makes as Merry with it as would some prophane Stager And in the midst of his Desires to be thought Meek to this little piece of a large and sober Answer basely cropt he gives the hard Names of Non-sense Folly and Impious The Scripture justifies me in what I said For Men dead in Trespasses and Sins talk of God and that perhaps according to the Letter of Scripture too why may it not be then said That Death talks of Wisdom as well as Dead Men. But this he calls arriving at as perfect Non-sense as G. Fox himself He would have done better not only to have answered but considered my following words Death or dead men's talking or feeding upon the Words of Scripture being ignorant of the true Sense of the Scripture But it had been vain to have expected this Candor from him In short The Scripture without the Spirit is Dead say some Independents as well as Quakers Men Unregenerate are dead in Sins say all What can such men's Feeding upon the Scriptures be but one dead thing feeding upon another Remember it was Christ that said It was the Spirit alone that quickens But that this Man may shew himself almost irrecoverably gone in Dishonesty because I said There is no Comparison betwixt what God requires and an immediate hearing of his Voice and being sensible of his living Touches upon the Soul Writings are but holy things at second hand He implyes and replyes thus Rep. Their Writings and Sayings they pretend to be perfectly immediate from the Spirit of God But the Scriptures handed through many Ages And therefore there is no Comparison because he affirms theirs to be more immediate Rejoyn Reader Right me in this Matter Was the Comparison betwixt our Writings and Sayings with the Scriptures or any Writings or Sayings and the Immediate Voice and Living Touches upon the Soul Do not I expresly say Writings are but holy things at second hand If so how do I make our Wrings holy things at the first hand Do not I prefer the Voice of God to the Soul and his Immediate Touches upon it as well before our own Writings and Sayings as the holy Scriptures of Truth And who dare deny that heavenly Enjoyment of God to be the blessed End of Writings and Sayings too It is after a manner not less Perverting though much more Scoffing that he deals with my Answer about Our Friends Denying Light to be in Scripture That is said I There is not Living Spiritual Essential Light in the Scriptures Now hear him Rep. Did he not intend his Writings for the View of those only who understand no more Right Reason then a Horse doth Hebrew He could not expect any success in such pittiful Attempts Whatsoever makes manifest is Light saith the Scripture But if there be no Light but according to the Character he gives Candles Stars Moon Sun Reason W. P's Writings also are gross and perfect Darkness Rejoyn This Man would pass both for Just and Rational Just he is not who has left out those very words which remove all Pretence to Scruple viz. That the Scriptures carryed a Descriptive and Declarative Light with them that is a Declaration from and of the divine Light Dares he affirm more or does this deny all other Lights besides the Living Spiritual and Essential Light Unjust Man to leave out that which only could wrong his Adversary and answer his infamous Ends. Besides he abuseth Scripture the Light mentioned in that Passage is the Living Spiritual Light of God in the Conscience as the Verse at length proves viz. That all things that are Reproved are made manifest by the Light for whatsoever makes manifest is Light Again Hear what he sayes to the same Matter Rep. And yet W. P. tells you of the Author of the Quakers Book he writ to give notice of the Day-spring of God's Eternal Light of Life to the World i. e. the Light within that needeth the Light of Farnsworth's Book to be seen by What cannot such a Reconciler do Rejoyn But what cannot such a Scoffer do who dare Affront God and be Injust to Men in the View of the World which is manifested thus First as I denyed a Living Spiritual and Essential Light to be in the Scriptures or any other VVritings so did I acknowledge a Descriptive and Declarative Light to be in them and measurably in other VVritings as well as the Scriptures which he hides from the Reader and then triumphs over a false Consequence Secondly If the Light within needs Rich. Farnsworth's Book as a Light without to be seen by because it is by it testified to the same upon his Argument may be said of God himself who is Light that he needed the Light of the Scriptures to be seen by But what shall I say The man is desperate in his Ventures From my concluding upon his Accusation and my own Answer so that our Adversary's Argument amounts to thus much We therefore prefer our own Writings before the Scriptures because in all our Writings we earnestly endeavour by numerous Quotations to prove what we write to be according to Scripture For this he flyes out into this following Reply Rep. I leave it to my Reader sayes J. Faldo to give a Name to this Passage the like to which for a daring Vntruth the World hath scarcely been ever acquainted with yet the man pretends besides all other Graces to Infallibility In many a large Libel I could produce where there is not one Quotation of Scripture W. Smith often quoted in Quakerism no Christianity in his Directory for Religious Principles consisting of above Two Hundred Pages hath not one Scripture quoted not one Exhortation to read the Scriptures But as his main Scope denyes and throws Dirt upon them Rejoyn Reader right a poor People once Never I think did man so slander Persons
Rule and Controversie on foot were manifestly implyed especially when I made no Advantage to my self by it But every such little thing must be called by a hard Name or John Faldo would have little to write and but a few to believe his Books But to the Point avoiding many Occasions for severe Reflection Perhaps he grants us what we can desire For upon my asserting that what was and is more general then the Scriptures is most properly the General Rule he replies Rep. I never affirmed them to be a general Rule nor is it that I charge the Quakers for denying but I charge them with denying them to be any Rule at all of Faith and Life he mistakes the Question and yields my Charge to be their Principle and pleads for it p. 54. Rejoyn If that be not the Question how have I granted the Question Do I plead for his Charge because I plead against the Scriptures being the General Rule p. 54. which he sayes is no part of the Charge and what himself undertakes not to contradict But sure I am if the Scriptures be not the General Rule as he implies and thereby cuts his own Throat and grants to the Quakers the Question as largely as needs to be They are not The Rule by way of Excellency or the Rule by which God's People in all Ages have walked for that was and is General So that the Scripture upon his own Concession is but a particular Rule and therefore must be subservient to the Spirit who is the great Evangelical Rule as are many other Instruments that have been made use of upon several Occasions He might have learn'd thus much in p. 53. of my Answer where I say that we acknowledge the Scriptures to contain many Holy Rules for Godliness I would know of him how that could be and yet deny them to be a Rule in any sense But we have good Reason to deny them to be the Rule of Faith and Judge of Controversies who can neither give nor govern Faith nor Judge of Controversies as the many different Perswasions in the World fully prove for then all that have the Scriptures would be of one Perswasion as it is most certain those are who have and walk by the One Spirit VVherefore since the Scriptures themselves testifie to the Spirit as the great Judge Rule and Leader especially under the New Covenant where the Law is not written on Tables of Stone much less Paper but of Flesh to wit the Hearts of the Sons and Daughters of Men the Spirit and not the Scripture must be the Rule of Faith and Judge of Controversie In short The Scripture cannot try a present Motion or Prophecy Bad Spirits are wholely hid from it For Instance Paul reproved not the Spirit that cryed These are the Servants of the Most High God that shew unto us the VVay of Eternal Life from the Scriptures neither did Peter Deceitful Ananias but from the heavenly Instinct and Savour Relish or Discerning they received from the Spirit of God within them 'T was in a Case of such Difficulty that some in these late Times have writ That the Scripture gave no general standing Rule for all particular Cases in fleeing or standing in Times of Persecution but that it was the Frame of the Spirits of the People of God to retire at that season which whether it be true or false that the Spirit of God did so influence them two things are undeniable first That it was the Frame of their Spirits witness their Practice secondly That the Scripture was not sufficient for them to square themselves by on that Occasion And what else do Professors mean when they advise People to seek the Lord in this or the other Case why do they not go seek the Scriptures rather Doth not such a Practice manifestly detect the Scriptures of Insufficiency and evidently prove their Acknowledgment both of Revelation and their Recourse to a more Living Spiritual Immediate and Sufficient Rule VVhy else do they seek God's Mind say they by Prayers not formal but by the Spirit But this is become despised Heresie with J. Faldo For Faith in his Sense rises no higher then so many Articles laid down suppose truly according to the bare Letter of the Scriptures which the Devil can believe as well as he This Faith I call meerly Verbal and Historical of which the Scripture may be a Rule but not of Saving Faith for of that Faith only the Spirit can be the Rule and why because the Spirit of God alone reveals him to the Soul who is the Object of Faith and works Faith in the Soul upon that Object and as this only begets Faith so it increases enlivens rules governs and strengthens Faith unto Dominion This alone unfolds those Mysteries spoak of in the Scriptures Wherefore answered the Eunuch unto Philip when he queried Understandest thou what thou readest How should I unless 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I had a guide as sayes our old English Translation which implies That the things declared of by the Scriptures are not to be understood from the Scriptures but a more Living Spiritual and Certain Guide Wherefore we affirm That Repentance Faith Sanctification Justification Redemption Regeneration c. are all a Mystery never to be disclosed but by the Revelation and Operation of the Spirit of God in Man the Scripture can only testfie to such things that they are but it is the Spirit alone that works them and illuminates guides governs and rules the Soul in and about such things 'T is true all the Spirit leads to is according to the Scriptures it overturns them not for they declare of most of these Operations yet because we believe know and witness them from the Conviction and Operation of the Spirit before we can possibly understand them in Scripture therefore the Scripture is but a Declaration and not the Rule of Faith c. And the only best way to determine any Controversie on foot about Repentance Faith Sanctification Justification c. is the Judgment of that Spirit which works them For how can the Scripture that has so many Meanings put upon it determine which of those meanings is the true Let them shew me that Scripture that plainly and uninterpretatedly tells me such a Proposition is True and such a one is False that consists only of their additional Meanings such a new Nick-named People right and such wrong and they do their Business if they cannot as it is impossible they should they must have recourse to something else to rule determine and what can that be besides that Eternal Spirit which worked the true Faith and ruled the holy Life of those Ancients who gave forth this Declaration of Faith and Life Can any Man tâ—ll another's Mind better then himself or resolve any Doubt or clear up any Mis-understanding concerning what is delivered better then he that spoak it To understand those holy Men's Mind and disprove them that mistake it
there is an unavoidable necessity of coming to that Spirit which made it theirs 'T is granted that all True Doctrine is according to Scripture but the Question is What is true Doctrine Scripture is a strong Testimony but what enlightens the Mind resolves Doubts and works Faith and informs guides and helps the Soul through the whole Work of Conversion and without which the Testimony of Scripture it self is truly an unintelligible and an incredible thing This must be nothing less then the Spirit it self In short The Scripture is not the Rule but Declaration of Faith and Knowledge That only must be the Rule of Faith which gave and ruled the Faith of those that gave forth Scripture And because none can give or work Faith now but what did give and work Faith then 't is not the Scripture but that which was before the Scripture even the Spirit of Truth which was the Author Rule and Finisher of their Faith And if our Faith in this Age be the same with the holy Men's of old that gave forth the Scriptures they are no more our Rule now then they were theirs then who had a Rule and a Faith before them But as it was a Declaration of what they believed knew and witnessed so it is a Declaration of what we now believe and desire to know and witness John's Epistle was not writ to be the Saints Rule for he directed them to the Anointing yet their Faith and Life of which the Anointing was the Rule was according to John's Epistle Agaiâ— The Declaration in time was after the Faith declared of but where there was Faith there was a Rule consequently that Declaration which was after that Faith and Rule was not that Rule so that the most that can be said against us is this The Scriptures cannot be a Declaration of your Faith till you come to such a Belief of the Truth 's thereby expressed as they had who writ them and a great Truth it is But then say we The Spirit must work that Faith before the Scriptures can be accounted a Declaration of our Faith or we interested in them And because that Faith has a Rule so soon as it has a being it must needs follow that the Declaration of that Faith cannot be either the Author or Rule of it Here lies the Mistake of my Adversary and many more that because what a Man does is according or agreeable to a thing therefore that is the Rule of the thing done To proceed For this reason it is a Constraint lies upon us from God to direct and exhort all People diligently to mind that Measure of the Holy Spirit which God hath given them to profit with as that alone by which Man comes to a certain Knowledge of his Mind and Will and to do the good and acceptable Thing in his Sight and that by which his poor labouring Mind is brought out of the Incertainties numerous Interpretations vain Janglings Men have pesterâ—d the World withal who have darkened Counsel and bewildered many in their Conscientious Enquieries after God drawing out their Minds from the seasoning Principle of Life instead of bringing them nearer to the Lord for which great and heavy Plagues hang over the Head of this Generation who make War against the Spirit with the Letter instead of confirming its Appearance from the Letter and under Pretence of calling the Scriptures the Word of God and Rule of Faith and Life divert People from Waiting for the Word nigh unto themselves which is the Word of Faith and gives Life to all that believe and obey it decrying us as Seducers and deriding us as Euthusiastick Canters because we prefer and turn all to the Spirit of Life within an Out-side Carnal Envious and Hypocrical Generation as it is I will conclude this Head with a Passage out of some certain Authors that were never professed nor reputed Quakers Wherefore they who are true Believers sayes the first and have received Christ's Spirit their Judgment is to be preferred in the Tryal of Spirits before a whole Council of Clergy-Men And they only who can try Spirits by the Spirit of God and Doctrines by the Word of God written in their Hearts by the Spirit can in measure discern all Spirits in the World And the Spirit of Christ which dwells in all true Christians cannot deceive nor be deceived in the Tryal of Spirits With abundance more to the same purpose The other brings in Two Objections frequently made against us and by him pertinently answered for us Object 1. It is said Isa 8. 20. To the Law and to the Testimony if any Man speak not according to this Word it is because there is no Light in him Answ Truth there is the Law and Testimony in the Spirit as well as in the Letter The Law of God is in the Heart there it is written and there it testifies the Truth of God and if any Man speak not according to this Rule it is because there is no Light or Morning risen in him The Spiritual Man judgeth all things yet he himself is judged of no Man Object 2. It is said Gal. 6. 16. That whoso walketh according to this Rule Peace upon him Answ True but that is not the Rule of the Letter but of the Spirit even the Rule of the New Man which after God is created in Righteousness and true Holiness Read the Words before and you shall see it There is nothing of any Value but the New Creature And whosoever walketh according to This Rule Peace shall be upon him c. And truly my Brethren it is my earnest Desire to see Souls to live more in the Spirit and less in the Letter and then they will see that we judge of the Letter by the Spirit and not of the Spirit by the Letter which occasions so much Ignorance amongst us and those who profess themselves to be our Teachers are chief in this Trespass Observe this J. Faldo Again The Spirit of God who is God is the ALONE RULE of a spiritual Christian c. Further declaring That some setting the Scriptures in the room of the Spirit they make them an Idol Ibid. p. 248. Let him either discard these Men from being Christians that were reputed great and refined Professors before the Breaking forth of the People called Quakers or leave off censuring this part of our Doctrine as no part of Christianity Nor have we any Ground to believe that they were intended for the Rule at first since they were not given forth all at one time and yet every Age stood in need of such a Rule but on divers Occasions as Miscarriages in the Churches Threatning of Judgments Prophecies Histories and Comfortings under Afflictions c. required Nor do they carry the least Method or Designment of the great Rule with them here they are Proper there Figurative in one thing Literal in another Allegorical without all Definition of Terms framing of Articles such Plainness and
