Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	place_n	spirit_n	worship_v	2,835	5	9.1263	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A62427	The Quakers quibbles in three parts : first set forth in an expostulatory epistle to Will. Pfnn [i.e. Penn] concerning the late meeting held to Barbycan between the Baptists and the Quakers, also the pretended prophet Lod. Muggleton and the Quakers compared : the second part, in reply to a quibbling answer to G. Whiteheads, entituled The Quakers plainness ... : the third part, being a continuation of their quibbles ... / by the same indifferent pen.	Thompson, Thomas.; Hedworth, Henry.; Penn, William, 1644-1718.	1675 (1675)	Wing T1013; ESTC R41153	141,349	262

they themselves now confess that notwithstanding all that and all their Preaching up and confidence of the Light Spirit and Voice of the Lord WITHIN them they yet had not a distinct discerning of the Lord's Voyce not their minds brought into so much as a CAPACITY to discern it how can they be MORE confident and Infallibly evidence they are MORE certain of it now Or why may they not be mistaken and mistake the Lords Voyce now as well as fifteen or sixteen Years ago or not well discern which or what is the Lords Voyce And why may they not change again and again fifteen or sixteen Years hence and say then they had not before a distinct discerning of the Lords Voyce If the Quakers say but they know now they have it so the Quakers formerly said they knew it they felt it they handled it they witnessed it IN themselves and yet the Quakers now say they were so far out then as not to have a distinct discerning of the Lords Voyce And so then may the Quakers now for all their pretences and confident talk Let my Reader take Notice and they Consider what 's become of their Quaking and Shaking their mighty Motions and pretended Voyce of the Lord within And I think this may be enough for Quaking to shew that the present Quakers I deal withall have little more than the Name now in this particular Sic mutantur SECT II. The Quakers Quibbles about Set-days and set-Set-places Sect. 1. PRinciples of Truth p. 42. per E. Burroughs We believe his True Worship required and accepted of him is not by the Tradition of Men in outward Observances or Set-days or Places but he is Worshipped onely in Spirit and Truth without respect of Times Places or Things And this was one while the Quak●rs general Doctrine that they should not run nor be enjoyned by others to come to Meetings but as they ●re moved of the Lord thereto and that without that it was but Will-Worship See Principles of Truth p. 24. 51. Every Man ought to be left FREE as the Lord shall perswade his own mind in doing or leaving undone this or th' other practice in Religion Sect. 2. But to whirle about and run round again at other times P. Livingstone can tell you Idem p. 5. It is a dark Spirit clearness and FREEDOM is not in it but it hath and doth lead into Bondage And here Satan by Transforming himself hath obtained his End and purpose in such for which cause he first Transformed himself in the matter of the Hat and the Hand and not coming to Meetings until they should be moved of the Lord untill at last he obtained his end to get them not to come at all and not to let them rest therewith but also made and makes them believe lyes as namely that they be moved of the Lord to cry against Meetings c. And we are certain enough what that Spirit leads to in the end for all its fair appearance if it be followed to the end c. And who now Observes more their set-days and hours too their first and fourth days meeting and set places Built on purpose a● the Bull and Mouth and Grace-Church-street c. than the Quakers And thus are they run into Forms as those whom they once condemned and now deny that FREEDOM they once allowed and cry'd for which is all but a Quibble SECT III. The Quakers Quibbles about Forms and the Church Sect. 1. THat the Quakers at first did cry out against Forms and several external Ordinances and all Formality in Divine Worship and the Church of God is so generally known that I think I need not trouble the Reader with Instances yet if any should doubt it see G. Fox Mystery p. 65. Paul brought the Saints off from things that a●● seen and water is seen and it's Baptism Here is a few words will serve for all Sect. 2. But then to go round again when others of the Quakers Object against them That taking off the Hat in prayer and taking by the Hand are but Formal and that by setting up this Friends were setters up of Forms now hear the Quakers Quibble P. Livingstone Idem p. 12. in Answer to that Objection The Form of Truth we own that which Truth appears in that is the Form of Truth Friends do not chuse a Form for the Truth but Truth chuseth its own Form and moveth in it at its pleasure Oh Excellent then it seems taking off the Hat or taking by the Hand is the Form among the Quakers that Truth appears in and this is the Form that the Truth chuseth