Selected quad for the lemma: blood_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
blood_n sin_n wash_v water_n 6,760 5 6.6239 4 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A54154 The invalidity of John Faldo's vindication of his book, called Quakerism no Christianity being a rejoynder in defence of the answer, intituled, Quakerism a new nick-name for old Christianity : wherein many weighty Gospel-truths are handled, and the disingenuous carriage of by W.P. Penn, William, 1644-1718. 1673 (1673) Wing P1305; ESTC R24454 254,441 450

There are 4 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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
Christ's eating the Supper with his Disciples just before his Death and their breaking Bread together soon after his Death Not a Year whereas the Pope showed not himself till near six hundred Years after I cannot see Friendly Reader how much more criminal I made my Adversary by charging him with saying in our Name The Bread and VVine Christ blessed is the Invention of the Pope then he hath made himself by his own Saying That we call the Lords Supper eaten soon after his Death the Popes Invention unless he should deny the Latter to be the same Sort of Supper with the former In short We cannot but repute this an Injury too apparent for John Faldo's utmost Invention to cover But that he may not suffer the Imputation of Forgery at least a very gross Perversion he thus braveth me Reply p. 70. If Pen dare deny it to be in W. Smith's Book which Iquoted three or four times over in pag. 39. I shall prove him a Deceiver to all that will but read it W. S. answers to this Question I would know Father how it is concerning these things called Ordinances as Baptism Bread and Wine which are much used in their Worship Answ Why Child as for those things they rose from the Pope's Invention Rejoynder This Citation as rankly and partially as he hath put down doth not prove that we account the Lord's Supper either as it was eaten by Christ and his Disciples before his Death or by his Disciples after his Death to be the Pope's Invention How can it since we know the Pope's Date to have been so many hundred Years after that Practice His Citation must therefore be understood of such a Baptism and such a Supper as the Apostate Church hath presumed to practice and that I put not a fairer Gloss then his own Answer will allow observe these Words and the whose Practice of those things AS THEY use them had their Institution by the Pope and were never SO ordained of Christ strongly implying that what was of Christ's Ordination was not of the Pope's Invention and Institution consequently That the Lord's Supper was neither a popish Invention nor Institution which is yet plainer from his following VVords For he did not ordain sprinkling Water in a Child's Face or to make a Sign of the Cross in his Forehead nor God-Fathers and God-Mothers to undertake for it Neither did he ordain Bread and VVine to be SO or after that Manner used and received So that nothing can be plainer then that his Reflection lies against their Manner of practizing and using them not against the Things themselves as at any time practiced by Christ or his Disciples Followers Therefore he is quite beside the Truth in telling the VVorld that he doth but apply these VVords Pope's Invention to the Name that is Lord's Supper which the Quakers apply to the Thing since we so clearly distinguish betwen Baptism the Lord's Supper Name and Thing and these Practices and Usages of them which have risen since the Apostacy Now it rests with thee Friendly Reader to pass Judgment which of us two hath acted the Deceiver to leave out a great many more of his hard VVords he that affirmed VV. Smith called that Baptism and Lord's Supper which was in Use some time as well after Christ's Death and Ascension as before the Pope's Inventions or I that affirmed and from VV. Smith's own Book have expresly proved that there was no such thing said as Primitively practiced but only as they have been since abused by the Apostate Church For the Supper it self I refer the Reader to the sixteenth Chapter of my Answer and shall only say at this Time that as it was a Commemoration or Remembrance of Christ to the Disciples who were at that Day so weak in Faith as Luke 24. 11. Mary Magdalen's news about Christ's Resurrection seemed to them as Idle Tales yet that the Service and consequently the Institution of it were of as they came to witness him the Evangelical Supper of Passover to their Souls and that we therefore discontinue it First Because the false Church hath made Market with her imitating that primitive Practice drawn the Minds of People abroad from the Heavenly Bread of Life which is only to be received within and hath been shedding so much Blood about it rendring it and Water Baptism the Seal of Christianity thereby puffing up People to believe that of themselves which they are not Next we have the Testimony of God's Spirit that he is withdrawn from such Observations that have been so much insisted on and magnified in the World Lastly and eminently we discontinue