Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
blood_n	body_n	flesh_n	heaven_n	6,440	4	6.0831	4	false

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

nothing but the Divine Nature to be Christ and then How could any such Distinction take place if it had been there so as to make your Friend mean directly contrary to his own words That Christ was seen with Carnal Eyes Is not this then one of your Quibbles For although thereby you make your Friend's words to be double with two faces to say one thing and mean another Yet your own Principles concerning the Christ obstructs you absolutely from clearing them or proving Hicks a Forger in that Particular Neither can that Distinction serve you except you will alter your Principle and hold that there are two Natures which are both united in One Person The Christ which yet I do not understand you are free to do Might not Tho. Hicks then rather have said in thy own language Thou art a Forger and hast forged this Distinction and such a silly one as is impossible to hold good if thy Principle touching The Christ hold true Canst thou be ignorant that this was only an Evasion or no better than a Quibble Consider with thy self and Thou mayest see how easily it is seen through 5. In that when upon the Real Occasion of this thy Distinction the Question was askt thee Whether Christ's Humane Nature was a part of Christ Or Whether the Body that was seen with Carnal or Corporeal Eyes and heard with Carnal or Corporeal Ears was the Christ Thou so long refusedst to answer when if only innocency had been in thee plain-heartedness and Christian simplicity thou mightest have done it in one word or two but instead thereof I believe thou madest above a thousand and them to no purpose but to evade an Answer contrary to your former Rule Let your Yea be yea and your Nay nay for whatsoever is more cometh of evil One while thou wouldst tell us that which was not askt nor desired of thee That the Body in Scripture was somtimes called Christ and yet all the endeavours could not bring thee to say that I could hear that That Body was Christ Here 's another of thy Quibbles Is it not a pritty one that thou shouldst tell us that sometimes the Scripture calls the Body or the Humane Nature Christ and yet dost not believe that it is indeed what the Scripture calls it The Word Christ is somtimes applied in Scripture to Christ's Body of Flesh and Blood that was born of the Virgin Mary and yet thou wilt not or darest not own that Body to be Christ or Christ that Body Oh horrible Perversion Oh fine Quibbler Oh strange Christian But for all thou wouldst hide thy self by such subtile Expressions thou art easily discerned by any that will be any thing considerate and not captivate their understandings Another time thou wouldst tell us That thou believest Christ to be God over all Blessed for ever of the Seed of Abraham c. But was this direct to the Question Then thou wouldst ask them Questions before thou hadst answered theirs which was first proposed which me thinks was not fair Then thou wouldst rise up and promise to give a direct Answer to the Question and yet gave none that I could hear or understand to be plain and so thou didst two or three times thy Passion or the Interest of thy Party so far transporting thee that thou didst not mind thy Word Then the Auditors themselves requested thee over and over again to Answer Dost thou think this was like a Christian to run out about a whole hour thus not only wearying your Auditors but frustrating their Expectations and manifesting either your own weakness folly or obstinacy and unreasonableness till many of them were constrained to cry out Away away Quakers or Answer Pray Sir deal faithfully and plainly in the thing Why didst thou not answer it Or couldst thou not answer it Doubtless thou couldst if thou hadst not feared giving some advantage thereby to thy Opposites was not this the thing Or was it because thou wouldst keep any of thy own Friends still in the Dark concerning this Or wouldst thou have thy Doctrine in this Particular remain a deep Mystery and unintelligible still If so why didst thou not deal honestly and tell us so plainly Or are you not agreed amongst your selves about this What makes thee go about to use Words so subtilly that might seem to make us think thou believest one thing when indeed thou knowest that you or many of your Friends believe quite contrary Is this fair or honest dealing for thee to endeavour to blind our Eyes or deceive our Understanding be we either Simple or Learned Or if perhaps thou art of a different mind from some of thy Friends in this Particular as it is reported thou hast brought them off from some ridiculous Fancies Why wouldst thou not honestly tell us so Or art thou ashamed to declare freely and plainly the bottom and whole of the Doctrine thou holdest in so high a Concern as