for its own Oh rare Formalists Sect. 3. Then P. Livingstone goes on p. 13. And we know those that do the contrary pretend what they will it is by and in that Spirit which is opposite and opposes the Truth of God and its Children and we know if they were lead by the Spirit of the Body id est the Church they would be led to the same things it leads the Body and acts the Body in for the Body is one though many Members it being guided by one Life and they agree in these things and one stands not with the Hat on and another with it off nor one doth not give the Hand and another refuseth which is a contradiction but we see further into the thing than the Hat and Hand We see and know the Spirit of Enmity in the ground and it is truly testified against to be that Spirit of ANTI-CHRIST against CHRIST and the Spirit of Truth in the Body i.e. the Church beareth this Testimony against that Spirit and them Acted by it Oh what Rents and Divisions this evil Spirit hath made How many poor simple Hearts have been drawn aside by it So far he Now is not this exactly like the Doctrine and Practice of the Church of Rome Nay the Quakers are got so far as to say Friends that stand in the Life and are the Body know that there is not NOR CANNOT BE preservation out of the Body meaning the Body of Quakers For they that are out of the Body are out of the Faith ●●d are not of the Body Pat. Livingstone p. 20. Just as the Papists say there 's no Salvation out of the Church Yea and more that they must believe as the True Church meaning the Quakers Church Believes or else positively they cannot be saved For these are his express words viz. I bear my testimony for that People in scorn called Quakers that the Lord hath chosen them a peculiar People above all People upon the Earth and we are to turn to no other People c. And they that believe not as the true Church-Believes CANNOT BE SAVED But this we know of an INFALLIBLE certainty that WE being faithful in the Truth those that are gone from us are of another Spirit and not of the Faith of the True Church P. Livingstone p. 22 23. this is like the very top-stone of Popery and

him as that he would be ashamed of it when I consider his Learning but that his undertaking to vindicate G.F. for notorious falshoods and nonsence evident to mens Eyes and Senses and against his own senses and ocular demonstration makes me much to doubt it see Contr. ended p. 39. being sorry to see that so ingenuous a Man as W.P. once was should Sacrifice his own Senses Reason Honour and Reputation to keep up the Credit of such a Man as G. F. who hath written in many things so ridiculously that it's impossible for any Man to vindicate him without making himself more ridiculous and by his Tautologies and incoherency a sober Man would take him to be Craz'd witness his Professors Catechism Testimony of the True Light and his Primmer for the Scholars and Doctors of Europe And which is yet more G. I have this to add That I do not think Tho● nor all the Quakers in England can bring Express Scripture for that which is your First and Grand Principle of all wh●ch you talk of so much above all viz. The Light of Christ within every Man or Christ the Light within every Man Now to speak in G.F. and J. Stubb's words I charge you Qu●kers Let us see where the Scripture speaks thus in these ●xpress words Let us see where it is written come do not Shuffle for we are resolved that the Scriptures shall buffet you Quakers about and that you shall be whipped about with the Rule Give us plain Scripture for it without shuffling adding or diminishing I charge you QUAKERS to give us Printed Scriptures for all these foregoing words and let us see in what Chapter and Verse they are Printed and if they do that I think I may promise them to turn Quaker presently But besides this their Hypocrisie herein is more gross For to what end except to deceive should they pretend that they cannot own this or that in the● Creed if it be not expressed in plain Scripture whe● they have so often and so plainly avowed That th● Scripture is not their Rule either for Faith or Pr●ctice But now for the Protestants to call for plai●-Scripture is but according to their Principle becaus● they own it for their Rule 7. So again p. 19. G.W. confesses that JESUS CHRIST is MAN one at first view might think h● spoke well so he does if he did but mean truly wh●● he speaks But that you may plainly see he doth not and may see what kind of Man he means in the sam● Page he gives you to understand that it is such ● Man as hath not HUMANE NATURE and p. 24 such a Man as is not a Person without us and wh●● kind of Man think you must or can this be Is no● this a fine Quibble Judg you That this their Equivocation may appear more plain even to the Capacit● of the Vulgar consider That when the Quaker● say that Jesus Christ is Man They must mea● either That he is truly and substantially a Man a created Body and Soul or that he is an Imaginary and Fictitious one only