Selected quad for the lemma: father_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
father_n	holy_a	son_n	spirit_n	92,207	5	6.2343	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49979	News of a trumpet sounding in the wilderness, or, The Quakers antient testimony revived, examined and compared with itself, and also with their new doctrine whereby the ignorant may learn wisdom, and the wise advance in their understandings / collected with diligence, and carefully cited from their antient and later writings, and recommended to the serious reading and consideration of all enquiring Christians, by Daniel Leeds.	Leeds, Daniel, 1652-1720.	1697 (1697)	Wing L914; ESTC R11241	77,230	166

Spiritual c. Of this false Doctrine G. K. complained to the Quarterly Meeting at Philadelphia but no Answer could he have nor no blame nor condemnation must pass against their Brother J. Humphery for this false Doctrine tho' its near six Years since these Letters were writ Well Reader This is a Taste of the Doctrine and Faith of our Delaware Quakers though as I said before we hear the contrary Doctrine is now preached in London and thou mayst expect to find much more such like false Doctrine Clashes and Contradictions in the ensuing Treatise And I should have been glad if I could been easie without detecting the same but I have now done it and have it may be the last I shall be concerned in And whatever ma●●e my lot for this I am content knowning my Intentions proceeding herein to be honest and sincere Amen D. L. The Contents THe Introduction page 1. Chap. 1. The Dis-harmony Clashes and Contradictions of the Quakers in both their antient and later Writings p. 4. Chap. 2. Of Opposition at Vnity p. 46. Chap. 3. A short Summary of Citations from the Quakers Books shewing that they deny Jesus of Nazareth to be the Christ p. 52. Chap. 4. Of calling Names for Religion p. 55. Chap. 5. Of Prophecyes p. 59. Chap. 6. Of Infallible Discerning p 61. Chap. 7. Of the Scriptures p. 68. Chap. 8. Of Magistracy and Government p 77. Chap. 9. O Persecution and Prosecution p 81. Chap 10. Friends Sufferings to be recorded by London Meeting p. 91. Chap. 11. Of Swearing p. 97. Chap. 12. Of Fighting Swearing and paying Tythes p. 202. Chap. 13. Of Miracles p. 810 Chap. 14. Of Life and Doctrine p. 113. Chap. 15. Sabbath Day Wheel turned round p. 118. An Appendix p. 121 Of In alli●lity p. 129 O● Temporizing p. 130 Concerning Papists p. 134. A Postscript by way of Question to the Leaders of my Old F●iends p. 137. A Proposition to meet our Adversaries in a publick Meeting concerning the matters contained in this Book p. 140. A Copy of a Letter sent to the Author by a Person of Note p. 142. INTODVCTION EXperience shews That the Quakers have always been exceeding Clamorons against those who have opposed any of their Doctrines especially in those books whose Authors are dead And yet notwithstanding no Christian Professors are mo●e guilty than themselves not only of condemning Doctrines of Persons that are dead as diver of their Books testify but also guilty of Cens●ring Persons too after their decease especially such as have been their opposers For this take one Example from W Penn viz. Reason against Rai●ing p. 163. Tho. Hicks complaining of E. Burroughs for giving ill Names to P. Bennit for asking Questions of the Quakers W. P. makes Thomas Hicks this Reply viz. 'T is Wicked with a witness and like a most irreligions Miscreant indeed God is my Record this day I would not to inherit more Worlds than there are Stars in the Firmament have so violated the Laws of Charity against the most violent of our deceased Opposers Vngodly Traducer whose Envy no doubt has fire enough in it to burn this good mans bones c. Note at what a rate he goes on considering the cause more like a Domineering Ranter then a meek and humble Quaker seeing himself is really guilty of Censuring and inveighing at ● Perrot one of there deceased Opposers as may be seen in his Book call'd Judas and the Jews And yet I know not that he got so much by so doing as to pay one Debt and much less so many Worlds as there are Stars in the Firmament but having not the Book at hand to cite particulars I 'll set down what John ●ayl● and Jo. Feild Brethren of W. P say of the said Perrot after his decease p. 9. of their Loving Invitation viz. J. Perrot say they became a Troubler and Opposer and lost the Vnity of Friends