of Christ's Person You are Charged with and thy and thy Friends Speeches and Writings give me to understand that you Quakers hold this Doctrine concerning the Christ of God 1. That the Body of Christ is not nor was the true Christ but the Spirit in that Body 2. That the Spirit in that Body was none other but God the Father and so the Father is the Son and the Son the Father in very deed and only nomically distinct and so God the Christ of himself and Christ the God of himself somewhat like as Muggleton does in this particular if my memory fail me not 3. That the True Christ is not a Person without us and so was not visible to Corporal eyes 4. And so of necessity you must hold that Christ died not but only the Body that he assumed for a time or that was prepared for him was laid down again For how is it possible for you to Believe really that Christ died when you hold that Christ is only God and God is and ever was immortal and so could not die Now either thou and thy Friends do hold these Doctrines or the contrary if either I or others have mistaken you herein through your own Friends ill expressing themselves or if you have since changed your Opinion in this particular what hurt can there be and why shouldst thou be so nice to inform us truly honestly and plainly like a Christian And if thou dost hold them what 's the Reason thou art unwilling to own it Therefore I request I pray I earnestly desire thee if thou hast any love for the Truth or for Men to tell me or the World the plain truth herein if not I must still conclude thou dealest not fair nor candidly like a reasonable Man or a Christian or willing plainly to vindicate thy Religion 6. In this that when thou shouldest have Replyed like a sober Disputant to the Answer that Jeremy Ives gave to shew the invalidity and falshood of thy Distinction instead thereof thou evadest doing of it

only and absurd G.VV. p. 18. acknowledges that they have plainly and often confest 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 says he we must own that if he was the Son of God BEFORE he took Flesh he was Christ And in p. 19. he grants he doth not own the Humane Nature is the Christ for want of Plain Scripture that saith so and says some do conscientiously scruple it and pretend it is a deviating from Scripture-Language which they cannot do in their Creed 2. Reply What a pretty medly of Hypocrisie Quibbling and Confusion here is I will now shew you For Hypocrisie how palpable is it in that they pretend they conscientiously scruple owning in their Creed THAT THE HUMANE NATURE IS THE CHRIST because it is a Deviating from Scripture-Language and they pretend they find no plain Scripture that says so when yet at the same time they tell you they have often confessed that the DIVINE NATURE or Word as CLOATHED with the most HOLY MANHOOD is and was the Christ and this they do without scruple of Conscience And yet there 's no plain Scripture that I know of that says so yea and it is a Deviating from Scripture-Language for where can they shew me this Language in Scripture CLOATHED WITH THE HOLY MANHOOD or such a word there as MANHOOD and until they have done that I must charge them with HIPOCRISY and their pretended Scruples to be nothing but pretences and DECEIT 3. As to their Quibbling herein it plainly appears that to blind the eyes of the simple they sometimes pretend as in p. 18. to own the Holy Manhood to be Christ And yet p. 19. Deny the Humane Nature to be Christ By the first they would seem as if they owned the Humane Nature to be Christ when-as indeed they utterly deny it as you may see by the Latter But since they own the Divine Nature Cloathed with the most Holy Manhood and as having taken Flesh of the Seed of Abraham not only was but is the Christ and yet say that the Light which is in every Man is the Christ I considered with my self whether this most holy Manhood was in every Man and the Manhood was the Light in every Man or a part of that Light Taking these words in their proper and common signification among us English Men but so I could not find it consistent with their Doctrine of the LIGHT WITHIN and therefore would it not appear a pretty Quibble if some of them do mean by MANHOOD not MAN really and essentially but only a GARMENT or a certain quality as Power Fortitude or Valour So when they confess Christ Cloathed with the most Holy Manhood they mean Christ was Cloathed with the most Holy Power Valour c. or Cloathed with a Garment Or else if they deny this they must confute their other Principle of the Light within every Man being the Christ or speak as absurdly if they say Christ's Manhood as he is really and essentially Man is within every Man 4. And then I further enquire of the Quakers Whether the most Holy Manhood be indeed the Christ or a real part of Christ And whether the Flesh that Christ took of the Seed of Abraham since