it because Christ is become unto our Souls that very Thing which it was most truly and properly the Sign of to wit the Heavnely Bread and Passover which nourisheth the Soul unto Eternal Life Where by the Way it must not be forgotten how perversly he wrongs Christ and Holy Scripture who turns this Passage Do this till I come after this strange Manner The Lord's Supper is a Remembrance of Christ's Death past NOT TO COME Rep. p. 71. wherein first he makes as if there were a Death to come Next Instead of exhorting People to look for his Coming until which he bid his Disciples practice it he turns back their Eyes from that Expectation and makes the Sign wholy to have Reference to what was past and not what was to come thereby seeking to perpetuate his Absence and bar out his Appearance implyed in these Words till I come which ends the Absence during which the Institution lasteth For the plain English of it framed into an Argument is this The Supper is to remember Christ's Death that is past but that will be alwayes past therefore it ought to be alwayes so remembred The like may be said upon the Word Remembrance for if it ought to be practised because of remembring Christ's Death then forever because his Death ought never to be forgotten Thus it perverts the Text in that it makes not the outward Supper to cease upon his Coming as John 14. 23. Rev. 3. 20. which is the Evangelical Supper till whose Coming Christ bid his Disciples do it But to continue upon the Score of remembring Christ's Death only which as I said before ought never to be forgotten is consequently to continue it upon Institution forever I shall only leave two things with my Reader and so proceed to the next Chapter first That from our discontinuing the Practice of these outward and temporary Observances J. Faldo concludes our absolute and general Denyal of them 2ly Because some of our Friends have denyed rejected and termed Popish the long Abuse of these Things he makes no Difficulty of charging us in so many Words with calling Water-Baptism and the Lord's Supper as laid down in Scripture and primitively practised Popish Inventions c. God if he please make this Man sensible of his notorious Injustice towards us CHAP. VIII Of the Doctrine of
they may come to receive the Benefit thereof for without that necessary Condition it will be impossible to obtain Remission of Sins though it be so generally promulgated thereby To conclude As in my Answer at large so here in short I say Justification may be taken in a two-fold Sense Compleatly and Incompleatly or rather thus compleat Justification hath two parts the first is not imputing past Sins or accounting a true Penitant as Righteous or clear from the Guilt of past Sin as if he had never Sinned through the Remission which God declared and sealed up to all such in the Blood of his Son and thus far Righteousness as imputed goes and is the first part or Justification begun The compleat or last part of compleat Justification is the Cleansing of the Conscience and Regenerating the Mind from the Nature Power and In-dwelling of Sin by the effectual working of the Heavenly Power of Christ and bringing into the Heart and establishing his Everlasting Righteousness in the room thereof Some Scriptures considered relating to this Doctrine To the first part belong such Scriptures as these Isa 53. 11. He shall bear their Iniquities 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is He shall bear away their Iniquities as did the Scape Goat figuratively under the Law or That God would declare his remitting or passing over the Sin that was past and. that he would be in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them Also Rom. 4. 5. But to him that worketh not but believeth on him that justified the Vngodly his Faith is counted for Righteousness that is God acquitted upon Repentance and Faith in his Promise such as have lived in a Course of Vngodliness For no present Work how good soever can justifie any Man from the Condemnation which is due for the Guilt of Sin that is past So that justifying the Ungodly in this place is pardoning the Ungodly and being so pardoned upon Faith in the Promise of God is accounted for Righteousness or as if the Person pardoned had never sinned and this appears from the 7th and 8th verses Blessed are they whose Sins are forgiven and whose Iniquities are Covered Again Chap. 5. 6. For when we were yet wit hout Strength Christ in due time dyed for the Vngodly and verse 8. But God commended his Love towards us in that while we were yet Sinners Christ dyed for us That is Christ laid down his Life to reclaim Sinners and to declare the Righteousness of God for the Forgiveness of the Sin that is past to all Ungodly and Sinful Men that turn from the Evil of their Wayes by unfeigned Repentance it was done in and by Christ for all Ungodly Men but not to the Benefit of any without Repentance Not that people should go on in Sin but by so recommending of his Love and sealing such Glad-Tidings with his own Blood to allure and engage them from their present Course of Sin 1 John 4. 