things which they received of the Apostles therefore to understand the Scriptures in those things which are necessary to Salvation for those things those Believers had received of the Apostles With much to the same Purpose in that Chapter I could produce many more Testimonies from Great and Famous modern Writers besides the Pathetical Expressions of a multitude of Martyrs both English and Forreign as well famous for their Learning as great Fidelity that express themselves fully in Defence of our Assertion That to bring Men and Women to the Obedience of the Everlasting Word nigh in the Heart is so far from being repugnant to or undervaluing of the holy Scriptures as without their Acquaintance with it and Conformity to it they can never be read by any with Instruction and Comfort But if God please there may be a time for our more full Disquisition of this Point But be thinks to supply his Wilful Omission and Disingenuous Carriage about my Answer to the ill use he made of my other Proof by reflecting upon my Honesty in transscribing his Second taken out of our Friend James Parnâ—ll his Book entituled The Shield of the Truth pag. 10. because I added not these words Seeking the Living among the Dead at the end of this Sentence By the same Light do we discern him to be in Darkness who putteth the Letter for the Light and so draw People's Minds from the Light within them to the Light without them And as if he had fully obtain'd his Will upon us by making us speak what he untruly sayes we own and practice he goes on This needs no Comment to render its Proof valid and is out of the Reach of the utmost stretch of Penn ' s Wit and Confidence to put any Appearance of another Construction upon it But methinks this Sound renders him very Empty It must be a very plain Case if not so much as the Appearance of another Construction can be made upon it then what he would have it to import but I am wholely of another mind and that there is no Difficulty in making a very free and sufficient Defence for the Passage I ought to take it for granted that the whole of his Objection lies against the Words I omitted inasmuch as he pretends not to reply to my Vindication of the former part of the Sentence which was to this purpose That by turning People to the Light of Christ we did not teach them to undervalue but how they should most truly understand and value the Scriptures that the Spirit was more excellent then the Letter the Power then the Form of Godliness yet both Letter and Form to be respected in their place and that we only took our Aim against such as put the Letter in the Place of the Spirit thereby keeping People from the Holy Spirit by which alone the Scriptures are read and understood unto Edâ—fication and Comfort My Adversary I say taking no notice of this I must think he had nothing to say saving his Charge of the fore-mention'd Omission To which thus much It was not designed I took and defended the Substance of the Passage For I would faiâ— know what Life is to be had in the Letter without the Aâ—â—â—stance of the Light or Spirit of Christ If then the Letter is Dead without the Spirit which is Old Protestant Doctrine Can it be any thing else then seeking the Living among the Dead to draw People from the Light and Spirit of Christ within to seek for Life in the meer Letter without â—or so the Question ran This was the State of the Jewish Church in her Apostacy and is the Condition of Thousands at this very day who under Pretence of Honouring the Scriptures despise grieve and in a sense quench the Spirit that gave them forth for which God is wroth with the false Christian and his Religion Worship is an Abomination in his Sight and great sudden will be their Distress for his Indignation is kindled aud his Fury ready to be revealed and in that day shall such lofty Boasters as my Adversary be brought â—â—ow their Spirits faint and Hearts fall within them â—at what time the Light Spirit and Life of Jesus shall be unto all that trust therein a Rock of Everlasting Strength an immoveable Foundation and Sanctuary full of Comfort Peace and Joy forever And indeed this thing â—oth so deeply affect my Soul that I cannot refrain from â—rying Wo Wo Wo against all such Watchmen of the Night who rack their Wits for Tales and Stories to care well-meaning and devout People from the Enjoyâ—ent of the Life Vertue and Substance of the Scripâ—ures Nick-naming that only Way by which so great â—nd heavenly Benefit can ever be procured I mean the â—nspiration of the Almighty with such hateful Terms â—s Enthusiasm Quakerism Familism a more refined â—rt of Ranterism c. and what else may keep them â— their Snare stop their Enquiery and render the â—iving Eternal Truth of God odious in their Sight â—etter were it for such that they had never been born then â—nder Pretence of being Ministers of the Gospel to â—urder the Life and Spirit of it estranging the minds of People from that unchangeable Covenant instead of inâ—teresting them in it thereby manifestly depriving their Souls of blessed and Eternal Priviledges They are like Troops of Robbers indeed as the Prophet anciently said they murder by Consent most of them combining against the in-dwelling Life of Jesus and immediate Springings and Flowings forth of his Spirit in the Hearts of his Children Let it never be forgotten that the first Murderer was a Sacrificer and the deadliest Persecutor a Pharisee Nor has there been a more Venemous Enrag'd Blood-thirsty Generation of Men then the Formal Literal Professor who ever called God Father and Christ Beelzebub who crucified his Son and persecuted the Apostles reputing them Mad Men that is Phanaticks or Enthusiasts Seditious Fellows Sect-Masters Introducers of New Doctrines Innovators upon the Church Turners of the World up-side down in fine Despisers of the VVritings of the Law and the Prophets while they themselves thought to have Eternal Life therein being of the Circumcision Sons of Abraham and Children of the Promise Oh! that these of our Day might Repent which those of that Day did not lest neglecting God's present Visitation neither entering themselves nor suffering others to enter into the blessed Rest the miserable Doom of that Hard-hearted Generation overtake them and that speedily CHAP. V. Of Scripture-Commands what are binding and what not Our Adversary's Disingenuity observed BUt however he has fail'd in his last Chapter doubtless he thinks he has done my Business in this he begins like himself Rep. My Charge and Argument in this Chapter is The Quakers affirm the Doctrines Commands Promises holy Examples expressed in Scripture as such not to be at all binding to us such an Argument and so proved by me mark Reader as a Thousand Penns can never invalid it
Learn'd Ministers do defend and rather out-word us in Testimony to the Truth But before J. F. proceeds to any such Excommunication let him remember that he cannot do it without Disturbance to the Grave and Injury to the Memory of Joseph Carl that Famous and Ancient Independent Pastor who Licensed J. Spâ—â—gg's Book Ann. 1647. and consequently entituled himself to the Doctrine therein exprest And for Christopher Goad's not only J. Sprigg perform'd the Friendly Office of Publisher after his Decease but himself was Pastor of a very eminent Congregation of Independents in his Life-time Strange that the Men of these dayes should not know the Principles of their Admir'd Fathers and Teachers when they meet them but that worthy Witness C. Goad in his Conclusion of his last Testimony pag. 74 77. gives a good Reason for it He that hath Ears to hear let him hear he that hath not it may be will cry Whimsie Fancy and turning the Scripture into an Allegory and whilst the Vail is over Error Heresie Blasphemy I had thoughts of adding no further Testimony but a most remarkable Passage of that Christian and Learned Martyr Dr. Barnes Burnt for his Faith in King Henry the Eighth's dayes after having been his Ambassador and in high repute pressed hard upon me and I know not but his greater Distance from us then those before cited may carry more Authority and obtain greater Favour with our Enemies who will at least make shew of Reverence to his Autiquity and Martyrdom his words are these That Man's Will Reason Wisdom Heart Soul or whatsoever thing is in Man without the Spirit of God is but the Wisdom of the Flesh let him intend his best do all that lieth in him with all his Might and all his Power and yet can it not please God for it is but all Flesh Again It is the Spirit of Christ that maketh him Christs and the Spirit of God giveth witness to our Spirit that we be the Children of God Our Spirit giveth no witness to himself thâ— he is Christ's for then were the Spirit of God frustrate wherefore let our Spirit as well as he can study his best to apply himself to Goodness or to the uttermâ—â— of his Power and yet it is but WISDOM OF THE FLESH and HATH NO WITNESS OF GODâ— yea it is but an ENEMY and it must needs bâ— SIN as St. Austin saith He that feedeth without mâ—â— feedeth against me Thus far D. Barnes which is but a little of the greaâ— deal that he writes to the same purpose against thâ— Papists about their Doctrine of Free-will And iâ— deed he cleaves the Hair and hits the Mark above moâ— Ancient Writers for as he unanswerably argues in thâ— very Smart Discourse that Man's cleaving to his oâ— Power brought him into transgression and consequenâ—â—ly could never redeem him out of it So doth he eâ—â—press the absolute Necessity of Man's having Recourseâ— the Spirit of God in himself for Counsel and Assistanâ— in order to understand and fulfil the Good-will of Goâ— which implyes that all those who call it opposing 〈◊〉 Spirit to the Scripture and vilifying the Knowledge Scripture to press the understanding of it and witnessing the Truths therein declared of from the Revelation and Operation of the Eternal Spirit only are upon the rankest strain of Free-will that was ever yet broach'd among Men and there we leave our bitter Enemy J. Faldo I am now come to a Passage more immediately concerning my self which he thinks touches me to the Quick but I know not why unless he measures me by himself being a Man so quick to be touch'd that at the soberest and solidst Answer which I could give him he doth so gaul and fret that there is no coming near him without being kick't and abus'd His Carriage towards me in this Particular amongst many Instances already past and yet to come proves what I say In a Book of mine called The Spirit of Truth Vindicated c. in Answer to a Socinian who seem'd to deride the Quakers asserting a Necessity of having a Right Faith in God and Knowledge of the Scriptures from the Revelation and Operation of the Eternal Spirit I used these words But I assure them they shall grope in the Dark till they come into the daily Obedience of the Light and there rest contented to know only as they Experience At this he scoffed What know God only as they experience Can we experience his Omnipotency That W. P. of all others should talk at this rate is most ridiculous To which he brings me in thus answering 'T is Unchristian in John Faldo to assert the right Knowledge of God obtainable any other Way then by Experience Here 's my Reflection by way of Consequence but where 's my Argument That he left behind as being better able to jeer it then confute it some short Account of it I will give That it is the Light or Spirit of God that by its illuminatition giveth the right Knowledge of God that such Knowledge never goes without Experience Again The World without in its Make Order Perservation Providences his Powerful Work of Redemption within prove what I writ But of this he takes no notice Now his Dis-ingenuity thus far is two-fold First his stretching the word Experience to all Cases when the Scope and End of my words went no farther then every Man 's particular Saving Knowledge of God with respect to his Repentance Conversion and Eternal Salvation 2 ly He not only has taken no notice of my Argument but has abused the Consequence viz. That the Right or Saving Knowledge of God is not obtaiâ—able but by Experience after this manner Rep. Reader you have his Character of asserting that Reason Faith Scripture yea the Spirit of God too all which are not one and the same thing with Experience are any Means by which to obtain the Right Knowledge of God Rejoyn How like a Disputant or an honest Man he deals with me may be seen First In that no Man can have Experience without Reason because Reason is that part of a Man which is eminently concern'd in receiving that Experience therefore not the Giver of it nor yet it without Reason Secondly The Work of Faith is one great thing experienced Thirdly The Scripture is oftentimes an Instrument to that Experience Lastly The Spirit of God is the efficient Cause or Worker of the Experience in the reasonable Soul For must not He be very Blind or Malicious that can suppose I meant by the Knowledge of Experience such an one as God's Spirit brings not to who have been all this while pleading for that Knowledge and Experience which the Spirit of God can only give and abused with a Witness by J. Faldo for doing so but that he should suppose me to exclude Reason from Men in their Experiences which is to render them Brutes and because therefore unreasonable to be sure most uncapable of Experience unless Men may Experience without their
Christian to read what is contained in the two pages quoted of vilifying Reproach to the Scriptures If this be not opposing the Spirit of God to the Scriptures the Devil himself must dispair of inventing words to express it by Thus far John Faldo And indeed I must confefs If all or any of these things were ever said or publish'd by VVilliam Smith there is great Cause for Amazement and Abhorrence too But what said I to this Truly enough but that J. F. was careful to conceal he brings in a small Limb of my Answer and then scares it with hard words Take notice of his Reply to what he ventures to trans-scribe of my Answer Rep. Penn saith VV. Smith reflected not in the least upon the Scriptures nor those Doctrines which were truly received thence No such words can be produc'd by our Adversary No Jesuit in the World did ever out-do VV. P. in Equivocations and Subterfuges His stress lies on the words TRULY received thence Rejoyn Suppose them to be my stress what Subterfuge lies there Are there not Doctrines falsly deduced through Men's Ignorance of the true Intendment of Scripture And do not such as confidently think them to be truly receiv'd from Scripture as if they really were so But the Stress lies here with J. F. His Religion cannot bear a Scruting and is as well nigh as shy of a Search as Mahometism it self Though had John Faldo and the rest of his Gang continu'd where they were the poor Quakers might have had an Inquisition with a VVitness at their Heels by this time But he has a further Comment for us Rep. The Quakers allow no Doctrine to be truly received from the Scriptures but such as is received by immediate Inspiration and not from the Authority of the VVritten VVord Rejoyn VVhere 's the Opposition now Doth not he set the Authority of the Scriptures against the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost at least exclude the holy Inspiration from any share in that Authority and so do what he can to shuffle out the Spirit from being concerned in the Authority of the Scriptures which is if not the only yet the greatest Proof of their Authorities since it is chiefly by the Testimony of the Spirit in our selves that we know them to have bin given forth by the Inspiration of the holy Ghost in others as held both the Primitive Christians our Famous Martyrs and most Considerable Protestants He speaks as if he affected Obscurity and aim'd only at jumbling and intricating instead of explaining the Matter But had we put the Spirit in Opposition to the Letter it is no more then what the Scripture hath done before us as H. Bullenger that notable Reformer observes upon Rom. 2. 29. The Spirit saith he is opposed to the Letter as when Paul saith The Circumcision of the Heart is the Circumcision that consisteth in Spirit not in the Letter And again The Lord 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 4 Dec. 8 Serm. A notable Application to our Purpose but while we only so oppose them as to give the Preference to the Holy Spirit J. F. falls foul of us for a Pack of Enthusiasts shutting out the Spirit at least setting it aside to exalt the Letter But what doth he mean by these Terms Immediate Inspiration for a Mediate Inspiration I never heard of Sure I am that Inspiration is God's own Breathing into the Soul by which it hath Understanding given it whether it be of things written or not written and how that can be done and not immediately I know not If he will exchange his impertinent Distinction of Mediate and Immediate for Ordinary and Extraordinary we shall allow him more then we can upon the other for by Ordinary Inspiration or Revelation I understand such daily and common Vision and Discovery to the Soul as concerns it in its general Station respecting God and Men By Extraordinary such as great Fore-Sights or Divine Prospects which give to fore-tell or prophesie things to come or decide some signal Controversie or very special Case of Difficulty The first is what I speak of and do affirm that neither can the Scriptures be understood our Souls fed and comforted nor our Duties to God rightly perform'd without it The last is a Case so peculiar that all along it is plain I never intended it But if by Immediate Inspiration respecting us he understands that from thence forwards we cast off all Scripture as an antiquated or insignificant piece of Business which are yet Words too Modest for his Malice to father upon us as I shall anon make appear then doth he wrong us and our Doctrine to an high Degree And no matter what he thinks of me or what Names he may please to call me who is too far gone in his present splenetick Disease to think any better of such as I am I shall plainly set down what was my Meaning by the Words he cavils at viz. TRULY received thence I hope to their Satisfaction who will be more dis-interested in their Judgment By Doctrines TRULY owned and received from Scripture we mean such holy Truths as God by his Spirit inlightning our Understandings hath given us a true Discerning of to be such and those are they which we put in Opposition to Men's Carnal Interpretations upon and Imaginary Deductions from the Scriptures and not that we clash the Spirit 's Inspiration against the Scripture for they harmonize and bear reciprocal Testimonies to each other And this God that knows all Hearts both knows to be our true Sense in the Matter controverted and will one day abundantly prove to our Adversary's Eternal conviction This I fear J. Faldo will never swallow and why because it would choak him Perhaps I must be a Jesuit an Equivocator and what else he pleaseth but wherefore because it strikes at his Honesty indeed Dishonesty for he had rather we were what he sayes we are then receive a Contradiction by finding us otherwise then he hath so confidently represented us to be So much dearer is Humor Pride and Worldly Credit to him then our being not so mistaken as he thought for Is this Man like to make Converts that first maims my Answers and then either pelts what he doth take with Dirt or if one Sense worse then another may be had that usher'd in with a Rant and wound up with a Quibble must be given for an apt and irrefutable Reply This hath hitherto been his Practice and we now go upon both a Proof of it and yet more evidently to clear the Truth In that little piece of my Answer he cropt off from the rest for after his wonted manner he thought it not best for him to encounter it at large but a snap and away I told him that he could produce no such Words as Traditions of Men Earthly Root Darkness Confusion Corruption Deceitful Whore's Cup c.