AS SUCH G.VV. sometimes viz. p. 18. confesses he IS the Christ be or can be the Christ the Light or a part of that Light which at other times the Quakers say is in every Man Or will they say that Christ's Flesh which he took of the Seed of Abraham is in every Man or is it another Christ See their confusions and absurdities 5. And when they say before Christ took Flesh let them deal plainly with us and tell us WHEN Christ FIRST took Flesh and whether they do not Believe he took Flesh BEFORE he was Conceived and Born of the Virgin Mary and what plain Scripture they have that saith so And if Christ took Flesh BEFORE whether it was Real Flesh and what sort and whether h●s Flesh that was born of the Virgin Mary was the same or had Christ at the time of his Birth two different sorts of Flesh not Figuratively but Really and Properly so called and all this will shew their Confusion and the Ridiculousness of their Fancies for by I. Pennington's Question p. 20. it seems the Quakers do hold that CHRIST's OWN FLESH BLOOD AND BONES are of an ETERNAL NATURE And that the FLESH AND BLOOD which Christ took of OUR NATURE was only OUR GARMENT and so of an EARTHLY PERISHING NATURE And thus would make Christ's Flesh Blood and Bones to be GOD for nothing can be of an ETERNAL NATURE but GOD. Monstrum Horrendum hear O Heavens and hearken O Earth What can be either Confusion or Equivocation in the World not to say worse of i● if this be not 6thly G.W. pag. 19. and in several other places says The Quakers must have not only Plain Scripture but Express Scripture viz. Scripture that saith so or else they cannot admit it into their Creed So in G.F. and J. Stubb's Epistle before G. W's Book intituled The Divinity of Christ Their very first Words are Whether do the Scriptures speak of three Persons in the God-head in these express words Let us see where it is written Come d● not Shuffle for we are resolved that the Scriptures shall buffet you about and that you shall be whipped abo●● with the Rule Give us Plain Scripture for it without adding or diminishing or shuffling We charge you Presbyterians to give us Printed Scriptures for these following Words and let us see in wha● Chapter and verse they are Printed viz. Concrete Abstract Relative c. and so in this manner they ar● giving Names to CHRIST and God besides the Rul● of Scripture c. And so they run on with it over and over again But now since they Impose Command and Charge others at this Rate and not only so but also pretend that they cannot admit of any thing in their Creed but what they have plain and express Scripture that saith so How Reasonable and Just is it to Charge them and accordingly I do here Charge them to produce where it is written in Scripture in these express words The Divine Nature or Word Cloathed with the most Holy Manhood was and is th● Christ which they have admitted into their Creed Let us see in what Chapter and Verse it is Printed So p. 24. The distinction of Father and Son is Real in the Divine Relation known as Co-workers in the Order and Degrees Where 's Chap. and Verse for these words Come G.W. Come Quakers shew me or any other the Chapter and Verse where these words are written viz. Manhood entire Manhood the most Holy Manhood Divine Relations Co-workers in the Order and Degrees Or henceforward be ashamed of your silly doings and such ridiculous scribbling I might think W.P. may yet have so much Ingenuity left in

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

yet will not own that Body either to be a part of Jesus or do believe it to be that Jesus which the Scripture calls it And here I appeal to all sober and understanding People in England to Judg if ever they heard such Quibbling before as the Quakers here use about CHRIST JESUS and this they are constrained ●o do To maintain that first Principle they have took up The Light within for if they should own that living Body of Flesh and Blood that was born of the Virgin Mary and that was Crucified and dyed to be JESUS and the CHRIST then they foresee they should confound that their Beloved Principle The Light within every Man For how can that Man or Body of Flesh Bone and Blood that was born of the Virgin Mary be in every Man and also upon this Ground They deny that Person that Man that was born of the Virgin Mary to be the Christ Because they cannot tell how to make tha● very Person and Man to be in every Man and in all Persons and so rather than forego their Principle of the Light within They will adventure to fashion and form to themselves a new Jesus and a New Christ and have hid it and kept it as much as they could in a Mystery and in Dark sayings as long as they might till at last being pressed by many Contests and Disputes they have been forced to discover it And now Dear Friends and Country-Men give me leave to tell you that though I do not remember that I ever positively