in general and so was cut off from the Vine Christ and dyed miserably being in debt as the say See now here they censure one of there deceased Opposers to Damnation Behold the self-condemnation of these men their want of charity to the deceased Where has any of their Opposers been so Vncharitable to any of them after death especially But my present business is not at all about the Dead neither about Men nor Things that are Dead but against confused Doctrines now living viz. owned patronized and justified by men now living as witness the late general account given in the City Merurcy or News Book by the 24 Quakers at London And W. Bayly p. 568. opposing some Doctrine of a Quaker who was dead says As for that which is dead I have little to say one way or other I look not sayes he at the Person of any Living or Dead in that respect but it is that that lives that makes the difference And just as W Bayly sayes so it is For those citations following are the Doctrines of those now living tho' some of the first Authors be dead And my care has been to cite the Passages so large as to deliver the plain and full sense and meaning of their Authors to all intelligent Readers as they will find who please to examine and compare the same impartially But if through my distance from the Press some Errors or Escapes should pass Uncorrected I desire the candid Readers excuse or pardon seeing none are designed Lastly Whereas some Preachers of late to ey●se such confused Doctrines as follow tell the People That 't is easie to find seeming Contradictions in the Scriptures And why then may it not be so in our Friends Books To which I say they themselves in their Books give the reason why 't is so with the Scriptures which reason cannot hold as to their Books for W. Penn takes up several pages in his Rejoynder to shew to J. Faldo the Uncertainty of the Scriptures bringing Reasons to Prove them not the same as given forth but altered and corruptud so Joan Whitehead to the same effect in Refuge fixed also G. Whitehead in divers Books and S. Fisher at large in Rusticus c. all which shall be shewed hereafter Now this cannot be alledged of their Books because we have the first Impression of them and therefore they cannot be altered or corrupted So that this is too short a cover for this Mystry of Confusion which I desire all sober Readers well to Note Having thus premised shall now proceed to note some of the Contradictions and Clashes of the Quakers as I find them set down in their antient and latter Writings with some Observations on the same CHAP. I. The Dis-harmony Clashes and Contradictions of the Quakers in both their antient and latter Writings Numb I. SAn●y Foundat p. 13. W. P. saith Since the Father is God and the Son is God the Spirit 〈…〉 unless the Fathers 〈◊〉 and holy Ghost are 3 distirct Nothings 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be ●●e● distinct S. ●●●ances

consequently three distinct Gods Qrs. Plainness p. 2● G. W. saith That the Distinction of the Father and Son are not only Nominal but Real Note here if G. W's Real distinction do not make the Father Son distinct Substances But W. Penn tells him they are distirct nothings Reconcile these who can Numb II. Quakers Plainness p. 24. G. W. saith we own that the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father And also that the Son is the mighty God the Everlasting Father the Prince of Peace Sandy Foundation p. 14. W. Penn saith If the only God is the Father and Christ be the only God then is Christ the Father which is Ridiculous and Shamefull Note how W P. calls his Brother Whitehead's Doctrine Ridiculous Shamefull Numb III. Qrs. plainness p. 19. G W. there declares that they cannot deviate from Scripture Phrase in their Creed For untill you bring us plain Scripture saith he that saith the humane Nature is the Christ which phrase is conscientiously scrupled we must rather patiently bear your censure than deviate from Scripture Language in our Creed But in p. 18. G. W. sayes Have we not plainly and often confest than the divine Nature or word cloathed with the most holy Manhood was and is the Christ Note cloathed with the most holy Manhood is not Scripture Language on phrase so that here he deviates from Scripture Language in his Creed in the very next page Pray what is this but Hypocrisie Numb IV. Sandy Founda p. 22. W. Penn saith Since Christ could not pay