If the first then they must own he is a distinct Person ha●h as essential to him Humane Nature For to be a Man is to have the Nature of Man and every substantial Man is a distinct Person But this they deny of Christ therefore they do not mean he is such a Man If the other viz. an Imaginary or Fictitious Man let them say so if they dare and consider how Blasphemous it would be and what horrible Consequences would follow thereon And therefore to go round again let the Quakers equivocate as much as they will they must hold that indeed Christ is not Man or else fall into the BLASPHEMY or Absurdity abovementioned In plainness G. is Jesus Christ a Man and not a Person Seeing thou dost define a Person to be a MAN c. In the Introduction of thy Book intituled the Divinity of Christ What meanest thou by the word MAN A Created Body and Soul or some uncreated thing Now G. use plainness and honesty in this particular if there be any in thee or whoever he be that undertakes to Answer for thee Generally all Men in the World that use the Term Man as properly an English word understand by it a PERSON or a RATIONAL CREATURE distinct from all other Men one that is in some certain Place and cannot be in distinct Places at the same time that hath in respect of his Body Dimensions of Length Breadth and Depth that is visible one that began to exist at a certain time one that hath a head and a body so closely united that when-ever they two are severed the Man ceases to be But the Quakers they seem to mean quite another thing by the term MAN sometimes one thing and sometimes another I believe themselves know not well what By the term MAN Do you not mean one that is not a Person or Rational Creature but Flesh Blood and Bones of an eternal Nature J. P's Qu. p. 20. an infinite Soul One whose Flesh is and he is in a multitude of Men and Women in distant Countreys at the same instant of time Myst p. 68. Christ ascend p. 18. One that is not in Heaven as a place to live in remote from Men that live on Earth Spir. of Truth p. 12. Christ ascen p. 21. one that is not VISIBLE Christ ascend p. 37. one that beg●n not to be for he was eternal one that is as far remote from his Body as Heaven is from Earth and yet lives See Quak. Plainness p. 23. In fine it seems Jesus Christ is a Man whose Glorious Body in Heaven is not a Humane or Man 's Body see the same p. 23. and doth not the Quaker use now admirable Plainness in his Confession of Faith in Scripture-Language Doth Europe or America afford such Equivocation 8. G.W. p. 19. says further That Christ's Body of Flesh and Blood that was born of the VIRGIN-MARY and that suffered was Crucifyed Dye++d and Rose again the third day is called the Body of Jesus But yet G. thou wilt not say nor own That that Living Body is Jesus or that BODY is so much as a part of Jesus Consider this serious Reader here 's still the Quakers Quibble and a clear proof of the Quakers Mystery whereby their poor unwary Hearers are deluded and deceived So they will say the seventh day of the week called Saturday and the eleventh Month called January and the Scripture called the word of God and the Writing or Declaration of Matthew called the Gospel of St. Matthew and abundance the like Which yet they do not one whit the more Believe it for Truth for saying it is called so But Believe quite the Contrary as they believe the Scripture is not the Word of God though it may be called so so they can say by their Equivocation The Body that was born of the Virgin Mary is called in Scripture the Body of Jesus and

and that 's all I ask of them 15. And thus G.W. says amiss when he talks as if I did not acknowledg the sufficiency of the Spirits Evidence and Teaching for I do fully acknowledg it where it APPEARS indeed to be and do more fully own it than yet the Quakers seem to do who are loath to own Real Miracles and the Gift of Tongues to be a certain EVIDENCE of the SPIRIT But must I therefore own that to be the Spirits Evidence which every one calls so or will G.W. himself acknowledg it so I dare say not why then it remains that G.W. others must Evidence to us That that is indeed the Spirits-Evidence which they call so Before that either he or they can justly call us UNBELIEVERS or accuse us for not owning the sufficiency of the Spirits-Evidence and this G.W. and all the Quakers in England must confess or else I may as justly accuse them for not acknowledging the sufficiency of the Spirits Evidence and Teaching in the Church of Rome or in Muggleton and let them clear themselves of it if they can 16. Now since the Quakers will not produce any of their Miracles I would not have them angry with me if I should produce one or two that are the likeliest that I know of if that which they say be true I never found any upon Record in their own Writings except this may be Recorded for one viz. in G. F's Professors Catechism p. 13. And is not the POPE the MOTHER of all your observing of Days Saints days as you call them