said That the Quakers were no Christians yet I have much and often doubted in my self and do still whether they can according to their Principles be true Christians since they do not own nor believe that Man nor that living Body that was born of the Virgin Mary to be the Jesus and the Christ and so do not believe that the Christ inde●d dyed and if Christ did not indeed Dy he did n●t indeed rise again Nay though they own that the Scriptures call that living Body Christ and Jesus yet they give us at the same time to understand They do not Believe nor own it to be what they themselves say the Scripture calls it and so set up another Christ than what the Scripture call's Christ and declares to us to be the true Christ and Messiah of the World And for this Reason and out of this Godly-Jealousy and Fear and not out of Envy and wicked malic● as they pretend it is that I cannot own them but have thus opposed them And let all People consider it weigh it well and take heed It is not for nothing or yet a sl●ght matter only that I set forth their Quibbles But for their setting up another Christ or another kind of Christ than the Scripture holds forth and calls the Christ to wit that Person Man or living Body that was born of the Virgin MARY and what can be of a higher Nature or more dangerous in the Christian Religion than for any to set up any other Christ or any other Person or thing for Christ 9. What pla●ner words is it possible to invent that are intelligible to Mankind than are used about this matter in Scripture if Men would not be wilfully Blind as to give you an Instance or two Acts 2.22 23. Ye Men of Israel ' hear these words Jesus of Nazareth A Man approved of God among you by Miracles and Wonders and Signs which God did by him in the midst of you as ye your selves also know HIM being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledg of God ye have taken and by wicked hands have Crucified and Slain v. 36. Let all the House of Israel know assuredly That God hath made that same Jesus whom ye have Crucifyed both LORD and Christ observe the Apostle says that same Jesus viz. Jesus of Nazareth A Man God hath made both Lord and Christ and if that same then no other and again that same Jesus whom the Men of Israel had taken and by wicked hands did Crucify and Slay That same Jesus and not any thing else hath God made both Lord and Christ Now it was not the Light within that the Men of Israel took and by wicked hands Crucified Hang'd on a Tree and Slew But it was that Man that Person that Body that was born of the Virgin Mary Jesus of Nazareth that the Jews took and by wicked hands Crucified and Hang'd on a Tree So it appears as plain as any thing in the World can be by words made Plain that that same Man that Body or that Person which was born of the Virgin Mary Jesus of Nazareth is he which God hath made both LORD and CHRIST and not the Light within every Man nor any other thing Luke 24.39 Behold my Hands and my Feet that it is I my self handle me and see For a Spirit hath not Flesh and Bones as ye see me have and when he had thus spoken he shewed them his hands and his feet John 20.24 25. But Thomas one of the twelve called Dydimus was not with them when Jesus came The other Disciples therefore said unto him we have seen the Lord but he said unto them Except I shall see in his hands the Print of the Nails and put my finger into the Print of the Nails and thrust my hand into his side I will not believe v. 26 27 28. And after eight days again his Disciples were within and Thomas with them Then came Jesus the door being shut and stood in the midst and said Peace be unto you Then saith he to Thomas reach hither thy finger and behold my hands and reach hither thy hand and thrust it into my side and be not faithless but believing And Thomas answered and said unto him my Lord and my God v. 31. But these are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have Life through his Name What Jesus even That Jesus that same Person that was not within but without Thomas who had the Print of material nails in his hands that Thomas put his finger in is the Christ the Son of God Now G.W. Answer me in plainness once if thou wilt be so honest Was this Jesus that the Apostle says here we are to believe is the Christ the Son of God without Thomas then when he put his finger into the Print of the Nails Or was it only Acted within Thomas his Body And hath the Light within which thou ownest for thy Jesus any Print of Material Nails or hands properly so called of flesh and bone as this Jesus had which is the true CHRIST see also Math 1.1 with verse 16 and Heb. 2.14 10. G.W. p. 20. takes notice of Jer. Ives great Question as he calls it Whether Christ's Humane Nature was a part of Christ But he gives no Answer to it but gives it the go-by by saying it was not a Question in Scripture Phrase But that could be