whole Book is this Men ought to teach and preach to others no further then they have a living Sense or Experience of what they so teach or preach that this was his Meaning by those Words Running into the Lines of what others have written hear the following Words in his Defence How dare any of you saith he make mention of his Name or speak of his Glory or of his Power seeing you have not beheld him yet made manifest in your selves Again thus For John testified that the giving forth of the Law was by Moses but Grace and Truth came by Jesus Christ John 1. 17. Mark says he Grace and Truth were come unto John by Jesus Christ and he had felt the Vertue of it by which Moses ' s Admistration was fulfilled in him I say Reader his whole scope was to inforce the Necessity of coming into the Enjoyments of the Holy Ancients and an Experiencing of the Truth of those Doctrines they declar'd before Men are fit to teach them unto others And as this is the Tendency of his Words so does holy Scripture strongly warrant the same Particularly Jeremiah and the Apostle Paul to the Corinthians in Jeremiah thus He that hath my Word let him speak my Word faithfully What is the Chaff to the Wheat saith the Lord Is not my Wordlike a FIRE saith the Lord and like a HAMMER that breaketh the Rock in pieces Therefore I am against the Prophets saith the Lord that steal my Word every one from his Neighbour Chap. 23. Vers 28 29 30. The Meaning of which notable place is plainly this Such as have God's Word to declare which is known from all False Pretenders who steal the Word from their Neighbour and then cry he saith as the 31th Verse expresseth by the Resemblance it bears to Fire a thing easily to be felt let them faithfully speak it But those who steal and preach the Word or Testimony that came from the Lord by and through another as if the Lord spake the same by them unto whom the Lord never spoak it such Prophets the Lord is against which strikes J. Faldo dead respecting his Pretence for Preaching who abundantly proves it to be his Belief that such are as Good Ministers as any yea the only Orthodox and the other but a Pack of giddy-headed Enthusiasts The next place is in the Apostle's 2d Epist to the Corinthians Chap. 10. Vers 15 16. Not boasting of things beyond our measure that is of other Men's Labours but having Hope that when your Faith is encreased that we shall be enlarged by you according to our Rule abundantly to preach the Gospel in the Regions beyond you and not to boast in another Man's Line of things made ready to our Hands Of this sort of Boasters is John Faldo who hath nothing for his Religion but the mâ—er Bible and but an usurpt Title to that Reader take notice that all along J. F. hath made no Difference between the Truths the Scriptures truly declare of and Man's dark and unregenerated Conceptions upon Scripture about Truth and Error Thereby confounding that which in it self is most clearly different to the end he may bring all those Blows we give at Men's Traditions and Doctrines which they pretend to be rightly deduced from Scripture but in Reallity are their own Imaginations to bear hard upon the Scriptures themselves and those Doctrines and Traditions that are truly delivered by them which is a wretched begging of the Question that was not about the Scriptures to which he would turn it but his and their way of understanding them as if it were the same thing to decry the Scriptures as to disclaim against J. F.'s false Opinions concerning them But he thinks he has quite done our Business and sav'd himself from the Black Blemish of Forgery by another Testimony produced to the same purpose which is this And reading in the Scriptures that there were some who met together and exhorted one another they observe and do as near as they can what they read of the Saints Practice and so conceive a Birth in the same Womb and bring it forth in the same Strength that others do and in the Ground it differs not W. S. pag. 22. But what of all this J. Faldo Can this Saying rise higher then a Reproof of those who are but in the Form of Godliness whom the Scriptutes exhort us to turn away from But why was he so disingenuous as to refuse us our Friends words at large thereby making People believe that the Imitation reprov'd by W. S. concerns the holy Life and Conversation of the Saints For it s not two Lines before that he tells us expresly what sort of Practice he means when he writes thus And because they Baptists read of some that went into the Water and were baptized they do the same In short The Zeal of his Spirit runs against all Apish Religions and those Persons who take unto themselves the Name and Form they are Strangers to the Nature and Power of being not led by the Eternal Spirit to Worship God but with an Unregenerate Mind and Ambitious Will eagerly rush into those things for which they have neither Commission nor Quallification I could urge several Testimonies out of Authors that neither liv'd nor dy'd in Fellowship with the Quakers as a further Vindication of their Sense in this Particular but Three shall suffice at this time The first is given us by Jo. Canne stiled by Parson Ball an Eminent and Early Presbyter The Leader of the English Brownists or Independents at Amsterdam more then 30 Years ago viz. Labour to Experience the Power and Leading of the Spirit It is very dangerous to rest in any thing that comes from the Creature till you have the Witness of the Spirit which is not fleshly heady or empty but powerful inward and abides and settles the Soul In thy Light shall we see Light and no where else let them pretend never so high Attainments A Knock to J. Faldo The second is a Passage in W. Dell's Tryal of Spirits writ as I take it while he was Master of Cains Colledge in Cambrige They says he who want Christ's Spirit which is the Spirit of Prophecy though they preach the EXACT LETTER of the Word yet are FALSE PROPHETS and not to be heard by the Sheep And one Reason among many for this Assertion was this Under the New Testament we are not to regard the Letter without the Spirit but the Spirit as well as the Letter yea the Spirit more then the Letter And therefore Paul saith That Christ shall destroy Antichrist with the Spirit of his Mouth and the Brightness of his Coming He scarce saith this Author takes any notice of the Letter but calls the true Preaching of the Gospel the Spirit of Christ's Mouth or the Ministration of the Spirit His next Reason is this They that preach only the outward Letter of the Word without the true Spirit they make all things outward in the
great Geneva Doctor that made Servetus keep Company with his Books or rather had him burnt by them as if it had been to save Wood for Exceeding their Presbyterian Reformation and instead of repenting defended it in Writing when he had done at what time the said Doctor and that whole City were persecuted themselves with the Anathama's of Rome and 't is not to be doubted but they thought them unchristian It would fill a Volumn to tell the Tragical Excommunications and other notable Feats done by some of this Tribe of Men for the Maintenance of their Church Power and Dignity oft times saving the civil Magistrate the Trouble of abusing such poor Dissenters from them as we are by a licentious Usurpation and Practice of his Power upon their Backs we well know it yet has this man the Confidence to fall hard on us for censuring such as recede from what they once own'd because we can never allow them as such to be of us he cryes out Oh the Charity of the Quakers the Quakers may see the Image of the Beast among themselves c. But on better Grounds may every ingenuous Reader return this Exclamation Oh the Incharity of J. F. and his Adherents whose very Mercies are Cruelties Let him pack up his Pipes and play us no more of these Envious and Hypocritical Notes and hold himself contented that whether we be the Image or no to be sure he has made Sydach Sympson and his Church the Beast in great Letters cum multis aliis not forgetting nor excluding his own railing and excommunicating self The Conclusion of the First Part. WE have now run through his Nine Chapters Seven of which concerned the Scriptures doubtless writ to vindicate his former Discourse but with what Success I leave with Thee Courteous Reader to judge And before I sum up our Sense for a Farewell to this Part of his Pamphlet I request thee when thou next falls into Company with J. F. or any of that Tribe of Men the pretended Admirers of Scripture and one would almost think the devoutest Observers of those Precepts and precisest Imitators of those Examples expressed therein to ask in good Earnest Whether it be the whole and every part of Scripture they call the Word of God and Rule of Faith and Life or No If they say All and every part of it then the Words of Wicked Kings False Prophets Persecutors c. yea the Devil himself therein at large declared with the whole Jewish History and Ceremenial and Judiacal Law containing the Government Sacrifices Priesthood and all other Jewish Rights will necessarily make up a great part of the Word of God and their Rule of Faith and Life But if they shall answer Negatively that they are not in the whole and every part of them the Word of God and Rule of Faith and Life Then ask them Which are those Places Precents and Examples that particularly concern us under this Administration And if they answer this Enquiry and are not grown too hot and angry by this time entreat them to tell thee By what they discern and distinguish in this weighty Matter For if they either set aside what they should receive or continue what should be laid aside they Add or Dminish to what themselves acknowledge to be the Word of God If they say the Harmony of Scriptures the same Question holds How and by What doth it appear so Harmonous since there are very deep and obscure places and sometimes seeming Contradictions and that in highest Points If they say by the Spirit and Vnderstanding of meer Man the Apostle Paul directly opposes himself to every such answer 1. Cor. 2. But if thus driven they answer in the Words of J. Owen That the only Publick Authentick and Infallible Interpreter of the Holy Scripture is HE who is the AUTHOR of them from the Breathing of whose Spirit it derives all its Verity Perspicuity and Authority Exerc. 2 7 9. against the Quakers Entreat their Patience to stand one Question more and thou hast done viz. If the Verity Perspicuity and Authority of the Scriptures depend upon the Breathing of the Holy Spirit or as he expresses it a little further the Infusing a Spiritual Light into our Hearts Then Whether People ought not to have recourse unto the Holy Spirit and Light as the only Interpreter Judge and Rule what Scripture remaine of Force to our Day and how and which way such Scripture is to be understood When thou hast obtained such sober Answers as thy Questions deserve at their hands I should be very glad to have the Perusal of them In the mean time we own and with our whole Hearts confess First That the Scriptures given forth by Inspiration are a true and faithful Narrative or Declaration of the Mind of God towards the Sons and Daughters of Men and his various Dealings with them respecting Precepts Prophecies Threatnings Promises Providences Rewards Punishments Deliverances Doctrines Examples and Practices Seconly That they are Profitable for Reproof Instruction Edification and Comfort Thirdly That it is the Spirit of God which only gives Men to read understand and use them to Advantage as Thomas Collier hath well expressed it about Twenty Five Years ago viz. And truly Brethren it is my earnest Desire to see Souls to live more in the Spirit and less in the Letter and then they will see THAT WE JUDGE OF THE LETTER BY THE SPIRIT AND NOT OF THE SPIRIT BY THE LETTER which occasions so much Ignorance amongst us And they who profess themselves to be our TEACHERS ARE CHIEF IN THIS TRESPASS Four â—hly That the Holy Spirit is the New Covenant Rule and Judge it being the Promise of the Father and Ministry and Dispensation of the latter Days as there Scriptures abundantly prove Neh. 9. 19 20. Job 32. 8. Isa 59. 21. Joel 2. 28 29. Hag. 2. 25. Mat. 16. 17. Jo. 14. 17 18 19. Chap. 16. 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15. Rom. 8. 1 9 14. 1 Cor. 2. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16. Gal. 5. 16 18. Eph. 1. 17. I. Jo. 2. 20 27. Yet we deny not but the Lord hath and yet may make the Holy Scripture a Mean to several in the Hand of his Spirit of Understanding and Comfort and so far they may be a particular Rule Yea I do believe they have been and yet are next to a Living and Powerful Ministry a more ordinary Mean then many if not any other whatever Howbeit we are not to center here but press on forward to the Life Power and Spirit it self of which they declare for into That God hath determined to bring and as it were wind up his People by which they come to be fulfilled whereas those that stick in the Letter of them and pass not througâ—â—â—d beyond it into the Life and Vertue they bear record of know but as the Scribes and Pharisees did and cannot as such be true and faithful Witnesses for the
But this Shift will not serve J. Faldo's turn since G. F. meant a visible changeable and not a visible permanent Worship This Passage relates to Figurative and Temporary Services standing in those things which were but Signs of the Substance to come and which are finished by it So that the Apostle did indeed labour to bring the Jews and other weak Christians off from their Visible Typical or Legal to the more Spiritual VVorship of the Gospel not that they should be debarred from expressing that VVorship for while Bodies and Souls are together there is as I writ at large in my Answer a Necessity of some Bodily Demonstration I will yet give one Relish more of the Man 's Disingenuous Spirit before I conclude this Chapter Reply pag. 50. Before W. P. parts from this Argument be grows kind and shews the Power of Condescension to have place in him by these words Yet thus far we could go That Visible Worship as such without a due Regard to what kind of Worship it may be and what is the Root from whence it came cannot be well-pleasing to God A great Compliance indeed which is thus much just and no more a man's filling a Dung-Cart or W. P's acting on the Stage or the Table in their Meeting-place as like a Fencer as ever was seen are not Worship because seen though they should by some be so called for every thing that is seen is not therefore Worship Rejoynder His Acknowledgment of my Condescension is a small Artifice to insinuate my yielding him the Cause But what Reason he had to commend me would be better seen by considering how aptly and honestly he hath replyed to that little piece of my Answer he found in his Heart to give us He thinks to fling us off with his dirty and vain Similitudes I writ of Visible Worship as Praying Speaking c. on a Religious Account he turns it to any visible thing as Filling a Dung-Cart Acting on a Stage or Table as a Fencer Similes right-well suiting his Disposition as if I denyed that to be Worship which was seen because seen which was the farthest thing from my Thoughts and is not at all deduceable from my Words Yet hath this Man the Confidence to tell his Reader that they signifie just thus much and no more But in good Conscience Courteous Reader can this Man think to escape the Hands of God that acts with so much willful Baseness against me as to make no Difference between my saying That visible VVorship as such unless proceeding from a Right Root cannot be well-pleasing to God and saying That visible VVorship is not Worship because Visible though it should proceed from never so true a Ground which he makes my Answer to speak at least he infers so from it though â— direct Contradiction Is it one and the same thing to say Visible VVorship is not therefore true VVorship because Visible and concluding filling a Dung-Cart is not true VVorship because Visible is it honestly done to â—pply that to Acting upon Stages and Fencing which â—lly me was joyned to Worship If I had said Visible Fencing as such is not Worship because seen his â—y Shift might have had something in it but to make Difference betwixt saying that Visible Prayer is 〈◊〉 true VVorship because seen and Fencing or filling Dung-Cart is not true VVorship because seen thereby turning what I said of VVorship to every Trivial or Common Action among Men is unworthy of an Ingenuous Disputant much more an Humble Christian and least of all a Christian-Minister In short I spoak against Visible VVorship not Rightly Grounded a Position as true as Scripture it self for it is Scripture twenty times over and he twisteth it to my Denyal of VVorship because visible be it grounded as it will as his last words in the Chapter tell us For every thing sayes he as the sense of my Answer that is seen is not therefore VVorship instead of this Every VVorship that is seen is not therefore true VVorship But his extending the Major Proposition to every visible Thing and not to visible Worship only opens a Gap for his wild and extravagant Similes I will lay down our Propositions that the whole VVorld may see his Unjust VVay of Dealing with us My Proposition lay in form thus That Visible Worship which ariseth not from a Right Ground is not acceptable with God But John Faldo's Visible Worship say ariseth not from a Right Ground Therefore John Faldo's Visible Worship is not Acceptable with God The Argument as he gives it in my Name formed lies thus That which is seen is not Worship But a man's filling a Dung-Cart c. is seen Therefore Filling a Dung-Cart c. is not Worship Which Argument makes nothing Worship that is seen or visible however truly grounded because Visible instead of making such Visible Worship not true which doth not proceed from a right Root Now be pleased Friendly Reader to observe whither this Evasion drives the Matter If that which is seen be not therefore Worship as says J. F. in my Name then publick Praying or Preaching though of never so True a Kind or arising from never so Right a Ground because seen is not Worship much less True Worship By this it undeniably appears that my Adversary hath at best mistaken my Answer which abundantly confesseth as he himself hath observed in his Reply pag. 50. That there will be there must be and there ought to be a Visible Worship and that such Visible Worship only is rejected which ariseth not from a Right Ground in the Heart But how can this be if publick Praying and Preaching springing from never so spiritual a Root because seen must be no Worship which J. F. tells the World in my Name How can these so grand Opposites meet Or how is it possible to reconcile things as contrary as this William Penn owns Visible Worship William Penn denyes Visible Worship For it is no less then to make me renounâ—e Visible Worship for Visibility's sake who by my Principle and Writings hold and maintain such Visible VVorship as is of a true Nature or springs from a good and spiritual Ground So that it is not the Visibility but the Ground or Nature not being as it should be that is the Reason of our Exception Dr. Everad's Sermons Beloved I would have you ponder these things well If ye set up Ordinances c. so as to build and rest in them ye do make Idols of them or at best you play the Babes and the Children with them by resting alwayes on such Crutches and Go-bies and never come to be Young-men much less as Fathers in Christ pag. 562. And truly with some men herein lies the Top or Quintescence of their Religion making such ado about Shadows Figures and Resemblances and they let the Truth the Substance the thing pass and regard it not forasmuch as they are so zealous and hot about Forms But if they are by
