Selected quad for the lemma: word_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
word_n	person_n	scripture_n	trinity_n	3,376	5	9.9610	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47145	George Keith's Fourth narrative of his proceedings at Turners-hall divided into three parts : detecting the Quakers gross errors, vile heresies, and antichristian principles, oppugning the fundamentals of Christianity, by clear and evident proofs (in above two hundred and fifty quotations) faithfully taken out of their books, and read at three several meetings, the 11th, the 18th, and 23d of Jan., 1699 before a great auditory of judicious persons, ministers, and others, more particularly discovering the fallacious and sophistical defences of George Whitehead, Joseph Wyeth, and seven Quakers of Colchester, in their late books on all the several heads contained in the printed advertisement : to which is prefix'd, the attestation of five ministers of the Church of England, to the truth of the said quotations, and a postcript [sic] / by George Keith.; Fourth narrative of his proceedings at Turners-Hall	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1700 (1700)	Wing K167; ESTC R2430	153,412	130

acknowledged his Error than to lay the Fault upon as wrong writ or wrong printed And if he corrected them long since how comes it that he never published his Correction in any of the Books he has published since betwixt the Year 1655. and 1690. containing the space of 36. Years But for evidence against him that he hath not sincerely said That he writ not that Part of the Book it is enough that he owned it and this I can prove that without Exception he owned it to be his jointly with these others who signed it with him as appears from his Truth defending the Quakers p. 1. printed four Years after the Ishmael And he belches out the like antichristian and profane Expressions against the three Persons in the Godhead in Terms equivalent to those in the Ishmael He saith in his first Page in Answer to the first Question Do not you repent for your endeavouring vainly to defend August 29. 1659. in so great a Congregation these Positions printed in a Book writ by George Whitehead He answers for himself and his Brethren thus The Positions we defended are according to the Scriptures of Truth and them we need not repent of These were they contained in that very Book called Ishmael as doth appear out of the Book Ishmael it self here the Book was produced one of which Positions were in asserting the Scriptures or Writing not to be the Word Another was That there is no such Word in the Scriptures as Three Persons in the Trinity but it is a Popish Doctrine as the Mass or Common-Prayer-Book mentions it Fourthly And thou that affirms three distinct Persons in the Godhead art a Dreamer and he that dreams and tells Lies contrary to the Scriptures of Truth which we own he with his Imaginations and Dreams is for the Lake Here it is plain that by his Imaginations and Dreams G.W. meant the Ministers Doctrines of calling the Scriptures the Word and affirming that there are three Persons in the Godhead so whereas he said in his Ishmael Townsend and the three Persons are shut up in perpetual Doctrines Here in Truth defending c. he saith He with his Imaginations and Dreams that is the three Persons is for the Lake Now this is not one whit more sober than his Words in the Ishmael how then is it that G. Whitehead has not found some shift to put this part of his Truth defending upon another Again in his Truth defending c. p. 25. he plainly owns that Book called Ishmael to be his four Years after it was printed and now though in his Truth defending c. he saith That he and his Brethren need not repent of the Positions laid down in that called Ishmael yet now in the Year 1690. in his Christianity he saith He was sorry his Name was to that Paper and yet as before is mentioned in Truth defending p. 1. he saith They need not repent of it Is not this a plain Change in G. W. He need not repent of what was writ and yet was sorry that it was writ Formerly he owned that Book in the Year 1659 and in the Year 1690 He writ not that Part and was sorry it was writ and all this without any Change in his Mind But when People are sorry for what they do we commonly reckon they repent of it This offensive Passage objected against G. Whitehead out of his Ishmael was objected against him by Christopher Wade in his Quakery slain p. 9. printed in 1657. And though G. W. printed against C. Wade in his Truth defending 1659. yet he then took no notice of that Passage to disown it to be his But how is it that G. W. disowns what was written in the Book called Ishmael against the three Persons Doth he now own the three Persons not to be Popish as he formerly charged them Truth def p. 2 Though he has not in the least retracted his abusive and reviling Speeches against this glorious Truth both in the Ishmael and in his Truth defending c. for that would reflect upon his Infallibility yet he would seem now to own the Doctrine of the three Persons since the Act for Toleration came forth for that Act of Toleration does except those who deny in their preaching or writing the Doctrine of the blessed Trinity as it is declared in the Articles of Religion viz. the 39 Articles But that G. W. may have the Benefit of the Act which at present he has not by Law whatever he has by Indulgence he ought also to disown some other abusive Expressions of his and sophistical Arguings he has used in his other Books as particularly not only in his Truth defending c. above mentioned but in his Divinity of Christ signed by the two Letters G. W. see p. 18. he hath these Words As to T. D ' s telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the Creation of his Body and Soul the Parts of that Nature be subsisted in c. To this I say saith G. W. if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both created doth not this render him a fourth Person And as nonsensical and abusive