Appearance and the Knowledge of God's right Hand near them to save and preserve them from Sin and Death See my Appendix to Reason against Railing p. 27. Now you that are T. H. his Compurgators Abettors and Witnesses See here how he and you have left out the very principal and explanative Part of the same Sentence is this your Care and Justice Would you be thus served both to wrong me and abuse the World or your Readers to tell them The Quotations are truly recited out of our Books But if you take this kind of unfair curtailing which destroyes the Sense to be significant to give the whole Sense of the Clause or Sentence before and all this to prove us No Christians Then it must be contrarywise given as your Opinion for Christianity That 't is not a Design of Satan to keep Men in carnal Imaginations of a human personal Christ consisting of Flesh Blood and Bones LIKE YOURS but a Christian Opinion so to think of Christ and of God's right Hand as limited to such Remoteness as that you thereupon neglect to wait for Christ's inward and spiritual Appearance or the Knowledge of God's right Hand near you to save you from Sin and Death but that you may be good Christians and yet guilty of such carnal Imaginations and sinful Neglect If this be your Christianity I hope through the Grace of God never to own it any more then your unjust and partial Proceedings against us to uphold and cover a Forger to keep back Judgment from passing upon contrary to your fair Pretences before cited But T. H. hath declared That he no where accuseth us for denying Christ's bodily Appearance How then do we deny his Person What was his Person if not his Body Sect. III. About the Bible and Scriptures AGain you give this Passage as truly recited among the rest viz. G. W. accounts it Idolatry to call the Bible a Means of our knowing God for which you quote Dip. plung p. 13. Wherein is a manifest Untruth and Abuse for in Answer to T. Hicks affirming That the Bible is THE Means of our knowing God Dial. 1. p. 41. My Words were He idolatrously sets up the Bible in the Place of Christ for no man knows the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son reveals him Mat. 11.27 Dip. plung p. 13. Mark the Difference betwixt A Means and THE Means as between the BIBLE and CHRIST That may be A Means which is not THE Means Christ being the absolute Way and Means by Way of Eminency for Man to come to know God not the Bible though it may be a Means instrumentally as God bestows a Blessing upon or acpanies the serious Reading thereof as it directs to Christ Jesus or to his Light and Spirit which openeth the Understanding in the holy Scriptures Again about my owning the Speaking of the Spirit in any to be of greater Authority then the Scriptures or Chapters you unfairly leave out my following words which explain my Sense and Intention which are viz. as receiv'd and proceeding from that Spirit and spoaken in the Senee thereof as Christ's words were of greater Authority when he Spoak then the Pharisees Reading the Letter Ser. Apol. pag. 49. And we might farther add that the same words of the holy Scripture are of more Authority and Efficacy when the Spirit in any speaks them or sets them home to the Conscience then when any one Reads or Speaks them without the Spirit and this not at all to undervalue the Truth of what is written Nor did we ever prefer our Books before the Bible as unjustly we are charg'd but do prefer the Bible before all other Books extant in the World as we can sufficiently evince out of our Friends Writings And as for Titles given upon some of our Books which is alledged as Proof against us viz. Voice of Wisdom Breathings of True Love A Shield of Truth Light risen out of Darkness c. but saith T. Hicks The Scriptures are call'd Dead Letter Paper Ink and Writing Carnal Letter c. and all this to prove That we give the Preference to our own Books but he giveth us not any Quotation for all these Words or Titles nor shews us on what Occasion any of them were spoken however his Brethren undertake to be Witnesses for him in these Things with the rest But herein he hath grosly abused us and our Intention and Principle which never was to bring our Books in Comparison with the Scriptures nor have we given any such Titles so to prefer our Books but with respect unto the secret Breathings of True Love and the Arising of the Light or Signification of God's Voice in our Souls Such Titles therefore have been not strictly but figuratively placed upon some Books and the Letter only made mention of in the Sense of the Apostle in Distinction between the Law and the Gospel or as between the Letter and the Spirit Circumcision in the Letter Circumcision in the