more Spiritual Nature and Dignity then the Flesh Christ took of the Seed of Abraham for he was made the high Priest of the second Covenant was without beginning of Dayes or End of Life Fourthly Because Christ himself magnifieth the Spirit above the Flesh They look not farther then his Body or Flesh as it was visible to the World and he appointed them to look farther yea to his Flesh and Blood spiritually which is Meat indeed and Drink indeed being that Living Bread which came down from Heaven that who eats thereof shall live forever Joh. 6. 48 to 58 63. And those that see not through and beyond that visible Body of Flesh which was the Vail which the eternal Word took to trasact and represent as in a common Person that which every Child of God ought measurably to witness in his own particular unto the beholding and partaking of the divine Widom Power and Righteousness that dwelt therein which are Meat indeed and Drink indeed unto every hungry and thirsty Soul they are not yet come to the chief Corner-Stone that is Elect and Pretious but are carnal not knowing the Scriptures nor the Power of God Mat. 22. 29. Fifthly Christ Jesus lay'd far more Weight upon the Coming of the Comforter or himself in his second and spiritual Appearance in them among whom he bodily conversed then upon the Continuance of his bodily Presence Joh. 16. 7. intimating that he intended a more spiritual Communion with them they in him and he in them even as he was in his Father his Father in him chap. 17 21 23. a Fellowship beyond what they had already known how could it otherwise have been expedient as the Text expresseth it if the Change from his visible to invisible Presence had not been both more glorious and advantageous His Disciples believed him for the Words he spoak Chap. 16. 30. But ver 31. 32. Jesus answerd them Do you now believe Behold the Hour cometh yea is now come that ye shall be scattered every Man to his OWN as much as if he had said You shall then know me and believe in me upon a more clear and certain Ground when you shall have received thus of my Fulness and Grace for Grace Joh. 1. 16. and be scattered to it which is hard to be done while I stay in this Capacity among you therefore it is expedient that I go away as to my bodily Presence Joh. 16. 7. on which you have such great Dependence but I Christ will not leave you comfortless I will come a Comforter unto you Chap. 14. 3 18 19 20. For lo I am with you alwayes even to the End of the World Mat. 28. 20. this is the Christ of God Sixthly Because the Apostle Paul desired not thence forth to know Christ after the Flesh but spiritually as he was the Son of God revealed in himself 2 Cor. 5. 16. Gal. 1. 15 16. and as the Apostle counted all other Knowledge Dross Dung to that of the Glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ reveal'd in him so was he not contented that the Galatians should rest in a fleshly Knowledge of Jesus Christ but travelled in Birth with them like a faithful Witness of the inward Work of God a second time until Christ was formed in them Gal. 4. 19. who doubtless was the true Christ Seventhly Because that Flesh of Christ is called a Vail but he himself is within the Vail which is the Holy of Holyest whereinto Christ Jesus our High Priest hath entered Hebr. 10. 20 21. And as he descended into and past through a suffering State in his fleshly Appearance and returned into that State of Immortality and Eternal Life and Glory from whence he humbled himself which was and is the Holy of Holiest then obscur'd or hid by his flesh or body the Vail while in the World so must all know a Death to their Fleshly Wayes and Religions yea their Knowledge of Christ himself after the Flesh or they stick in the Vail and never enter into the Holy of Holyest nor come to know him in any Spiritual Relation as their High and Holy Priest that abides therein Eighthly Because that Christ lives and dwells in the Hearts of his Children Joh. 14. 23. chap. 15. 5. chap. 17. 21. Coloss 1. 27. which cannot be said of the Outward Body of Christ Therefore I cannot by any means believe that the meer visible Flesh and Body constitutes Christ though I shall confess that respecting the Administration and the Service of that Holy Body fitted and quallified of God as an Instrument to usher introduce and bring it forth into the World it may very well have attributed to it the Name Christ being so nearly related But rather that Divine Nature Wisdom Power Righteousness Grace and Truth of which he is the Fulness whose transcending Glory was vailed by that Body of Flesh he wore and was only let forth in that Day as any were capable of beholding and receiving it which dwelt therein And those who at this Day do seed upon the History of the Bodily Appearance yet honourable in its place know not a breaking through the Vail by witnessing a Measure of the same Divine Wisdom Power Righteousness Grace Truth revealed and born forth in themselves they are but carnal and fleshly Christians being unacquainted with the Formation of the Christ of God in themselves which is the opening of the Mystery of Christ God manifested in the Flesh and Christ abiding the Hope of Glory in the Souls of his People This distinction friendly Reader of Christ and his Body is very unpleasant to me but I am thrust into it by the loud Clamours of our Adversary against us as too short he rests our words so as to rebuke his fond Absurdities I hope sufficiently detected and which was more in my Eye and indeed lay hardest upon my Spirit to oppose and defeat his Carnal Objections against the Glorious Christ of God for by his vehement Out-cries at us as Persons denying the Christ of God because we rather chuse to call that Body that was prepared of God the Body of Christ then Christ himself to beat People off at once from hearkening after our Doctrine of the Spiritual Second Coming of Christ into the Souls of Men for if his Doctrine be true Christ doth not really dwell in his Children thereby depriving the Children of Men from the most Heavenly Enjoyment and Priviledge God hath laid up for them that fear him For I am bold to affirm and that in the Name of the only True and Wise God The True Church is become Christ's Body and he the Divine Wisdom Power and Righteousness lives reigns and puts forth himself in and by her and that all those who come not thus to experience the Christ of God to dwell in them their King Prophet and High Priest who is without Beginning of Dayes and End of Life they are ignorant of God's Christ do stick in the