is the reasoning of G. Fox their great Apostle in the Epistle prefixed to the Divinity signed by him and John Stubbs where in the 9th Page of that Epistle they thus argue And he speaks again in his 14th Page of three distinct Persons are one with the Godhead Now Reader is not here four to wit three Persons and the Godhead And thus G. F. and G. W. make no less by their wild and nonsensical Reasonings than five Persons in the Godhead an Absurdity they would fix on the Doctrine of three Persons for by their Arguments the Godhead is the fourth Person and Christ's created Soul and Body is the fifth Do not these Passages require a Retractation and will they say they are Protestants and one with the Church of England in Matter of Doctrine and in the common Principles of Christianity and yet boldly stand in the Defence of those abusive Passages But whereas they argue ad hominem that there must be five Persons if Father Son and Holy Ghost be said to be three Persons seeing G. W. calls them three Witnesses by their nonsensical Argument there must be five Witnesses that bear Record in Heaven viz. the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost and the Godhead these are four and the created Soul and Body of Christ that is the fifth But G.W. has a way to evade this last by denying that Christ has any created Soul or Body as in the Words in p. 18. above mentioned doth appear for which I shall have some use hereafter Jos Wyeth in his Switch p. 184. would make his Readers believe It 's only the Word Person they object against as too gross We cannot saith he but think the VVord Person too gross to express them But to detect this Fallacy pray let us take notice that G. F. whom he calls an Apostle has expresly

for would not the Quakers account it a great Sin and Trespass if any of the Church of England or Dissenter should sit in one of their Galleries where they stand to preach and kneel at Prayer and mend an old Doublet while they are preaching in their Meeting Places Surely they would greatly aggravate it and call it rude and unmannerly and profane Again whereas they query Where dost thou read in the Scripture that Men must do no Work on the first Day of the Week And this Query is made to justifie the Quaker's sitting on the Communion Table to mend an old Doublet on the first Day in time of Divine Service Is not this a great Shame to print and reprint such avowed Profanation of the Lord's Day and Worship also in the Face of a Protestant Nation that zealously profess to be against the Profanation of it and where are standing Laws against the Profanation of it Note here that whereas the Quakers affirm that what they speak and write is immediately and infallibly from God their professed Principle obligeth them to hold that what they speak and write is of greater Certainty and consequently of greater Authority than the Scriptures because they are certain of what they speak and write from the Spirit in themselves but they are not certain of the Writings of the Scriptures as W. P. argues in his Discourse concerning the General Rule They have not the Autographa the Copies differ and so do the Translations but they have their own Autographa and their Books and Writings are from the Original immediately Thus when G. W. sent me his Curse Thus saith the Lord c. and signed G. W. This had more Authority with him than the Scripture by his own Doctrine and if he please let him add simply considered as without the Spirit Proofs on the fourth Head Concerning the Holy Trinity GEorge Whitehead G. W's Truth and Inn. p. 50. in his Truth and Inn. and Jos Wyeth in his Switch pretends That it is not the Doctrine or thing intended that they deny i. e. the Father the Word and Holy Spirit which three are one And saith Jos Switch p. 184. Wyeth We own their Distinction in all the Instances of it recorded in Holy Writ The only thing they pretend to scruple at or deny is the calling them three Persons which they say are not Scripture Terms and they are wholly for keeping to Scripture Terms in Matters of Doctrine But to this I say ' first How many unscripture Terms do they freequently use Where do they find in Scripture the Term immediate Revelation immediate teaching of the Spirit immediate Word which they so commonly use Again where do they find in Scripture That see G. M. p. 324. the Seed to which the Promise of Salvation is is Christ within Several Papers c. p. 47. And that Expression where do they find it in Scripture That the same Spirit takes upon it the same Seed which is Christ now as ever c. That God the Father took upon him Humane Nature That the Spirit is the Rule and many more not only unscripture Terms but contrary to Scripture But why do they call them Three Witnesses as G. W. hath so expresly called them Where do they find them in Scripture so called That Place in John's first Epistle doth not call them Three Witnesses but Three bearing Record or witnessing But it is not only the Words Three Persons wherewith they are offended th● unjustly for personal Acts and Properties are given to them and therefore according to plain Consequence from Scripture they may be called Persons but the Doctrine or thing intended they deny for they allow not that they are distinct otherwise than in Manifestation see G. W's Divinity of Christ p. 94. he saith The Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit or the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one and inseparable no where in Scripture called three separate Persons nor finite in Personalities though Three in Manifestation and so testified of as Three Witnesses for the Confirmation of the Gospel Note Seeing G. W. doth not own them to be Three otherwise but in Manifestation this is not only to deny the Names or Words Three Persons but to deny that they were Three from all Eternity or before all Ages for there was no Manifestation either of One or Two or Three from Eternity His calling them Three in Manifestation is to call them three Manifestations