but reviving that old and durable Ministration of the Spirit Therefore Blasphemous Derogations will return to our Adversary as unduely charged upon us with a Charge upon him of base Derogation from the Truth of our Belief But he thinks that Humph. Smith has made much for him in thus Querying Whether should People be led in these dayes by Moses according to his outward Ministration or the Person of Christ limiting it to his Visible Appearance or the Spirit of Truth which he promised to pour out after his Ascension which contains the Substance of what he quotes out of H. Sm. to which he thus answers There is no sober Christian can read this Passage without Anger and Disdain to see such wicked Wretches scoff and fleeringly insult upon the sacred Person of our Lord Jesus The whole History of whose Life and Death in the Letter of it they esteem no better then one of Aesop's Fables Answ But our Adversary will not so easily escape the Hands of the Just God whose is Vengeance for these Ungodly Defamations as he well knows he may do ours Anger Disdain and Lyes become him and it is little to be wondred that he should be guilty of them all against a Quaker If H. Sm. had asserted that Moses could not be our Leader neither the Visible Person of Christ but the Spirit of Truth he had not exceeded the Warrant of Scripture nor the very Judgment of this Reviler It is not two pages off that he quoted Joh. 16.14 He shall receive of mine and shall shew it unto you Which if I understand any thing imports thus much That those things which they knew not whilst Christ was with them after his Ascension the Holy Ghost should reveal unto them as these two preceeding Verses fully prove I have yet many things to say unto you but ye cannot bear them now Howbeit when the Spirit of Truth is come he will guide you into all Truth and he will shew you things to come Nay Christ himself sayes in the 7th Verse Nevertheless I tell you the Truth It is expedient for you that I go away For if I go not away the Comforter will not come unto you And in the 14th Chapter he speaks thus I will pray the Father and he will give you another Comforter 〈◊〉 will abide with you for ever even the Spirit of Truth So that the personal Ministration was manifestly transient and temporary but That of the Spirit was to abide for ever But I would not any should think it to be less Christ's Ministration because the Ministration of the Spirit for the Lord is that Spirit as his own Words manifest Again I will not leave you comfortless I will come to you Yet a little while and the World seeth me no more but ye see me Because I live ye shall live also For he that dwelleth with you shall be in you At that day you shall know that I am in my Father and you in me and I in you And that this Comforter is Christ in his Spiritual Coming and Appearance let it be further observed that the same Word for Comforter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in John 16.7 is the Word used by the same Apostle in the first Verse of the 2d Chapter of his first Epistle for Advocate when he sayes We have an Advocate with the Father Christ Jesus the Righteous In short the Dispensation of his Visible Appearance was but Temporary It is expedient for you that I go away But his Ministration who so appeared then dis-appeared and after re-appeared in a Spiritual and unalterable Ministration Lo I am with you to the End of the World And truly thus much our Adversary in Contradiction to himself grants us that the Ministration of Christ was indeed the Ministration of the Spirit Now what Scoffs Fleerings or Insults against the sacred Person of our Lord Jesus any can see in this Doctrine to incite a sober Christian to Anger and Disdain I leave to any but such an Angry and Disdainful Enemy to judge I cannot forget his horrible Ly of us concerning the Scriptures stolen probably out of an Anabaptists lying Dialogue lately printed against us Prelaticks and Sectaries can sometimes agree against Quakers Aesop's Fables have more worth in them then all the Books that ever were written against the Quakers I do not at all doubt but there are Twenty Fables in Aesop that well considered would have taught them more Discretion and it should have been their own Fault if not more Honesty too then any or all of them have shown in their utmost Endeavours against us But that we have no more Regard to nor Belief in the Holy Scriptures of Truth then in Aesop's Fables is a Story more prophane and fabulous then any Fable in Aesop and God will recompence with a Vengeance this Defamer of an Innocent People unless diverted by his unfeigned Repentance §. 