Spirit and so between Baptism in the Letter and Baptism in the Spirit and between Carnal Commands or Ordinances and Spiritual and this chiefly to those whose Minds have been too much in the Shadows and Letter thereof neglecting the Substance Power Spirit We knowing also that in the New Covenant we must serve the Lord in the Newness of the Spirit and not in the Oldness of the Letter But more over would T. Hicks and you his Witnesses take it well if you and the World should be told that the Baptists prefer their own Books before the Scriptures when they entitle their own Books Light from the Sun of Righteousness The Light within The Marrow of Christianity A Way to Sion Some Beams of Light c. But the Scriptures they have calld the Letter or the Oldness of the Letter Marrow of Christianity pag. 35.44 And say The Scriptures may be and is corrupted by Man having been in the hands of corrupted Men and the Spirit in the Rule of more Efficacy then the Letter St. John Newman's Light within p. 19 20 104 105 106 108 110 112. Judge Reader how these Baptists are faln into the Pit which they have dig'd for others and how they are more highly concern'd in the same thing that they alledge against us to prove us No Christians But should any hereupon make a Comparison between the Titles they give to their own Books and those they have given to the Scriptures and thereupon should positively charge them with giving their own Pamphlets the Preference they would take it very hardly But if they can find any reasonable Allegations to bring themselves off from this ensnaring Objection that is retorted upon them according to their own Method they might in Charity have reserved a better Construction for us in the Case Sect. IV. Of the Light within I May not well omit one Passage which is cast upon me as an Absurdity in their fourth Page viz. If the Life
which I presume by this time you have consider'd what say you thereunto To which he gives this Answer in the Quakers Name viz. I say tho Plagues and Judgments of God will follow thee and to this subscribeth George Whitehead But T. Hicks's Abuse and Falshood herein was detected in W. P's Answer to his last Dialogue Counterf Christian pag. 19 20 21. As also his Forgery herein laid upon him in my Appendix to Reason ag Railing p. 13. Howbeit he is not ashamed in the Barbican Relation to say The Truth of this Answer see attested under Mr John Gladman ' s hand Dial. 3. pag. 85. I do not think that T. Hicks can be ignorant of his wittingly wronging both me and John Gladman in this case for observe doth Jo. Gladman in the place quoted attest that this was G. W's Answer to the Question to which it is annexed by T. H. in G. W's Name No. But that G.W. spoak the Words in Discourse with him that is with John Gladman Not to T. H. in Answer to his Question If J. Gladman speak his Conscience he dare not attest that this was G. W's Answer to this Question to which it is here adjoyned as his Answer or saying thereunto Therefore T.H. is a Forger and hath cheated his Witnesses and drawn in J. Gladman for a Cover to his Deceit which shews his Spirit and Work to be in the Dark like that of an Impostor and Jugler in these matters And Men fearing God would be ashamed either to be his Witnesses or to countenance or encourage him therein Although I deny not that I spake any such Words against T. H. at any time as J. G. hath unfairly represented me in telling the World That G. W. denyeth he said so against T. Hicks Dial. 3. pag. 85. for my Answer shows the contrary in my said Appendix p. 13. though still I deny that to be my Answer unto T. H's Question before however as I did not question as in my Appendix but that the Judgments of God would follow T. Hicks for his Forgeries Slanders so I am of the same mind still and my so speaking I neither did give nor do give for an Answer to his particular Questions But in his fictitiously placing it as my saying to that one Question before he might as well have made it serve to every Question in all his Dialogues which was never so intended nor spoaken by me but with reference to his Forgeries and Slanders in general There are divers other things in their Relation aforesaid which concern Geo. Keith W. Penn and others that we might justly except against but they are answered elsewhere and we could have wish'd that you who are T. H's Witnesses would have seriously perus'd our former Answers to T. H. wherein his Forgeries Slanders Perversions and plain self-Contradictions are laid open particularly in those Books entitul'd Reason against Railing and Counterfit Christian detected from page 6. to p. 54. this might both have prevented that Disgrace Trouble that is since befaln you by engaging for such an Agent and that you would be pleas'd yet seriously to view all the Controversies you may perceive many Particulars charg'd against T. Hicks which neither himself nor you have either answer'd or in the least clear'd him of And further consider those Particulars charg'd against him out of his fictitious Dialogues printed in our Friends late Account of the Meeting with you at Barbican the 9th of the 8th Month 1674. as in Pag. 8 9 10 11. 