19. He first loved us men must not therefore continue in Sin that Grace that is Forgiveness may abound God forbid Rom. 6. 1. The last considerable Place is in the second Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 5. 21. For he hath made him Sin for us who knew no Sin That is He was made a Sacrifice for the remitting or passing over of the Sin that was past for such as repent and believe that they might be made the Righteousness of God or rather accounted Righteous in the Sight of God as if they had never committed Sin by not imputing or forgiving the Sin that was past This Sence the two fore-going Verses confirm to wit that God was in Christ reconciling the World unto himself not imputing their Trespasses unto them and hath committed unto them the Word of of Reconciliation Now then we are Ambassadors for Christ as though God did beseeeh you through us We pray you in Christ's Stead that you would be reconciled to God verse 19 20. agreeing with Rom. 3. 25. Whom God hath set forth to be a Propit●ation through Faith in his Blood to declare his Righteousness for the Remission or passing over of Sins that are past through the Forbearance of God which is neither a rigid Satisfaction for nor a Justification from Sins that are past present and to come as a late shallow VVriter in his Preface to the Hartford self-confuting Pamphlet idlely and falsely called the Quaker converted would have us believe but an acquitting from or remitting of past Sin upon Faith and Amendment of Life which makes up that only imputative Righteousness that the Scripture holds forth or we can allow of The Scriptures that belong to the second Part of this Doctrine which makes up compleat Justification are such as these Keep thee far from a false Matter the Innocent Righteous slay thou not for I will not justifie the wicked Exod. 23. I. Lord who shall ABIDE in thy TABERNACLE who shall DWELL in thy HOLY HILL He that WALKETH UPRIGHTLY and WORKETH RIGHTEOUSNESS and SPEAKETH THE TRUTH IN HIS HEART Psalm 15. 1 2. When a Righteous man turns away from his Righteousness for his Iniquity that he has done shall he dye Again when the wicked Man turneth away from his Wickedness and doth that which is Lawful or Right he shall save his Soul Ezek. 18. 26 27. Not every one that sayeth unto me Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that DOTH the Will of my Father which is in Heaven Math. 7. 21. Vnless a Man be born again he cannot enter into the Kingdom of God John 3. 3 5. If ye keep my Commandment ye shall abide in my Love John 15. 10. For not the Hearers of the Law are justified but the Doers of the Law shall be justified Rom. 2. 13. If ye live after the Flesh ye shall dye but if ye through the Spirit do mortifie the Deeds of the Body ye shall live for as many as are led by the Spirit of God are the Sons of God Rom. 18. 13 14. That the Offering of the Gentiles might be acceptable being sanctified by the Holy Ghost Rom. 14. 16. But this is the Will of God even your Sanctification 1 Thes 43. Because God hath from the Beginning chosen you to Salvation through Sanctification of the Spirit and Belief of the Truth 2 Thes 2. 13. Was not Abraham our Father JUSTIFIED by WORKS when he offered Isaac his Son upon the Altar Ye see then how that by Works a Man is justified and not by Faith only Jam. 2. 22 24. In all these weighty Passages there is nothing more clear then that Sanctification both ushers in and compleats Justification First In that no Man can have right to Remission of Sins but upon Vnfeigned Repentance and True Faith begotten in the Heart which is as well the Beginnings of Sanctification as Introduction to Justification 2 dly That though we grant as before at large Remission of Sins not
Why did Christ say I thank Thee O Father Lord of Heaven and Earth that thou hast hid these things from the Wise and Prudent and revealed them unto Babes if they are discoverable by humane Reasoning for Babes are ignorant of that Art yet out of the Mouth of Babes and Sucklings c. The Apostle's Question 1 Cor. 1. 20. was very impertinent if J. Faldo may be of Authority who said Where is the Wise Where is the Scribe Where is the Disputer c. for this implies an Exclusion of all those Arts Sciences and Natural Gifts from any Capacity to reveal the deep Things of God shut up in the Divine Principle of Life Besides W. S's Words imply a Clouded Understanding and degenerated and therefore Uncapable J. F. must either intend by his Derision that he thinks W. S. deserves to be hiss'd for denying the Knowledge of Divine Things to be attainable by the Degenerated Understanding of Man or sanctified If the first All may have Cause to abhor his False Doctrine If the latter I would know which way that can be without the Divine Principle of Life This abundantly manifests J. Faldo's unsavory Spirit and proves him to be ignorant of the Way Method Work of God in his Children When the Natural Man by his Reason can know Christ he may know his Sheep the Scriptures and the Power of God and not before but because it is impossible in Reasoning or Arguing pro and con by the utmost Strength and Search of Natural Abilities to