chosen called out of the World they are not of this World as he is not of this World W. Dell's Sermons p. 152 156 186. The Church is a Spiritual Invisible Fellowship gathered together in the Unity of the Faith Hope and Love Christ and the Spirit are the only Officers CHAP. IV. His Charge of our Denying to Hear the Word of God examined True Preaching acknowledged HE hath maintained this Charge against our Answer with the same sort of Jeers and Florish but manifest insuccess too that he hath done what went before His words are these Reply pag. 61. Concerning denying the Ordinance of hearing the Word preached to my Proof from G. F. We must not hear Man c. W. P. saith That is so far from making against us that it makes for us at an high rate Much like the Mad-man of Athens who called all the Ships that came into the Port his own while he was for all that but a poor Thred-bare Gentle-man I proved that they asserted the Light to be only preached to be the only Preacher and only â—eached to yea and the only Obeyer Rejoynder If this be done Erit hic mihi magnus Apollo If to cease from Man be not false Doctrine then not to hear Man is no false Doctrine for Man is taken in the same sense in both places For as God never intended by ceasing from Man that they should not regard his Prophets who were Men when they came to declare his VVill so neither did G. F. intend that Man ought not to be heard when he comes on God's Errant or Message in the Name of the Lord but meer Man Man in his Natural Capacity and Ability without the Holy Spirit and Power of God which is but a carnal humane and worldly Ministry To say we only preach the Light is no more then to report The Quakers preach Christ for our Doctrine directs People to the Knocks of Christ the true Light at the Door of the Soul who is the Saviour Redeemer and Preserver of them that believe in him and keep his Commandments But that we ever said That it was only preached to yea and the only Obeyer of such Preaching is as false as any Thing that can be said He tells us he proved it I will give the strongest Passage he brought J. Parn. Shield c. Epist To the Light of God in all your Consciences I speak Very well and what then Is the Light therefore preacht to taught or instructed when he only appealed to the Light in all their Consciences concerning the Truth of what he said as the Apostle did To the Light I speak that is To the Light I direct my self To that I make my Appeal if what I write be not true for what soever is reproveable is made manifest by it Ephes 5. 13. This Construction is Natural Our Adversary's forced for nothing is more common with us in General and that Author in particular then to turn People to the Light pressing their Conformity to the Reproofs and Instructions of it alwayes respecting it as given us of God to be our true certain and constant Teacher and alwayes have we been reproacht by such as J. Faldo for doing so But above all that this Passage should be brought to prove the Light is the Obeyer of such Doctrines and Instructions who is the Author of them is an Absurdity that reflects great Ignorance or something worse upon our Adversary We have already declared our Faith so freely and plainly in this Matter besides the Testimony of our dayly Practice that we need say no more then this A true Living Gospel-Ministry we own and the Service and Benefit of such a one we have enjoyed and beautiful are their Feet who come in the Power and Demonstration of the Spirit that open the blind Eye turn People from Darkness to Light and from the Power of Satan unto God Act. 26. 18. that He may be their Instructer according to that Promise They shall be all taught of Me which is the chiefest End of all External Instrumental Ministry To prove our Sence of true Preaching we may add these two following Testimonies out of that renowned Independent Dr. Everad Dr. J. Everad's Sermon Militia Coelestis Truth it 〈◊〉 many toss and tumble the Letter and make you believe they expound it and give you the Sense and Vertue yet how shallow how literal how humane how low how sensual and carnal do they make the Worlâ— to be Even your Rabbies your Doctors your great Schollars which shews if God himself if the Lion of the Tribe of Juda if the Root of David do not open the Seals 't is not all the Learning or all the Universities in the World can help us to the Mystery and the Mind of Christ as the Apostle calls it Shadows vanishing c. p. 326. I dare not offer at any Method in the whole nor at any Connection in the Parts For I find that all the curious Dichotomzers do but dream and play with the Scriptures feeding themselves with Fancies and not Truth for Sure I am the only Method that holy Men of old observed was to speak as they were moved by the Holy Spirit There be many Expositions on this Place which I will not trouble you withall for Men speak according to Men but the Scriptures were written by God's Spirit dictated by his own Finger We must therefore labour to find out what is God's Mind in the Scriptures whatever Men say pag. 369. 370. CHAP. V. Of True and False Prayer HE pretends in this Chapter which containeth not a page to refute several pages in my Book relaing to Gospel-Prayer in which if I 〈◊〉 not he hath done me and the Truth I defend the greatest Service that a reasonable Man would desire at the Hands of his Adversary for the Truth of the Matter is the Man hath shrunk from his Post and deserted his Colours which we shall make appear by comparing his first Book with his Reply Reply VV. P. according to my Charge disowns man's Wilâ— and the Vse of his Conceptions to have any thing to do in Gospel-Prayer pag. 122. and disowns all Prayer that is not by and in the Light within The Quakers Christ The Reasons he gives are as Witless as his Assertion Truthless Thus Now unless Men may perform Gospel-VVorship without the Spirit and the Truth or if in the Spirit and the Truth yet not by the Motion of either a thing absurd it must needs be that Men ought only to preach and pray by the Motion of the Spirit and of the Truth How absurd is W. P' s Reasoning here as if the Vnderstanding Conceptions Will of Man in Prayer must needs exclude the Motions of the Spirit or the Motions of the Spirit exclude them Rejoynder The first Thing our Adversary charged upon us in his former Book was our Denyal of Gospel-Prayer to prove which he cited W. Smith who in his Catech. p. 107. spoak against Prayers of Man's forming
Christ's eating the Supper with his Disciples just before his Death and their breaking Bread together soon after his Death Not a Year whereas the Pope showed not himself till near six hundred Years after I cannot see Friendly Reader how much more criminal I made my Adversary by charging him with saying in our Name The Bread and VVine Christ blessed is the Invention of the Pope then he hath made himself by his own Saying That we call the Lords Supper eaten soon after his Death the Popes Invention unless he should deny the Latter to be the same Sort of Supper with the former In short We cannot but repute this an Injury too apparent for John Faldo's utmost Invention to cover But that he may not suffer the Imputation of Forgery at least a very gross Perversion he thus braveth me Reply p. 70. If Pen dare deny it to be in W. Smith's Book which Iquoted three or four times over in pag. 39. I shall prove him a Deceiver to all that will but read it W. S. answers to this Question I would know Father how it is concerning these things called Ordinances as Baptism Bread and Wine which are much used in their Worship Answ Why Child as for those things they rose from the Pope's Invention Rejoynder This Citation as rankly and partially as he hath put down doth not prove that we account the Lord's Supper either as it was eaten by Christ and his Disciples before his Death or by his Disciples after his Death to be the Pope's Invention How can it since we know the Pope's Date to have been so many hundred Years after that Practice His Citation must therefore be understood of such a Baptism and such a Supper as the Apostate Church hath presumed to practice and that I put not a fairer Gloss then his own Answer will allow observe these Words and the whose Practice of those things AS THEY use them had their Institution by the Pope and were never SO ordained of Christ strongly implying that what was of Christ's Ordination was not of the Pope's Invention and Institution consequently That the Lord's Supper was neither a popish Invention nor Institution which is yet plainer from his following VVords For he did not ordain sprinkling Water in a Child's Face or to make a Sign of the Cross in his Forehead nor God-Fathers and God-Mothers to undertake for it Neither did he ordain Bread and VVine to be SO or after that Manner used and received So that nothing can be plainer then that his Reflection lies against their Manner of practizing and using them not against the Things themselves as at any time practiced by Christ or his Disciples Followers Therefore he is quite beside the Truth in telling the VVorld that he doth but apply these VVords Pope's Invention to the Name that is Lord's Supper which the Quakers apply to the Thing since we so clearly distinguish betwen Baptism the Lord's Supper Name and Thing and these Practices and Usages of them which have risen since the Apostacy Now it rests with thee Friendly Reader to pass Judgment which of us two hath acted the Deceiver to leave out a great many more of his hard VVords he that affirmed VV. Smith called that Baptism and Lord's Supper which was in Use some time as well after Christ's Death and Ascension as before the Pope's Inventions or I that affirmed and from VV. Smith's own Book have expresly proved that there was no such thing said as Primitively practiced but only as they have been since abused by the Apostate Church For the Supper it self I refer the Reader to the sixteenth Chapter of my Answer and shall only say at this Time that as it was a Commemoration or Remembrance of Christ to the Disciples who were at that Day so weak in Faith as Luke 24. 11. Mary Magdalen's news about Christ's Resurrection seemed to them as Idle Tales yet that the Service and consequently the Institution of it were of as they came to witness him the Evangelical Supper of Passover to their Souls and that we therefore discontinue it First Because the false Church hath made Market with her imitating that primitive Practice drawn the Minds of People abroad from the Heavenly Bread of Life which is only to be received within and hath been shedding so much Blood about it rendring it and Water Baptism the Seal of Christianity thereby puffing up People to believe that of themselves which they are not Next we have the Testimony of God's Spirit that he is withdrawn from such Observations that have been so much insisted on and magnified in the World Lastly and eminently we discontinue it because Christ is become unto our Souls that very Thing which it was most truly and properly the Sign of to wit the Heavnely Bread and Passover which nourisheth the Soul unto Eternal Life Where by the Way it must not be forgotten how perversly he wrongs Christ and Holy Scripture who turns this Passage Do this till I come after this strange Manner The Lord's Supper is a Remembrance of Christ's Death past NOT TO COME Rep. p. 71. wherein first he makes as if there were a Death to come Next Instead of exhorting People to look for his Coming until which he bid his Disciples practice it he turns back their Eyes from that Expectation and makes the Sign wholy to have Reference to what was past and not what was to come thereby seeking to perpetuate his Absence and bar out his Appearance implyed in these Words till I come which ends the Absence during which the Institution lasteth For the plain English of it framed into an Argument is this The Supper is to remember Christ's Death that is past but that will be alwayes past therefore it ought to be alwayes so remembred The like may be said upon the Word Remembrance for if it ought to be practised because of remembring Christ's Death then forever because his Death ought never to be forgotten Thus it perverts the Text in that it makes not the outward Supper to cease upon his Coming as John 14. 23. Rev. 3. 20. which is the Evangelical Supper till whose Coming Christ bid his Disciples do it But to continue upon the Score of remembring Christ's Death only which as I said before ought never to be forgotten is consequently to continue it upon Institution forever I shall only leave two things with my Reader and so proceed to the next Chapter first That from our discontinuing the Practice of these outward and temporary Observances J. Faldo concludes our absolute and general Denyal of them 2ly Because some of our Friends have denyed rejected and termed Popish the long Abuse of these Things he makes no Difficulty of charging us in so many Words with calling Water-Baptism and the Lord's Supper as laid down in Scripture and primitively practised Popish Inventions c. God if he please make this Man sensible of his notorious Injustice towards us CHAP. VIII Of the Doctrine of
to Mis-eite Mis-render or Mis-apply our Writings To conclude He seems to write at all Adventures supplying his VVeakness with Confidence and drowning the Noise of his own Forgeries by his vehement Clamours against such imaginary ones as he hath provided for me to go under my Name which is his greatest of all I heartily pray to God that he may be stopt in this Unconscionable Course and come to find true Repentance that Eternal Anguish do not irrecoverably over-take him as the Just Recompence of such Unjust Dealing with us His third Citation was out of I. Penington Can outward Blood cleanse the Conscience Can outward Water wash the Soul clean His Comment upon it is this A plain Denyal of the Efficacy of the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross to cleanse the Soul from the Guilt of Sin by its Satisfaction to the Justice of God To which I answered Doth I. P. deny or any way meddle with the outward Blood concerning the Guilt of Sin past how far it had an Influence into Justification taking Justification in that Sense But doth not I. P. treat of the outward Blood with respect to Purgation and Sanctification of the Soul from the present Nature Acts and Habits of Sin that lodges therein Is there no Difference betwixt being pardon'd Sin past and the Ground of it and being renewed and regenerated in Mind and Spirit and the Ground of that Conversion His Reply to this though he gives not two Lines of what I now repeated out of my Answer lyes thus Reply pag. 74. And if we allow Penn's Construction that he denyed the Blood of Christ which he calls outward to have an influence into Sanctification he commits a foul Error for cleansing the Conscience by Sanctification is the Effect of the Blood of Christ as well as the other The New Testament or Convenant is by Christ said to be the Cup of the New Testament in my Blood wherein all the Promises and Mercies of the New Covenant are asserted of which I think Cleansing by Sanctification is none of the least Rejoynder If by the Promise of Sanctification to be asserted in the Blood of Christ he understands that both the Promise of Sanctification and all other Promises relating to the Dispensation of the Gospel were asserted ratified and sealed to them that believe in and by the Blood of Christ I shall heartily and cheerfully submit But if he mean that the Blood of Christ shed so many Hundred Years ago by the Hands of Ungodly Men is the inherent real Purger of the Conscience from Dead Works I must deny what he sayes for the Scripture attributes Sanctification to the Eternal Spirit It is one Article of the common Creed of the called Christians viz. the Lavour of Regeneration which is by the Spirit But what is all this to J. Faldo's defending himself from abusing I. Penington's Words to wit that by asking Can Outward Blood Cleanse Can Outward Water wash the Soul He would make him to deny Christ's sacrificing of himself upon the Cross to have any Influence towards the Remitting of the Guilt of Sin past which is quite another thing as this Argument manifests which naturally expresseth J. Faldo's wresting of I. P's words He that denyes Outward Blood can cleanse the Conscience denyes that Outward Blood may be a Sacrifice whereby to declare the Remission of the Guilt of Sin past which is so absolutely and obviously false that it may be seen of every mean Capacity Yet hitherto J. Faldo's Reasoning runs Once again before we leave him thus He that is pardoned the Guilt of Sin that is past by the Blood of Christ as a Sacrifice declaring Remission to all that believe is by the same Blood washed cleansed renewed and regenerated in his inward Man from the very Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin which is as untrue as the other yet both these Arguments follow upon J. F ' s mis-rendering of I. Penington ' s words But his Credit in this Particular is not at all blemisht by his Comment upon I. P' s words if we will believe him for he thinks it may be justified by a Passage out of W. Smith Reply Catech. pag. 64. We believe that Christ in us doth offer up himself a Living Sacrifice to God for us by which the Wrath of God is appeased to us This Passage I cited which Penn among many others takes no notice of And if this can be the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem on the Cross of Wood it is a most incredible Mystery Rejoynder There is no Difficulty Friendly Reader in unfolding his pretended Mystery if the Question unto which the Answer was made be considered which was this What is your Faith concerning Christ IN YOU as a Redeemer which relates not to the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross of Wood wherefore to make the Answer deny Remission of Sins to be declared by Christ's sacrificing of his Body upon the Cross which was no part of the Question to be answered is like all the rest of his Injustice towards us If the Answer had rejected that Sacrifice we should have condemned it as much as he hath abused it But unless he denyes that Christ offers himself in his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice W. Smith's words are so far from Denying the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross of Wood that he must allow them to be sound in themselves for Christ is a Mediator and an Attoner in the Consciences of his People at what time they shall fall under any Miscarriage if they unfeignedly Repent according to 1 John 2. 1 2. as allowably as that he prayes in his People as their Head which A. Sadeel saith out of Augustine and D. Everad as anon So that upon the whole this is as strong and clear a Proof as others that he hath hither to brought for as they so this in Question and Answer wholely concerns what Christ is to Man in Man which was no part of the Question and not what he was to any in his Visible Appearance which was the only Question Before I leave this Particular I must again declare That we are led by the Light and Spirit of Christ with Holy Reverence to confess unto the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem as that by which a Propitiation was held forth to the Remission of the Sins that were past through the Forbearance of God unto all that believed And we do embrace it as such and do firmly believe that thereby God declared his great Love unto the World for by it is the Consciousness of Sin declared to be taken away or Remission sealed to all that have known true Repentance and Faith in his Appearance But because of the Condition I mean Faith and Repentance therefore do we exhort all to turn their Minds to the Light and Spirit of Christ within that by seeing their Conditions and being by the same brought both into true Contrition and holy Confidence in God's Mercy