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39. pages of the said Account also George Keith's late Vindication I hope you have consider'd that moderate Account which your Friend and Brother W. L. hath given in his Book entitul'd The Twelve Pagan Principles or Opinions c. and what a Serious Check it containeth to Thomas Hicks for his Immoderation and Unfair Dealing George Whitehead Page 17. Line 13. there should be a noted stop or this ‖ direction after Proved to which the Margent refers p 28 l. 25. for every read very p. 4◠l. 5. for for 1. so * Dial. p. 63. Title-Page Mat. 27.58 Joh. 2.19 20.12 Luke 24.3 Heb. 10.5 * Which having various Significations their being imposed hath caused Divisions and fruitless Contests * In his Book entit Light from the Sun of Righteousness p. 94. * when it is probable they had heard that before the Meeting Dial. 1. p. 62 75. Append. p. 17. Appendix p. 20 21 23. * See Hen. Grigg's Light from the Sun p. 30. 31 33 34. * See J. Newman's Light within p. 55 66 72. answered by me in my Book Christ ascended p. 18 19 20 21. Dial. 3. p. 33. P. 17. P. 26. Rom. 2.29 7.6 2 Cor. 3.6 Hebr. 9.10 Rom. 7.6 On Joh. 1.4
THE Quakers Plainness DETECTING FALLACY IN Two Short Treatises I. The First in Answer to an Abusive Epistle styl'd The Quakers Quibbles and the Comparison therein between the Muggletonians and Quakers proved Absurd and Vnjust II. The Second being a brief Impeachment of the Forger's Compurgators in their Quakers Appeal Answered whose Injustice Partiality and false Glosses have given the chief Occasion of these late Contests By George Whitehead Ye have eaten the Fruit of Lyes Hos. 10.13 Printed in the Year 1674. Unprejudiced Reader IF the TRUTH could have been overcome by Falshood or buried under Reproaches or stopt with Popular Clamours or undermined by the secret Combinations of its Adversaries or supprest by Injustice and Partiality I confess these implacable and envious Men who are chiefly concerned against us would have the Day and their Iniquity been triumphant and remained uncontroulable But such their Weapons and Engines â—â—ve not prevailed nor ever shall effect the Enemies Designs against God's Cause or Heritage Had they been Men of Tender Conscience or respected the Honour of Religion more then Interest and Popular-Fame they would not have given us Occasion for these publick Contests neither by abetting a manifest Forger nor by lying Pamphlets or false Relations that they so frequently bring forth and cause to be spread against us But their hard Hearts their fretful striving Spirits vent forth their Envy and declare their Spleen and Ill-will towards us only that they want Power to effect their Revenge upon us to evince this I could give divers Instances that an Inveterate Persecuting Spirit hath long been and yet lives and works in divers of these Baptist-Teachers and Leaders such as cannot suffer Persecution themselves for their Religion but a little Storm or small Gust would blow them into their Holes and Obscurities again and yet they seem to envy the Liberty and grudge the Prosperity of others we have Cause to think that even Ours is as an Eye-Sore to them If they urge me herein I doubt not but I can particularly demonstrate it and in some Measure shew the Antiquity of their persecuting Envy and of late their Outrage is ominous of their Decrease Confusion and Ruin I am sensible the secret Hand of God hath been and is at Work against this Perverse Generation because of their Hypocrisie and Envy against us his People And how do they Revile Infamize Baite and Bark at that Sincere-hearted and Zealous Man William Penn What Libels Pamphlets Books Squibs Cantings Jeers Silly Drolls and Railing have his Adversaries Baptists and their Assistents let fly at him as Men full freight with Envy by all which both He and many more are but the more confirmed against them and their Way resolving if they were otherwise to seek they would never be Dipt by these Baptists into their Spirit Religion or Church Of late I have met with a very partial and scornful Pamphlet styled The Quakers Quibbles said to be set forth in an Expostulatory Epistle to W. Penn unto which I thought meet to write this following brief Tract though it be not