by wicked Works degenerated into the Earthly and thereby rendered our selves Aliens yea Rebels to his pure Law of Life first declares or holds forth Forgiveness of Sins past upon true Repentance by the laying down of his Life and then works out by his Holy Power and Spirit in our Consciences the Sin that is inherent and in the room thereof brings in his own Everlasting Righteousness So that our being accounted Righteous is as Christ was accounted a Sinner That is he was not a Sinner by Commission or Guilt neither were we as of our selves Righteous by Innocency or Non-commission of Sin for then there had been no need of Remission to have been declared by his publick offering up of himself But he was so reputed from bearing away the Sins that were past through the Forbearance of God and we are accounted as Righteous upon Repentance and true Faith because of that Remission and perfect Acquittance of Sins that are past as if we had never committed them Therefore wofully will they be mistaken that shut out the inward Work of God in the Heart and stretch this to Sins past present and to come without any regard thereto when as the Benefit of Christ's Suffering can in no sense be known or enjoyed without the true Faith and unfeigned Repentance which must precede Remission it self by whom or where is that wrought if not by Christ within much more must they go before compleat Justification which comprizeth Sanctification and Redemption we cannot but pron ounce it a Dangerous Doctrine since it flatters People with that being compleated that is not thereby deluding their poor Souls into a Perishing Security CHAP. IX Of the True Christ We own and our Adversary prov'd to deny him THe sixteenth Chapter of his first Book charged us with the Denyal of the Christ of God Among other Testimonies that he brought out of our Friends Books to maintain it I did eflectually consider two viz. This we certainly know and can never call the Bodily Garment Christ but that which appeared and dwelt in the Body Again For that which he took upon him was but a Garment even the Flesh and Blood of our Nature I. Peninington Quest p. 20 23 32. To introduce my Answer I observed at the same time and in the very same page He confost That we don't deny there was such a Man as Jesus the Son of Mary and that God or rather Christ was in him which I then said makes up our Christ I meant God manifested in the Flesh He replyeth thus Reply p. 76 77. But this I told W. P. was no more then the Quakers profess themselves We witness saith Fox the same Christ that ever was now manifested in the Flesh Rejoynder He should have given us the Book and Page where G. F. hath so expressed himself however we deny not that Doctrine for God doth dwell and walk in his Children who are called his Temples and Tabernacles in Holy Scripture 2 Cor. 6. 16. Rev. 21. 3. But we must forever reject J. Faldo's ignorant or worse Consequence That because we own that God dwells in his Children therefore he dwelt no more in that Body of Flesh he prepared to manifest himself by then he doth in his People Or that our asserting that God appeared and dwelt in that Holy Body eminently prepared by him is to be understood in no larger Sense then that in which we understand him to dwell in his Children I might as well argue against the Scripture as J. Faldo doth against us Christ was full of Grace and Truth therefore when he fills his Children with Grace and Truth they have as much Grace and Truth in them as their Lord and Master Or thus God was in Christ and God was in Paul therefore he was as much in Paul as he was in Christ It is after this Rate Reader our Adversary essayes to confute us as if we made no Distinction between the Fulness and the Measure the Treasury and the Gift He was full of Grace and Truth and of his Fulness have we received and Grace for Grace Joh. 1. 14 16. The next Thing I observed from what he gave as our Confession of the true Christ was this That he whom we call Christ is not John Faldo ' s Christ for he was that Body only that dyed here he cuts my Answer of short and bestoweth this Reply upon it Reply pag. 76. Here the Word Only W. P. forgeth he makes my allowing Christ's Body to be his Garment to imply it is not Christ himself Rejoynder Why did he not give my Words who knows by what he quoted of my Answer that he had ever been so kind the Man knew it pincht him and seem'd resolved to conceal it It was this In the midst of his second Proof he inserts these two Words VERY RIGHT as his Assent to that Part of it which to me seems as inconsistent with his Purpose as may be to wit that which Christ took upon htm was our Garment even the Flesh and Blood of our Nature therefore said I John Faldo as well as we acknowledgeth That the Garment is not Christ unless there be no Difference betwixt Christ and his Garment Or that Christ was but the Garment of that divine Being that dwells therein which were unscriptural and very carnal and I still say That Christ's Garment can never constitute him Christ And that as he darkly calls it the intire Christ as I shall make appear so hath he in this Concession contradicted himself and utterly given away the Cause But he is of another Mind as his Reply will inform us Reply pag. 76. The Apostle Paul calls his and the Saints Bodies their Cloathing 1 Cor. 5. yet they were never the less a part of themselves Rejoynder A meer Rattle for Children Did the Body God prepar'd for his Son to do his Will in help to constitute him Christ as much as the Apostles Body did help to constitute him Paul If it did why may we not as well say that Paul was among the Fathers in the Wilderness so many hundred Years before he was born as the same Apostle doth assert Christ by Name to have been the spiritual Rock of which the Fathers drank in the Wilderness 1 Cor. 10. 4. for if the Body constitute him Christ as sayes J. F. then he could no more be Christ before he had that Body then Paul could be Paul before he had his Body and consequently There is no more Absurdity in affirming That Paul was Paul so many hundred Years before he was born then that Christ was Christ so many hundred Years before he was born Again If Paul's Body were but a Cloathing how much more remote doth J. F's Comparison make Christ's Body to be from his Divinity since Paul did not preexist Christ did but he that took that Body and that Body that was taken were not of equal Date for the Body was taken in the Fulness of Time but he that took it and