2. Of Revelation He tels us the second thing wherein the Familists and Quakers are all one is the Pretence of Immediate Revelation Dav. Geo. and H.N. both pretend to receive their Doctrine from the Angel Gabriel And W. Gibson the Quaker sayes that the Gospel which they preach they have not received it from Men nor from Books nor from Writings but by the Revelation of Jesus Christ in them and then denyes the Scriptures of the old and new Testament to be the revealed Will of God Answ After what manner D.G. and H.N. received their Commission I know not but sure I am that W. Gibson's Assertion is sound Take away Revelation and the Gospel ceases of course Christ is put besides the Dignity of his Prophetical and Priestly Office the Promises of God will be broken and the most excellent part of the Scriptures God's Traditions made void Who was it said A Prophet shall the Lord your God raise up like unto me Him shall ye hear in all things There is a Spirit in Man and the Inspiration of the Almighty giveth Understanding As for me This is my Covenant with him saith the Lord My Spirit that is upon thee and my Words which I have put in thy Mouth shall not depart out of thy Mouth nor out of the Mouth of thy Seed nor out of the Mouth of thy Seed's Seed saith the Lord from henceforth and forever I will REVEAL unto them the Abundance of Peace and Truth I thank thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth because thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and hast REVEALED them unto Babes And no Man knoweth the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son will REVEAL him No Man can come unto me except the Father which hath sent me draw him But God hath REVEALED them unto us by his Spirit For the Spirit searcheth all things yea the deep things of God For the things of God knoweth no Man but the Spirit of God If anything be REVEALED to another that sitteth by
some Form of his making Answ But can this Man have the Vanity to plead the Necessity of the Use of this Form much less of those that are of Mens Invention and Appointment from those Quotations Has his Religion brought him no farther Can he believe that Matthew writ by the holy Ghost and yet imply an absolute Reproof in his so much more commending Luke's account which he thinks requires the express Words and not others like them But let it be considered that this was a time of Infancy and that it was before the more full pouring out of the Spirit is certain and that they knew not Gospel Prayer as afterward is undeniable Besides It is either Sufficient or it is not If Insufficient it reflects on Christ beside who can supply its Defect If Sufficient why do you use any other What ever it is upon our Principles you must confess it be a setting of your Postes by God's Postes your Invention by his Institution It is meer Deceit to attempt the Defence of the Popish English Mass-Book from Christ's Prayer Prove your Forms to be of Divine Institution and that God by his Spirit now requires them and the Debate will end otherwise we reject the Allusion as improper and incoherent The Spirit is not confinable to set Forms though in times of Ignorance he hath administred Comfort in them by those who were sincere and knew no better But Forms are not therefore to be perpetuated for that were to obstruct the more free Operation of the Spirit and our Expression by it It is at best but a State of Weakness to be condescended to but never to be pleaded for God's Spirit will be unlimited as well as the Words he prompts us to must never by another be confined §. 4. Of Baptism He sayes we both deny Baptism by which I understand Water because Christ finding it among the Jews adopted it into his Religion a Ceremony neither burthensome nor offensive and the only Door set open under the Gospel for Salvation For which he brings three Scriptures Matth. 28.19 Go and teach all Nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father c. To the same purpose by Mark Chap. 16. v. 15 16. And Christ's Saying Joh. 3.5 Except a Man be born of Water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God Answ If Baptism was ever Jewish as our Adversary grants then because Christ came to end all Jewish Ceremonies Water-Baptism can bear no Evangelical Perpetuity And if it should be objected that it was used after the Pouring forth of the Holy Ghost I answer so was Circumcision Vowes Purification Forbearing to eat things strangled and Blood And the common Practice of Christendom so called sufficiently tells us what is become of those Observations Using and Instituting are two things The Apostles condescended where they never commanded In the two first Scriptures which contain a Commission there is no Water mentioned That there is a Baptism of the Holy Ghost I hope all will grant That such a Baptism admits of no outward Water is plainly implyed And that it was the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and therefore not of Water which Christ intended I will briefly prove First this Commission was some of the last Words Christ spoak that it is to be fulfilled is certain that they could not do it without Power is clear that neither of those Chapters mentions any such Endowment must be granted Whether then must we go to fetch that Account here omitted I