directed to me I am concerned for the Truth and People of God being both abused through the Envy and Folly of their Confused Adversaries We find the said Pamphlet subscribed with the Name Thomas Thompson p. 26. And in Conclusion Thomas Thompson whether this be the Real Author's Name some question however some of the Baptists have commended and promoted his Work as an Ingenuous Piece who have pretended themselves ignorant of the Author of it but whatever he be he writes like a Confident Controuler of W. P. and the Quakers and would seem to be somebody but his Complement of Sir and thou Sir and thou c. as also Mountebank Fool c. with much more such Language to W. P. looks but oddly a strange Way of complementing from such a Person as would be thought a Moderator and Indifferent Pen But whoever the Author be his Work will further declare what dark Spirit it came from and that it much resembles that of a Prejudiced Angry Anabaptist only disguised and mixed with a little of different Style and silly Drollery However he and these Baptists that so much envy us and out of their Pride and Emulation would be smiting at W. Penn because of his Testimony for the Truth among us and his Zeal against Truth 's Adversaries they do but strive and quarrel in vain and I must tell them there was a Hand of the Lord in raising him up as also will appear in many more to bear Witness against such a stingy Generation of Hypocrites and Apostates as of late do busy themselves and take Counsel together like malicious Incendiaries against us and their Counsel God will bring to nought and scatter the Proud in their Imaginations yet I have a secret Sadness and Sorrow of Spirit because of the great Loss Declension Apostacy that divers even of these Baptists are fallen into On the former Zeal for Religion Tenderness of Conscience and Desires after an Experimental and Inward Knowledge of the Spirit Power and Work of God that were stirring in many when they were in a Low and Suffering Condition which now they have lost and the Zeal of several turned into Enmity and they grown Cold and Dead in the Earth and Spirit of the World yet there is a Remnant among them whom the Lord will visit and gather out as those other Sheep that desire to return to the great Shepherd and Sheepfold from off those Barren Hills and out of those Empty Professions and Dead Forms and Shadowy Observations under which the Souls of many yet lye starving and pining for want of the True and Heavenly Bread which is in the Father's House G. W. THE Quakers Plainness DETECTING FALLACY Section I. Of the Partiality and Confusion of the Pamphlet styled The Quakers Quibles and the Authors Hypocrisie and Envy WHereas the Author of the Pamphlet whoever he be styles himself an Indifferent Penn and would appear to be a very meek moderate man assuring us he is neither Baptist nor Quaker p. 37. implying that he is an Impartial Person between both But now let the serious Reader consider and judge of this Man's Moderation and Ingenuity who instead of impartially relating Matters of Fact for others to judge of all along bears upon the Quakers with hard Language Jeers Taunts and Canting Quibles comparing W.P. with a Jesuite in his Oration and to a Mountebank or Stage-Player accusing him with Shuffles Railing Clamour less Railing at Billingsgate the Author of a Lye not only a Fool his unjust and us his Friends with Foll Immoderation Rancor Malice Obstinacy Vnreasonableness not to say Madness Passion â—â—gling Refractoriness Ridiculous Fancâ—â—s Weakâ—â—ss Qâ—â—bling base old Way of Evasion and Shâ—fâ—ing perverse Generation obstinately confident and confidently obstinate without Order or Rule Rime or Reason Fools fit for nâ— Man to dispute with except some of Muggleton 's Discâ—ples Billingsgate Rhetorick misterious Subtitâ—â—es
supposed that nighan hundred of the Anabaptists would clamor together and make a hideous Noise and Bawling to stop him that was about to speak and in such wise were we Beset Interrupted and Hector'd by their Companies in the Galleries and near us upon their Leaders Example insomuch that we must wait a considerable time ere we could be heard The Charge of Shuffling and Bogling at one single Question being afraid c. pag. 12. is unjust and scornfully aggravated for though there was some Intermission before an Answer was given it was not at all out of any Fear or to Shuffle about it but because 1 st It was not W. P's place then to Answer Interrogatories and unscriptural Questions when his Adversaries had given a Charge that we were no Christians and upon the Proof as they pretended instead whereof they fell to Catechising us 2 dly And if we had not at that Time answered one Word