manifested himself by it was from Everlasting In short Christ qualified that Body for his Service but that Body did not constitute Christ He is invisible and ever was so to the ungodly World that was not his Body as honest J. Bradford told Arch-Deacon Harpsfield B. Mart. 3. Vol. p. 293. and so much the Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or anonted signifieth which was not outward after the Jewish Ceremony but by the Spirit and invisible Power of God Lastly I will leave it with my Reader to consider what better terms then Earthly and Perishing J. F's Comparison implyeth to Christ's Body for such was the Apostles and the Bodies of those Saints he writ to But he will by no means have himself concerned with a great Part of my following Discourse which was he thinks in Opposition to no Body because I argued that the meer Body of Christ could not be the intire Christ though he makes our Denyal of it to be a disowning of the true Christ producing a Passage out his Book to my Purpose in Contradiction to himself viz. p. 72. The Flesh and Blood of Christ we do not believe to be Christ separated from his Mans Soul or that to be Christ separated from his Divne and Eternal Nature bestowing upon me for so ill employing of my time these Terms Vain Trifler Pedantick Magesterialness Forger and that it is a greater Wickedness then being a Thief to make him assert the meer Body to be the intire Christ adding but this is Penn ' s high-way and beaten Rode One would think after all this that I had wronged him with all imaginable Baseness in fastning upon him any such Conclusion yet if I make it not appear by his Reply which one would think he should have penned a little more cautiously after he had given such Occasion by his former Discourse and that to in his very next page let my Reader say I merit all thâ—se hard Words that J. Faldo flingeth so angrily upon me He produced several Scriptures to prove as I understood him the Manhood to be the Christ of God or else he did nothing for without so believing and arguing it was impossible for him to prove our Denyal of the true Christ because we asserted Christ to have been before that Body consequently that it was not the the intire Christ which I explained and rescued He omits giving the Reader any account of it only in general Tearms and that not without Perversion His Reply unto which will make good my Construction of his Words or I am greatly mistaken Reply p. 77. Whereas I produced Abundance of Scriptures to prove that the Man Jesus is the Christ W. P. will by no means allow them to have that Sence no not that in Luke 2. 26. And it was revealed to him Simeon by the Holy Ghost that he should not see Death before he had seen the Lord's Christ neither that the Child Jesus whom Simeon took up in his Arms was the Christ Certainly sayes W. P. p. 161. This Allegation from Luke 2. 26. will never prove the Body of Jesus which the Father prepared before him to be the whole intire Christ c. Neither did I produce It to prove the Body to be such what Disputing can there be with a Man that keeps neither to my Words nor to the Question Rejoynder But is this the great Enemy to Forgery the express Quoter one that cites to a Tittle and scorns as to Ignore his own Concessions so to render his own Conclusions for his Enemies Assertions who charges me with denying this Passage among others as any whit proving the Man Jesus to be the Christ whilst he quotes my own Conclusion upon it to have been no other then the Body of Jesus to have been the whole and intire Christ Now he cant compass his End he produced not those Scriptures to prove any such Thing but what is clearer then that it is the same thing with J. Faldo to deny the Body of Jesus to be the intire Christ of God and to deny the Christ of God consequently that by the Christ of God he understands with L. Muggleton only the Body that died So that he did but evade when he said that I argued against no body in affirming and proving that the Body taken in that time was not the whole Christ of God and that he produced those Scriptures to that very End notwithstanding what he sayes to the contrary for what else can any infer when he so obviously makes no Difference between saying The Man Jesus is not Christ and the visible Body of Jesus is not the whole intire Christ Thus Reader he Faulters at the Entrance I will give a brief Account of neer two pages of Answer by him omitted It is and will be granted that Simeon saw the Lord 's Christ but I hope J. F. will not deny unto that good man who waited for Israel's Consolation that he had as well a spiritual as natural or inward as outward Sight of Christ for it were both to deny Christ's Divinity and to conclude Simeon void of any spiritual Sight or Intendment in these Words of the Lord 's Christ as a Light enlightning the Gentiles c. though still be it understood that we confess that Child as seen and understood by Simeon with Respect to that great End of his Appearance to be the Lord 's Christ Let none then be so unjust as to infer we deny the Lords Christ because we rather chuse to say the Body of Christ then Christ for sayes J. Faldo as well as we elsewhere Christ is God manifest in Flesh See my Answer pag. 161. Nothing can be clearer then that I only argued in Opposition to his carnal Doctrine against the meer Bodie 's being the Christ of God Now since he makes me hereby to deny the Man Christ Jesus I must conclude that by the Man Jesus he understands no more then the meer Body of Jesus otherwise how do I deny the Man Jesus to be the Christ of God in only scrupeling to call the meer and only Body of Jesus the â—hrist of God His next Animadversion was this Reply p. 78. Let us observe how W. P. abuses that Scripture Acts 5. 30 31. The words sayes he are thus to be understood The God of our Fathers who raised up the Body of Jesus from the Dead which ye slew and hung upon a Tree him whose Body you so cruelly used hath God exalted at his Right Hand c. Beside this Construction which renders it not to be Christ but only his Body that suffered and so Christ never suffered nor dyed nor rose he W. P. puts instead of whom he slew which he slew that it may intend only the Body and not the Person of Christ Rejoynder I appeal to my Reader 's Understanding and Conscience if J. Faldo doth not in this Sentence make the meer Body of Christ to be the Christ of God for one Reason why he denyes my Interpretation is my
