Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	abel_n	cry_v	day_n	499	4	4.2672	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47759	Satan dis-rob'd from his disguise of light, or, The Quakers last shift to cover their monstrous heresies, laid fully open in a reply to Thomas Ellwood's answer (published the end of last month) to George Keith's Narrative of the proceedings at Turners-Hall, June 11, 1696, which also may serve for a reply (as to the main points of doctrine) to Geo. Whitehead's Answer to The snake in the grass, to be published the end of next month, if this prevent it not / by the author of The snake in the grass.	Leslie, Charles, 1650-1722.	1697 (1697)	Wing L1149A; ESTC R2123	80,446	76

He was the Seed of the Woman Promised Gen. 3. before He was Made of a Woman and even before any Woman in the World was Made This is New Divinity These Men Dance in the Clouds They have not a Mind to be understood which is a Demonstration that they Mean not as we do and that their Meaning is not Good SECT 2. Of Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed 1. WE come now to the Second Head of G. Keith's Charge which T. E begins to Answer p. 103. which is That the Quakers do Deny Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed And the first Proof is W. Penn who Totally Excludes the Satisfaction of Christ His Argument is from that Petition in the Lord's Prover Forgive no our Debts as we forgive our Debtors From whence W.P. infers That if it is our Duty to forgive without a satisfaction received and that God is to forgive us as we forgive them then is a Satisfaction Totally Excluded But though the Debtor makes no satisfaction yet God has promised to do it in Full Measure Pressed down shaken together and Running over to those who Forgive any thing for His sake So that here is Satisfaction not Totally Excluded But Filled up every to the Brim But how do's T. E. Answer this He says p. 104 105. That W.P. meant only to Exclude a PLENARY or FVLL or RIGID which is the same Satisfaction 1st Every true Satisfaction must be PLENARY else it is no Satisfaction Paying part of a Debt is not a Satisfying of the Debt But 2dly W. P. neither made any such Distinction nor could Intend it For his Argument runs against All Satisfaction He did not mean that we were Commanded to Forgive our Debtors only in part else God was to Forgive us but in part since as he says God is to forgive us as we Forgive them And thence concludes That A Satisfaction i. e. Any Satisfaction is not only Excluded but to shew his Vehemence TOTALLY Excluded T. E. was no Friend to W. P. in mentioning his Sandy Foundation upon this occasion which is wholly Socinian Disputing Expresly against the Holy Trinity and the Satisfaction of Christ Particularly and I Charitably believe that he wishes it had never been wrote and that it may be now Forgotten Therefore I Forbear to Rip it up II. The next Quotation is out of George Whitehead which T E. comes to p. 109. and Repeating the Charge That G. W. blames W. Burnet his Opponent for saying The Blood shed upon the Cross sprinkles the Conscience Sanctifies Justifies Redeems us says That G. W. only Blames him for saying thus as an Absurdity following upon what W. Burnet had said That that Blood was not now in Being Why Do's G. W. believe that that Blood is any otherwise in Being than as W. Burnet did believe He Dare not say so And if not their there was no Contest betwixt Burnet and him upon that Head So that this is Plainly giving us the Go by and all the Consequences which G. W. draws or pretends to draw from that saying of Burnet's are fully Chargeable upon Himself But 2dly I desire the Reader here to take Notice of the Grossest piece of Deceit that perhaps ever he met with For that saying of Burnet's p. 40. of his Book is only his Repetition of it as being the Quakers own Objection against the Efficacy of that Blood which was shed upon the Cross to us now viz. That it was not now in Being and therefore that we could not now be Justified by that which was not in Being To which W. Burnet Answers That though that Blood shed be not in Being that is Supposing but not Granting it yet the Efficacy of that Blood is still in Being and it still speaks in God's Ears and crys aloud for Mercy If Abel 's Blood did cry against the Murderer for Vengeance How much more louder doth the Blood of the Lamb slain cry for Mercy c. Here Burnet only gives way to this Supposition of the Quakers viz. That that Blood was not in Being by way of Concession not as his own Opinion to shew that no Consequence