they may come to receive the Benefit thereof for without that necessary Condition it will be impossible to obtain Remission of Sins though it be so generally promulgated thereby To conclude As in my Answer at large so here in short I say Justification may be taken in a two-fold Sense Compleatly and Incompleatly or rather thus compleat Justification hath two parts the first is not imputing past Sins or accounting a true Penitant as Righteous or clear from the Guilt of past Sin as if he had never Sinned through the Remission which God declared and sealed up to all such in the Blood of his Son and thus far Righteousness as imputed goes and is the first part or Justification begun The compleat or last part of compleat Justification is the Cleansing of the Conscience and Regenerating the Mind from the Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin by the effectual working of the Heavenly Power of Christ and bringing into the Heart and establishing his Everlasting Righteousness in the room thereof Some Scriptures considered relating to this Doctrine To the first part belong such Scriptures as these Isa 53. 11. He shall bear their Iniquities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is He shall bear away their Iniquities as did the Scape Goat figuratively under the Law or That God would declare his remitting or passing over the Sin that was past and. that he would be in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them Also Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justified the Vngodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness that is God acquitted upon Repentance and Faith in his Promise such as have lived in a Course of Vngodliness For no present Work how good soever can justifie any Man from the Condemnation which is due for the Guilt of Sin that is past So that justifying the Ungodly in this place is pardoning the Ungodly and being so pardoned upon Faith in the Promise of God is accounted for Righteousness or as if the Person pardoned had never sinned and this appears from the 7th and 8th verses Blessed are they whose Sins are forgiven and whose Iniquities are Covered Again Chap. 5. 6. For when we were yet wit hout Strength Christ in due time dyed for the Vngodly and verse 8. But God commended his Love towards us in that while we were yet Sinners Christ dyed for us That is Christ laid down his Life to reclaim Sinners and to declare the Righteousness of God for the Forgiveness of the Sin that is past to all Ungodly and Sinful Men that turn from the Evil of their Wayes by unfeigned Repentance it was done in and by Christ for all Ungodly Men but not to the Benefit of any without Repentance Not that people should go on in Sin but by so recommending of his Love and sealing such Glad-Tidings with his own Blood to allure and engage them from their present Course of Sin 1 John 4. 19. He first loved us men must not therefore continue in Sin that Grace that is Forgiveness may abound God forbid Rom. 6. 1. The last considerable Place is in the second Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 5. 21. For he hath made him Sin for us who knew no Sin That is He was made a Sacrifice for the remitting or passing over of the Sin that was past for such as repent and believe that they might be made the Righteousness of God or rather accounted Righteous in the Sight of God as if they had never committed Sin by not imputing or forgiving the Sin that was past This Sence the two fore-going Verses confirm to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them and hath committed unto them the Word of of Reconciliation Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseeeh you through us We pray you in Christ's Stead that you would be reconciled to God verse 19 20. agreeing with Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a Propitâ—ation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission or passing over of Sins that are past through the Forbearance of God which is neither a rigid Satisfaction for nor a Justification from Sins that are past present and to come as a late shallow VVriter in his Preface to the Hartford self-confuting Pamphlet idlely and falsely called the Quaker converted would have us believe but an acquitting from or remitting of past Sin upon Faith and Amendment of Life which makes up that only imputative Righteousness that the Scripture holds forth or we can allow of The Scriptures that belong to the second Part of this Doctrine which makes up compleat Justification are such as these Keep thee far from a false Matter the Innocent Righteous slay thou not for I will not justifie the wicked Exod. 23. I. Lord who shall ABIDE in thy TABERNACLE who shall DWELL in thy HOLY HILL He that WALKETH UPRIGHTLY and WORKETH RIGHTEOUSNESS and SPEAKETH THE TRUTH IN HIS HEART Psalm 15. 1 2. When a Righteous man turns away from his Righteousness for his Iniquity that he has done shall he dye Again when the wicked Man turneth away from his Wickedness and doth that which is Lawful or Right he shall save his Soul Ezek. 18. 26 27. Not every one that sayeth unto me Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that DOTH the Will of my Father which is in Heaven Math. 7. 21. Vnless a Man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God John 3. 3 5. If ye keep my Commandment ye shall abide in my Love John 15. 10. For not the Hearers of the Law are justified but the Doers of the Law shall be justified Rom. 2. 13. If ye live after the Flesh ye shall dye but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the Deeds of the Body ye shall live for as many as are led by the Spirit of God are the Sons of God Rom. 18. 13 14. That the Offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable being sanctified by the Holy Ghost Rom. 14. 16. But this is the Will of God even your Sanctification 1 Thes 43. Because God hath from the Beginning chosen you to Salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and Belief of the Truth 2 Thes 2. 13. Was not Abraham our Father JUSTIFIED by WORKS when he offered Isaac his Son upon the Altar Ye see then how that by Works a Man is justified and not by Faith only Jam. 2. 22 24. In all these weighty Passages there is nothing more clear then that Sanctification both ushers in and compleats Justification First In that no Man can have right to Remission of Sins but upon Vnfeigned Repentance and True Faith begotten in the Heart which is as well the Beginnings of Sanctification as Introduction to Justification 2 dly That though we grant as before at large Remission of Sins not
manifested himself by it was from Everlasting In short Christ qualified that Body for his Service but that Body did not constitute Christ He is invisible and ever was so to the ungodly World that was not his Body as honest J. Bradford told Arch-Deacon Harpsfield B. Mart. 3. Vol. p. 293. and so much the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or anonted signifieth which was not outward after the Jewish Ceremony but by the Spirit and invisible Power of God Lastly I will leave it with my Reader to consider what better terms then Earthly and Perishing J. F's Comparison implyeth to Christ's Body for such was the Apostles and the Bodies of those Saints he writ to But he will by no means have himself concerned with a great Part of my following Discourse which was he thinks in Opposition to no Body because I argued that the meer Body of Christ could not be the intire Christ though he makes our Denyal of it to be a disowning of the true Christ producing a Passage out his Book to my Purpose in Contradiction to himself viz. p. 72. The Flesh and Blood of Christ we do not believe to be Christ separated from his Mans Soul or that to be Christ separated from his Divne and Eternal Nature bestowing upon me for so ill employing of my time these Terms Vain Trifler Pedantick Magesterialness Forger and that it is a greater Wickedness then being a Thief to make him assert the meer Body to be the intire Christ adding but this is Penn ' s high-way and beaten Rode One would think after all this that I had wronged him with all imaginable Baseness in fastning upon him any such Conclusion yet if I make it not appear by his Reply which one would think he should have penned a little more cautiously after he had given such Occasion by his former Discourse and that to in his very next page let my Reader say I merit all thâ—se hard Words that J. Faldo flingeth so angrily upon me He produced several Scriptures to prove as I understood him the Manhood to be the Christ of God or else he did nothing for without so believing and arguing it was impossible for him to prove our Denyal of the true Christ because we asserted Christ to have been before that Body consequently that it was not the the intire Christ which I explained and rescued He omits giving the Reader any account of it only in general Tearms and that not without Perversion His Reply unto which will make good my Construction of his Words or I am greatly mistaken Reply p. 77. Whereas I produced Abundance of Scriptures to prove that the Man Jesus is the Christ W. P. will by no means allow them to have that Sence no not that in Luke 2. 26. And it was revealed to him Simeon by the Holy Ghost that he should not see Death before he had seen the Lord's Christ neither that the Child Jesus whom Simeon took up in his Arms was the Christ Certainly sayes W. P. p. 161. This Allegation from Luke 2. 26. will never prove the Body of Jesus which the Father prepared before him to be the whole intire Christ c. Neither did I produce It to prove the Body to be such what Disputing can there be with a Man that keeps neither to my Words nor to the Question Rejoynder But is this the great Enemy to Forgery the express Quoter one that cites to a Tittle and scorns as to Ignore his own Concessions so to render his own Conclusions for his Enemies Assertions who charges me with denying this Passage among others as any whit proving the Man Jesus to be the Christ whilst he quotes my own Conclusion upon it to have been no other then the Body of Jesus to have been the whole and intire Christ Now he cant compass his End he produced not those Scriptures to prove any such Thing but what is clearer then that it is the same thing with J. Faldo to deny the Body of Jesus to be the intire Christ of God and to deny the Christ of God consequently that by the Christ of God he understands with L. Muggleton only the Body that died So that he did but evade when he said that I argued against no body in affirming and proving that the Body taken in that time was not the whole Christ of God and that he produced those Scriptures to that very End notwithstanding what he sayes to the contrary for what else can any infer when he so obviously makes no Difference between saying The Man Jesus is not Christ and the visible Body of Jesus is not the whole intire Christ Thus Reader he Faulters at the Entrance I will give a brief Account of neer two pages of Answer by him omitted It is and will be granted that Simeon saw the Lord 's Christ but I hope J. F. will not deny unto that good man who waited for Israel's Consolation that he had as well a spiritual as natural or inward as outward Sight of Christ for it were both to deny Christ's Divinity and to conclude Simeon void of any spiritual Sight or Intendment in these Words of the Lord 's Christ as a Light enlightning the Gentiles c. though still be it understood that we confess that Child as seen and understood by Simeon with Respect to that great End of his Appearance to be the Lord 's Christ Let none then be so unjust as to infer we deny the Lords Christ because we rather chuse to say the Body of Christ then Christ for sayes J. Faldo as well as we elsewhere Christ is God manifest in Flesh See my Answer pag. 161. Nothing can be clearer then that I only argued in Opposition to his carnal Doctrine against the meer Bodie 's being the Christ of God Now since he makes me hereby to deny the Man Christ Jesus I must conclude that by the Man Jesus he understands no more then the meer Body of Jesus otherwise how do I deny the Man Jesus to be the Christ of God in only scrupeling to call the meer and only Body of Jesus the â—hrist of God His next Animadversion was this Reply p. 78. Let us observe how W. P. abuses that Scripture Acts 5. 30 31. The words sayes he are thus to be understood The God of our Fathers who raised up the Body of Jesus from the Dead which ye slew and hung upon a Tree him whose Body you so cruelly used hath God exalted at his Right Hand c. Beside this Construction which renders it not to be Christ but only his Body that suffered and so Christ never suffered nor dyed nor rose he W. P. puts instead of whom he slew which he slew that it may intend only the Body and not the Person of Christ Rejoynder I appeal to my Reader 's Understanding and Conscience if J. Faldo doth not in this Sentence make the meer Body of Christ to be the Christ of God for one Reason why he denyes my Interpretation is my
to invalidate the most convincing Testimony Man can have of a Deity and to principle Men for the rankest Atheism that ever was Yet such a sort of a Doctor J. Faldo is become and of all other Texts in the Bible from which to preach it hath chosen this Col. 1. 27. This Mystery among the Gentiles is Christ in you the Hope of Glory which indeed of all other doth most oppose and subvert it Once more and he hath done with us upon this Passage for this time Christ is in his People by his Graces wrought by his Spirit which is his Image and Likeness by the Manifestation of his Love and Glory his Works and Image in and on the Soul and do as effectually possess the Soul for Christ his Vse and Interest as a Faithful Friend can do according so that Text That Christ may dwell in your Hearts by Faith Eph. 3. 17. But I would fain know of J. Faldo how Christ's Graces Works and Image can be there and Christ the Workman excluded If Christ be not actually there they can never Actually be wrought there for none can work them but Christ by his Spirit In short either they may be wrought without Christ's Spirit which J. Faldo disallows or Christ's Spirit may work them and yet not be where iâ— works them or if the Spirit may be where it worketh them yet Christ cannot be where it works them and consequently divided from his own Spirit though indeed the Lord Christ is that Quickening Spirit which only makes alive again to God who is the Resurrection and the Life Oh the Dreadful Darkness that yet over-spreads the Hearts of called Christians It may be as truly said of them as it was of the Jews The Vail is yet over them and Christ Jesus the Anointed Saviour is unknown to them by that Redemption which he effectually worketh in all those that hearken to his Voice and are conformed to his holy Government They are Witnesses of his Graces Works and Image through believing in his Appearance and giving up like the Clay in the Hand of the Potter to be ordered and disposed by him Nor doth the Scripture he quotes impugn the Real Presence of Christ in his People for by Faith Christ dwelleth in the Hearts of his Children that is by believing in Christ he cometh to live and dwell in us who through the Unbelief of Men is shut out from being Head and Ruler in them Our Adversary would make Faith and Christ's real Presence incomparable or inconsistent whereas the one cannot possibly be enjoyed without the other Faith being as the opening of the Door of the Heart to receive Christ in to be Lord and King and if this be not J. Faldo's Faith he is void of the Faith of God's Elect which purifieth the Heart and gives to see God according to Mat. 5. 8. Blessed are the pure in Heart for they shall see God This Doctrine is the Overthrow of Christianity a turning back of the whole Stream of the New Covenant a cutting off the Spiritual Union for the Christian Dispensation is IMMANUEL God with us the Word is not stinted to Christ as the Head but concerns the Body also and God is manifested measurably in his People as he was in fulness by and through that holy Body nay some eminent Professors have gone so far as to say They make up but one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Anointed for the Oyl runs from the Head to the lowermost part of the Garment which takes in all It gives the Lye to Christs own Words who said He would come and receive them to himself he would not leave them Orphants which implies a real Presence Testimonies Good Old Apostolical Ignatius was not of J. Faldo's mind who in his Epistles produced and endeavoured to be proved genuine by Bish Vsher Isaac Vossius and D. Pearson says in that to the Ephesians pag. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. Let us do all things he so dwelling in us that we be HIS TEMPLES and he our God IN us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Corrupters of his House shall not inherit the Kingdom of God Iust Mart. Expos Tid p. 375. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. See saith he how he Paul is teaching the Edification that is in Christ whence we are the Temple of Christ according to what is written I will dwell in them and walk in them and I will be their God The Story of Richard Woodman in the Book of Maâ—tyrs affordeth us thus much to our Purpose in answer to the Bishop of Winchester I believe verily that I have the Spirit of God No Man can believe aright without the Spirit of God It is impossible to believe in God unless God DWELL IN US C. Goad defends our Faith in these words The Gospel is nothing else but the bringing forth of Christ IN us It calls us from Conformity to the World and from walking as Men unto the Life of God Right Spirit of Christ p. 17. T. Collier God is a Mystery Col. 22. and it is by the Appearance of God IN US we come to know God who is a Mystery The Truth is that we have had and stâ—ll have low and carnal Thoughts of God judging him to be a God AFAR OFF and not a God NIGH AT HAND This is that ANTICHRIST WHICH DENIES CHRIST TO BE COME IN THE FLESH See his Works p. 399. Again God who is in himself and in the Son not only by Union but also by a Dispensation of Grace to Men is likewise IN THE SAINTS and that not as in the Creatures or other Men BUT HE IS IN THE SAINTS AS HE WAS IN CHRIST The Saints are TRULY made Partakers of his Nature hence called CHRISTIANS they are CHRISTED and indeed Christ and Christians MAKE BUT ONE CHRIST ONE ANOINTED ONE GOD FILLS THEM BOTH See his Works p. 241 242. J. Sprig in his Preface saith thus Those that know Christ in them only immediatione virtutis not suppositi know not so Full and Glorious a Proportion in him to their End It is and must be confessed that God is and subsists otherwise in Himself then Men but this hinders not the IMMEDIATENESS OF HIS PRESENCE AND DWELLING IN MEN If you confine Christ's Dwelling to a LOCAL HEAVEN you are ignorant of that which is the greatest Joy that can be CHRIST DWELLS IN THE HEART Sprig ' s Testimony p. 87. Thus Martin Finch who stiles himself Preacher of the Gospel in his little Treatise intituled Animadversions upon Sr. Henry Vain ' s Book pag. 81. The Word of God abided and dwelt in them 1 John 2. 14. If we take it for Christ they had him Christ ABIDING IN THEM and surely they that abide in Christ and have Christ abiding IN THEM they are true Saints Thus Reader we take leave of this Chapter and proceed to examine his next CHAP. XI That we are not guilty of Idolatry as charged by our Adversary True Worshippers The Charge inverted