would desire my Reader to turn to the first Chapter of Luke's Acts of the Apostles where we shall find Christ's last Words to his constant Followers thus left upon Record And being assembled together with them he commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem but wait for the Promise of the Father which saith he ye have heard of me For John truly baptized with Water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many Dayes hence When they therefore were come together they asked of him saying Lord wilt thou at this time restore again the Kingdom to Israel And he said unto them It is not for you to know the Times or the Seasons which the Father has put into his own Power But ye shall receive Power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you and ye shall be Witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and 〈◊〉 Samariah and unto the uttermost part of the Earth And when he had spoken these things while they beheld he was taken up and a Cloud received him out of their Sight Now if the Promise of the Father was the Pouring out of the Holy Ghost and if the Pouring out of the Holy Ghost be the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and that the Baptism of the Holy Ghost was that which qualified them to be his Witnesses as the whole place fully proves Then Go and teach all Nations c. in Matthew and Go ye into all the World in Mark must not have been spoken before these Words in the Acts at least not to take place till they themselves had been baptized with the Holy Ghost and consequently the Baptism mentioned in that Commission must not have been a Water-Baptism as John's was but that of the Holy Ghost which they were to be baptized with so that the Order of the Words at least in Execution if not in Expression must have been this John indeed baptized with Water but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many Dayes hence Then go ye and teach all Nations baptizing them in or rather into the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost And lo I am with you alwayes unto the End of the World Nor is this incredible when we consider without their so baptizing it had been utterly Impossible for them to have turned them from Darkness to Light and from the Power of Satan unto God And doubtless they might as well baptize with the Holy Ghost as reconcile by the Word For where the one was the Power of the other could not be wanting For the third Scripture though Water be mentioned yet what Water will be the Question That it is not meant of outward Water I offer several Reasons 1. To be born of Water and of the Spirit is no more then to be born of Water or of the Spirit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being here explicative For were it otherwise and that by Water were understood External Water this Absurdity would inevitably follow that the Soul of Man which is Spiritual and Internal could in part be regenerated by Water External and Elementary But this place is excellently unfolded by that notable Passage of the Apostle Paul in his Epistle to Titus Not by Works of Righteousness which we have done but according to his Mercy he saved us by the Washing of Regeneration and Renewing of the Holy Ghost where we not only have the WASHING of Regeneration to parrallel being born again of Water which say we must be as Spiritual as the NewBirth it produceth but also the Renewing of the Holy Ghost to answer being born again of the Spirit That
as the washing of Regeneration or Renewing of the Holy Ghost are Synonymous or Expressions to the same Purpose so being born again of Water or being born again of the Spirit are equivalent But if our Adversary will have this Water to be material in Honour of his Baptism Let him never refuse the like Liberty to us in Construction of that great Water-Baptist's own Words But he shall baptize you with the holy Ghost and with Fire that is material Fire My Judgment is if that were the Church of Englands Baptism he had never been her Son though such Sons are ready to Christian many with that Fiery Baptism But if such an Interpretation be absurd let him not esteem his own Rational And if it must be the holy Ghost or Fire then let it be Water or Spirit for indeed they are but so many Words intimating the various Operations of one Divine Power In short John was but a Forerunner therefore not to be perpetuated He was the Water but Christ the great Spiritual Baptist The Former to decrease the Latter to increase And the least in Christ's Kingdom which is not of this World is greater then John not then his private State but outward Administration Paul whose Commission was larger then any Priests in England tells us He was not sent to baptize with Water but to Preach And instead of enjoyning the Practice of it upon others he thanks God that he baptized but very few himself which surely he had never done if it had been part of his Commission or the durable Baptism of the Gospel For