could be drawn from it to favour the Quaker Heresie of Denying Justification by that Blood And yet T. E. concealing of this would put it upon Us That G. W. in Answer to this Place of Burnet did oppose him only for that Supposition and that agreeing Perfectly with him in Justification by that Blood he only shew'd the Ill Consequences of that Supposition which was his own and which he will not no nor T. E. or any other of their Quakers Dare Deny at this Day viz. That that Blood shed upon the Cross is not now in Being This is Turning the Tables upon W. Burnet in such an Impudent Manner that if I had not seen his Book I could not have believed it But 3dly If that Supposition had been W. Burnet's and not the Quakers own it would not Rescue G. W. because he plainly makes the Conclusion his own by Denying Justification by that Blood However justly it is drawn from that supposed Supposition 4thly The Agonies and Passion of Christ upon the Cross are not now in being And this Argument of G. W's will Dissolve all the Merits of His Death to our Justification thereby as well as by His Blood for indeed they are the same But 5thly All these little Cavillings about the Blood of Christ which was shed either before or after His Death are only to Amuse For they Deny any Justification by the outward Christ upon any account In A Serious Apology written by George Whitehead and William Penn printed 1671. p. 148. Repeating a Charge against them in these words That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in His own Person for us wholly without us and therefore Deny the Lord who Bought us To which W. Penn answers in these words And indeed this we Deny and Bodly affirm it in the Name of the Lord To be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which does now Deluge the Whole World If they think to come off by that saying wholly without us I answer that the Meritorious and only Procuring cause of our Justification is wholly without us i. e. By the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in His own Person for us and the Satisfaction which He hath made by His Death and Passion for our Sins But the Application of this to Particular Persons must be Inward by the Operation of His blessed Spirit in our Hearts And this hinders not but rather supposes that the Meritorious Cause is wholly without us i. e. All the Merit is to be Attributed to what Christ hath done and suffer'd for us for we can Merit nothing from God of our selves And not only to Deny this but to call it a Doctrine of Devils c. And that In the Name af the Lord As it shews these Men to be

Wit and their Time to Gloss and Cover their Errors which does but Expose them the more And since they now do pretend in Discourse and otherwise to be the same with the Church of England in Faith and Doctrine that they wou'd with a Noble and a Christian Courage Fairly and Above-board Retract and Condemn whatever they have said or wrote to the Contrary This is Incumbent upon them to Rescue the many Souls Deluded by them For that they are so Deluded none can deny I have many times heard several of them some of their Preachers plainly own all the Gross things Charged upon them even Denying any Merit or Salvation by the Blood of Christ which was outwardly shed That Christ is now a Man That there will be any Resurrection of our Dead Bodys or Future Universal Judgment Now where did they Learn these Doctrines There are none of any other Communion who believe few that ever heard of such things Therefore it is certain that these have been Deluded And who have Deluded them And nothing will undeceive them but seeing their Leaders downright Retract these Errors While they seem to excuse them they Confirm their Ignorant Followers in them Whose Blood will be requir'd at their Hands if they do not all that is in their Power to retrieve them What shall I say more To my Perswasions I will add my Prayers for them Which I do daily offer for their Conversion And thus to God and his Mercy I leave them through Jesus Christ who shed his Blood for them Dyed Rose and Ascended OVTWARDLY and will in the same Body come again to Judge them In which Day may they hear a Favourable sentence from Him and with us be one with him to all Eternity Amen Oct. 14. 