to the Question but held them to the Proof of their Charge judicious Auditors would have held us excusable To that of T. H's saying Most of the Particulars he would prove from our Principles and the rest by Testimonies p. 13. he said the rest by Consequence Though here T. H. made a Stop yet W. P. is charged with an Interruption a Lye a Fool and Vnjust when he did not insist on the Matter see their disingenuous Carping and Reviling Whereas many gross things were instanc'd and laid against him wherein he had most falsly and abusively personated us as so speaking and being our own Answers and VVords and our Method and Manner of Reasoning even in many Particulars which he had neither Testimony for nor are they deducible either from our Words or Principles However if he say He will prove them by Consequence this bewrayes his own Falseness in saying They were the Quakers Answers when they were but T. Hicks's Forgeries staâ—â—d in our Name and Person Sect. II. Of the Christ of God c. THat we have denyed Distinctions p. 15. is false for true and reasonable ones we deny not But if our Friends Words have not deceived this Man he saith we own nothing but the Divine Nature to be Christ p. 16. Where proves he these Words to be ours Have we not plainly and often confest also that the Divine Nature or Word cloathed with the most holy Manhood and as having taken Flesh of the Seed of Abraham was and is the Christ Yet we must own that if he was the Son of God before he took Flesh he was Christ with respect to his Divine Nature as proceeding from the Father and that he was the Son of God before is not denyed that we know of in which Respect he was not seen with Carnal Eyes but with Respect to the Body which he took upon him in Time And as for two Natures viz. the Divine and Human united in one Person being the Christ p. 16. Then how consistent with this is it to say that the Human Nature or Christ's Body of Flesh and Blood is Christ p. 17 18. Which is all one as one while to say that Christ is made up of a Divine and Human Nature another while of a Human Nature or Body and yet that Body the Body of Christ. I must confess that if you impose upon us a Creed in such Impropriety of Speech and besides Scripture-Language and Phrase or otherwise unchristian us we must tell you that untill you bring us plain Scripture that saith the Human Nature is the Christ which Phrase some do conscientiously Scruple at least as being too low to entitle to the Christ of God we must rather patiently bear your Censure or Damnation then deviate from Scripture-Language in our Creed which is that Jesus Christ is come in the Flesh that he is God Man the Son of God yea and God manifest in Flesh that as Mediator betwixt God and Man he is THE MAN Christ Jesus that Christ's Body of Flesh and Blood that was born of the Virgin Mary and that suffered was crucified dyed and rose again the Third Day is called The Body of Jesus this Temple and a Body hast thou prepared me was not this the Son speaking to the Father As for J. Ives's great Question so much insisted on Whether Christ's Human Nature was a Part of Christ p 17. As it was not a Question in Scripture Phrase or Language so it was as abruptly and sillily obtruded begged instead of proving the Charge of our being no Christians As also thus to divine Christ into Parts is a Contradiction to the Human Nature being Christ. Pray you Baptists before you conclude a final Sentence upon us agree upon a consistent Creed that you intend to stand by if you will impose upon us to believe as you believe in Matter and Form upon Pain of Excommunication as Ethnicks or Heathens and finally of Damnation and then we may answer you further as we see Occasion you having already attempted to excommunicate us from among all Christians chiefly about Words wherein as yet you have not stated a plain and congruous Form among your selves And we need not think our selves oblieged further to answer you or defend our selves from your bare Charge of being no Christians until you have given us such a formal Creed and withal explain prove and reconcile these your Terms which you impose question and strive about some of you have endeavourd to tye us up to answer Aye or No unto as about your Expressions viz. Two Natures in one Person the Christ. Christ's Human Nature Part of Christ. The Body that was seen with carnal Eyes the Christ. Christ's Body of Flesh Blood to be Christ or Christ's Person The true Christ a Person without us or a Personal Being without us But let it be further observed that your Brother H. Grigg confesseth of Jesus Christ the Son of God thus viz. That he was of the same Essence or Substance with the Father the holy Spirit and