what was not his own Debt it follows that in the payment of his own the case still remains equally grievous since the debt is not hereby absolved or forgmen but transfered only Divi. of Christ Ans ●● T. D. p. 16. How false and Blasphemous says G. W. this charge is against Christ I appeal to all sober Professors of Christianity viz. That when God required Satisfaction of Christ is was due from Christ. Now observe That as before W. P. Renders Geo. Whitehead's Doctrine Ridiculous Shamefull so here G. W. renders W. Penns Doctrine basphemous for holding that Christ had a Debt of his own to satisfy to God as W. P. more laregly affirms p. 22. of his Sandy Foundat Therefore as G. W. in his Quakers plainness p 20 says Pray you ●aptists agree upon a consistent Creed that you intend to stand by so now the Bap●●sts may say Pray you Quakers agree upon a consistent Creed that you intend to stand by c. Again I cannot but observe that though G. Whitehead as before pretends that they concientiously scruple to deviate from Scripture Language or phrase yet I have not met with one Book of controversie that G. W. has written but he himself diviates from Scripture phrase herein Likewise in Divinity of Christ by G. W. and G. Fox they begin in the Epistle with Commanding and charging Professors to bring express Scripture for their Doctrine saying whether do the Scriptures speak of three Persons in the Godhead in these express words Let us see where it is written Com● do not shuffle for we are resolved the Scripture shall buffet you about And where doth the Scripture speak of a Humane Nature of Christ in Heaven And where doth the Scripture say the Soul is part of mans Nature Give us plain Scripture without adding or diminishing Come let us see Chapter and verse c. Now may not the Professors say Come G. W. Come Quakers where doth the Scripture say the Distinction of Father and Son is not only Nominal but Real in these express words Let us see where it is written Come do not shuffle And where doth the Scripture speak or say the divine Nature cloathed with the most holy Manhood was and is the Christ And where doth th● Scrip-say these words The Light within every man Give us plain express Scripture for this your first and grand Principle of all without adding or diminishing Come let us see Chapter and Verse seeing you pretend you cannot deviate from Scripture phrase in your Creed Besides if G. W. does not hereby mean deceit and hypocrisie for what end does he pretend they cannot own this or that in their Creed if it be expressed in plain Scripture seeing they so often and plainly testify that the Scripture is not their Rule but the light within is their rule in Faith But for Professors to call for Scripture is but according to their principles because they own it for their rule Numb V. Sandy Founda p. 15. W. P. saith In the fullness of time God sent his Son who so many hundred years since in PERSON testified the virtue c. Quakers plainness p. 24. G. W saith The Title PERSON is too low and unscriptural to give to the Christ of God Numb VI. E. Burroughs p. 142. J. Bu●jo● said How are they deceived who own Christ no otherwayes then as he was before the world began E. B. Replys Here then hast discovered thy sel● more plainly Did not the Saints own Christ Jesus the same yesterday to day and for ever for Salvation Quakers vindication p. 16. by G. Bishop We distinguish between Christ which was before the Foundation of the World and his being within the true Light the Body which he took of the Virgin c. Note here G. B. owns Christ otherwayes For Salvation than as he was before the world began for he makes 3 distinctions of Ch●ist Numb VII R. Huberthorns works p. 20. Preist says Christ himself was not capable of Faith and Repentance R. H. Replys Here I Charge thee to be a Lyar and a Slanderer for he was capable of Faith and Repentance Divinity of Christ Ans to T. D. p. 22. Christ he never did nor could sin says G. Whitehead Note does not G. W. here hold Christ not capable of sin And how then was he capable of Repentance Numb VIII Quakers Challenge by Solomon Eccl●s George Fox whose Name says he thou art ne● worthy to take in thy Mouth who is a Prophet indeed It was said of Christ that he was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not so it may be said of this true Prophet whom John said he was not But thou wilt feel this Prophet one day as heavy as a Milstone upon thee c. G. W. excuses this in his serious search p. 58. Book call'd Ishmael c. p. 9. by G. W. One said It is all one to say the Scripture faith and God saith G. W. Replys Thou Blasphemous Beast dost thou make no difference between the Scripture and God! Here let all that reads this see thy Blasphemy Note upon what occasions they revile others for Blasphemy But G. W. excuses that real Blasphemy in his Brother S. E. and only sayes 'T is a little failure in syntax But let G. Whitehead tel me If a man should affirm it is all one to say His Book Ishmael saith and the