and seeing all Manifestation has a Beginning with Time by his Doctrine there were not Father Son and Holy Ghost three any wise distinct from Eternity There was no God the Father from Eternity that did beger nor no Son from Eternity that was begotten nor Holy Ghost that from Eternity did proceed from the Father and the Son by G. VVhitehead's Doctrine And F. Hougil in his Collection p. 308. delivers the same erronious Doctrine He saith That the Holy Ghost is called another than Christ Another is not understood of another Life of another Substance but is understood of another Manifestation or Operation of the same God who subsists in the same Power in which the Father the Son and the Spirit subsist as I said unto thee before Another as to distinguish of the Operation and VVork of the Spirit and of the Son we do not refuse By this Doctrine of F. Hougil they are but distinct Manifestations Operations and Works Now if G. VV. or the Author of the Switch will say that there were three Manifestations Operations or Works in the Godhead from all Eternity It is absurd to suppose such Manifestations beside that they are unscripture Terms the same Arguments that they use against three Persons will as much and indeed much more be of Force against three Manifestations for if the Father be a Manifestation from Eternity of what is he a Manifestation Can he be a Manifestation of himself Or is he a Manifestation of the Son who as they say is a Manifestation Thus one Manifestation would be the Manifestation of another Manifestation but then what would the Holy Spirit be a Manifestation of And seeing in God there are no Accidents these three Manifestations are not three Accidents nor three Subsistences nor three Substances nor three Persons and consequently according to these Men they are nothing at all but their own Inventions But VV. Penn in his Sandy Foundation has not only argued against three Persons but against the Holy Three for he bringeth five Arguments against their being a Holy Three Page 12 13 14. one of which is this in express Words Since the Father is God the Son is God and the Spirit is God which their Opinion necessitates them to confess then unless the Father Son and Spirit are three distinct nothings they must be three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct Gods Now let his Argument be applied to the unscripture Terms three Manifestations and it will have the same Force or rather

Humility But do no not they better who confess their Sins and yet through humane Frailty find that they relapse into some Sins than such proud Pharisees among the Quakers who neither confess nor forsake their Sins such as their sinful Ignorance and Errors in the great Fundamentals of the Christian Faith their too high Esteem of themselves and Uncharitableness towards others calling all others but themselves The World and Idolaters and their Worship Idolatry And if any formerly among them come to a more sober Mind and to a more sound Understanding and Faith in Christian Doctrine and are more charitable towards others They call them Apostates as they do call me and others whom God in his great Mercy has of late recovered from the Errors and Uncharitableness that were and are among them so that for owning the Protestant Churches and that we can join in the Worship of God with them we are rendred Apostates by G. VV and his Brethren in their printed Pamphlets against us But if we be Apostates for this then by G. VV's and his Brethrens Sentence all the Protestant Churches are Infidels and Idolaters But if the Church of the Quakers be a sinless Church that need not to confess their Sins nor pray for Forgiveness of their Sins how doth this agree with the large Acknowledgments that G. VV. has made in his Christian Epistle to the People called Quakers of so many things amiss among them as above quoted Either such faulty Persons are owned Members of their Church or they are not if they are not why do not they disown them and excommunicate them or declare them to be none of them If they own them to be of their Church then their Church is not without Sp●t Wrinkle or Blemish and consequently not the Church of Christ by G. F's Doctrine If it be said The Tares cannot be discerned oft times from the Wheat then where 's their Spirit of discerning whereby they can know who are Saints or Devils without speaking ever a Word Surely if they have such a Spirit of discerning their Sin is great to suffer such a Mixture among them as G. W. complains of in his Christian Epistle especially now that they reckon E●oth's Prophecy is fullfilled in them Truth and Inn. p. 13 They i. e. the Quakers are the ten thousand of his Saints in whom the Lord is come to execute Judgment upon all Why do they not begin at home and first cleanse their own House and purge out the old Leaven from among them How is it that diverse unclean Persons even of their Ministry have been owned to preach among them while living in secret Uncleanness diverse of whose Names they know I can produce Why did they not discern them seeing they have as they pretend an infallible discerning of Mens Hearts Or if they did discern them why did they not discover them and get them cast out of the Camp As to the Instance above given of the daily Sacrifices for Sin which were offered under the Law If it be replyed That they grant the Law made nothing perfect but now a sinless Perfection is brought in by the Gospel I ask them what became of them all of that ancient Church who daily confessed their Sins and prayed for Forgiveness when they died Did they die in their Sins Or where were they cleansed from their Sins after Death Or did they all perish according to G. W's manner of reasoning against his Opponents in his Voice of Wisdom above quoted As to that Place in Scripture The Law made nothing perfect and other the like Places they are to be understood first Comparatively the Gospel State under the New Testament as to the general is a State of more Purity and greater