he had just Reason to suspect some disaffected would make that Ill-Use of his Liberty that it was to ingratiate and set up himself being conscious that he had no Authority for what he did This he further gives us to believe in that pertinent Passage to our Purpose There is One Body One Spirit One Lord One Faith One Baptism One God and Father of all If more Baptisms then one then more Bodies Spirits Lords Faiths Gods and Fathers of all who were above all and through all and in them all unto whom Paul wrote If this be absurd and that there is but one Baptism I hope it will not be denyed to be that of the Holy Ghost which is both most suitable to the Evangelical Ministration and the peculiar Baptism of Christ Jesus our Lord. I shall touch upon one Passage more The like Figure whereunto even Baptism also doth now save us as our modern Translation has it From which though our Adversary would infer that Water-Baptism is to be used as co-assistant with the Answer of a good Conscience to Salvation I doubt not unanswerably to mantain from it our foregoing Assertion This Verse admits of various readings in ancient Copies and diverse Interpretations by learned Men. We shall a little disquisite the matter that he may see we shall not refuse Learning where it may perform the Office of an honest Servant not an Usurper 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some has it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the modern Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Augustin has it Vos and our old Books saith Zegerus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Vatabalus makes the truth relative to the Type Flood And saith Grotius Vox 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 est communis utrique relatâ— i. tam figurae tribuitur quam rei per figuram significatae signifiing Type and Antitype or the thing signified by the Type Erasmus hath it cui nunâ— simile sive respondens Baptisma so that Baptism may answer as the thing typified not another Type 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sayes Dr. Hammond a famous Man of the English Church is certainly best renderd Antitype yet there be â—wo different senses sometimes Contradiction thus Zenophon and Hesychius Then Destruction was by Outward Water now Salvation by Inward otherwise pro or in lieu of another as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that supplies the Consul's place so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in an old Coppy in Oxford is the Ark inward supplying the place of the Ark outward 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Capellus understands to be Baptismum internum quo fimus mortis resurrectionis Christi participes Hujus interni baptismi typos aliquot habemus in V.T. imprimis autem arcam diluvii et arcam Noae By Inward Baptism we are made Partakers of Christ's Death and Resurrection Of this Inward Baptism we have several Types in the old Testament of which Noah's Ark was one Grotius refers us to these Scriptures for an Apostolical Exposition Rom. 6.3 4. Ephes 4.5 Gal. 3.27 Col. 2.12 all which refer to Man's being baptized into Christ's Death his putting on of Christ and to the One Lord One Faith One Baptism And indeed Beza shewed them the Way who will have it that the Baptism which answered to Noah's Ark was not material Water but the Power of Christ within wich preserves us cleansed and enables us to call on God with a good Conscience Nor is Doctor Hammond of a different Judgment in this Case who not only will have 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rendred Antitype but the Baptism that is that Antitype answering to Noah's Ark to be the Inward Washing of Men's Consciences from Pollution and delivering them from the Deluge of Sin and Destruction Not only from all this do I conclude the Baptism mentioned in that place to be the Antitype or Truth answering to the outward and typical Salvation of Noah's Ark but for those Reasons which were with me before my Perusal of these Authors and which I shall now briefly offer First If 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were but a Type or Figure one Type would answer another which is not proper 2 dly It were both to suppose that the Gospel were a State of Figures which is the Substance of all and of such Figures too as are less demonstrative or significant for what is that Sprinkling Baby-Baptism for Dipper or dipped I suppose our Adversary to be neither to the Worlds Deluge and Noah's Ark. 3 dly The Baptism in the Text must be such a one as hath Efficacy enough in it to save which outward Water can't do Besides the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or saveth hath Relation to Noah's Ark wherein the eight Souls were saved Therefore the Antitype or Truth answering to That as Type 4 ly It is such a Baptism as saves by the Power of Christ's Resurrection answerable to Rom. 6.3 4. Know ye not that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his Death that like as Christ was raised up from the Dead by the Glory of the Father even so we also should walk in Newness of Life 5 ly And this the Parenthesis in the Verse undeniably proves