not mortal So that VV. Penn in his Address to Protestants vaunts at the Priests for their Clink Clank And S. Fisher mocks at them for their SO NO But the Priests may now face about and vaunt at the Quakers for their Clink Clank and mock at them for their NO SO. Therefore behold the ingenious Figure of NO SO with some Verses that Sam. Fisher inserts in pag. 773. of Rusticus which are now pertinently truly and justly to be turned back again upon these Quakers viz. Sometimes it s this sometimes it s that Sometimes it s this and this and that Sometimes it s either this or that Sometimes it s neither this nor that One while it looks like SO not NO Another while like NO not SO One way it seems or SO or NO Another way nor NO nor SO Some ways it shews both SO and NO So 't is a meer Endless NO and SO. You have observed before the Clashes Contradictions Sayings Gainsayings false Doctrines of these men one contradicting the other and many times the same man contradicting himself So pray observe once more how G. Whitehead dances the Rounds as S. Fisher says in his Appendix to J. Owen For in his Introduction to Divinity of Christ he defines a Person to be a Man and a Man to be a Person And in Qrs. plainness p. 19. confesses Jesus Christ to be a Man but not a Person p. 23.24 Again That Jesus Christ is a Man whose glorious Body in Heaven is not a humane or mans Body yet as in Numb 35. declares it to be the same Body that dyed and yet deny● Christ to have the Body of Man Thus as S. Fisher says p. 773. Now it is One thing then Another And now and then nor t 'one nor t'other Numb 40. G F's Great My●t p 206 131 250. If Christ th●● crucified be not within that Christ that 's risen be not within If 〈◊〉 are all Reproba●es The Apostles preached Christ that 's crucified within and not another for the ●●the is the Antichrist And thou sayst thou are saved by Christ without the● and so hast recorded ●oy self a Reprobate A●● 〈◊〉 in the fancy that he out of the state of witnessing Christ that suffered within them and rose again Answ to Dr. Lancaster They own Christ that was crucified without the Gates did visibly ascend into Heaven and answ to W Harworth is in Heaven in a Body of Flesh circumscribed and not in every place where God is Note While they justifie their old Doctrine and the new not being free but streined out we must take it as G. W. tells F. B. That they may intend the same only now se●●● cause Otherwise to word it Numb 41. G W's Light Life of Christ p. 58. he there defend this Passage viz The Blood that was forced out of him Christ by the Souldier after he was dead was no more than the Blood of another Saint Ans to Dr. Lancaster The whole sacrifice of Christ whereof his Blood outwardly shed was a part was of great price with God for mans Redemption Note the Contradiction or the Craft Numb 42. Ibid. Light and Life p. 38. The Quakers see no need of directing men to the Type for the Anti-Type viz. neither to the outward Temple nor to Jerusalem either Jesus Christ or his blood knowing that neither the Righteousness of Faith nor the Word of it doth so direct And where do the Scriptures say the Blood was there shed for Justification and that men must be directed to Jerusalem to it Ans to Dr. Lancaster We sincerely believe in Jesus Christ as born of the Virgin Mary Christs Blood that was shed without the Gates of Jerusalem with the whole Sacrifice of himself both Soul Body was a true Propitiation through Faith c. Note here G. W. s●●h opposing his Old Doctrine now sees cause to word the matter Otherways Numb 43. J. W's Refuge fixt p. 90. I have several times saith he denyed that Christ hath now a Body of Flesh and Bones circumscript or limitted in that Heaven which is out of every man on Earth Let these 2 Brother Whiteheads reconcile their Doctrine Ans to W. Harworth as