Perfection than the State of the People under the Law Secondly The ceremonial Part of the Law as Circumcision and the Sacrifices did neither in whole nor in part give them the Remission of their Sins but were Types of Christ that alone Sacrifice by which Remission of Sin and Sanctification both then was and now is obtained It is on the Conceit that the Quakers have of their sinless Perfection especially their Ministers that they are not known to pray for the Forgiveness of their Sins in their publick Meetings which gave occasion to that Question in Truth defending the Quak. by G. VV. p. 8. Q. 11. Do not you think it needless to pray for the Pardon of your Sins To this G. Whitehead replies We have prayed for the Pardon of our Sins and the Lord who heard our Prayers hath pardoned and remitted our Sins by the Power of the World to come which we have tasted and do taste of as many witness But of late some of them have got a way to pray in the third Person plural in their Meetings as I have observed as thus If any here have sinned against thee give them Repentance and Forgiveness Or thus Pardon them that have sinned against thee Thus I have heard John Field pray but I never heard him or any here in England to the best of my Remembrance pray in the first Person plural Forgive us our Sins though Daniel and the best of the holy Men recorded in Scripture prayed Forgive us our Sins A Quaker said George dost not thou know that it is the manner of Friends if any have done amiss to deal with them and get them to confess and ask Forgiveness I said that was but as to particular Persons and private Offences but that was no Proof as to their general Confession and praying for Pardon of Sin Another Quaker stood on a Bench and began to read a Passage out of a Book of mine called The Way cast up printed in the Year 1677 containing some Words of Prayer which I said I had heard or Words to that effect used in our Meetings both to God the Father in the Name of Jesus Christ and also to Jesus Christ naming him by the Name Son of David This Passage that Quaker brought his Name as I am informed is John Whiting to prove that the Quakers prayed for Forgiveness of Sin for I was then a Quaker but what he read out of my Book not being well heard he was desired to hand the Book to the Minister that stood by me and read the Quotations which was done and the whole Passage containing a Prayer was read which is this VVay cast up p 121. Son of David have mercy on us O thou blessed Lord Jesus that wert crucified and died for our Sins and shed thy precious Blood for us be gracious unto us Thou that in the Days of thy Flesh wert tempted of Satan afflicted bore our Sins on the Cross felt our Infirmities and wert touched with them O thou our merciful High Priest whose tender Bowls of Compassion are not more straitned since thy Ascension but rather more enlarged and whose Love and Kindness is the same towards thy Servants in our Days as it was of old help us and strengthen

owned the Person of the Father G. M. p. 247. But thou saith Christ doth not dwell in them personally doth not Christ dwell in his Saints as he is in the Person of the Father the Substance And are not they of his Flesh and of his Bone Again G. Fox G.M. p. 248. owns expresly Christ's Person for first having cited his Opponent's Words It is a false thing to say Christ's Person is in Man in his Answer without finding the least fault with the Term Person he makes Opposition thus VVhich is as much as to say none are of his Flesh or of his Bone nor eat it nor had not his Substance By this it appears that G. F. did not find fault either with the Word Person as belonging to the Father or with Christ's Person but he will not allow them to be two Persons but one Person But if any will say he allowed them to be two Persons then by the Arguments both of G. F. and G. VV. they must be two Gods for if three Persons infer by Argument three Gods by the same Argument two Persons will infer two Gods The above mentioned Words of G. F. in G. M. Doth not Christ dwell in his Saints as he is in the Person of the Father the Substance Jos VVyeth in his Switch recites as quoted out of the Snak● Here the Switch finds no fault with G. Fox's owning the Person of the Father which were G. F's own Words but labors to prove that by that spiritual Oneness betwixt Christ and his Followers G.F. did not mean to make the Soul of the same Person and Substance with God which how ineffectual his Labor is in that may be shewn afterwards Note that the Switch doth justifie G. F. his Saying That God the Father did take upon him Humane Nature p. 190. and in Truth 's defence by G. F. p. 85. The Son's Body is called the Father's they are one not two viz. the Son and the Father But here once more on this Head let us take notice of G. VV 's Fallibility and self Contradiction in most evident manner In his Light and Life p. 47. he blames his Opponent VV. B. for these Words following concerning Christ Now as he was God he was Co-creator with the Father and so was before Abraham and had Glory with God before the VVorld was and in this Sense came down from Heaven To this G.VV. replies VVhat Nonsence and unscripture Language is this to tell of God being Co-creator with the Father or that God had Glory with God Doth not this imply two Gods and that God had a Father let the Reader judge Note how he calleth it Nonsence and unscripture Language to say That Christ as God had Glory with God and that he had a Father which is a plain Evidence that G. VV. denied the eternal divine Generation of the Son contrary both to the Nicene and Athanasian Creed and Scripture also But let us see how he excuses himself in his Antidote p. 188. But the Phrase God Co-creator with God I think still implies two Creators and consequently two Gods 'T is not the Particle Co with in this case will excuse the matter for Co or Con is simul together as Co-workers Co-partners which are more distinct Agents than one but the Creator is but one God