According to this it seems G.F. their Grand Prophet Converted a MAN into a WOMAN and that a POPE too which if true must needs be a Miracle and that it was not the Printers fault his next words assured me And is not SHE your Example and not the Scripture And again in another place in the same Page is not the POPE the MOTHER Then I considered what Pope this was whether it might not be Pope-JOAN that did first Institute Saints Days and so G.F. the Prophet by a strange impulse speak more Truth than he thought of But my Authors assure me 't was not Pope-JOAN but that it was a MAN Pope and the name Pope signifieth as much as FATHER and yet for all this G.F. hath turned the HE into a SHE and Converted the MAN into a WOMAN yet this is the Man that hath helpt to set out a whole Book in Folio shewing the sinfulness and impurity of saying you and not thou to one in the singular What a Prophet What a Scholar is this that cannot tell the MASCULINE Gender from the FEMININE was he can any one think skill'd in so many Languages as he hath set his Name to that does not write true English 17. The other thing which I shall leave to your own Judgments whether it be a Miracle or not is what is Recorded of them in the Court of Chancery THAT THE QUAKERS CAN TAKE AN OATH AND YET NOT SWEAR AT ALL If this be so some think it must be miraculous That they cannot swear that they swear not at all is their Principle That several of them have taken Oaths and have been sworn in Chancery is upon Record in that Court as Jer. Ives hath satisfied the World by Certificates in his Questions for the Quakers and yet the Quakers still say they did not Swear nor take an Oath which if true must be won●erful at least But these are not such Miracles and Evidence as lie necessarily incumbent on the Quakers to produce for the better Evidence and Proof of what they say and pretend to and therefore I shall say no more of it here but refer them to produce such Evidence as will indeed prove them to be sent of God to go forth as Apostles Prophets c. more than all others and be satisfactory in Answer to the foregoing Particulars SECT IV. In Reply to his fourth Section shewing the Comparison betwixt the QUAKERS and MUGGLETON to be both Just Rational Honest and Necessary G.W. P. 35. TO compare Muggleton and them he says is both Idle Quibbling and Envious Canting What if W.P. does not pretend to more than Muggleton does will it therefore follow the Quakers are Impostors or like him who holds many Blasphemies The Baptists may be ashamed of such gross and abusive Insinuations as these Reply Stay George be not so hot run not so fast give me leave to call thee back again and tell thee that if the Comparison in my Epistle was any abuse that it was not the Baptists that did it but I and therefore if so I am to bear the blame of it But neither they nor I need to be ashamed of doing it that I see as I shall now shew you and if you had exercised a good Conscience you might have seen it your self and spared me the Labour 1. Then I say That if W.P. does not pretend to more than Muggleton yet if he or the Quakers pretend to have received immediately a Commission from Heaven and Divine Revelations and inspired by the Spirit of God to go forth as Apostles Prophets c. as Muggleton does and yet he be an Impostor as he is then if the Quakers can produce no more for theirs than Muggleton does for his it will follow that the Quakers are also Impostors And do thou Answer it if thou canst and so thou hast thy idle Quibbling and envious Canting return'd on thy self 2. And for thy accusing Muggleton with Blasphemies it is as certain that he accuses you with Blasphemies and many others have condemned you also as holding apparent Blasphemies then by this thou art as well condemned as Muggleton is condemned by thee so that this will be no Proof and besides How wilt thou evidence to others That all what thou sayest and callest Blasphemy is such indeed or doest thou think thy bare word is sufficient for all others to give Credence to and build their Faith on so that here the doubt and Question will remain still 3. I am verily perswaded in my heart that many Quakers have censured several Doctrines for Blasphemy which yet are not truly so as if they had the Romish Authority and every one of them a Pope within him Take an Instance out of G.W. himself Ishmael p. 9. For a Man's saying That it is all one to say the Scripture saith and God saith G. calls him thou Blasphemous Beast dost thou make no difference between the Scripture and God here let all that reads this see thy Blasphemy Now George let me ask thee if a Man should affirm it is all one to say thy Book Ishmael saith and the Spirit of God saith whether this would be Blasphemy since in thy Title Page thou asserts it was given forth from the Spirit of the Lord in us and was not that given forth by Scripture Writing or Speech If thou sayest no then thou hast condemned the Man wrongfully unless thou wilt say that that Book