in you that was also in Christ Jesus who being in the Form of God thought it not Robbery to be equal with God And He that sanctifieth and they that are sanctified are all of One for which cause he is not ashamed to call them Brethren Again They that are joyned to the Lord are One Spirit and He that doth Righteousness is Righteous even as He is Righteous To deny this is to deny the most Heavenly Benefit we have by Christ namely Unity and Fellowship we have with the Father and with the Son That it was an Unity not an Equality especially in the Sense he takes the Word the faithful Narrative of that Proceeding printed in the Year 1654. will further testify How great then must this Man's Miscarriage be who to render a good Man an Impostor turns Forger himself but God will reward him The next Pair he pitches upon to prove his Assertion is Maenander and James Nailer The one for affirming Himself to be sent from the invisible Regions to be the Saviour of Man-kind And James Nailer for asserting himself to be Christ and accepting Hosannah's and Divine Worship in the Streets of Bristol Answ What Maenander was I know not and it is hard believing a Character of any Man when it is given by his Enemy But sure I am that James Nailer never asserted himself to be the Christ of God Neither did he ever deny Him that appeard at Jerusalem to be the Lord 's Christ as his Writings plentifully declare especially one Paper written by him to the then Parliament when a Prisoner in Bride-wel Christ Jesus the Emmanuel of whose Sufferings the Scriptures declare Him ALONE I confess before Men for whose sake I have deny'd what ever was dear to me in this World that I might win him be found in him and not in my self whom alone I seek to serve in Body Soul Spirit night day according to the Measure of Grace working in me even to that Eternal Spirit be Glory and to the Lamb forever But to asscribe this Power Virtue to JAMES NAILER or for that to be exalted or worshipped TO ME IS GREAT IDOLATRY So having an Opportunity given with Readiness I am willing in the Fear of God the Father in Honour to Christ Jesus and to take off all Offences from every Simple Heart without Guile or Deceit His third Comparison lyes betwixt Photinus who is said to have denyed the Trinity and G. Fox as guilty of the same Error in his Account Answ I can find no such place in the Book so called Either our Adversary sets up for a New Controvertist or he dishonestly shunned giving us the Page But I am willing to believe that he took it as he found it in some other Adversary for any thing reported or printed against a Quaker is ground enough for an envious Priest to accuse him But what if G. Fox denyed the Unscriptural Expressions viz. The Trinity of distinct and separate Persons must it necessarily follow that he denyed the Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father Word and Spirit We justly renounce those Barbarous School-Terms as not suited to God's Heavenly Manifestations but the dark Conceits of some Popish Doctors His fourth Comparison is made between Soâ—inus and James Nailer in that the one denyed the Satisfaction of Jesus Christ and look'd upon his Passion only as an Example The other in that he affirmed The End for which Christ did suffer was to be a living Example to all Generations Love to the lost page 56. Answ He has not truly delivered the Opinion of Socinus whose Books shew however mistaken about Christ's Divinity that he ever esteemed his Death and Passion to have more in it then a bare Example Nor has he faithfully dealt with J. Nailer in this Quotation For first I find not the Words as cited and next the Word ONLY is by himself omitted which alone renders the Passage heterodox Suppose then that J. Nailer writ that Christ was in his Suffering a living Example to all Generations Is there no Difference between Christ's being in his Death and Passion Only our Example which he charges upon Socinus and Christ's being our living Example in Suffering which he attributes to J. Nailer How can there be a Comparison where there is so great a Disparity The First is denyed by all that own Christ The Last is owned by all that do not deny Peter who thus writ to the scattered Brethren For even hereunto were ye called because Christ also suffered for us leaving us an Example that ye should follow his Steps 1 Pet. 2.21 His fifth Comparison he makes between the Valentinians the Quakers The Former he sayes arrogated to themselves a Knowledge beyond Christ and his Apostles The Latter impudently throw away the written Word of God delude the credulous Vulgar with new fangled Revelations which he thinks he has prov'd by two Inances 1. That Th. Hollbrow a Quaker to One that urged Scripture answered What dost