one VVord one Spirit and so one Creator Note Here we see the Force of G. VV's Argument against Christ the Word being God Co-creator with the Father is that it would infer the Father and the Son to be Co-workers and consequently two Gods This Antidote he writ in the Year 1697. but in the Year 1674. wherein he published his Quakers Plainness in p. 24. he allows the Father and the Son to be Co-workers in the following Words That the Distinction of the Father and the Son is not only nominal as this Opposer implies against us but real in the divine Relation of Father and Son the Son as being the only begotten of the Father and also known as Co-workers in the Order and Degrees of Manifestation and Discovery where it is plain by his late manner of arguing in his Antidote against the Father and the Son being Co-workers that it doth infer two Gods that in his Saying in his Quakers Plainness as above quoted That the Father and the Son are known as Co-workers he has rendred himself guilty by his own Argument of holding the Father and the Son to be two Gods This is not only a Contradiction to himself but a severe Censure on himself that in the Year 1674. he was guilty of Idolatry in holding That the Father and the Son are two Gods Note Reader that the Quakers use to object two things against my charging Contradictions upon G. W. and other their principal Authors First That I have contradicted my self in my former and later Writings To this I have answered What in my later Writings I have retracted of my former Errors is no Contradiction for that 's a Contradiction when a Man holds contradictory Propositions to be both true simul semel without retracting his Errors But what a Man retracts he is no more chargeable with let G. W. and his Brethren retract their Errors and I shall cease to charge them with them or with Contradictions Secondly they object That I may find as many Contradictions in the Scriptures as in their Books Thus we see how they undervalue the Scriptures to be as contradictory as their Authors but I deny there are any real Contradictions in the Scriptures but there are many in the Quakers Authors Again further hear a Quotation out of the Primmer of G. F. junior and S. Crisp p. 24. And they that come to see and know the Son they come to see and know the Father also for the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father as saith the Scriptures and they are called by one Name which is The Word or The Light For the Word is God and Christ is the Word and God is Light and Christ is the Light of the World and the Spirit of Life proceeds from God and Christ who are Light Note Seeing they hold that the Father and the Son are called by one Name which is The Word and that the Father is the Word and the Son is the Word it is evident they make no Distinction betwixt the Father and Son and therefore according to their false Doctrine seeing the Word was made Flesh and the Father is the Word the Father was made Flesh the Father was born of a Virgin the Father suffered Death on the Cross yea the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father which is a plain overturning the great Fundamentals of Christianity yet this Primmer is so highly magnified among the Quakers that almost every Family of them have it to teach it their Children and they call it in the Preface A Fruit of the Plant of Righteousness given forth for the removing the Vse of such Books and Catechisins as

Could Christ have been said to have been transfigured if his coming in the Flesh had not been a Figure or Example till his Glory was revealed And hast thou not read That he was the express Figure of his Father's Substance instead of which it is translated he is the express Image c. Note This Quotation was objected in a late printed Sheer called An Account from Colchester And a pretended Answer was given to it in another printed Paper signed by seven Quakers of Colchester And the like Answer is given by G.VV. in his Truth and Innocency p. 53. They abuse me still in this saith he it was none of my Assertion That Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure I positively disown these Words as a downright Forgery put upon me Ans How can he in Conscience disown these Words and charge them to be a downright Forgery put upon him when in his Answer to that Charge against R. Hubb he finds no Fault with the Phrase But a Figure but brings two Places of Scripture to justifie it which are most ignorantly and impertinently brought to prove it Why did he not then except against the Word But a Figure But instead of excepting against it he brings two Scriptures to prove the Assertion alledged against R. Hubb the one is That Christ was said to have been transfigured which because it sounded in English like his being made a Figure therefore in his great Ignorance of the Word Transfigured as well as of the Sense intended he thought it was a good Proof that Christ as he came in the Flesh was but a Figure but transfigured there signifies nothing other but transformed the Greek Word has no Relation either to Figure or Example for it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i.e. Metamorphosed a Word some use in English and what that Transfiguration was Matthew tells us Mat. 17. 2. that His Face did shine as the Sun and his Raiment was white as the Light Now what Relation has this either to Figure or Example in that Sense for which G.W. brought it to prove R. Hubb's Saying Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure Of what was Christ's Transfiguration a Figure Or how was it our Example to follow But that G.W. meant not an Example of Imitation but a Type or Figure that was to vanish or be laid aside is evident from his own Words Could Christ have been said to have been transfigured if his coming in the Flesh had not been a Figure or Example till his Glory was revealed Thus we see how long G.W. thought that Christ's coming in the Flesh was to continue a Figure viz. until his Glory should be revealed to wir by his inward coming into the Hearts of the Disciples which was the Substance of that Figure for thus G.W. and his Brethren argue for the Disuse of outward Baptism and the Supper they were but Figures of the inward Substance and were to continue but until that was revealed so here Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure till his Glory was revealed So whether G.W. makes it Figure or Example he tells us how long it was to be our Figure or Example till his Glory was revealed But taking Example for an Example that we ought to follow in all holy living and walking we shall find the Scriptures set him forth for our Example after his Glory was revealed 1 Pet. 2. 