IN his former Book he charged us with the Sin of Idolatry his Argument lay thus Those who own and profess that to be God which is not God are gross Idolaters But the Quakers do so in professing the Light within and the Soul of every Man to be God Therefore Idolaters The Testimonies upon which he insisted I faithfully and fully considered in above Seven Pages of Sober Answer he returns me about Three in Defence of his Charge not giving above a Dozen Lines of what I writ and those made up of Scraps rather contracting what he said before then making any substantial Reply to them But however I will be just to him Thus he begins Reply p. 84 85. To my Charge of Idolatry he answers as one that intended to confirm not confute it His very Denyals implying a large Grant of the Question p. 192 193. We do forever renounce any such Principle as that the Soul of Man simply as such is the very Essence and Being of God Then it is with him the very Essence or Being of God though not because it is the Soul of Man Rejoynder No such Matter But it is plain how much the Man is upon the Ketches His Argument led me to such an Answer for he calls it The Soul or Spirit of a Man which is a constitutive Part of a Man pag. 114. I was therefore led by him to write in that Abstract Sense which thus far makes for him in case he can maintain his Charge that the Idolatry would be the grosser Besides God is the Soul or Life of the Soul therefore there was a Necessity for such a Distinction Reply p. 85. W. P. pag. 193. We never did do nor shall assert the God that made Heaven or Earth to be comprehendible within the Soul of Man so that when we say the Light is within any we do not intend the whole Being of Light All that W. P. denyes here is but God's being so in the Soul of Man as that he is no where else or nothing else yet allowing the Soul and Light within to be God essential Rejoynder It were heartily to be wished we had nothing but Ignorance to charge him with in this Passage but methinks he would not have us to take him for a Man of so little Understanding as he hath need to have that writes so much Falshood and does not know it First He hath dropt the most substantial part of my Answer in the middle Secondly These Passages relate not to the Soul but to the Light upon occasion of a place he cited out of G. Fox the younger therefore not applicable to the Soul yet by him as well applyed to the Soul as to the Light Thirdly He sayes All that I deny in those words he quoted out of my Answer is only God's being so in the Soul of Man as that he is no where or nothing else which if he had only said it of the Light it would be no Contradiction to my Principle or the Truth for the Light is as well on the Earth as in the Heavens and in my Chamber as in the Firmament without any Error in Physicks and so may God whom in my Answer I called the great Sun of Righteousness that caused his Spiritual Light to arise and shine into the Souls of Men be God as well within as without the Soul for where-ever Divine Light is God is and where God is Divine Light is Howbeit we do not call the Manifestation of Light God though the Manifestation of God Fourthly His saying That I yet allow the Soul and Light within to be God essential is a down-right Falshood as with respect to the Soul it is nigh two pages before that I considered his Charge against us about the Soul What shall I call then his thrusting of it in here which cannot be concerned in the very Nature of the Answer as thus appears If the Soul be God God is comprehended within the Soul and is no where or nothing else but Soul and where the Soul is An Absurdity yea a Blasphemy never rightly to be inferred from any thing I ever said or writ thus scandalously flung upon my Answer by J. Faldo for want of a better Reply I cannot think that ever man adventured under his Pretences of Religion so knowingly to pervert wrest and misapply Men's Words about Doctrines of the greatest Importance This shows he values Credit more then Conscience who undertakes to fasten a Blasphemous Consequence untruly on my words lest he should be thought to have charged us beyond what he could prove but his Weakness bewrayes his Malice For if the Soul may be God and yet I deny that God may be nothing else his very Words in my Name then may the Soul be God and God the Soul and yet God something else and that something else God When or where did I ever give Occasion for such Biasphemish Gibberish Yet this is the Result of what he dares tell the World is my Meaning I may say the same respecting Locallity or Place for what Man not stark Mad would say the Soul is God yet deny not but that God may be else-where which J. Faldo also makes though an express Contradiction to his wrests a piece of my Meaning for unless God may be divided from God where-ever he is the Soul is if the Soul be God and so one Man is in another and every Man â—biquitary or every where at the same time Friendly Reader none of this Blasphemy and Nonsence belongeth to me therefore I return it to the True Parent to maintain it as he is able But he would have the VVorld believe that of 23. Citations out of acknowledged Quakers I did but nibble a little at five of them I think him not worth proving a L that have already so many times done it upon unquestionable Ground in this Discourse besides I should be necessitated to transcribe my whole Answer but I beseech this Kindness of the Reader that he would not think his Time lost in perusing the 20th Chapter of my Answer where he may see himself if I have only nibled perhaps he will have a better Opinion of my Endeavours I shall have Occasion here to touch upon some of them and no more yet enough to show my Adversary's unfair Dealing Reply To Fox Junior's who calls the Light the Eternal God which created all Things In his continued Discourse personating the Light he calls it the Light in you me the Light in them which P. would evade by saying I granted that in the first part within Man was not mentioned Rejoynder Had I said no more then this it might have past for an Evasion But to pass over a page and a half of pertinent Answer to his Application of both Passages out of G. F. and then say I evaded them by urging his Grant that within Man was not mentioned in the first Passage is to act the Shifter with a Witness especially when the little Part he quotes was
not said by me concerning the last Passage in which lay the Difficulty to wit me the Light in them but the first on which he very little insisted himself viz. that the Light is the Eternal God c. this transposing of my Answer and exchanging it was not ingenuous This Reader in short I offered as the Explanation of G. F's Expression and the Conclusion of a great deal more too large to be recited viz. That he who is the Eternal Fountain of all Life and Sun of Light caused his Light to visit the Hearts and shine in the Consciences of all Man-kind as well of such as rebel against it and scorn it to reprove them as of those who receive it and gladly submit to it to direct and justifie them wherefore we utterly deny that the Manifestation in Man strictly considered is the most high God but a Manifestation of God and from God by the In-shining of his blessed Light and we cannot be said to worship the Manifestation but that Eternal God who is Light that is thereby manifested p. 194. The next Testimony brought by him and examined by us was out of E. Burroughs's True Faith c. for page he gave us none neither then nor now but supposing true Citation a Thing most unusual with him I will set down his Words as they lye Reply p. 85. The next W. P. brings off as clearly Every Man hath that which is one in Union with the Spirit of Christ even as good as the Spirit of Christ according to his measure E. Burroughs Can any Man saith W. P. be so stupid as to think that E. B. ever intended the Soul of Man that purely and simply constitutes him such for he is speaking of that universal Grace Light Spirit which God hath given unto all c. His purely and simply constitutes is pure learned Non-Sense If what every Man hath be as good in kind as the Spirit of Christ which E. B. confesseth it must be God and Christ Rejoynder He should either have past the Manner of my Expression or have corrected it better but I had rather be guilty of Non-sense then horrible Perversion J. F's Crime for he applies that to the meer Soul of Man which E. B. not only intended but expressed of the Light of Christ within Men. I will set down some of his Words that it may be an indeleable Brand upon J. F. a notorious Abuser of our Writings E. Burroughs in his Answer to J. Bunnion and this Passage Heathens Turks Jews Atheists have that that doth convince of Sin yet are so far from having the Spirit of Christ in them that they delight to serve their Lust Thus expresseth himself Do they serve Sin or Lusts because Christ hath not given them Light to discover their Sin or because they hate the Light that is given them Tell me Is not the Light or Spirit of Christ the only Thing that doth convince of Sin Or doth any Thing convince of Sin contrary or besides or without the Spirit of Christ If nay then it must needs be that it is from or by or something of the Nature of the Spirit of Christ which is in the Heathens E. B. argues and about five or six Lines lower thus concludes Till thou provest the Light of Christ which thou confessest every Man hath to be contrary to the Spirit of Christ I shall say Every Man hath that which is one in union with and like the Spirit of Christ even as good as the Spirit of Christ according to its Measure Now let J. Faldo blush if he can Certainly Reader greater Injustice could not well have been acted towards any Man's Writings then he hath acted in this Particular for what is clearer then that the Soul is no further concerned in E. B's Words then that it onght to obey the Light and Spirit he wâ—â—â—es of I told him this before as that Part of my Answer he hath transcribed into his Reply shows to wit that E. B. was speaking of the Vniversal Grace Light or Spirit which God hath given unto all c. of which he takes no Notice but thinks an Epitomy of his first Book of Accusation and Wresting Reply enough to my Answer But which is yet baser he hath the Confidence for all this to cry out against Shifting and Evasion But to make it yet plainer I will set it down more distinctly E. B. Every Man hath that which is as good and like the Spirit of Christ J. F. Then every Man's Soul is as good and like the Spirit of Christ whiâ—h is God therefore the Soul is God W. P. answers E. B. understood it not of the Soul but the Vniversal Grace Light or Spirit therefore no Proof J. F. If what every Man hath be as good in kind as the Spirit of God which E. B. confesseth it must be God and Christ W. P. That which E. B. confesseth is of the Light or Spirit and not the Soul therefore J. F's Charge is false Now Reader what shall we call this but Petitio principii a begging of the Question a repeating of his Perversion It is so because I will have it so as much as if he should say I have charged them higher then any more then that I pretend to bring their own Books for Evidences If I yeild to have perverted them my Credit is gone my Books are despised and which is worst of all my Gain is lost But to the next Reply p. 86. That of Fox he deals treacherously in leaving out the Proposition to which the Answer is made and thereby its Sense also F. brings in the Priest saying It is an Expression of a dark Mind to say that God is not distinguished from his Saints To which he reples He is a Reprobate and out of the Apostles Doctrine What can be better proved If God be not distinct from them not only their Souls but the Composition of the Saints Souls and Bodies are God But if this Passage do not prove P. a designed Deluder none in the World will Rejoynder The Substance of my Answer took in the Priest's Assertion but that J. Faldo almost alwayes takes Care to conceal G. F. writ not like a Philosopher but an honest plain Christian Man Nor is it any Disadvantage to our Cause that either willingly or through Unskilfulness he neglects them for he meant by not being distinct that they were not at a Distance in point of Place by Reason of the dwelling of God and Christ in his People It is apparent G. F. intended no more by his Answer which our Adversary in his first Book gave in these Words But God and Christ is in the Saints and dwells in them and he the Priest is a Reprobate and out of the Apostles Doctrine We see by this that the Question was not whether the Soul be God and Christ but whether God and Christ are at a distance from or dwell in the Saints yea or nay I leave it with my Reader
's Conscience who hath shown himself the designed Deluder of us two Reply W. P. tells me p. 197. That Fisher did not mean the Spirit of Man that is any Part of Man's Nature whereas his very Words are The Spirit of Man which concurs to the constituting Man in his primitive Perfection I told him also that Fisher allowed no Man in his degenerate Estate to have any Spirit at all as Constitutive of Man Rejoynder 'T is true if he puts primitive Perfection to it for nothing can reduce Man to his primitive Perfection but that Holy Spirit which he may be said to have lost that is any Interest in by his Transgression but to say he told me that S. F. allowed no Man in his degenerate Estate to have any Spirit at all as constitutive of Man meerly is to tell his Reader an impious Falshood twice over and not to essay the enervating of one of those Reasons by me urged to prove it so S. Fisher's Words were briefly these As to the Spirit of Man which concurs to the constituting of Man in his primitive Perfection it is the Breath of Life which God breathed into his Soul whereby he became a Soul that did partake something of God's own Life This is that living Principle of that Divine Nature which Man did before his Degeneration and shall again after his Degeneration partake of I told him that S. Fisher did never intend it of the Natural Soul of Man but rather of the divine Life of the Soul without which the Soul is destitute of the Knowledge of the true and living God his own Words very plainly show for if S. Fisher intended that Spirit which is the divine principle that man did partake of before his Degeneration certain and clear it is that since Man did under that Degeneration pertake of his own Soul or else he could not have been a Man S. Fisher never meant the meer Soul of Man but the Life of that divine Principle which regenerates and renews the Soul unto a Life of Purity and Blessedness Unto which and much more he affords me no other Reply then what I have already inserted to wit I told him that Fisher allowed no Man in his degenerate Estate to have any Spirit at all as constitutive of Man as if his meer tell him were Convincement enough to his Reader that S. Fisher held all sinful Men to have no Souls and he knows the Consequence If no Souls then no Punishment for to be constituted a perfect Man to God and a meer Man is not one and the same thing neither can pertaking of the divine Life or Nature be so understood as that the Soul is that divine Life or Nature it self or that such as pertake not of it have no Souls Such Doctrine better becomes J. F's adventures Abuses then the Writings of that honest and Christian Man He tells us of some other Quotations which I medled not with particularly that G. Fox in his Book called the Great Mystery c. should say The Soul was Equal with God that it was without beginning infinite in it self and a Part of God for which he assigns us no Page in his Reply in his first Book the 16th I have diligently perused it and find no such thing however should he have ever written these Words I dare say for him he understood no more by Equality then Vnity for God is greater then all by Infinite no more then something that is not finite or which comes to an End and by the Soul 's being without Beginning and a Part of God no other then that divine Breath of Life which is as the Soul or Life of the Soul that came out from God and therefore is of God that Cause is much to be suspected that props it self with such shallow Cavils he observes no Nicety of Expression in his Writings and it is therefore disingenuously done of any to make this ill Use of his plain and vulgar Phrases But least all this should fail and he had Reason to suspect it he brings us out a Piece of a Letter formerly written by Josiah Coal who lived and dyed a faithful Servant of God and is now at Rest with him put into his Hands I suppose by his Gentle-Man p. 94. as he received it at the Hand I suppose of some Vagabond-Quaker First That he should call George Fox the Father of many Nations but what is this more then to say that Men of several Nations have been begat unto Christ through him Thus Paul was a Father to the Romans Corinthians c. 1 Cor. 4. 15. for though ye have ten thousand Instructers yet ye have not many Fathers for in Christ have I begotten you Secondly That his Life hath reached through his Children to the Isles afar off to the begetting of many again unto a lively Hope But what of all this The life of God is one in all Paul lived by the Life of Christ and so did Peter Paul was present in Spirit though absent in Body 1 Cor. 5. 3 4. Thirdly That Generations to come should call him blessed But is not the Memory of the just blessed Prov. 10. 7. and did not God by Isaiah promise concerning Israel I will make thee an Eternal Excellency and the Joy of many Generations Isa 60. 57. This belongs to G Fox Josiah Coal and every Child of God yea and J. Faldo too if he were so good as he should be 4thly That his Being and Habitation was in the Power of the Highest And so it should be for that is the Habitation of every Child of God for others dwell in the Power of the World In short we are exhorted to stand fast in the Power of Godliness and we read that it was the End of the Evangelical Ministry to turn People from the Power of Satan unto the Power of God which is the Power of the Highest 5thly That he ruled and governed in Righteousness This is but what Paul exorts Timothy to do in the Church of Christ as both his Epistles inform us at large Every Elder Overseer or Pastor in the Church of Christ is bound to do so If J. F. can prove he doth otherwise he may then charge him with uncomely walking but not J. Coal with Blasphemy for saying that a good Man governs in Righteousness Lastly That his Kingdom is established in Peace and the Increase thereof is without End So is the Kingdom of the Saints of God That they have a Kingdom and Dominion is clear from several Scriptures It is the Fathers good Pleasure to give you a KINGDOM Luke 12. 23. Wherefore we have received a KINGDOM which cannot be shaken Heb. 12. 28. The Saints shall JUDGE the World 1 Cor. 6. 3. The Nature of this Kingdom is declared Luke 17. 12. The Kingdom of God is within Joh. 18. 36. My Kingdom is not of this World Rom. 14. 17. For the Kingdom of God is not Meat and Drink but Righteousness Peace and Joy in the
Holy Ghost The Durableness of this Kingdom is laid down by Daniel and the Time came that the Saints possessed the Kingdom whose Kingdom is an Everlasting Kingdom Dan. 7. 22. 27. Yet upon these so innocent Expressions so scriptural and therefore so easily defensible doth this Adversary of ours call an Evidence of the blasphemous unheard of Passages and Principles among our Ministry conceived vented and allowed which did the World know it would make their Ears tingle and their Hearts ake But we will see if these Words belong not of more Right to a Passage that fell from the Mouth of a Court-Chaplain in the Golden Age of Independency not in a private Letter but a publick Auditory that we may help him to a clearer Sight of his own Folks and that his severe Exclamation better suits them then us After the Death of O. C. that all due Acknowledgments might be paid to his Memory for the noble Acts he did of breaking all Oaths he made to God and Men to advance his own Family and Interest though to the Scandal of Religion and Loss of the Cause a certain Chaplain of his broak forth with this Extatical and Elegiack Assertion that if that were the Word of God meaning the Bible in his Hand then as certainly that blessed Spirit the Protector was with Christ at the right Hard of the Father and if he be there what may his Family expect from him for if he were so useful and helpful and so much Good influenced from him to them when he was in a mortal State how much more Influence will they have from him now he is in Heaven THE FATHER SON AND SPIRIT THROUGH HIM BESTOWING GIFTS AND GRACFS UPON THEM I will omit naming the Party he is dead I give the Fact and it speaks so much Idolatry that nothing ranker can be produced of the most Extravigant Votaries of Rome God if it pleaseth him of his great Mercy give this poor Man Repentance before that Hour overtake him in which it will be hid from his Eyes which ends my Return to these hard and evil Speeches I shall as my Manner hath been produce the Testimonies of certain considerable Men in defence of what we believe concerning the Light within and others relating to the Soul of Man for their Sakes whom Tradition hath abused the frequent Clamours and Invectives of many against us blinded so as to think we are the Sink of Error and off-scouring of all Heresy to the End that they may see our so much decryed Doctrine clearly and abundantly approved by such as are of general Reputation among them Of the Light shining in Man Vatablus and Drusius upon Job 24. 13. They are of those that rebelled against the Light say that it is the Light of God and that it is God himself I suppose none will doubt that this Light shined in the Consciences of those that rebelled against it consequently the light that shines in the Conscience is the Light of God as he is the great Sun of Light Munsterius and Clarius upon Job Ch. 25. 3. Upon whom doth not his Light arise ask Who is there in whom the Light of the Divine Wisdom doth not shine Codurcus is of the same Mind saying he enlightneth all Men referring us to John's Testimony Drusius upon the same Place queries Who receiveth not his Light and is not illuminated by his Light Erasmus and Vatablus on Joh. 1. 9. calls it the Fountain of Light whence the Light also flowed to John himself Now if this Light be in Men and of the Fountain of Light which say they is God I hope none will deny theâ—â— the Light that shines in Men is divine Light and consequently God 1 Joh. 1. 5. Zegerus on Joh. 1. ver 4 5. In him was Life and the Life was the Light of Men c expresseth himself thus That Life by which all things were made that which is the Word yea which is God the Fountain of all Life that alwayes was and is the Light of all Men and it shineth in the Darkness of our Souls which the Prince of Darkness had darkened Cameron on the place saith It is to be understood especially of that Light which is unto Salvation and whereby it comes to pass that we are freed from the Darkness of Sin and Death All which is to say that the Light which shineth in Man's Heart is Divine and Saving therefore God manifesting himself in Man Dr. H. Moor in his Philosophick Cabbal pag. 27. sayes The Light pursued Adam and upbraided unto him his Case after his Transgression and that it was the DIVINE Light wherefore he was ashamed and hid himself at the Approach of the DIVINE Light manifesting himself to him to the Reprehension and Rebuke of him And the DIVINE Light charged all this Misery and Confusion upon the Eating of the forbidden Fruit and Luscious Dictates of his own Will And the DIVINE Light spoak IN Adam concerning the Woman What work hath she made here Thus doth he make the Light that reproves in the Conscience to be the Divine Light and consequently of the Nature of God who is the great Fountain of Divine Light Nay to put it out of doubt he reads those words which in Genesis say It was God himself that reproved Adam after the manner before expressed to wit the Divine Light in Adam reproved him thereby making the DIVINE LIGHT in Adam and GOD to be ONE and the same Being Of the Soul Justin Martyr brings Tryphon questioning thus concerning the Soul and himself allowing it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. That is Is the Soul Divine and Immortal Is it a Particle of that Commander Himself and as it seeth God so is it also permitted to contain Divinity in our Mind and thereby even now to be happy Yea altogether said I. Tertullian de Anima p. 297. asserts the Immortality and Divinity of the Soul P. Fagius in Gen. 2. 7. Rabbi Nehamanides hath observed That he that breatheth on any contributes something of his own to it whence Christ our Saviour when he would communicate the Holy Spirit to his Disciples he did it by breathing upon them signifying that he contributed to them something of his own that was Divine The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth something DIVINE and HEAVENLY some think 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because the Immortal Soul of Man is a certain DIVINE THING come from Heaven And the Poets call the Soul of Man a PARTICLE OF DIVINE BREATH 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a breath or spiritus DIVINE HEAVENLY Vital Immortal and Enduring forever The Soul of Man DIVINE and HEAVENLY consists in a DIVINE and HEAVENLY Spirit The Author Hiskuni understands it to be an Inspiration from the Holy Spirit of God Peter Martyr speaks of the Soul thus in Psalm 94. We are taught not to with-draw from the Divine Nature those things that are perfect and absolute in us pag. 12. and in pag. 122. They say says he 〈◊〉