thou tell me of Scripture which is no more to me then an Old Almanack 2. That Fox and Hubberthorn in a Book called Truth 's Defence say The Scriptures are no standing Rule and it is dangerous for ignorant People to read them Answ To the first I say there is great Difference between one that was no Quaker and one that was or is a Quaker We have examined the matter and by all we can find both that Saying is not true as charged and it is of an ancienter date then the coming of any of our Friends into those Parts therefore not the Saying of a true Quaker To the second I return thus much 'T is true there is such a Book and it was written by G. Fox and R. Hubberthorn but he has not given us so much as one Page to direct us to the Passage So that either People must read till they find it or else take his Perversion for our Assertion Unworthy Man does he think us such Wretches that we deserve not common Justice Methinks Justice should not be denyed where so little Mercy is shewn But to answer the Instance Our Judgment about the Scriptures being the Rule we have already delivered And in what sense it is Dangerous to read them their own Book will declare 'T is dangerous say G. Fox R. Hubberthorn to read the Scripture in order to make War against the Saints to give carnal Expositions upon them Meanings contrary to them and to make a Trade of them but Blessed is he that doth read and doth understand them If this prove that Sleight to Scripture our Adversary would suggest them to be guilty of then let us be condemned But God's Witness in every unseared Conscience will acquit them and judge him for corrupt Citation and hard Speeches who dares to cry thereupon Are these not as Impudent Hereticks as the Valentinians whom he represents to have arrogated to themselves a Knowledge above Christ
us out of Polybius That the better and simpler Ages of the World rarely used any Oaths at all no not so much as in Judicature but after Perfidy and Lyes encreased Oaths encreased as a Remedy to restrein those Mischiefs To which let me add That some of the ancient Sages Socrates and Xenocrates knew urg'd and also practised a Life beyond an Oath So that if those who are truly discipled redeemed and renewed by the Power and Spirit of Christ Jesus need no Oath Nay that it is a Questioning of their Veracity and an Affronting of their Profession to offer them one and if the Lying familiar Swearing Forswearing and fraudulent Dealing of Wicked Men make their Oaths of little or no Credit as saith the Bishop out of Lactantius and Austin certainly it will be much better to prevent Swearing and punish Lying with the Penalty due to Forswearing which suggests an unanswerable Return to that familiar Objection But how do we know that ye are those Honest Men For we have not only the same Answer the ancient Christians had to give with this severe Rebuke That ye are the Reproach of Christianity who under that good Name act those vile Impieties the nobler Heathen judged and the loosest have not out-done but we have this further to offer Dispense with our Consciences in not-Swearing and punish our Untruth when ye find it as severely as ye do their Perjury What more can be desired since Truth-speaking fulfils the Law and Punishing False-speaking satisfies it CHAP. VII Of the Light Within IT is Matter of sad Complaint that a Man should write of so excellent a Subject as the Light Within and shew so much Darkness in treating of it But lest he should say That our uncertain and various Expressions for such he esteems them put him besides all Faith in it we shall endeavour to make appear their Consistency both with themselves and the Scripture of Truth He quotes Tho. Foster in his Guide to the Blind p. 1. thus God is the Light p. 7. as a Man forgetting himself Christ Within is Man's true Light to walk by And in p. 9. As doubting whether that would hold Water sayes The Spirit of Christ in Man is the true Light and Guide and this Light enlightens every Man that comes into the World But says he if James Nayler may be Judge our Friend Thomas he was so though thou art an Enemy and a Mocker of his Memory is very much mistaken for in his Book called A Door opened to the Imprisoned p. 2 3. he sayes That the Light of the Word is God's Love to the World and this Light is not given to any till they come out of the World And that George Whitehead in The Seed of Israel's Redemption p. 20. sayes That the Light Within is a Measure of the Lord's Life and Light Answ To the first Quotation there can be no Cavil for 't is plain Scripture God is Light 1 John 1.5 And it was the Apostolical Message so to preach That God is Light and in him is no Darkness at all The second is also most true for Christ is Man's true Light that was the true Light which enlightens every Man c. And that it was for Man to walk by both Christ and his Apostles prove I am the Light of the World he that followeth me shall not walk in Darkness but shall have the Light