1696. SOME GLEANINGS WITH Other further Improvements I. 1. THomas Ellwood is not onely Chargeable with what he has wrote in this Answer which has been Examined but the whole Body of the Quakers except Turners-Hall and those in Communion with them because it has been approved of by The second days Meeting as all Books are that they give forth which is their Supreme Authority in such Cases 2. Looking over his Answer again I cannot but Remark a Bold stroke of his p. 34. Thomas Danson being a Presbyterian Minister said G. Keith did Head that Christ as Man had a Crea●ed Soul Nay hold there Replies T. E. Thom. Danson spake of the Son of God i. e. That Christ is not the Son of God If he thinks to come off by that Limitation in Danson's words As Man it will not Rescue him For even As Man He was The Son of God Luk. 1.35 And as to his Eternal Generation He was the Son of God from all Eternity Therefore T. E. is to tell us in what sense he oppos'd Christ's being The Son of God And with the assurance of a Nay hold there As if some great Absurdity had been coming upon him II. 1. I told you in my Conclusion of the great Ignorance of the Generality of the Quakers And that many of them do at this day plainly own the most Blasphemous and Hereti●● Doctrines which have been objected against them And thence I infer'd that whatever Face their Writers since the late Controvers● against them have put upon their Principles yet this shews undeniably that such Heresies have been taught amongst them and are still so understood by their People And that vehemently A present Preache● of theirs not long since being Pressed to acknowledge the Man Christ without us and the necessity of Faith in him Answered The Man Christ a F rt Horrid It Astonishes to Repeat such disdainful Blasphemy Tho it be necessary towards undeceiving of the World I know the Man and to whom he said it He deny'd before me and several others at another time That Christ's Body Rose out of the Grave That our Bodys should Rise That there wou'd be any General Judgment Or that the Scriptures were all True This is a Teacher Thus he has been Taught And thus he Teaches others And it is no wonder that they who are thus Taught to believe no outward Christ now in being shou'd use him with the utmost Contempt And his Worshippers with the greatest severity as being the Grossest sort of Idolaters to worship a Dead God who is no more in Being But the Quakers Faith is in an Inward Christ Viz. Their Light within And Inward Blood Inwardly shed c. 2. Can outward Blood Cleanse the Conscience Says Isaac Pennington in his Questions to the Professors p. 25. Was it the Flesh and Blood of the Vail or the Flesh and Blood within the Vail I have before observed that they call Christ's Body the Vail or Garment which he wore without taking it into his own Nature or being any Part of Christ For say they in a Book Compos'd by a great Club of them Intituled Some Principles of the Elect People of God in scorn called Quakers Printed 1671. p. 116. The Scriptures do expresly distinguish between Christ and the Garment which He wore between Him that came and the Body in which He came between the substance which was Vailed and the Vail that Vailed it There was the outward Vessel and the Inward Life This we certainly know say they and can never call the Bodily Garment Christ So that the Blood of Christ's Body was none of His Blood it was but the Blood of his Garment or Vail which the Quakers do not acknowledge to be Christ And which Isaac Pennington says cannot Cleanse the Conscience What Blood then is it which Cleanses Not the blood of the Vail that is of Christ's Body but The Flesh and Blood within the Vail i. e. of the Spirit which was within Christ's Body And this Spiritual Blood must be Spiritually that is Inwardly and not visibly shed This totally excludes the outward Christ and the outward Blood from having any Efficacy towards our Salvation Which Isaac Pennington explains yet fuller ibid Was it says he The Flesh and Blood of the outward Earthly Nature or the Flesh and Blood of the Inward Spiritual Nature Was it the Flesh and Blood which Christ took of the First Adam's Nature or the Flesh and Blood of the Second Adam's Nature This is Nonsense for Christ himself was the Second Adam and this Quere is whether he took Flesh and Blood of His own Nature But by the Second Adam the Quakers mean onely the Eternal word of God exclusive of the Humane Nature And they plainly here Exclude the Flesh and Blood which Christ took of the First Adam's Nature 3. Pursuant to this Notion the Quakers do not confine this Blood not ●● the Vail i. e. Of Christ's Body but the Blood within the Vail i. e. the M●stical Blood of the Spirit that dwelt in the Body of Christ they do not Confine this Blood to Christ alone but say that it is in themselves for they make i● to be nothing else than The Light within And from hence they