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth chiefly signifie that which is DIVINE and Reasonable that God doth give unto us H. Bullenger saith The Soul is a Spiritual Substance poured of God into Man's Body in his 4 Decad. 10 Serm. Augustine saith It is felt in the Life it is unutterable breathed into Man's Body by God of his own Essence and Nature from the secret Power of God In short Very various have been the Opinions of the Ancients concerning the Soul Plato divided it into Two parts Zeno into Three Panaetius into Five or Six Soranus into Seven Chrysippus into Eight Apollophanes into Nine by some of the Stoicks into Ten by Possidonius into Twelve as Tertullian reports in his Book de Anima p. 273. and H. Bullenger tells us That hardly two say one and the same thing concerning it Seeing then that Men of such excellent Abilities and nicest Disquisitions both in Nature and Theology rather prove their own Contradiction and Confusion then give us any certain Account of the Soul what she is and that the Scripture mentions it so rarely and obscurely and that J. Faldo denies all immediate Inspiration as he calls it which is the only Way left us to understand it he hath not shown himself a Charitable Divine but an Impious Wrangler in falling so heavily upon us with the opprobious Name of Idolaters for assigning something more of Divinity unto the Soul in its primitive Perfection then his Opinion will allow us CHAP. XII Of the Resurrection of Dead Bodies and Eternal Recompence Our Doctrine maintained by Scripture Reason and Authorities IN his former Book he charged us with the Denyal of the Resurrection of the Dead and Eternal Recompence The Testimonies he brought for Proof were such as rendred him very weak or something worse I hope they were sufficiently dis-engaged from his Service unto which according to his old Custom he hath not thought fit to reply He only takes notice of two or three short Passages out of six or seven pages of Answer on which he bestows a few Squibs and concludes with that Contempt and Rudeness no Man pretending to Religion or Humanity would have vented especially against a Man that he provok't to answer him by beginning to abuse his Friends in general and him in particular considering withal that his Profession is to suffer not to insult Strange that my Religion and Conscience should subject me to so much Contempt with a Man that pretends to both But W. P. I dare say had not been thus treated by J. F. could he threaten the Law and Flant and Swagger at the rate J. F. doth But it is like such Folk to insult where he may do it safely One of his Testimonies was this Christ is the Resurrection to raise up that which Adam lost and to destroy him who deceived him So Christ is the Resurrection unto Life of Body Soul and Spirit and sorenews Man Princ. pap call Quak. p. 34. I will not trouble my self nor spend my Reader 's time in transscribing what I said in Defence of this Passage as to the End he designed it Nothing can be clearer then that this concerns Regeneration so sayes J. F. himself pag. 132. consequently the Resurrection of Dead Bodies is not concerned in it His second Testimony fell from G. Whitehead in these words if we may believe him I do not believe this Body shall rise again after it is Dead I told him of his Disingenuous Catching and put him in mind of the Apostles own Expression that justifies the Saying if it was ever said Thou Fool Thou SOWEST NOT that Body that shall be But unto whatever I urged for the clearing of our Friends Words and Writings from his ill Constructions like an unfair if not a fearful Adversary he makes no Return I will now set down what he thought fit to give us Reply p. 88. Take W. P' s own words acknowledging the Truth of my Charge Either the Resurrection of the Body must be without the Matter or it must not If it must then it is not the same numerical Body and so their proper and strict Resurrection they must let go although this allows my Charge true and so enough to its Vindication yet I shall Answer P's Arguments against the Resurrection wherein be opposes Philosophical Conclusions to the express Doctrine of the Scriptures Rejoynder If I have herein vindicated his Charge it must follow that he charged us with Denying the Resurrection of the Body without any Allowance of Change as to that Matter and Corruptibility it was buried with consequently That J. Faldo believes a Resurrection of the same Carnal Bodies that are interred without any Alteration whatever for that allowed they cannot rise properly and strictly the same Bodies If our rejecting this Carnal Dream of his is that horrid Principle he charged us with Denying we have no Reason to be much concerned about the Success But he proceeds Reply pag. 88 89. The latter part of W. P's Dilemma is the Horn with which he pushes at the Resurrection viz. If it must not be without that same gross matter it dyed with then I affirm it cannot be incorruptible because it will carry with it that which will render it corruptible ad infinitum The Body must necessarily be the same Matter is allowed but W. P. calls it in his assumption of the 2d part of his Dilemma the same gross Matter which makes his Argument Falacious in the Form of it But to let that pass it shall be the same Matter and numerical though not of the same Grosness and shall have the same Substance and Essential Form though not the same Accidents Rejoynder Is this the Scripture-Doctrine he says I oppose with Philosophical Conclusions Would he would give us but one Scripture that looks but favourably towards this Reply I never read one yet of a Body's having the same Matter and not the same Grosness the same substance and Essence and not the same Accidents For shame must our Denyal of Physical Nicities or rather J. Faldo's Absurdities be branded for horrid Doctrine 'T is true in Philosophy that a Substance may loose its Accidents and yet remain the same Substance Things may be discolour'd yet the same Beings they were before But that Matter should be such and not gross is incongruous with Scripture and Philosophy Matter and Grosness or Corruption are Synonimous in Philosophy and common Speech But that Grosness or the Substantial Part of any Man's Body should be but an Accident that the Accidence teaches all Boyes in a Noun-Substantive deserves a Lash at least Are Flesh Blood and Bones Accidents or that of them which is gross and corruptible an Accident I wonder what a fearful sort of a Noun-Substantive J. F. would be in case he were condens'd and rarefied of such gross and corruptible Accidents Indeed one would think his Head if not all the rest had been near akin to them when he writ this piece of new Philosophy But this abundantly proveth