of Life Again if ye walk in the Light as He is in the Light c. God is Light and Christ is Light and since there is no knowing of God or Christ but by the Manifestation of Light and that none know the Father but those to whom Christ the Light reveals him therefore Christ is Man's true Light without which Man can never know either God or Christ For his 3 d. Quotation I see no Contradiction in it to the two former unless Christ can be without his Spirit for if the Spirit of Christ dwell in any Man Christ dwells in that Man This Language the Apostle used to the Romans Chap. 8.9 10 11. If the Spirit of God be in you Again If the Spirit of Christ be in you yet again If the Spirit of Him that raised up Jesus dwell in you all which are Synonymous or to one and the same Purpose For Shame thou a Scholar a Graecian a Disputant that makes such sorry Cavils might not the Jews and Heathens have made the same Exceptions against the Apostle But 't is an old Devil-Trick to besaint and extoll the Holy Ancients whilst they hugg the Spirit that murdered them and with it persecute the Truth in this Age so Cunning is the Devil and so Blind is the World But let us see how much more Honest he is in his next Quotation then Rational in the three former That the Light of the World is God's Love to the World I find in James Nailer's Book But that the Light is not given to any till they come out of the World is a direct Ly to our Principle and a putting an absolute Forgery upon his Book For he sayes That God has given his Light to the World that therein is his Love manifested that such as follow it in its Leadings out of the World have the Nature of Sons But Sonship is that which cannot be had whilst in the World's Nature therefore they are to come out of the World's Wayes to follow the Light which visits Man in the World's Wayes in order to bring him out of them and here the true Sonship is received so that the Son-ship and not the Light is that which cannot be had in the World Now what Contradiction can this be to our Dishonest Adversary's honest Friend Thomas who said that the light enlightened every Man that comes into the World Sure I am it is a plain Instance of our Adversary's Disingenuous and Injurious Practice For G. Whiteheads Words The Substance of them is to be found in Joh. 1.14 1â— The Word was full of Grace and Truth and of his Fulness have all we received and Grace for Grace But he sayes H.N. teaches that every Godly Man is God Incarnate and Christ Incarnate and that this is the Doctrine of the Quakers sayes he I prove First because T. Foâ—ter in his Guide to the Blind pag. 13. saith The Light which is Christ within is not Natural but Sufficient to Salvation Now I appeal to the whole World what Affinity there can be between H. N's Words and Th. Fosâ—er's Is God incarnate or Christ incarnate to be found in his Assertion Nor will I pass my Word for his right Quotation of H.N. What he quarrels at here I know not Would he not have Christ manifested within Or would he have him Natural in Opposition to Spiritual Or would he have his Light and Spirit Insufficient to Salvation If he intends any of these he crosses express Scripture blasphemes against God aâ—d frustrates the very End of the Gospel If none of them why was this
let the first hold his Peace For when it pleased God to REVEAL his Son in me For I neither received the Gospel of Man neither was I taught it but by the REVELATION of Jesus Christ If any be other-wise minded God will REVEAL it to him As I said before so again Who uttered these excellent Sayings and for what End If no Inspiration no Understanding If no Revelation no Knowledge And if the Spirit cease to teach as it can never teach but by Inspiration or Revelation then the Administration of Christ and his Apostles is ceased indeed And so not the Quakers but their Adversary overturns the Gospel-Ministration as begun and preached by Christ and his Apostles And be it known to all the World we think Revelation no Disgrace to our Cause Parrats may learn Scripture but can never experience it And those know little better who know not by Experience They are unprofitable Canters indeed who confidently talk of what they never felt and Idle Boasters who bo◠up themselves unto the Reputation of Ministers and Christians with a loud talk of their Travels Tryals Inspirations and Experiences whom they plainly mock in their Posterity concluding all blind because they cannot see In short Let it be the Character of the despised Quakers and we glory in it that all the Councils Synods Universities Doctors Scholars and the most Unanimous Decrees Learned Books and what ever the Power and Art of the Spirit of Man can produce will never be able to give or rule that true Faith which overcomes the World For that which may be known of God is manifested within Man And though outward Records may testify of and direct to that Unerring Light and Spirit by which Man comes both to know God and to be