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth chiefly signifie that which is DIVINE and Reasonable that God doth give unto us H. Bullenger saith The Soul is a Spiritual Substance poured of God into Man's Body in his 4 Decad. 10 Serm. Augustine saith It is felt in the Life it is unutterable breathed into Man's Body by God of his own Essence and Nature from the secret Power of God In short Very various have been the Opinions of the Ancients concerning the Soul Plato divided it into Two parts Zeno into Three Panaetius into Five or Six Soranus into Seven Chrysippus into Eight Apollophanes into Nine by some of the Stoicks into Ten by Possidonius into Twelve as Tertullian reports in his Book de Anima p. 273. and H. Bullenger tells us That hardly two say one and the same thing concerning it Seeing then that Men of such excellent Abilities and nicest Disquisitions both in Nature and Theology rather prove their own Contradiction and Confusion then give us any certain Account of the Soul what she is and that the Scripture mentions it so rarely and obscurely and that J. Faldo denies all immediate Inspiration as he calls it which is the only Way left us to understand it he hath not shown himself a Charitable Divine but an Impious Wrangler in falling so heavily upon us with the opprobious Name of Idolaters for assigning something more of Divinity unto the Soul in its primitive Perfection then his Opinion will allow us CHAP. XII Of the Resurrection of Dead Bodies and Eternal Recompence Our Doctrine maintained by Scripture Reason and Authorities IN his former Book he charged us with the Denyal of the Resurrection of the Dead and Eternal Recompence The Testimonies he brought for Proof were such as rendred him very weak or something worse I hope they were sufficiently dis-engaged from his Service unto which according to his old Custom he hath not thought fit to reply He only takes notice of two or three short Passages out of six or seven pages of Answer on which he bestows a few Squibs and concludes with that Contempt and Rudeness no Man pretending to Religion or Humanity would have vented especially against a Man that he provok't to answer him by beginning to abuse his Friends in general and him in particular considering withal that his Profession is to suffer not to insult Strange that my Religion and Conscience should subject me to so much Contempt with a Man that pretends to both But W. P. I dare say had not been thus treated by J. F. could he threaten the Law and Flant and Swagger at the rate J. F. doth But it is like such Folk to insult where he may do it safely One of his Testimonies was this Christ is the Resurrection to raise up that which Adam lost and to destroy him who deceived him So Christ is the Resurrection unto Life of Body Soul and Spirit and sorenews Man Princ. pap call Quak. p. 34. I will not trouble my self nor spend my Reader 's time in transscribing what I said in Defence of this Passage as to the End he designed it Nothing can be clearer then that this concerns Regeneration so sayes J. F. himself pag. 132. consequently the Resurrection of Dead Bodies is not concerned in it His second Testimony fell from G. Whitehead in these words if we may believe him I do not believe this Body shall rise again after it is Dead I told him of his Disingenuous Catching and put him in mind of the Apostles own Expression that justifies the Saying if it was ever said Thou Fool Thou SOWEST NOT that Body that shall be But unto whatever I urged for the clearing of our Friends Words and Writings from his ill Constructions like an unfair if not a fearful Adversary he makes no Return I will now set down what he thought fit to give us Reply p. 88. Take W. P' s own words acknowledging the Truth of my Charge Either the Resurrection of the Body must be without the Matter or it must not If it must then it is not the same numerical Body and so their proper and strict Resurrection they must let go although this allows my Charge true and so enough to its Vindication yet I shall Answer P's Arguments against the Resurrection wherein be opposes Philosophical Conclusions to the express Doctrine of the Scriptures Rejoynder If I have herein vindicated his Charge it must follow that he charged us with Denying the Resurrection of the Body without any Allowance of Change as to that Matter and Corruptibility it was buried with consequently That J. Faldo believes a Resurrection of the same Carnal Bodies that are interred without any Alteration whatever for that allowed they cannot rise properly and strictly the same Bodies If our rejecting this Carnal Dream of his is that horrid Principle he charged us with Denying we have no Reason to be much concerned about the Success But he proceeds Reply pag. 88 89. The latter part of W. P's Dilemma is the Horn with which he pushes at the Resurrection viz. If it must not be without that same gross matter it dyed with then I affirm it cannot be incorruptible because it will carry with it that which will render it corruptible ad infinitum The Body must necessarily be the same Matter is allowed but W. P. calls it in his assumption of the 2d part of his Dilemma the same gross Matter which makes his Argument Falacious in the Form of it But to let that pass it shall be the same Matter and numerical though not of the same Grosness and shall have the same Substance and Essential Form though not the same Accidents Rejoynder Is this the Scripture-Doctrine he says I oppose with Philosophical Conclusions Would he would give us but one Scripture that looks but favourably towards this Reply I never read one yet of a Body's having the same Matter and not the same Grosness the same substance and Essence and not the same Accidents For shame must our Denyal of Physical Nicities or rather J. Faldo's Absurdities be branded for horrid Doctrine 'T is true in Philosophy that a Substance may loose its Accidents and yet remain the same Substance Things may be discolour'd yet the same Beings they were before But that Matter should be such and not gross is incongruous with Scripture and Philosophy Matter and Grosness or Corruption are Synonimous in Philosophy and common Speech But that Grosness or the Substantial Part of any Man's Body should be but an Accident that the Accidence teaches all Boyes in a Noun-Substantive deserves a Lash at least Are Flesh Blood and Bones Accidents or that of them which is gross and corruptible an Accident I wonder what a fearful sort of a Noun-Substantive J. F. would be in case he were condens'd and rarefied of such gross and corruptible Accidents Indeed one would think his Head if not all the rest had been near akin to them when he writ this piece of new Philosophy But this abundantly proveth
upon what Foot his Resurrection standeth if it may be said to have any or to stand at all Faellacious is but one of his hard words for if the Body rifeth with the same Matter it carried to the Grave it riseth with gross Matter unless it carried no gross Matter thither Let him chuse of the two which to deny But is this to answer my Argument to tell us with so much unwarranted Confidence that the Body shall be the same Matter Substance and Essence c. the very Question What is this but to say It shall be so because it shall be so If he would have done any thing he should have demonstrated how Matter can be without Grosness and the most gross and Material part of the Body to be but the Accidents But he thinks he hath said something to the Point Reply pag. 89. To talk that it the Body cannot be incorruptible because beyond the Nature of Matter it self is to talk like an Atheist making Nature to be God and not acknowledging the God of Nature Rejoynder Did I dare sport in Religion scarce ever Man gave a fairer Occasion in his Compass But he practises it and I abhor it This is such a riddle me riddle me as I never heard of before W. P. sayes The Nature of Matter admits not of Incorruptibility ergo W. P. is an Atheist ergo he makes Nature to be God and ergo he acknowledges not the God of Nature This is the very Man that not a page off reflects Ignorance upon my Philosophy Doubtless a Peerless Disputant one way or other May he evermore thus confute me which is all I will say to such subtil Reasoning and losty Argumentation in this place Yet he has not done Reply p. 89. If God be omnipotent which he is or he is not God he is able as the Apostle speaks to subdue all things to himself with which words he answers all Cavils from Impossibility in Nature Rejoynder The Question was not about God's Power nor was it so much as any Part of the Question But whether Matter is not by Nature corruptible and how that which is corruptible by Nature may be by Nature incorruptible This Scripture he urges to prove his carnal Resurrection will as well prove the Popish Transubstantiation or any the most unreasonable Conceit in the World for it is but saying All things are possible with God and God is able to subdue all things unto himself and the Business is done at J. Faldo's rate of arguing But the Question is not about what God can do but what he hath done and has declared he will do I know there are Impossibilities in Nature which God's Omnipotency makes possible but if J. Faldo doth not know that there is a Difference between Impossibility in Nature and Contrariety to Nature I now tell him there is one and that so wide as though Almighty God frequently supplies Nature's Want of Power yet he rarely if ever acts contrary to and inconsistent with the Nature of his own Creatures What is spiritual remains spiritual what is material material and what is corruptible corruptible But let us see how much better he acquits himself of another Passage which he ventures to cite and in my Opinion doth no more Reply p. 89. W. P. proceeds farther in this vain Reasoning and wicked too p. 202. I say we cannot see how that which is of the Dust should be eternal whilst that from whence it came is by Nature but temporal and that which is yet most of all irreconcileable with Scripture and right Reason is that the Loss and Change of Nature from corruptible to incorruptible natural to spiritual should not make it another Body That it is according to Scripture I have given large Proof in my Book to no one of which he replyeth as also how unreasonable it is to call that a Resurrection which is not of the same numerical Body Rejoynder We may guess how well he proved it in his first Book by the Strength he hath employed to maintain it in his second But let all sober Men judge if this Reply be pertinent to this Part of my Answer yet he promised he would answer my Arguments For the Scripture it is clear That Corruption shall not inherit Incorruption neither can Flesh and Blood inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 15. 50. Thus Anota cert Divin anno 1645. upon the Place and if he will know the true Resurection set him learn to understand this weighty Passage For we know that if our Earthly House of this Tabernacle were dissolved we have a Building of God an House not made with Hands Eternal in the Heavens 2 Cor. 5. 1. And I cannot but wonder my Adversaries Understanding should be so benighted as that contrary to express Scripture he should assert a Resurrection of the same Body that is buried properly and strictly so the Apostle teaches us to believe that it is not that same Body that is sown that shall be for though we shall be changed from Mortality to Immortality Corruption to Incorruption 2 Cor. 5. 1. and 1 Cor. 15. 37 50. yet mens Bodies of Flesh and Blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God For the Word Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth hot strictly imply a taking up of the same Numerical Body as he would have us believe from his new found Relative IT first Book 2. Part p. 138. for which Beza shall give him a Release both from the Latin and original Greek there being no Word in either for his Relative IT on which he and his factious Brother Hicks have so relatively insisted Indeed as their last and best Refuge The Text lyeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seritur corpus animale resuscitatur corpus spirituale i. e. Anatural Body is sown a spiritual Body is raised that is They lay down a natural and take up a spiritual Body or in lieuof a Natural receive a spiritual Body not that the Natural Body shall be transubstantiated into a Spiritual Body or that admitting of such an Exchange that the Spiritual is the same Numerical Body that was the Natural for so the Natural and Spiritual Body would be one and the same but suppose J. Faldo ' s Relative IT to hold I do utterly deny that this Text is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's Carnal Body at all I will recite it with the five following Verses as they ly in our English Translation It is sown a Natural Body it is raised a spiritual Body There is a Natural Body and there is a Spiritual Body and so it s written The first Man Adam was made a Living Soul the last Adam was made a Quickning Spirit howbeit that was not first which is spiritual but that which is Natural and afterward that which is Spiritual The first Man is of the Earth Earthy the second Adam is the Lord from Heaven As is the Earthy so are they that are Earthy and as is the Heavenly so are they also
Earth and that those very Bodies the Molds being turned aside shall start out of the Grave This Doctrine the Atheist very dearly hugs as a Pledge in his bold Conceit of the Falsness and Vanity of all the other Articles of Religion wherefore he fancying the upshot of Christianity to be so groundless and incredible he fairly quits himself of the Trouble of all and yields himself up wholely to the Pleasures of this present World To the Objection of Atheists who play hard upon J. Faldo's Carnal Resurrection First In that Canables proper Bodies are made up the Flesh of other Men so as if every one had his own he would have never a Body in the Resurrection Secondly That it implies that all Men are buried when as Myriads are drowned in the Sea and eaten by Fishes Thirdly That Men's Bodies are passing like Rivers consequently no more the same Numerical Bodies then the Water that runs away is the same River and upon this score the Body of an Old Man must pay for the Sine of a Young Man whose youthful Body felt the Pleasure and is gone He thus answers out of the best sort of Philosophers That the Soul of every Man is his individial Person and that she alone it is that sees hears enjoyes Pleasures and undergoes Pain and that the Body is not sensible of any thing no more then a Man's Dublet when he is well Bastinado'd and this Answer sayes he takes away all the first and last Cavil he goes on and why do Men plead for the Consociation of the Soul 's numerical Body in Reward or Punishment but that they fancy the Body capable of Pleasure Pain but they err not knowing the Nature of things the Body being utterly uncapable of all Sense and Cogitation as not only the best Platonists but also that excellent Philosopher Des-Cartes hath determined and is abundantly demonstrated in my Treatise of the Immortallity of the Soul See Book 2. Chap. 2 4 5 6. To the second Cavil I answer That the Universal Expression of Men's rising out of the Grave is but a Prophetical Scheme of Speech the more strongly to strike our Sences as I have already intimated in my Exposition on the 1 Cor. 15. against the Psichopannachites see Book 1. c. 6. § 3. This Succour saith he we have against the Atheists out of Philosophy but I answer further as concerning the Scripture it self That I dare challenge him to produce any place of Scripture out of which he can make it appear that the Mystery of the Resurrection implies the Recessitation or raising up of the same Numerical Body The most Pregnant of all is Job 19. which late Interpreters are now so wise as not to understand at all of the Resurrection And for 1 Cor. 15. that Chapter is so far from asserting this Curiosity that it plainly sayes it is not the same Body But the Atheist will still hang on and object further That the very Term Resurrectio implies that the same Body shall rise again for that only that falls can be said properly to rise again Where let the Reader take notice that D. More calls J. Faldo Atheist for it his Objection against me Rep. p. 89. But sayes D. More The Answer will be easie the Objection being grounded meerly upon a Mistake of the sense of the word which is to be interpreted out of those higher Origiginals the Greek and Hebrew and not out of the Latine though the word in Latine doth not alwayes imply an Individual Restitution of what is gone or faln as in that Verse in Ovid Victa tamen vinces subversaque Troja resurges But this faith he is not so near to our Purpose yet it excludes the same numerical Troja Let us rather consider the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which resurrectio supplies in Latine and therefore must be made to be of as large a sense as it Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so far from signifying in some places the Reproduction or Recovery of the same thing that was before that it â—ears no sense at all of Reiteration in it as Mat. 22. 24. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and shall raise up Seed unto his Brother Also Gen. 7. 4. there 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies meerly a living Substance and therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in an active signification according to this sense will be nothing else but a giving or continuing Life and Substance to a thing The word in the Hebrew that answers to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Translators translate a living Substance whence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to this Analogy may very well bear the same latitude of sense that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they being both words that are rendred Resurrectio but simply of themselves only Vevification or Erection unto Life Thus far D. H. More against John Faldo's Carnal Resurrection of whose Philosophy Scripture-Challenge and Criticisms let him clear himself if he can I shall also produce a Testimony out of T. Collier T. Coll. Works pag. 169. This Doctrine of the Resurrection of this Body is by some denyed by others too Carnally looked upon some thinking that our Bodies of Flesh shall be raised in the same Form in which it dyed others that it shall be spiritual yet question whether it shall be of the same Substance therefore it will be necessary to consider two Particulars for the clearing of it First By what Power we shall be raised Secondly With what Bodies 1. By what Power Answ 1 st By the same Power by which Jesus Christ was raised which was by the Power and Spirit of God 2dly By the same Power and Spirit that the Saints are raised from the Spiritual Death of Sin and Self Phil. 3. 10. Rom. 8. 11. This being a Truth that they shall be raised by the same Power it may somewhat direct us to the Form in which they shall be raised which is the second Particular that is in a spiritual Form not in a Fleshly for as the Spirit of Christ raiseth us up in the Spirit while we are here so shall it raise up our Spirit in the last Day It is sown a Natural Body it is raised a Spiritual Body Our vile Bodies shall be changed and made like his Glorious Body D. H. Hammon also denyes a proper and strict Resurrection of Bodies and consequently is guilty of that horrid Principle as J. Faldo calls it which may be seen at large in his Comment 1 Cor. 15. Among other things he tells us of one Synesius out of Vossius who was made Bishop not withstanding he refused to subscribe the Article of the Resurrection of the Body which shows how much greater Charity they had for Dissenters then our rigid Adversary whilst a Dissenter for indeed it was very diversly thought on and very obscurely laid down in the beginning of the third Century sayes P. D. Huetius in Origenianis p. 132. Farrellus Calvin's Predecessor at Geneva