21. Because Christ also suffered for us leaving us an Example that ye should follow his Steps this was after his Glory was revealed in and among the Believers And as the Quakers Reason why they cast off outward Baptism and the Supper is because the Substance is revealed in them whereof they were Figures so for the same reason they think Christ's Death at Jerusalem is not to be minded nor preached because it was a Figure Christ in his People is the Substance of all Figures And his Flesh is a Figure Here Figure in both Places hath the same Signification He doth not say Christ without his People but Christ in his People is the Substance of all Figures And as a Proof of this a Quotation was brought against the Quakers out of one of their ancient Books called The Doctrine of Perfection vindicated So when you come to know this to wit the Operation of Christ or the Light within you will cease remembring his Death at Jerusalem and will come to see how he hath been crucified in you and what it is that hath crucified him Thus we see how according to him Christ's Death at Jerusalem being but a Figure of Christ crucified within the Substance the Use and Remembrance of it ceaseth Is not this horrid Blasphemy Why have they not all this time retracted this To this G.W. answers Truth and Inn. p. 55. I do 〈◊〉 believe this to be justly or impartially quoted let them produce it at large and whose 〈◊〉 it is But the Book being produced it did appear to be justly and impartially ●●ored and the Book to be a Quakers Book and printed for R. VVilson the Quakers Bookseller at that time the Author's Name is John VVhitehouse who shews how and by whom he was brought over to Quakerism But let us see how that other Place of Scripture brought by G.W. to prove R.H. his Assertion That Christs coming in the Flesh is but a Figure will clear him or rather indeed render him guilty of the same Error with R.H. the Place is most impertinently quoted by G.W. to prove That Christ's coming in the Flesh was either a Figure or Example for us to follow as he would have us to understand him That by Christ's coming in the Flesh his being a Figure that is an Example of our lmitation Truth and Inn. p. 24 25. Heb. 1. 3. Christ is there called The Brigthness of his viz. God ' s Glory and the Express Image of his Person and this G.W. brought to confirm R. H's Assertion telling us from his pretended great Learning that he is the express Figure instead of which he saith it is translated express Image And he is at great Pains to shew that Type or Figure sometimes points at a thing to come sometimes it denotes a present Example and that either of Imitation or of Warning and Caution But how can he make it appear That by the Description given of Christ Heb. 1. 3. his being the express Image of his viz. the Father's Person that Christ is there set forth to be our Example either for Imitation or Caution for he is not there said to be our Example or Image but the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is in the Greek of the Father's Person or Hypostasis But the Word Character can no wise justly here be understood to be an Example of our Imitation and C.VV. was but idle to render it Figure to quadrate with R. H's Assertion and to make the ignorant think he could mend the Translation but his now turning it to Example makes it Blasphemy as to say

upon the Souls of Men But what then Must they therefore none of them that have sinned be saved Had not the Ephesians been great Sinners yea and they were dead in their Sins and Trespasses yet these very same Men having the same Souls were quickened and made alive by Christ Ephes 2. 3. And you hath he quickened who were dead in Trespasses and Sins And George Whitehead himself is guilty of the same absurd Doctrine with G. F. and Edward Burrough who in his He-goats Horn pag. 11 12. denieth that Christ hath our Nature in Heaven and that it is one and the same Nature in Men by which the Gentiles sinned aud by which they did the things contained in the Law And in his Voice of Wisdom page 20. he holdeth That Christ is both the Efficient and Subject of the good Works that are wrought in Men which is in effect to say it is not Men or the Souls of Men that repent believe obey God but Christ in them or else he must say The Soul that believes repents obeys is Christ and though in his later Books he seems to deny this yet will retract nothing for that would reflect on his Infallibility But his common Salve for this Sore is That he may see cause otherwise to word the Matter and yet mean the same thing as he has of late exprest in some of his Books Note Whereas in the Close of the third Meeting a Letter of John Audland a Preacher among the Quakers to George Fox was read wherein is contained gross Idolatry which confirms in matter of Fact what George Fox said of himself That he was equal to God and that he was Christ and upon this Notion John Audland addressed himself to George Fox as to God and Christ in his said Letter the which for its Affinity with the Doctrine of George Fox discovered in the first and second Part of this Narrative I think fit here to insert John Audland's Blasphemous Letter to George Fox Spelt and Pointed according to the Original DEare and presious one in whome my life is bound up and my strenth in thee stands