that he had a PERSONAL EXISTENCE or Subsistence before he did assume our Nature c. See here they own a Personal Being of Christ before he assumed our Nature they should have agreed upon the Definition of Words Person and Personal Existence and Subsistence and clearly explain them to us in their Nature and Property as also the Nature and Extent of the Word Human both as they apply it to Body to Nature and as it relates to Man and not darkly and dubiously to impose them upon us in their â—uestions but rather be content with plain Scripture-Language and Words which the Holy Ghost hath taught which it seems these Men are not content with as also appears where W. Penn confest his Belief of Christ to be of the Seed of Abraham yet God over all blessed forever c. This was and is excepted against as not direct to the Question p. 18. Therefore upon their variable Terms about Christ I Propose these few plain Questions seriously
the Old Fancies of Sabellius revived and new vampt not heard of till long after Christ and then quickly exploded the Church about 1400. Years ago pag. 36. I must needs say that as this Accuser's smiting at us is in the dark herein for he does not lay down these old exploded Fancies of Sabellius or tell us particularly what they are but thus in dark general Terms is smiting and squibbing at us and abusing his Readers as if they were all bound to believe his Accusations on his bare Word But what were those Fancies or Opinions of Sabellius and such others that were exploded as Heterodox or Heretical It 's reported That their Books contain many Blasphemies against the Almighty God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and withal much Incredulity touching his only-begotten Son and First begotten of all Creatures and the word Incarnate and senseless Ignorance of the Holy Ghost Euseb. lib. 7. fol. 125. ch 5. As also those that denyed Christ to have been God from Everlasting and affirm'd that by Nature he was but only a bare Man as it is said the Followers of Paulus Samosatenus did Such disapprov'd the Essence and Divinity of Christ which hath been before all Worlds and such as confound the Father the Son and Holy Ghost imagining Three Names in One Thing and in One Person Soc. Schol. l. 2. ch 15. But we are sure that we are clear from all such Opinions as Denying the Deity or Divinity of the Son of God or his being that Word that became Flesh and so from affirming him to be butonly a bare Man As also we never went about to confound the Father and Son truly conâ—â—der'd according to Scripture-Testimony or to deny either the Property Relation Manifestation or Operation of Father or Son though the one Divine Being of Father Son and Holy Spirit from Everlasting we have and must confess Let it suffice that as we confess to the Father's bringing or sending forth the Son both from his own Being and Substance as also to his taking Flesh and the perfect Manhood upon him in due time and that we really believe his Sonship and all this according to Scripture so that he was and is the Christ of God the same yesterday to day and for ever And therefore to compare us with Sabellius or such as before mention'd is very Envious and Unjust But that Baptists have done no less then denyed the Deity of the Son of God or Divinity of Christ appears in what follows John Newman's Argument If Christ as Christ was not from the Beginning then Christ was not the Word from â—he Beginning But Christ as Christ was not from the Beginning Therefore Christ was not the Word from the Beginning pag. 52. of his Book entitul'd The Light Within Mark here Though he grants Christ and the Word to be one and the same yet this Argument denyes him to be either Christ or the Word from the Beginning What was he then He tells us not Doth not this oppose the Divinity of Christ or Deity of the Son of God to affirm that He was neither as Christ nor the Word from the Beginning for The Word was with God and the Word was God And T. Hicks among much more of his idle Quibbling and Opposition thus queries viz. I ask thee if Christ signifie Anointed and God be Christ as thou Quaker affirmest Whether God himself e anointed Dial. 3. pag. 32. Mark here who is the Quibbler irreverently reflecting upon Scripture-Language But unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God! is for ever a Scepter of Righteousness is the Scepter of thy Kingdom Thou hast loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity Therefore God even thy God hath anointed thee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy Fellows Hebr. 1.8 9. Psal. 45.6 7. But these Baptists are willing to throw off God being Christ with as thou affirmest which is not as they