upon what Foot his Resurrection standeth if it may be said to have any or to stand at all Faellacious is but one of his hard words for if the Body rifeth with the same Matter it carried to the Grave it riseth with gross Matter unless it carried no gross Matter thither Let him chuse of the two which to deny But is this to answer my Argument to tell us with so much unwarranted Confidence that the Body shall be the same Matter Substance and Essence c. the very Question What is this but to say It shall be so because it shall be so If he would have done any thing he should have demonstrated how Matter can be without Grosness and the most gross and Material part of the Body to be but the Accidents But he thinks he hath said something to the Point Reply pag. 89. To talk that it the Body cannot be incorruptible because beyond the Nature of Matter it self is to talk like an Atheist making Nature to be God and not acknowledging the God of Nature Rejoynder Did I dare sport in Religion scarce ever Man gave a fairer Occasion in his Compass But he practises it and I abhor it This is such a riddle me riddle me as I never heard of before W. P. sayes The Nature of Matter admits not of Incorruptibility ergo W. P. is an Atheist ergo he makes Nature to be God and ergo he acknowledges not the God of Nature This is the very Man that not a page off reflects Ignorance upon my Philosophy Doubtless a Peerless Disputant one way or other May he evermore thus confute me which is all I will say to such subtil Reasoning and losty Argumentation in this place Yet he has not done Reply p. 89. If God be omnipotent which he is or he is not God he is able as the Apostle speaks to subdue all things to himself with which words he answers all Cavils from Impossibility in Nature Rejoynder The Question was not about God's Power nor was it so much as any Part of the Question But whether Matter is not by Nature corruptible and how that which is corruptible by Nature may be by Nature incorruptible This Scripture he urges to prove his carnal Resurrection will as well prove the Popish Transubstantiation or any the most unreasonable Conceit in the World for it is but saying All things are possible with God and God is able to subdue all things unto himself and the Business is done at J. Faldo's rate of arguing But the Question is not about what God can do but what he hath done and has declared he will do I know there are Impossibilities in Nature which God's Omnipotency makes possible but if J. Faldo doth not know that there is a Difference between Impossibility in Nature and Contrariety to Nature I now tell him there is one and that so wide as though Almighty God frequently supplies Nature's Want of Power yet he rarely if ever acts contrary to and inconsistent with the Nature of his own Creatures What is spiritual remains spiritual what is material material and what is corruptible corruptible But let us see how much better he acquits himself of another Passage which he ventures to cite and in my Opinion doth no more Reply p. 89. W. P. proceeds farther in this vain Reasoning and wicked too p. 202. I say we cannot see how that which is of the Dust should be eternal whilst that from whence it came is by Nature but temporal and that which is yet most of all irreconcileable with Scripture and right Reason is that the Loss and Change of Nature from corruptible to incorruptible natural to spiritual should not make it another Body That it is according to Scripture I have given large Proof in my Book to no one of which he replyeth as also how unreasonable it is to call that a Resurrection which is not of the same numerical Body Rejoynder We may guess how well he proved it in his first Book by the Strength he hath employed to maintain it in his second But let all sober Men judge if this Reply be pertinent to this Part of my Answer yet he promised he would answer my Arguments For the Scripture it is clear That Corruption shall not inherit Incorruption neither can Flesh and Blood inherit the Kingdom of God 1 Cor. 15. 50. Thus Anota cert Divin anno 1645. upon the Place and if he will know the true Resurection set him learn to understand this weighty Passage For we know that if our Earthly House of this Tabernacle were dissolved we have a Building of God an House not made with Hands Eternal in the Heavens 2 Cor. 5. 1. And I cannot but wonder my Adversaries Understanding should be so benighted as that contrary to express Scripture he should assert a Resurrection of the same Body that is buried properly and strictly so the Apostle teaches us to believe that it is not that same Body that is sown that shall be for though we shall be changed from Mortality to Immortality Corruption to Incorruption 2 Cor. 5. 1. and 1 Cor. 15. 37 50. yet mens Bodies of Flesh and Blood shall not inherit the Kingdom of God For the Word Resurrection 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth hot strictly imply a taking up of the same Numerical Body as he would have us believe from his new found Relative IT first Book 2. Part p. 138. for which Beza shall give him a Release both from the Latin and original Greek there being no Word in either for his Relative IT on which he and his factious Brother Hicks have so relatively insisted Indeed as their last and best Refuge The Text lyeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Seritur corpus animale resuscitatur corpus spirituale i. e. Anatural Body is sown a spiritual Body is raised that is They lay down a natural and take up a spiritual Body or in lieuof a Natural receive a spiritual Body not that the Natural Body shall be transubstantiated into a Spiritual Body or that admitting of such an Exchange that the Spiritual is the same Numerical Body that was the Natural for so the Natural and Spiritual Body would be one and the same but suppose J. Faldo ' s Relative IT to hold I do utterly deny that this Text is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's Carnal Body at all I will recite it with the five following Verses as they ly in our English Translation It is sown a Natural Body it is raised a spiritual Body There is a Natural Body and there is a Spiritual Body and so it s written The first Man Adam was made a Living Soul the last Adam was made a Quickning Spirit howbeit that was not first which is spiritual but that which is Natural and afterward that which is Spiritual The first Man is of the Earth Earthy the second Adam is the Lord from Heaven As is the Earthy so are they that are Earthy and as is the Heavenly so are they also