by thy breathings I am nurished and refreshed and by thee my strenth is renewed blessed art thow for Ever more and blessed are all they that Enjoy thee life and strenth comes from thee holy one and thow art the blessed of the lord for Ever more dear dear reach unto mee that I may be strenthened to stand in the mighty power and dread of the lord for the sarvisse is very great my travell and burthen was never soe as now since I saw thee but dayly doe I find thy Presence with me which doth exceedingly Preserve mee for I cannot reane but in thy presence and power pray for me that I may stand in thy dread for Ever more deare my deare brother John Cam hath been Exceeding sicke and he is very weake I can say little of his Recovery as yet his wife is with him she is deare and preciously keept their deare love is to thee chreach through all in thy mighty power to him this bearer can declare to thee of the work this way Jo Willkinson and Jo Storey is heare their love is dearly to thee deare harte there is one thinge that lies upon mee I shall lay it before thee as tuching my coming into Wiltshire I was there at Justice Stoks house and his famaley is all prety loveing and convinced and he is a sober wise man and there is honesty in him which will stand and there is a pretey people that way it hath laid exceeddingly upon me these 3 days of thy beeing at that place I know not such another place in all the Counterey for thee dear I was much wounded to know that thow was in such a rude place and suffers soe amongst them and this was I moved to lay before thee and great is my disere that it may be soe the Place is about 20 miles from brestol in wiltshire one mile from chipenam a markete towne Justice stoks house Jo Cam tould me that the Justice he was with was a very Loving and prety man this bearer was there he can declare to thee more but oh that thou weare but at that place I mention it is free and suteable for frends coming to thee it lies much upon mee and if thow find movings strike over thither I shall say no more of it the worke is great heare away pray for us all that in thy Power we may abide for Evermore I am thyne begoten and nurished by thee and in thy Power am I preserved glory unto thee holy one for Ever John Audland The Letter being read the Auditory was struck with Admiration and generally signified their great Abhorrency of the Blasphemy and Idolatry contained in it to G. Fox I told them the Quakers had two Excuses as to this Letter one was that it was feigned because as it was once printed it had a wrong Date viz. 1665. which was some Years after John Audland was dead But that was the Fault or Mistake of the Publisher of that Letter that proves not the Letter to be feigned for the original Manuscript was read in the Meeting that had no date and was handed about to several Ministers and others together with another Letter of the same John Audland in Manuscript to another Person who did unanimously judge it was the same hand that writ both the Letters Their next Excuse is That these Words in John Audland's Letter were not intended to G. Fox but to Christ or the Life in G. Fox And the like Excuse G. F. made in a Letter writ with his own Hand which was produced and read in the Meeting and is ready to be produced before any that shall call for it for a Woman Quaker that in a Quakers Meeting said to George Fox Thou art the King of Israel That she spoke her Words to Christ viz. in G. Fox But I told This did not hinder it to be Idolatry nor was any just Excuse in the Case for it was the same Excuse that the Heathens gave for their worshiping Idols because it was not the Idol but the divine Power that was in it which they worshiped The like Excuse gave those Quakers that sung Hosanna to James Nailer at his Procession into Bristol and the same Excuse he made for them PART III. Containing the Proofs on the 7th Head concerning Justification and on the other following Heads contained in the Printed Advertisement Read at Turner's-Hall the 23d of January 1699. Concerning Justification by the Blood Merits and Righteousness of Christ. I Produced a Printed Paper in the Meeting call'd A few Positions of the sincere Belief and Christian Doctrine of the People call'd Quakers Sign'd by G. Whitehead to which is adjoined another printed Paper Sign'd by Thirty two Quakers which they say was given to the Members of Parliament in the Year 1693 In which Paper I noted divers gross Fallacies and gross Equivocations such as follow

a break l. 42. before you should be p. 5. l. 41. before know r. and. p. 6. l. 7. for he confesseth it and r. doth not disown it but. l. 8. dole the Spiritual Man judgeth all things l. 9. after World r. I am the Way the Truth and the Life p. 7. l. 14. for haughty r. lofty l. 16. after gift r. and Spirit p. 8. l. 20. after come up l. 36. for 54. r. 45. l. 45. after Colchester r. p. 12. 13. p. 10. l. 20. after perfect should be a break l. 35. before as dele is perfect l. last after broken should be a break p. 11. on the Margin add compare l. 9. after adoption r. p. 217. l. 11. after Church r. G. M. p. 301. l. 12. after thing r. G. M. p. 27. meaning surely the Quakers Church put within l. 21. for false r. self l. 22. after upright should be a break l. 37. after these r. things p. 12. l. 44. after Wisdom r. p. 18. p. 13. l. 45. after which r. state p. 14. l. 31. on the Margin for G. W. r. G. F. l. 37. after witness r. the Scripture l. 46. for truth r. truths p. 15. l. 1. after thou add hast p. 15. l. 22. after Sons r. any p. 16. l. 25. for p. 23. r. p. 4. p. 17. l. 84 after was dele a. l. 35. before the female dele in l. last for where r. when p. 18. l. 11. the Quotation out of Truth and Inno. p. 10. beginning at the and ending at Christ should be in Italick p. 19. dele no. p. 23. l. 20. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 l. 32. r. Christianity p. 24. l. 27. for p. 15. r. 155. p. 25. l. 26. after Quakers r. 7. l. 29. before Chapters for and r. or p. 26. l. 30. after defending r. p. 18. Q 29. p. 27. l. 32. for affirming r. saying to this purpose Reason against Railing p. 109. p. 28. l. 36. after Rule r. Append. to Chr. Quaker p. 141. p. 29. l. 11. after Nature r. G. M. 246. l. 35. for erroneous r. erronious p. 30. l. last for single r. singular p. 31. l. 36. after lake r. p. 10. p. 32. l. 28. for Doctrins r. Darkness p. 34. l. 6. after Switch r. p. 50. p. 37. l. 11. for 19. r. 18. p. 38. l. 36. as a Man hath a Coat or Garment but doth not consist of it should have been of Roman Letter and within to distinguish them from the Quotation p. 41. l. 43. for must r. might p. 42. l. 25. after 44. r. to this effect l. 29. for 44. r. 56. p. 43. l. 14. for 21. r. 20. l. 25. after Figure r. and it is a manifest forgery upon me that Christ's coming in the Flesh was but a Figure or Type of the inward Christ or Light within p. 45. l. 24. after defence r. Truth and Inno. p. 54. p. 46. l. 3. after Blood r. of l. 23. after Jerusalem r. to it l. 24. for was r. is l. 31. after Colchester r. p. 14. p. 47. l. 5. after Faith r. Light and Life p. 45. l. 10. for P. r. V. l. 24. as is evident in the place quoted should be in Italick p. 47. l. 32. r. is not l. 34. should be in Italick p. 48. l. 1. after useth r. Truth and Inno. p. 55. l. 26. after saith add Truth and Inno. p. 57. p. 49. l. 16. before here r. Truth defended p. 23. 24. l. 24. after it r. viz. l. 37. after within dele p. 50. l. 40. before they r. that p. 51. l. 26. after which r. will l. 30. r. shall rise after Life r. and. p. 52. the two last lines should be put in Italick p. 54. l. 12. for an r. and. l. 17. for terms r. term p. 56. l. 20. after 293. r the answer is as it was l. 22. after Womb r. a holy thing l. last from the word yet to l. r. in p. 57. after greatest should be put betwixt and in Roman Letter p. 57. l. 12. after of dele the. l. 14. after Person make a break l. 17. before Tho' should be a break p. 58. l. 35. for Word r. Mind l. 40. for for this r. his l. 44. after Word should be a break p. 59. l. 11. after Life should be a break l. 41. after Colchester r. p. 12. p. 60. l. r. dele not p. 62. l. 18. for state and r. state of p. 64. l. last before the r. Truth and Inn. p. 9. p. 68. l. 25. for Israel r. Saints p. 71. l. penult for Manicheus r. Manicheans p. 72. l. 16. for and reign r. or reign p. 81. l. 7. after is r. ibid. l. 43. after Christ r. being a meer Spirit l. 36. for above r. alone p. 82. l. 24. after Spiritual r. p. 14. p. 85. l. 30. after God r. p. 55. l. 33. before And should be a break p. 56. l 40. for in r. is after Types should be a break p. 57. ibid. for this r. his l. 45. before so should be a Break p. 86. l. 8. for can be r. is p. 88. l. 12. after believed r. Switch p. 38. p. 94. l. 13. after S. E. r. Light and Life p. 58. p. 95. l. 16. after therein r. Antidote p. 224. 225. p. 96. l. 16. for p. 248. r. p. 250. p. 98. l. 29. for 6. r. 26. p. 101. l. 44. after G. W. r. in Truth and Inno. p. 105. l. 32. dele the. p. 106. l. 3. for dim r. one l. 18. after this Light r. in Believers and regenerate Persons l. 25. for works r. work l. 40. r. defending p. 107. l. 40. for materal r. material p. 108. l. 38. for add r. and. A Catalogue of the Authors and Books of Quakers quoted in this Narrative and some Books of their Opponents GReat Mystery by G. Fox Printed 1659. Fol. Saul 's Errand to Damascus By G. F. c. 1653. In 4to Truths Defence By G. F. and Richard Hubberthorne about 1654. In 4to Voice of Wisdom By G. W. 1659. In 8vo The Watcher By J. Parnel In 4to A Brief Discovery of the Dangerous Principles of Jo. Horne by G. Whithead 1659. in 4to Truth Defending the Quakers by G. Whithead c. 1659. in 8vo A Brief Discovery of the Three-fold State of Antichrist by G. F. c. 1653. in 4to Doctrine of Perfection Vindicated by Jo. Whitehouse 1663. in 4to Fr. Howgil ' s Works 1676. Fol. Several Papers given forth by G. F. 1671. in 4to W. Penn ' s Reason against Railing 1673. 8vo W. Penn ' s Christian Quaker 1674. Fol. Appendix to Christian Quaker 1674. Fol. W. Penn ' s Sandy Foundation 1668. 4to Ishmael and his Mother by G. W. c. 1655. 4to G. Whitehead ' s Divinity of Christ 1669. 4to Light and Life by G. Whithead 1668. 4to Quakers Plainness by G. Whithead 1674 8vo Primer by G. F. Jun. and Stephen Crisp 1682 240 Serious Apology by W. Penn 1671 4to W. P ' s Rejoinder to Jo. Faldo 1673 8vo Rich. Hubberthorne ' s Collection 1663 4to He Goat ' s Horn Broken by G. Whithead 1660 4to Edw. Borrough ' s Collection 1672 Fol. W. Penn ' s Address to Protestants 1679 4to Jacob found in a Desart Land 1656 4to William Bailie ' s Collection 1676 4to Tho. Elwood ' s Answer to my First Narrative 8vo Truth Defended by T. Elwood 8vo Nature of Christanity by G. Whithead 1671 4to Christ Ascending above the Clouds 1669 4to G. Foxe ' s Distinction betwixt the two Suppers 1685 4to News out of the North by G. Fox 1655 4to Glory of Christ within by G. Whithead c. 4to True Faith of the Gospel of Peace by Ed. Burr 1656 4to Some Principles of the Elect People of God by G. F. 1671 4to W. Penn ' s Key last Edition 1699. a little 8vo Antidote against the Snake by G. W. 1697 8vo Switch for the Snake by Jos Wyeth 1699 8vo Truth and Innocency by Geo. Whithead 1699 4to Judgment Fixed by Geo. Whithead 8vo Some Account from Colchester by Seven Quakers 1699 4to G. Whithead's Christian Epistle to Friends 1691 4to G. Fox ' s Canons or Orders 1669 8vo A Few Positions of the sincere Belief c. by G. W. c. 1698 A Testimony for the true Christ by the Quakers 1668 4to BOOKS against the Quakers Quoted Quakery Slain by Christopher Wade 1657 4to His Second Book to the People called Quakers 4to The Scornful Quaker Answered by Magnus Byne 4to A further Discovery of that Generation of Men called Quakers by Five Ministers of New-Castle 1654 4to The Way cast up by Geo. Keith 1677 8vo This Book was Published by him when under the profession of a Quaker tho' many things in it are contrary to the Quakers particularly the Prayer quoted in this Narrative p. 21.