Why did Christ say I thank Thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth that thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and revealed them unto Babes if they are discoverable by humane Reasoning for Babes are ignorant of that Art yet out of the Mouth of Babes and Sucklings c. The Apostle's Question 1 Cor. 1. 20. was very impertinent if J. Faldo may be of Authority who said Where is the Wise Where is the Scribe Where is the Disputer c. for this implies an Exclusion of all those Arts Sciences and Natural Gifts from any Capacity to reveal the deep Things of God shut up in the Divine Principle of Life Besides W. S's Words imply a Clouded Understanding and degenerated and therefore Uncapable J. F. must either intend by his Derision that he thinks W. S. deserves to be hiss'd for denying the Knowledge of Divine Things to be attainable by the Degenerated Understanding of Man or sanctified If the first All may have Cause to abhor his False Doctrine If the latter I would know which way that can be without the Divine Principle of Life This abundantly manifests J. Faldo's unsavory Spirit and proves him to be ignorant of the Way Method Work of God in his Children When the Natural Man by his Reason can know Christ he may know his Sheep the Scriptures and the Power of God and not before but because it is impossible in Reasoning or Arguing pro and con by the utmost Strength and Search of Natural Abilities to know Christ but by the Revelation of the Spirit of God alone as hath been abundantly proved therefore William Smith's words are sound and weighty and J. Faldo's carnal and prophane showing himself to be a Mocker of the Priviledges and Mysteries of the Gospel but what else may we expect from one that walks after the Lusts of his own vain Mind having not the Spirit Jude 18 19. Yet that we may manifest how inconsistent he is with himself as that he can't write against us but he must write for us take this Passage out of Quakerism No Christianity which ought alwayes to begin his Books against us upon this subject as it ends this Chapter of mine Those Gospel-Illuminations are beyond the utmost reach of our Natural Faculties of the Mind though sanctified and therefore it is said to be 2 Tim. 3. 16. Divinely inspired It is not produced in the Exercise of the Rational Faculties the Soul is purely passive or receptive therein and is to those Illuminations as the Wax is to the Seal CHAP. XV. His several gross Miscarriages summ'd and further observed I. Of his Over-looking my Answer and Arguments OF Twenty Two Chapters in his Reply there is not one of them in which he hath not wilfully declined inserting my Answer and Arguments and only flutters about pecks and scratches at some part that is of least moment to the Reason of the Point perhaps some Rebuke or Reflection upon the ill use he makes of our Friends Writings particularly pag. 9 22 23 24 30 31 35 53 56 57 71 73 82 83 85 86 90 92 93. How is it possible my Arguments should be conquered when they were never encounter'd I was never yet so unjustly dealt withal in this Particular by any Adversary of his Pretences II. Of his drawing False Inferences Where he ventures at any time to insert any considerable part of my Answer he is sure to draw some Inference that may bring an Odium my words never deserved I could particularize at large pag. 6 13 17 18 31 35 41 42 47 49 71 72 73 74 75 85 86 87 88 89 90 91. but take these following for the rest 1. From Edw. Burroughs Reflecting upon Peoples imagining God to be confined to some place beyond the Stars he implies they deny Christ's Manhood Vindic. pag. 6. 2. From our not styling the Scriptures the Word but Words of God he infers that we deny the Scriptures First Book p. 18 19. 3. From our Asserting the Doctrine of Inspiration and Certainty of what we are inspired either to write or speak he infers not only our Equalling with but preferring what we speak and write before the Scriptures First Book pag. 40. Vind. p. 17. 4. From our Condemning the Imitation of any of the Holy Men of God of former Ages in particular Cases without they are thereunto required by the Spirit of the Lord he infers that Commands of God in Scriptures are no Commands unless we think so and that it is no Sin to break all Commands in the Bible if our Consciences can but be so blinded as to tell us it is no Sin Vind. p. 34 35. 5. From our Asserting that there is no knowing of God but by the Spirit and that Mens Apprehensions of God and his Work in the Souls of his People are but the Endeavours and Effects of the Wisdom of the Flesh he infers that we oppose the Spirit and the Scriptures nay that we reject and scorn them Vind. pag. 41 42 47. 6. From our denying a Carnal Worldly Mercenary Ministry Lifeless Prayers a meer formal Church Preaching and not by the Spirit and W. Smith's saying that the present Use of Bread and Wine and Water called Baptism and the Supper as they are used at this Day are no other then Popish and Humane he infers that the Quakers deny the Gospel-Ministry Gospel-Prayer Gospel-Church Gospel-Preaching and that we CALL Baptism and the Lord's Supper as PRACTISED IN THE FIRST AGE AFTER CHRIST the Popes Inventions c. Vind. from p. 49. to p. 71. Oh Injurious 7. From our reproving People for feeding in an Unconverted State upon the meer Report of what Christ hath done without them and depending thereon from our asserting that Justification taken for Remission goes not before Repentance which is an inward Work much less that Men can be compleatly justifi'd or made inwardly just but by the washing of the Word of Regeneration Sanctification of the Eternal Spirit this Man dares to infer Our Denyal yea our Vndervalue and that to the Degree of Blasphemous Contempt of the Transactions of Christ at Jerusalem Vind. p. 71 72 73 74. 8. From J. Penning asking If outward Blood would cleanse the Conscience from indwelling Sin he infers that we deny all Benefit by the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross for the declaring of Remission of Sins Rom. 3. 25. First Book 2. Part p. 46 47. Vind. 77. 9. From our chusing to call that Body God prepared in which to do his Will the Body of Christ rather then the Christ of God And from our asserting God to be that Light which enlightens every Man and that the Soul of Man had something of the Life of God in its primitive Perfection he makes no more ado but concludes First That we deny the Christ of God 2dly That we make the Measure of Light in every Man the Eternal God thereby confining him to Man's Soul And lastly That the Soul of Man is
God himself and so God saves God and God worships God This my Reader may find in his Vind. from p. 75. to 87. particularly this following of E. B. about the Soul 10. From E. Burroughs affirming the Light of Christ in every Man to be one with the Spirit as good as the Spirit of Christ in order to prove it the same J. Faldo infers he made the Soul of Man God because that which is as good as the Spirit of God is God Book 1. Part 2. p. 122. Vind. p. 85 86. As if E. B. had spoken it of the Soul of Man and not the Light of Christ shining in the Soul of Man as his Words express it 11. Lastly from our Denyal of his carnal Resurrection as inconsistent with Scripture and Reason he takes Heart to tell all People that W. P. and all the through Quakers deny the Resurrection of the Dead and are guilty of not believing a future Reward in an other World with a Train of Ill Language too long to bring in Vind. p. 88 89 91. This Friendly Reader hath been the Entertainment we have received at J. Faldo's Hands but all things shall work together for good III. of his evading my Answer and Arguments It is very frequent with him next to leaving out what I say or fastening false Consequences upon what he transcribes to evade the Strength of mine Answer either by pretending to have said enough in his first Book as if that had foreseen my Answer and anticipated his Reply with a Refutation or by some one Word which will serve him to play at or by being in haste or else my Answer deserves no Reply at all c. An Evidence of this Sort of Carriage my Reader may find in his Reply p. 5 17 18 38 51 57 58 59 69 71 76 91 93 One at large for all To my several Arguments in defence of Immediate Revelation Inspiration as he terms it he returns three or four Lines This W. P. is so far from denying that he pleads for it but after such a Rude Impertinent manner that I should but injure you and shew my self idle to animadvert upon it p. 17. The cheapest Way that ever Man took to confute his Adversary Doth this become any Man of his Pretence to either Schollarship or Christianity IV. Of his Forgery or Perversion I am sorry I have such reiterated Occasion to charge him with Forging that is foisting in Words into our Writings and Sayings that are wholly inconsistent with them or perverting those he delivers to the End he may make them ponounce his Mind the more plainly A few of many Places I have observed as in page 22 25 41 42 50 51 92 93. Of which I shall give four Instances more particularly 1. â— Pennington speaking of Knowledge according to the Flesh By Flesh sayes he The Quakers understand the Vse of our Vnderstandings though sanctified first Book p. 41. Vind. p 24 25. 2. His second is making W. Smith to call the Scriptures Traditions of Men Earthly Root Darkness Confusion Corruption Rotten Deceitful the Whore's Cup the Mark of the Beast all out of the Life and Power of God and not that the meant them of those who had degenerated from the Power of Godliness and had set up their own Imagination in the stead of God's Institutions teaching for Doctrines the Traditions of Men first Book p. 117. 119. Vind. 41 45. 3. The Third is his making I. Pennington to call visible Worship the City of Abomination Vind. p. 50. 4. Lastly That he gives in our Name this Interpretation of the Vail is over them i. e. the Belief of the Man Christ Jesus which was of our Nature to be the Christ c. Vind. p. 93. V. Of his grand Improbabilities and downright Untruths This Charge I know must needs be very unpleasant to a Man as Vain Glorious as many Places of his Book declare him to be but I cannot help it 'T is Truth if there be anâ— Truth in the World that he hath writ a great many unlikely and absolute untrue Things Let my Reader take the Pains to look over these following Pages of his Reply and I am well assured if impartial he will not think that I have in a Tittle wrong'd him p. 6 7 19 21 33 35 38 39 42 46 47 48 49 55 56 65 70 72 73 89 93. Of which I will only instance four 1. First he affirms that he quoted forty Places out of our Friends Books that would prove the Light within as within us to be the only Lord and Saviour and very God p. 6. whereas he brought not any one that either proved the Terms or the Matter 2. Secondly He confidently accused us of charging the Miscarriage of Mens Souls on the Knowledge the Letter of the Scriptures by God's Blessing doth convey p. 21. 3. Thirdly Whereas I said that W. Smith's Words reflected not in the least upon the Scriptures nor those Doctrines truly received thence neither that any such VVords can be produced by our Adversaries he boldly tells his Reader I intended no other but that Smith doth not accuse himself in so many Words of Blaspheming the Spirit of God in the Scriptures and the Doctrines from thence received as much as to say We both knew it to be Blasphemy but W. Smith did not call it so p. 41. There is no ingenuous Man that will not abhoâ—â— the Falseness of this Passage 4. Lastly I opposing his Affirmation that we did not profess or believe Eternal Rewards thus pretends to confute me W. P. opposes me rather because he would not be thought to subscribe to me then that he believes not what I say to be true p 69. But if this be true sure I am there is no Truth in the World And indeed there is no giving this Sort of Carriage at large but by transcribing far the greatest Part of his Book VI. Of his idle Jeers and frothy Expressions I have not met with any Man writing upon so serious a Subject as Religion is that gives himself the Liberty of so many vain Expressions as if he had intended his Discourse for vulgar Merriment not to Christian Information If my Reader please to trouble himself with the Perusal of these following pages he shall find enough to nauseate p. 6 22 23 26 27 29 30 34 37 40 47 50 51 53 58 60 69 71 72 95. Take two Instances He cackles like a Hen when he had laid a WORSE THING then an Egg p. 47. Again because we said God spoak once by Balaam's Ass thereby proving that he did not alwayes speak by the Scriptures he thus reflects I wonder not that they leave the Teachings of God by the Scriptures to attend on the Ministry of Asses thereby calling us Asses p. 27. Which how Witty soever he thinks such sort of Sayings to be sure they are more Frothy and Irreligious then becomes a Man professing Religion much less writing of the Weightiest Points of it
second Books both by a fair Rescue of our Words from his gross Perversions and indirect and unnatural Meanings and the Confirmation of our real Sense with plenty of plain Scripture many Reasons and the unquestionable Testimonies of several Ancient and Modern considerable Authors My Design hath not been Conquest but Information that by these Religious Wars we may at last arrive at Peace And these Weapons be all beaten into Plow-shares so as to learn War no more That to fear God and work Righteousness the Life of Jesus Christ our Lord who hath left us his most Holy Example that we should follow his steps may be the very bent of our Hearts the Resolution of our Minds and constant Practice of our Lives which bring the Soul to the Inheritance of Substance establish the Heart forever Oh that all who read this Discourse may with me wind up their Spirits and lodge their Souls not in the Love of Controversie but of that Divine Life which stills resolves and fixes all and gives such Heavenly Waiters to feel and enjoy Immortallity To see and possess something that is beyond time these painful Exercises that are within it Oh this makes Men Weighty Serious Loving Meek Holy Forbearing and Constant the Image and Delight of God! Such become Livers of Pure and Vndefiled Religion who have been thitherto but so many vain and verbal Contenders for Religion so shall this Scripture be fulfilled to our unutterable Rejoycing Surely his Salvation is nigh them that fear him that Glory may dwell in our Land Mercy and Truth are met together Righteousness and Peace have kissed each other The God of Everlasting Strength Bless and Prosper this Glorious Work in the Earth to the Praise of hiâ— Holy and Blessed Name Amen W. P. THE END ERRATA THe Author 's frequent Absence from the Press with that continu'd Difficulty which attends us in printing has now as at other times made way for several Escapes The most offensive though few very obstructive to the Sense are here collected and corrected The other as Stops Parenthesis and some â—ew Improprieties are left for the Ingenuity of the Reader to excuse and amend Page 9. line 20. read Principle p. 10. l. 9. for were r. was pag. 20. l. 3. r. writ in p. 21. l. 11. r. charged p. 30. l. 27. r. should not p. 32. l. 16. for no r. not p. 33. l. 9. r. there are l. 10 11. r. as much p. 35. l. 27. f. who r. whom p. 38. l. 33. r. belief p. 42. l. 22. r. much more p. 50. l. 22. r. doubtful p. 53. l. 26. it dele p. 54. l 2. r. as are so l. 29. r. 1651. p. 55. l. 22. f. but even r. even p. 56. l. 2. in dele l 4. f. the r. his p. 59. l. 32. for this dele p. 64. l. 7. f. no r. any p. 78. l. 18. r. 〈…〉 7. l. 8. for dele l. 20. r. lame p. 88. l. 32. f. me r. 〈◊〉 l. 33. f. thy r. my p. 92. l. 23. r. praelect p. 117. l. 2. r. cull'd p. 129. l. 10. r. Caryl p. 136. l. 3. f. it r. them p. 140. l. 15. r. reply pretended p. 142. l. 3. r. scars l. 19. r. scrutiny p. 144. l. 22. r. gone I fear p. 147. l. 31. r. ye teach p. 153. l. 16. r. Cajus p. 161. l. 23. r. distinct p. 166. l 5. r. certainty p. 169. l. 18. r. but it p. 188. l. 3. f. of r. have l. 9. r. sinfully p. 195. l. 28. r. foild p. 197. l. 25. r. to conclude p. 204. l. 17. not dele p. 209. l. 22. r. serpâ—ntine p. 216. l. 24. r. and a. l. 27. r. spake p. 225. l. 33. f. it out of the Soul r. Sin p. 226. l. 26. r. promised in his Discourse p. 232. l. 16. r. repute p. 235. l. 11. r. verb. p. 239. l. 22. r. word l. 31. r. Dichotomizers p. 244. l. 25. f. any r. my p. 247. l. 29. r. Barker p. 248. l. 27. f. they r. themselves p. 249. l. 21. f. with such an r. thus with his l. 22. r. 65 66. p. 253. l. 23. â— Sharers p. 259. l. 30. after dele p. 260. l. â—8 the Baptism dele p. 262. l. 17. to dele p. 263. l. 32. r. he wore p. 265. l. 6. r. trouble in his p. 266. l. 2. r. crowing l. 15. r. philosophical p. 269. l. 2. f. a r. of p 270. l. 18. r. were l. 30. f. yet r. so l. 31. r. wore off p. 255. l. 5. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 30â— l. 25. r. incompeâ—ible p. 308. l. 16. r. he that p. 310. l. 12 8 22. r. holys p. 311. l. 24. f. too short r. to show f. so as to r. so to p. 318. l. 26. it dele p. 319. l. 25 r. needs no. l. 22. r. or slip p. 320. l. 5. f. â— r. what p. 324. l. 14. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 325. l. 27. f. Propheâ—s r. Poets p. 326. l. 7. r. had p. 327. l. 14. r. that they p. 329. l. 15. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 17. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 20. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 330. l. 11. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 332. l. 1â— 21. r. Polyglott p 339. l. 7. r. of some l. 23. r. 〈◊〉 p. 346. l. 21. r. ubiquitary p. 348. l. 15. r. â—leverly p. 352. l. 11. r. terreno p. 353. l. 19. r adventrdus p. 358. l. 11. f. then r. that p. 3â—0 l. 8 12 22. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 361. l. 21 r. imperious p. 365. l. 18. f. in r. is 〈◊〉 p. 369. l. 12 r. fictious l. 15. r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 372. l. 11. r. and bring l. 21. however dele l. 29. r. Souly Body p. 373. l. 24. r. pass p. 374. l. 27. r. up of p. 375 l. 15. r. numerical p. 370. l. 2. r. resuscitation l. 4. f. 32. r. 2. p. 379. l. 1. f. but r. and. l. 20. r. restituent semina l. 26. r. weigh'd l. 31. r. as dâ—stroyes p. 380. l. 17. r. intricate p. 382. l. 19. r. wrotâ— p. 383. l. 21. r. hath p. 408. l. 24. r. and would p. 419. l. 4. f. as r. and. p. 422. l. 24. r. of the Light p. 423. l. 18. r. and Inspiration l. 〈◊〉 r. Pretences p. 428. l. 9. r. Vind. pag. 47. l. 19. r. Vind. pag. 4. p. 429. l. 4. f. and r. greater then l. 5. and dele p. 430. l. 11 31. f. Chapters and Pages r. Chapters or Pages * advers Err. Johan Hierosoly mitani Qua. no Chr. pag. 2. My Answ pag. 2 3. pag. 5. Acts 4. 12. 1 John 1. 7. Rom. 8. 14 17. Qua. no Chr. pag. 13. pag. 8. pag. 21 22. D. Cave Primitive Christianity Rom. 8. 1 2 3 4. Tit. 2. 12. Heb. 1. 1. See my Answ p. 193. pag. 7. p. 15 16. See my Answ pag. 24 pag. 13. pag 25. See it in Dr. Wilkins Real char pag. 14. pag. 28.