affirm them I ask then If they own that Christ is God Or that as the Son who is God he be anointed as he is the Son And If He was the Son of God and so Christ before his Incarnation or assuming Flesh However these men appear Socinianized now and boggle at this Pre-Existence of Christ and seem to define or limit him only as a Person without us in Flesh yet formerly some of their Brethren have confessed That Christ is God That Christ is call'd the Spirit 2 Cor. 3.17 yea that The Father hath put his Name upon him Exod. 23.21 And that it is the Christ that is there spoaken of is manifest That the Father hath put his Name upon him so far as He is call'd the Father Isa. 9.6 See their Book entitul'd A Way to Zion p. 102. I pass by several Falshoods traducing and canting Language in the said Qu. Quibbles and grant that at length that the Author hath shewn himself more ingenious then in all the Book besides where he concludes thus viz. If I have mistaken thee or any of thy Friends it is not willingly and if thou shewst me honestly wherein I will beg thy Excuse I not pretending to Infallibility my Opinion being still so long as we are men in this Condition Humanum est errare But he should have consider'd this at the Beginning of his Book and have been more submissive and gentle in his Work beeing so subject to Mistake THE Second Treatise Wherein the Forgers Compurgators Are IMPEACHED In a strict Examination of divers Citations and Doctrinal Matters in their Book entituled The Quakers Appeal answered or a full Relation of the Occasion Progress and Issue of a Meeting held in Barbican the 28th of August last past as their Style is Which Meeting was held by the Baptists to clear T. Hicks to charge and insult over the Quakers in their Absence as the Mannagement and Issue thereof hath manifested This is published not only for want of Justice from them but because of the Injustice of those Baptists so deeply concerned for their Brother Tho. Hicks against the People of God called Quakers George Whitehead He looked for Iudgment but behold Oppression for Righteousness but behold a Cry Under Falshood have they hid themselves THE Second Treatise Wherein the Forger's Compurgators are Impeached A Brief Introduction THat these Men who have undertaken to answer our Appeal against Tho. Hicks have pretended very fair in Words is undeniable but how they have performed and answered is already manifest and will further appear in divers Particulars wherein I do complain against them both of their Injustice Partiality and false Testimony and affirm that they have neither approv'd themselves Just Judges nor faithful Witnesses in matters plain and obvious nor yet clear'd T. Hicks In their Title-Page they say Wherein the Allegations of William Penn in two Books lately published by him against T. Hicks were answer'd and disproved This is a manifest Vntruth as any Impartial Eye may see who is willing but to compare this their Barbican Relation styl'd The Quakers Appeal
of his principal Allegations for Proof is that their Opinion is That the Soul is God or part of God and of God's Being without Beginning and Infinite which perversly and darkly he hath drawn from G. F's meer Question as plainly appears before we had need to look the more strictly into the matter Upon which I ask If to put this Question Is not THAT of God and of his Being which came out from God by which Man became a living Soul be an Opinion sufficient to prove Us No Christians Then Whether or no they are Christians who say that the Soul of Man is a Spirit of the NATURE of God which returns to God that gave it And whether this be not as high an Assertion of the Soul of Man as can be supposed G. F. ever asserted And that some Baptists have thus asserted of the Soul see what they say in their own Instances and Words viz. That this is a known Truth that every thing at its Dissolution dissolveth into its first Principles 1. The Springs Rivers run into the Sea from whence they came out Eccles. 1.7 2. The Ice Snow Hail that are congeal'd of Water dissolve into Water and out of Water they are congeal'd again 3. The Light centereth into the Sun which is the Fountain of Light therefore in the Night time it is dark and Moon and Stars give Light as they are aspected to the Sun 4. For Man at his Dissolution 1. The SOUL being a Spirit of the NATURE of God is said to return to him that gave it and the Body being made of the Dust returns to the Dust again Eccle. 