more I that live but Christ in me that is The Apostle had no Life in him in any sense Would this be good Doctrine But more openly do the Words of Christ lay to the Exception of such Cavillers 'T is not I that speak but the Father in me Again It is not you that speak but the Holy Gost in you For after J. Faldo's Parapharase we must either deny that Christ or his Apostles spoak those words or confess that they contradicted themselves in saying they did not speak when they did or lastly He must acknowledge to us That such Teachings and Speakings are not the Teachings and Speakings of Men but of God by and through Men. Let him first see if he can reconcile himself to these Scripture-Passages so pertinent to our Purpose and leave off his silly Shifts as easily confuted as discovered Upon my saying That we do believe that there is One and but One Universal Church the Ground and Pillar of Truth and that is in God and that the Members of it are washed in the Blood of the Lamb and grafted into the True Vine bringing forth Fruit unto Holiness p. 113. he thus replyes and I beseech my Reader to consider it Reply p. 59. If he own no other Church but this which is the Character of the invisible Church he owns not a Gospel-Church whose Order and Frame is according to the Doctrine of the Apostles and Practice of the Saints in the New-Testament Rejoynder VVe are beholden to him for this May we ever meet with such kind Adversaries It seems then my Definition hath nothing to do with the Gospel-Church VVhat is it but to say that the Gospel-Chruch is not the Pillar of Truth The Gospel-Chruch is not washed in the Blood of the Lamb The Gospel-Chruch is not grafted into the true Vine that Men may be in the Truth washed in the Blood of the Lamb grafted into the true Vine bring forth Fruit unto Holiness and yet no wayes concered in the Gospel-Church in short the Gospel-Church is not the Vniversal Church nor the invisible Church a Gospel-Church and what is his Reason if any there can be for all this pernicious and Anti-christian Doctrine Because a Gospel-Church is one whose Order and Frame is according to the Doctrine of the Apostle and Practice of the Saints Worse and worse it seems then in J. F's Sence that the Order and Frame the Doctrine of the Apostles brought the Church of Christ to and the Practice of the Saints in the New Testament had nothing to do with the Pillar of Truth dwelling in God being washed in the Blood of the Lamb grafted in the true Vine and bringing forth Fruit unto Holiness What Sort of impious Gibberish is this For according to his Notion of the Gospel-Church the most Satanical Crew may as well be of that Church as the best of Christians since the External Order at most but the Form of Godliness was and is imitable and imitated by arrant Hypocrites By this Argument Elias and the Seven Hundred who had not bowed their Knees to Baal so invisible as Elias himself knew not of them were Schâ—s maticks or Infidels to the then Jewish Church being without all Visible Church Policy or Order and the Jews that had it though Apostatized must have been God's Legal Church It will also follow that for above 1200 Years together since Christ's time there hath been no Gospel-Church yet Gospellers as their Enemies have called them which were to grant to the Roman-Catholicks all they Desire What was that Church that fled into the Wilderness It must either be the Gospel-Church or not the Gospel-Church If not the Gospel-Church then not the Christian and consequently the Antichristian-Church But that could not be because she fled from Antichrist If the Gospel-Church then may a Church be Gospel without punctuallity in visible Order for it is notorious by all Story the Remnant of the Woman's Seed who have born a faithful Testimony against the Spirit of Antichrist in their Sack-Cloth and Wilderness Estate have been destitute of that Visible Order Indeed I hitherto thought that a Gospel-Church constituted necessary external Order and not that meer external Order constitutes the Church Gospel or Evangelical But John Faldo sayes No who seems not to scruple at the Word Church but to play upon the Word Gospel as if external Order and Gospel were synonimous or of equal force whereas the Gospel is called in Scripture The Power of God to Salvation from that Spiritual Redemption it efficatiously worketh in them that receive it from the Bondage of Corruption under which they have fruitlesly laboured which is the Reason and a good one too why it signifieth Glad-Tidings since nothing can be more Joyous to a weary and heavy-loaden Sinner then to be eased of his former Iniquities by Remission and purged from the Nature and Habits of it out of the Soul by the Operation of this Heavenly and Everlasting Gospel which worthy Christopher Goad Right Spirit of Christ pag. 17. calls the forming or bringing forth of Christ in us What is all our Adversary hath said but to make Remedies against or Condescension to the Weakness of the Church's Infancy as sayes honest W. Tindal in his Works p. 9. 436 438. the only great Constitutes of a Gospel-Church By which he denyes a Gospel-Church to have been antecedent to that External Order and consequently that the Believers were not a Gospel-Church when met together on the Day of Penticost not long after since the Gospel had been many years preached Multitudes converted and many baptized by the One Spirit into the One Body of true Gospel-Fellowship before ever those Epistles were written by the Apostle Paul either to the Church at Corinth or to Timothy in which only External Order is mentioned Nay at this rate he hath Unchurched every Party in England but one if yet one may be excepted for if External Order only constitutes a Gospel-Church every Party in England differing greatly in their External Order it must follow that none but one if any one can have any just Pretence to a Compleat Gospel-Church consequently Mungrils He still forgets what he promised that None of them were further concerned against the Quakers then Vindicated Howbeit herein they may hold him excused that he hath equally unchurched Himself and these he preacheth to in Company with all other Parties in England being out of that Order But I intreat the Reader to consider what a Monster he hath made of Christ who describeth him with two such Bodies to one Head one Invisible the other Visible one washed in the Blood of the Lamb grafted into the true Vine bringing forth Fruit unto Holiness Qualifications hid from the Eye of the World as worthy John Bradford told T. Weston as in B. Martyr p. 104 312. That the Church of Christ is Invisible to him that hath not a Spiritual Eye The other constituted of People no matter how Vnregenerated if submitted to