know Christ but by the Revelation of the Spirit of God alone as hath been abundantly proved therefore William Smith's words are sound and weighty and J. Faldo's carnal and prophane showing himself to be a Mocker of the Priviledges and Mysteries of the Gospel but what else may we expect from one that walks after the Lusts of his own vain Mind having not the Spirit Jude 18 19. Yet that we may manifest how inconsistent he is with himself as that he can't write against us but he must write for us take this Passage out of Quakerism No Christianity which ought alwayes to begin his Books against us upon this subject as it ends this Chapter of mine Those Gospel-Illuminations are beyond the utmost reach of our Natural Faculties of the Mind though sanctified and therefore it is said to be 2 Tim. 3. 16. Divinely inspired It is not produced in the Exercise of the Rational Faculties the Soul is purely passive or receptive therein and is to those Illuminations as the Wax is to the Seal CHAP. XV. His several gross Miscarriages summ'd and further observed I. Of his Over-looking my Answer and Arguments OF Twenty Two Chapters in his Reply there is not one of them in which he hath not wilfully declined inserting my Answer and Arguments and only flutters about pecks and scratches at some part that is of least moment to the Reason of the Point perhaps some Rebuke or Reflection upon the ill use he makes of our Friends Writings particularly pag. 9 22 23 24 30 31 35 53 56 57 71 73 82 83 85 86 90 92 93. How is it possible my Arguments should be conquered when they were never encounter'd I was never yet so unjustly dealt withal in this Particular by any Adversary of his Pretences II. Of his drawing False Inferences Where he ventures at any time to insert any considerable part of my Answer he is sure to draw some Inference that may bring an Odium my words never deserved I could particularize at large pag. 6 13 17 18 31 35 41 42 47 49 71 72 73 74 75 85 86 87 88 89 90 91. but take these following for the rest 1. From Edw. Burroughs Reflecting upon Peoples imagining God to be confined to some place beyond the Stars he implies they deny Christ's Manhood Vindic. pag. 6. 2. From our not styling the Scriptures the Word but Words of God he infers that we deny the Scriptures First Book p. 18 19. 3. From our Asserting the Doctrine of Inspiration and Certainty of what we are inspired either to write or speak he infers not only our Equalling with but preferring what we speak and write before the Scriptures First Book pag. 40. Vind. p. 17. 4. From our Condemning the Imitation of any of the Holy Men of God of former Ages in particular Cases without they are thereunto required by the Spirit of the Lord he infers that Commands of God in Scriptures are no Commands unless we think so and that it is no Sin to break all Commands in the Bible if our Consciences can but be so blinded as to tell us it is no Sin Vind. p. 34 35. 5. From our Asserting that there is no knowing of God but by the Spirit and that Mens Apprehensions of God and his Work in the Souls of his People are but the Endeavours and Effects of the Wisdom of the Flesh he infers that we oppose the Spirit and the Scriptures nay that we reject and scorn them Vind. pag. 41 42 47. 6. From our denying a Carnal Worldly Mercenary Ministry Lifeless Prayers a meer formal Church Preaching and not by the Spirit and W. Smith's saying that the present Use of Bread and Wine and Water called Baptism and the Supper as they are used at this Day are no other then Popish and Humane he infers that the Quakers deny the Gospel-Ministry Gospel-Prayer Gospel-Church Gospel-Preaching and that we CALL Baptism and the Lord's Supper as PRACTISED IN THE FIRST AGE AFTER CHRIST the Popes Inventions c. Vind. from p. 49. to p. 71. Oh Injurious 7. From our reproving People for feeding in an Unconverted State upon the meer Report of what Christ hath done without them and depending thereon from our asserting that Justification taken for Remission goes not before Repentance which is an inward Work much less that Men can be compleatly justifi'd or made inwardly just but by the washing of the Word of Regeneration Sanctification of the Eternal Spirit this Man dares to infer Our Denyal yea our Vndervalue and that to the Degree of Blasphemous Contempt of the Transactions of Christ at Jerusalem Vind. p. 71 72 73 74. 8. From J. Penning asking If outward Blood would cleanse the Conscience from indwelling Sin he infers that we deny all Benefit by the Blood of Christ shed upon the Cross for the declaring of Remission of Sins Rom. 3. 25. First Book 2. Part p. 46 47. Vind. 77. 9. From our chusing to call that Body God prepared in which to do his Will the Body of Christ rather then the Christ of God And from our asserting God to be that Light which enlightens every Man and that the Soul of Man had something of the Life of God in its primitive Perfection he makes no more ado but concludes First That we deny the Christ of God 2dly That we make the Measure of Light in every Man the Eternal God thereby confining him to Man's Soul And lastly That the Soul of Man is