12.7 Gen. 3.19 saith God Thou shalt return to the Ground for out of it thou wast taken Thus far Dan. King in his Book entitul'd A way to Sion p. 92. printed at London reprinted at Edenburgh Anno 1656. and highly approved and commended by T. Patient J. Spilsbury W. Kiffin and J. Pierson who in their Epistle dedicatory give this Commendation viz. It hath pleased God to stir up the Spirit of our Brother Dan. King whom we judge a faithful and painful Minister of Jesus Christ to take this Work in hand before us and we judge that he hath been much assisted of God in the Work in which he hath been very painful Observe here how it is affirmed that the Soul is of the NATURE of God and that according to the Instances before of these things that return into their first Principles See now Baptists your own Doctrine about the Soul or Spirit of Man Were you well advised to suffer your Brother so highly to charge and taunt at us about the Soul because of G. F s Question which concern'd the Breath or Spirit of Life from God by which Man became a Living Soul when you tell us plainly that the Soul is a Spirit of the NATURE OF GOD You would take it ill if any should scornfully Dialogue upon you for this as your Brother Hicks hath done upon us for G. F's Question Is not That of God which came out from God c. to wit the Breath or Spirit of Life with whose Words also about the Soul agreeth Wisd. 15.11 Forasmuch as he knew not his Maker and him that â—NSPIRED unto him an active Soul and BREATHED in a Living Spirit See also VAVASOR POWEL'S Concordance about the Soul viz. The Soul is put for the whole Person Acts 2.41 7.14 it is put for Life Isa. 53.12 it is put for Breath Acts 20.10 marg it is put for a Reasonable Creature Gen. 2.7 it is put for GOD HIMSELF Prov. 6.16 marg Hebr. 10.38 I suppose these men are not ignorant both how this Concordance is approved and the Author of it esteemed by them Sect. I. About the Person of Christ. WHereas T.H. to prove the Quakers deny Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without us quotes these words viz. Jesus Christ a Person without us is not Scripture Language for it quotes Dip. Pl. p. 13. Whereas the Words there are Jesus Christ God-man a Person without thee as in his Dia. 1. p. 9. is not Scripture-Language c. Mark he hath left out the Words GOD MAN in the Citation and in his two last Dialogues likewise Dial. 2. p. 10. Dial. 3. p. 7. So that it appears these Witnesses have either taken this defective Citation upon trust from T. H. and not from their own Sight and Knowledge or else they have knowingly born Witness to this Abuse owned this defective false Citation for a Blind But how comes his Charge now to be so Low against us as only denying Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without us and he so hard put to it to prove this when before he charged us in these Words viz You reprobate the Scriptures and the Person of Jesus Christ without you Dial. 1. p. 62. O wonderful Impudence and Falshood The Reason of my Answer in this Case before to T.H. as also my owning the Man Christ Jesus as to his Being without us as well as within us is plainly shewn in my Appendix to Reas. against Rail p. 17. my Words being thus viz. Jesus Christ God-man a PERSON without thee which Phrase I did and do say is not Scripture Language but the Anthropomorphites who profess a Personal God denying him to be an Infinite Spirit doth it therefore follow that I deny the Man Christ Jesus in his being either without or within us But T. H's Words God-man a Person without thee equally excluding God under the Limitation of Man and Person without us he is pleased now to leave out the word God-man to accuse us of denying the Person of Christ without us He should have explained what he means by the Word Person for though we are not satisfied with the Words before being unscriptural this is no denying of Jesus Christ in his being either as without us or within us we confessing that he is ascended into Glory far above all Heavens and that he is at the Father's right Hand of Power in his Glorious Being which yet doth not exclude or limit him from being within us And its false that we deny Christ to be a Man His Exaltation and Glory into which he is ascended not only into the Heavens but far above all Heavens transcends that Degree attained in these suffering earthly Tabernacles his inaccessible Glory is above Men and Angels c. Again T. H. hath very unfairly cited but the Beginning of a Sentence of mine leaving out the latter and chief Part thereof viz. at 'T is a Design of Satan to keep Men in carnal Imaginations and dark Thoughts of a Human Personal Christ And here they break off leaving out the following Words of the same Sentence which are Consisting either of Flesh Blood and Bones LIKE THEIRS or of Flesh and Bones without Blood and so of God's right Hand as limited to that Remoteness That they neglect to wait for Christ's inward and spiritual