to Mis-eite Mis-render or Mis-apply our Writings To conclude He seems to write at all Adventures supplying his VVeakness with Confidence and drowning the Noise of his own Forgeries by his vehement Clamours against such imaginary ones as he hath provided for me to go under my Name which is his greatest of all I heartily pray to God that he may be stopt in this Unconscionable Course and come to find true Repentance that Eternal Anguish do not irrecoverably over-take him as the Just Recompence of such Unjust Dealing with us His third Citation was out of I. Penington Can outward Blood cleanse the Conscience Can outward Water wash the Soul clean His Comment upon it is this A plain Denyal of the Efficacy of the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross to cleanse the Soul from the Guilt of Sin by its Satisfaction to the Justice of God To which I answered Doth I. P. deny or any way meddle with the outward Blood concerning the Guilt of Sin past how far it had an Influence into Justification taking Justification in that Sense But doth not I. P. treat of the outward Blood with respect to Purgation and Sanctification of the Soul from the present Nature Acts and Habits of Sin that lodges therein Is there no Difference betwixt being pardon'd Sin past and the Ground of it and being renewed and regenerated in Mind and Spirit and the Ground of that Conversion His Reply to this though he gives not two Lines of what I now repeated out of my Answer lyes thus Reply pag. 74. And if we allow Penn's Construction that he denyed the Blood of Christ which he calls outward to have an influence into Sanctification he commits a foul Error for cleansing the Conscience by Sanctification is the Effect of the Blood of Christ as well as the other The New Testament or Convenant is by Christ said to be the Cup of the New Testament in my Blood wherein all the Promises and Mercies of the New Covenant are asserted of which I think Cleansing by Sanctification is none of the least Rejoynder If by the Promise of Sanctification to be asserted in the Blood of Christ he understands that both the Promise of Sanctification and all other Promises relating to the Dispensation of the Gospel were asserted ratified and sealed to them that believe in and by the Blood of Christ I shall heartily and cheerfully submit But if he mean that the Blood of Christ shed so many Hundred Years ago by the Hands of Ungodly Men is the inherent real Purger of the Conscience from Dead Works I must deny what he sayes for the Scripture attributes Sanctification to the Eternal Spirit It is one Article of the common Creed of the called Christians viz. the Lavour of Regeneration which is by the Spirit But what is all this to J. Faldo's defending himself from abusing I. Penington's Words to wit that by asking Can Outward Blood Cleanse Can Outward Water wash the Soul He would make him to deny Christ's sacrificing of himself upon the Cross to have any Influence towards the Remitting of the Guilt of Sin past which is quite another thing as this Argument manifests which naturally expresseth J. Faldo's wresting of I. P's words He that denyes Outward Blood can cleanse the Conscience denyes that Outward Blood may be a Sacrifice whereby to declare the Remission of the Guilt of Sin past which is so absolutely and obviously false that it may be seen of every mean Capacity Yet hitherto J. Faldo's Reasoning runs Once again before we leave him thus He that is pardoned the Guilt of Sin that is past by the Blood of Christ as a Sacrifice declaring Remission to all that believe is by the same Blood washed cleansed renewed and regenerated in his inward Man from the very Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin which is as untrue as the other yet both these Arguments follow upon J. F ' s mis-rendering of I. Penington ' s words But his Credit in this Particular is not at all blemisht by his Comment upon I. P' s words if we will believe him for he thinks it may be justified by a Passage out of W. Smith Reply Catech. pag. 64. We believe that Christ in us doth offer up himself a Living Sacrifice to God for us by which the Wrath of God is appeased to us This Passage I cited which Penn among many others takes no notice of And if this can be the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem on the Cross of Wood it is a most incredible Mystery Rejoynder There is no Difficulty Friendly Reader in unfolding his pretended Mystery if the Question unto which the Answer was made be considered which was this What is your Faith concerning Christ IN YOU as a Redeemer which relates not to the Blood of Christ shed on the Cross of Wood wherefore to make the Answer deny Remission of Sins to be declared by Christ's sacrificing of his Body upon the Cross which was no part of the Question to be answered is like all the rest of his Injustice towards us If the Answer had rejected that Sacrifice we should have condemned it as much as he hath abused it But unless he denyes that Christ offers himself in his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice W. Smith's words are so far from Denying the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross of Wood that he must allow them to be sound in themselves for Christ is a Mediator and an Attoner in the Consciences of his People at what time they shall fall under any Miscarriage if they unfeignedly Repent according to 1 John 2. 1 2. as allowably as that he prayes in his People as their Head which A. Sadeel saith out of Augustine and D. Everad as anon So that upon the whole this is as strong and clear a Proof as others that he hath hither to brought for as they so this in Question and Answer wholely concerns what Christ is to Man in Man which was no part of the Question and not what he was to any in his Visible Appearance which was the only Question Before I leave this Particular I must again declare That we are led by the Light and Spirit of Christ with Holy Reverence to confess unto the Blood of Christ shed at Jerusalem as that by which a Propitiation was held forth to the Remission of the Sins that were past through the Forbearance of God unto all that believed And we do embrace it as such and do firmly believe that thereby God declared his great Love unto the World for by it is the Consciousness of Sin declared to be taken away or Remission sealed to all that have known true Repentance and Faith in his Appearance But because of the Condition I mean Faith and Repentance therefore do we exhort all to turn their Minds to the Light and Spirit of Christ within that by seeing their Conditions and being by the same brought both into true Contrition and holy Confidence in God's Mercy