made conformable to his heavenly Image yet nothing below the Discoveries Convictions and Effectual Operations of the Eternal Spirit can give Man the certain Knowledge of God nor that daily Ability by which alone he may be enabled to obey him But he opposeth to us Miracles and Reason insinuating that we have no more of the last then the first and therefore not to be believed To the first I say we pretend to no other Religion then what was professed and practised by the Apostles and therefore need no new Miracles after that Manner to confirm that which has been confirmed by Miracles already especially by those who believe those Miracles And to deny Revelation where there are no Miracles is to discard many of the Prophets and to deny the Pouring forth of the Spirit upon the primitive Christians But above all hear the Man's Interpretation of Deut. 18.22 When a Prophet speaks in the Name of the Lord if the thing follow not nor come to pass that is saith this horrible Perverter of holy Scripture if he do no Miracle whereas the Verse intends no such thing Is this to rant over the Quakers for Idiots as if he were some Doctor of the Chair that where the Scripture speaks of Prophecy he should render it Miracle as if he that is a Prophet is a Worker of Miracles and that Miracles and Prophecy are equivalent But Argumentum ad hominem let us see how it will hold He that is a true Prophet must necessarily work Miracles But the Priests of England cannot work Miracles therefore the Priests of England are all False Prophets A true Conclusion yet false Premises A Paradox Now for the Reasonableness of our Doctrine He thinks a very mean Capacity can find none in it for how should there be any Reason in what they teach when they themselves sayes he deny the Use of Reason But none have less then they which pretend to so much This Man dares swagger for Reason and yet cryes out Heresy as soon as he sees it His Reason is the Authority of his Church The SAY-SO of some University Doctor finally The Workes of some learned Men and offer never so much Reason Conscience against them and your Reason is Sophistry and Conscience Enthusiasm The justest Separation in the World is with such but Schism and which is the last Stratagem such Persons must be Enemies to Caesar But I may say of those Men as Heraclitus said of their Fore-Fathers If blind Men were to judge of Sight they would say Blindness were Sight God is the Fountain as well of Reason as Light And we assert our Principle not to be without Reason but most Reasonable Whence it is frequent with us in our Reproof of Cruel Men to say they are Unreasonable whether it be to Man or Beast making good what the Prophet saith For his God doth instruct him to Discretion and doth teach them Again Come let us Reason together And Tertullian will have the first Verse of John thus rendr'd In the Beginning was Reason and that Reason was with God and that Reason was God by that were all things made c. And this seems no forreign Interpretation for in the 10th Verse of Jude we have sensual Men not having the Spirit called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Unreasonable Creatures according to which the Apostle Peter speaks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to him that askes Reason ready to give it Thus much to overlook our own Translation in Paul's second Epistle to the Thessalonians where he calls such Unreasonable Men that have not Faith concerning Reason So that it is very evident by our Adversary's denying and the Quakers asserting an unerrable Principle to be in Man and the Refusal of the one and the Readiness of the other to be governed thereby not the Quakers but their Enemies are Unreasonable both in their Faith and Practice §. 3. Of Forms of Prayer Our Adversary spends two or three Pages in proving the Necessity of Bodily Worship and he doth it so lamely that if it were so much my Judgment to deny it as it is to practise it I know nothing he has said to encline me to it This he makes an Introduction to that Agreement he sayes there is between D.G.H.N. and the Quakers in their mutual Renouncing both Bodily Worship and Visible Ordinances For Bodily Worship I need say no more then that our publick Meetings judge him guilty of great Dishonesty For his Visible Ordinances we shall proceed to consider them The first is concerning a Form of Prayer hear him With the like silly and weak Confidence they exclaim against Forms of Prayer wheras our blessed Saviour taught his Disciples a Form Math. 6.9 After this manner therefore pray ye c. And least sayes he we should think that this was only a Pattern Saint Luke Chapt. 11. expresses it when ye pray say Our Father c. that is do it in these Words Moreover John taught his Disciples and one of Christ's Disciples desired that he would teach them where we are told first that John delivered a Form of Prayer to his Disciples 2. That Christ's Disciples besought him that he would also give them