above at Numb 34 35 G. W. declares the same body of Christ which was put to death ascerced into Heaven and is still in being though made spiritual yet a circumscribed Body not in every place where God is Numb 44. G. W's Light Life p. 39 47. As for those Expressions saith he God Man being born of Mary we do not find them in the Scriptures nor do we read that Mary was the Mother of God but in the Popes Canons c. What Non-sence and Vnscriptural Language is this to tell of God being to Creator with the Father or that God had Glory with God! doth not this imply two Gods or that God had a Father Ans to Dr. Lancaster as above We believe in Jesus Christ both as he is true God and perfect Man and a● he was conceived by the holy ghost born of the Virgin Mary Note here G. W. in contradiction to himself owns Mary to be the Mother of God-Man and God to be his Father And if he implys two Gods thereby I cannot help it seeing he now sees cause so to word the matter Numb 45. G. W's Qrs. plainness p ●9 That Jesus Christ is come in the flesh That he is God-man c. Note how inconsistent G. W. is with himself he Quarrels with the word God-man before but here he uses it Numb 46. G. F's Great Mystry p 289 God was in Christ and they are one the Creator the Father in the Son and the Son in the Father and Christ in you and God in Christ the Creator And in Qrs. plainness p. 24. G. W there says The Son is co-worker with the Father Light and Life as before what Non-sense is this says G. W. to tell of God being co-Creator with the Father Note Does not G. W. here accuse both G. F. and himself also with Non-sense for what 's the difference between Co-worker and Co-Creator Numb 47. Paper against J. ● London 6 m. 1670 And we also testifie That ● any Person whatsoever shall act or speak any thing that is evil under pretence of a motion from the Spirit of God we utterly deny that Motion to be of God G F's Great Mystry p. 77. And as for any being moved of the Lord to take your i.e. Priests Hour-glass from you by the eternal Power it is owned Note here the Father G. Fox Justifies what is Fellony by the Law But his London Children are so bold as to controul him Numb 48. If Pennington's Que. p 33 Now the Scriptures do expresly distinguish between Christ the Garment which he wore between him that came and the body in which he came between the Substance which was vailed and the Vail which vailed it there was plainly HE and the Body in-which HE came this we certainly know and can

the Debt of our sins as he is God because then the Father Spirit being God they also pay the Debt Nor not as Man he being Finite as above Nor not as God Man as W. P. in that page expresly affirms A Little of G. Whiteheads help here might do well to word the matter so as to reconcile this Doctrine of W. P. and G. F. Numb 56. R. B's Apology p. 95. Wherefore as we believe he Christ was a true and real Man so we also believe that he continues so to be glorified in the Heavens in Soul and Body Note W. P. says as above Christ as Man was finite viz. came to an end But here R.B. says he continues a real man in Soul Body so is not finite Chuse which of these you will believe Numb 57. G F's Gr. Mys●ry p. 90 Priest says There is a kind of Infiniteness in the Soul but it cannot be infiniteness in it self G F. answers Is not the Soul without beginning coming out from God returning into God again Note W. P. as above holds the Soul to be properly the man And here according to G F. this Man is without b●ginning if no beginn●●g then no end which is not only Infinite ●ut also Eternal And yet Mark the Confusion W. P. before denys the Man Christ to be Infinite Numb 58. G. W's Div. of Christ p. 27. The God whom we serve and b●lieve in is infini●e the only wise God and nothing relating to him or his being finite Sandy Foundat p. 20. W. P. there calls the Man Christ The Finite Impotent Creature Note the Clash unless the Man Christ be not relating to God Here I cannot but take notice that tho' W. Penn blasphemously calls the Man Christ the finite imp●tent Creature yet he afterwards in his Reas against Rail a above and in other Books calls his Body a holy Body as if he thought that way to salve and excuse his former gross Doctrine or at least to hood-wi●k his Readers so as to let them see that he has so reverent esteem of Christ as to call his Body a holy Body after he ha●● so irreverently call'd his whole Man the