Vail and know not any Entrance into the Holy of Holies where the Divine Vnction from the High Priest is received and the Blessed Holy Spiritual Fellowship of the Gospel is witnessed for which Glorious Dispensation we contend through all Difficulties making it our Business to promote it in the World and though it be now but as a Cloud of a Span long yet it shall spread and cover the Heavens from whence the Inhabitants of the Earth shall receive Refreshment being bedewed and covered with the Vertue and Righteousness thereof for want of which the World is as a Wilderness being over run with all manner of Impiety under a specious Shew of Religion making up that Whore of Babylon and Mother of Harlots and City filled with all sorts of Abomination against which the Wrath of God is now and will yet be more and more revealed Oh! Compassion to the Souls of Men our Brethren in the Flesh opens our Mouthes with frequent Cryes that they would come out of her lest they be Partakers of her Plagues for knowing the Terrors of the Lord we therefore perswade them to a diligent search after the one Thing necessary which shall never be taken from them I mean the Testimony of Jesus in themselves that they are his by the Washing of Regeneration For with great Sorrow I write it God he knows Unspeakable and Irreparable is the Loss Multitudes have sustained by such Carnal Conceits as their Preachers through Blindness have begot a Belief in them of and a Zeal for as sufficient to Salvation to the suspecting and open decrying under the hateful Names of Error Heresie and Blasphemy the very Soul or Substance of True Christian Religion which only brings to the Inheritance of it For us our Appeal is to God and that Impartial Generation he is now bringing forth who will have an Ear to hear and a Palate to savour and taste the Truth of this Ancient Mystery Christ in them the Hope of Glory at what time these testimonies shall be of value however dis-regarded by the false Jew and Carnal Christian of the present Age. I will end my part herein with our most solemn Confession in the Holy Fear of God That we believe in no other Lord Jesus Christ then he who appeared to the Fathers of old at sundry Times and in divers Manners and in the Fulness of Time took Flesh of the Seed of Abraham and Stock of David became Immanuel God manifest in Flesh through which he conversed in the World preached his Everlasting Gospel and by his Divine Power gathered faithful Witnesses and when his Hour was come was taken of cruel Men his Body wickedly slain which Life he gave to proclaim upon Faith and Repentance a general Ransom to the World the Third Day he rose again and afterwards appeared among his Disciples in whose view he was received up into Glory but returned again fulfilling those Scriptures He that is with you shall be in you I will not leave you comfortless I will come to you again and receive you unto my self John 14. 3 17 18. and that he did come and abide at really in them and doth now in his Children by Measure as without Measure in that Body prepared to perform the Will of God in That He is their King Prophet and High Priest and intercedes and mediates on their behalf bringing in Everlasting Righteousness Peace and Assurance forever into all their Hearts and Consciences to whom be Everlasting Honour and Dominion Amen A few Testimonies in Defence of our Sense B. Jewel Serm. upon Jos 6. 1 2 3. My first Testimony is out of that great English Author and worthy Man B. Jewel who speaking of what Christ was to the Jews in the Wilderness sayes thus Christ had not yet taken upon him a Natural Body yet they did eat his Body He had not yet shed his Blood yet they drank his Blood St. Paul saith all did eat the same Spiritual Meat that is the Body of Christ All did drink of the same spiritual Drink that is the Blood of Christ and that as VERILY AND TRULY AS WE DO NOW and whosoever then did so eat lived forever I think a pregnant and apt Testimony to Christ's being the Christ of God before his Coming in the Flesh But this being the Language of a Bishop though more then an Hundred years old Perhaps his Stomach will not digest it and therefore let 's hear what some considerable Separatists will tell us Joshua Sprig Test to an Approaching Glory Pag. 80 81 86. I beseech you therefore be not offended whenas we say That Christ according to the History of him only and according to his Ministration in the Flesh is but a Form in which God doth appear to us and in which God doth give us a Map of Salvation Thou knowest it not to be thy real Salvation except it be revealed within thee by the Spirit A map serves until a Man knows the Country There is Christ in the Flesh and Christ in the Spirit Christ in the Flesh is the Witness the common Person in whom our Salvation is transacted as in a Figure Christ in the Spirit is the real Truth and Principle of Righteousness and of Life he is the real Salvation within us Again in his Preface he saith That in that Degree that the Spiritual Administration takes place the Fleshly Administration gives place in that Measure that Christ's Second Appearance draws on us we are drawn from under his first Appearance Thus far Joshua Sprig whose Book was licensed as we have formerly said by Joseph Caril a reverend Minister among the Independents C. Goad's Last Testimony pag. 76 77. Destroy the Vail and destroy Death the taking away of the Vail is the taking away of Death Death upon a true Account is nothing but a Vail upon God who is our Life even Christ's Flesh was a Vail Ordinances are Vailes If God be our Life the less we are in these things the more we are in Life T. Collier's Discovery of the New Creation pag. 399. We have had very narrow Apprehensions of Christ and the Manifestation of the Glory of Christ limiting it to the one Man when the Truth is that Christ and all the Saints make up but One Christ 1 Cor. 12. 12. And God as Truly manifesteth Himself in the Flesh of all his as he did in Christ although the Measure of that Manifestation is different What sayes John Faldo to these things Are not we Out-done in our Expressions by profest Ministers and those of the Independent and Baptist Way shall we be stiled Blasphemers that more modestly utter our Belief whilst these Men notwithstanding pass for Orthodox I hope J. Faldo has more Reverence for J. Caryl then to question his Judgment in the License of the first and not so little Respect for the two last as to cry out Heresie Blasphemy c. CHAP. X. Three Scriptures rescured from the false Glosses of our Adversary Joh. 1. 9. Rom. 10. 3. 2