finite impotent Creature Again I observe W.P. to be one with his 24 Brethren that in the City Mercury or News Book owns and and defends these sayings first in the Battledoor viz. All Languages are to me sayes G. F. no more but Dust who was before Languages were Next in J. P●s Collection p. 199. But to the end of all D●sput●s and Argume●ts I am come for before they were I AM says James Par●ell To Pre-exist is to ●ave a being before where 't is plain the declare themselves at least to pre-exist and yet W. P. denys the Apostles to pre-exist for in his Rejoynder p. 299. he says Paul did not pre-exist Christ did Now is not this a setting thems●lves above the Apostles and equal with Christ For Christ pre-existed G. Fox and Ja. Parnell pre-existed but Paul did not pre-exist says VV. P. Nay further I find in pag. 1. of the Book of the two women at Malta D. Baker is not only for having his Friends the Quakers to pre-exist but also declares them to be Eternal saying O ye Eternal and blessed Ones whilest the man CHRIST must be calld The finite impotent Creature by this high and elevated dust and ashes VV. Penn. I shall now return to insert a few more Contradictory Clashes and so haste to another head Numb 59. W. P's Rejoynder p. 13 That Christ his coming was but Mark but to bring the world to a more improved knowledge and large enjoyment of that divine Power Wisdom Life and Righteousness which former Ages had comparatively but an obscure sight and imperfect sence of And p. 296-300 he justifies this saying viz. That which Christ took upon him was but a Garment even the flesh blood of our Nature which is of an earthly perishing Nature Truths Principles by J. Crook If Christ had not ●yed Man must have pe●ished in sin this being the way found out by God to recover him Note Here 's one Christian he grants the merit of Christs coming and Death But W.P. makes the benefit of his coming to be no more but to shew man more plain what he saw before as through a glass perhaps thinks he mends ●he matter by often calling the Body A holy Body whilst yet he renders that earthly perishing Numb 60. G. F's Gr. Mystry p. 222. Priest says C●rt●● is wit●out his Saints in respect of his Bodily presence G. F. answers H●w then are they of his flesh and his bone W. P. Chr. Quaker p. 97. The Body of Christ is not so much as in any one Note This W P. is still clashing against G. F. almost on every hand Numb 61. W. P's Address to Protestants p. 119. Let us saith he but soberly consider what Christ is and we shall the better know whether Moral men are to be reckoned Christians What is Christ but Meekness Justice Mercy Patience Charity Virtue in Perfection Note Tho' W. P. Allegori●es Christ and makes him nothing but Virtues yet his Brother G. W. tells W. H●r●orth as above ●hat Christ is something else viz. a MAN consisting of Spirit Soul body the same Body as dyed or he only words the matter so to deceive the People Observe now That tho' these two mens Books quarrel about Doctrine yet they agre● in praising one another for G VV. in Qrs. plainnes● p 5 calls VV. P. A sincere hearted and zealous Man and VV. P in one of his Books does as ●uch for G. VV. And 't is abundance of Books these two men have written yea more by hal● than ever I have seen nor do I desire to see them for truly I find Confusion enough in those I have seen yea more than I intend to ●emonstrate at this time here being enough to shew the reason why they have not profited the People at all W Penn says Christ left nothing in writing Chr. Quak. p 114 Christ wrote no Books But they have not followed his Example in this and yet he says Christ was their Example But Note further tho' W. P. will have Moral men to be Christians yet R. Habberthorn denys that Christ o● Gods gift is obtained by moral means and in p 33. he calls them Lyars that so affirm So let the Reader judge who is the Lyar in this case Again I cannot but mind W. P 's devised distinction and unscriptural Expression if it were no worse in calling the Man Christ The FINITE and IMPOTENT Creature and yet G. VV. in his Introduction to Divinity of Christ says We judge that such Expressions and words as the holy ghost taught the Apostles and holy Men mentioned in the Scriptures are most meet to speak of GOD and CHRIST and not the words of mans VVisdom and devised Distinctions since the Apostles days Now is not here a doubl● face they carry in seeming