Selected quad for the lemma: soul_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
soul_n	body_n	good_a	sin_n	10,890	5	4.5531	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A57953	Quakerism is paganism, by W.L.'s confession; in a book directed to Mr. N.L. citizen of London: or, Twelve of the Quakers opinions, called by W.L. The twelve pagan principles, or opinions; for which the Quakers are opposed to Christians examined and presented to William Penn. By W. R. a lover of Christianity.	Russel, William, d. 1702.; Roberts, Daniel, 1658-1727. aut	1674 (1674)	Wing R2358; ESTC R219761	57,659	96

of Gold for a pound of Clay 1. If the same body shall not be raised as the Quakers say then he cannot mean the glorious form of this body which shall be made incorruptible glorious and full of majesty like to the glorious Body of Christ with which they shall shine forth as the Brightness of the Sun in the Kingdom of their Father Phil. 3. 21. Matth. 13. 43. 2. If he means That this body which goes into the grave shall rot there and not be raised and reunited to the same soul But that instead thereof some other matter shall be formed into a body and possest with the soul This is not to be allowed for it 's highly rational That if any body be raised and re-united to the soul it should be the same body because the Scripture declares That the end of the Resurrection of Man is that he might receive a reward according to the deeds done in the body 2 Cor. 5. 10. and that the Righteous shall go into life Eternal Matth. 25. ult Seeing it was the same body in which these good deeds were done why should not the same body receive the Reward together with the same soul why must there be a new another body to enjoy it made of they know not what 3. If this be so Then whether it be not most absurd to imagine seeing some men shall be damned that one body should commit the sin and another body that never sinned should suffer Eternal punishment in Hell for those sins another committed This is to condemn the innocent and acquit the guilty Both which are an Abomination to the Lord And the Quakers can no ways avoid this Absurdity unless they will say That no man shall be damned Which I take to be the necessary Consequence of their affirming The Soul to be a part of God's Being and their denying The Resurrection of the Body 4. If so then all that W. L. hath done is but Quibling for all the Resurrection he and they must be understood to intend is only within men while they are in this World And in truth their Opinion about the Resurrection as worded by some of their noted Teachers is this 1. The Resurrection of the unjust is sins rising in man and getting above the Light 2. The Eternal Judgment is the Lights condemning and reproving for sin 3. And as any one comes to hearken to the Teaching thereof the Light comes to rise up in him Which say they is the Resurrection of the just Now from hence they infer That they are in the Resurrection and past the Eternal Judgment even in this life and that it is not they themselves that shall rise but the Light within them Which Light say they is sufficient to lead them into all Truth cleanse them from all sin and will Eternally save them Thus you see that W. L. hath discharged T. H. of Forgery in all these Twelve Pagan Principles of the Quakers But how the Quakers can clear themselves of Lies and Forgery would do well to be considered seeing they tell T. H. that he hath belyed them when he hath not charged them with any thing in all these particulars but what is truly chargeable upon them As appears by this brief Account and W. L.'s Confession under each Head But saith Geo. Whitehead I hope you have considered that moderate Account which your Friend and Brother W. L. hath given in his Book entituled The Twelve Pagan Principles or Opinions c. and what a serious Check it containeth to Thomas Hicks for his immoderation and unfair dealing G. W. in The Quakers Plainness detecting Fallacy p. 88. Now that there is no reason to account him a Baptist as G. W. doth in these words because they are the persons to whom he writes I will here insert a Testimony given under the hands of two of the eminentest Baptists in those parts where he hath had his abode for above seven years past that in all that space of time he hath not been a Member with them nor any of the Churches to whom they belong much less a Sober Baptist-Preacher as the Quakers had the confidence to call him in the Title-page of their Book touching the Barbican-Meeting Octob. 9. 1674. THis is to certifie That WILLIAM LUDDINGTON hath never been in Communion with the Congregations in the Country to whom we belong either in Buckinghamshire or the County of Hertford which are the places in which he hath lived for above seven years last past so as to partake with us in that Holy Ordinance of the Lord's Supper Witness our hands Tho. Monck Tho. Heyward Decemb. 1. 1674. I have two things to tell the World and I have done 1. An Account of some Slanders and Abuses of the Quakers cast upon me for my opposing their Doctrine 2. Open and manifest Confessions of some Eminent in the Quakers Ministry concerning the Man Christ Jesus and His dying for our sins 1. As touching the first of these I being at the Bull and Mouth May 8. 1674. and demanding of them to prove that Great Principle of theirs which Geo. Whitehead was so baffled about in his Dispute with Mr. Ives in the Market-place at Croyden in the County of Surrey April 24. 1674. before hundreds of people The Question was this Quest Whether every man that comes into the World is enlightned with the Light of Christ They did then affirm it But when they saw they could not prove it I was so pulled struck and abused that I was not able to keep my standing and attend the Discourse They also made such a Bawling on purpose to prevent my being heard that it was impossible to hear what was said And at last to prevent any further Discourse one of them concludes the Meeting in prayer A Gentleman that was a stranger being present and observing the violence they offered to my person came up into the Gallery where I was and said Sir I perceive that if a man comes to dispute with these men he had need to take a Guard with him to secure his person And as we went out one crys out Children of Babylon Brats of Babylon another Thou art a Blasphemer c. I being there again May 15. 1674. to hear whether they had any thing further to say to that Question before-mentioned And when their Friend in the Ministry had done and I began to speak to the Question one that is called a Friend in their Ministry whose name is Samuel Thornton thrust in between me and the post where I stood and another Quaker crushed me up on the other side the Rail of the Gallery was before me and a crowd of Quakers at my back thronging upon me and my leg between the Banisters which were turned with knobs he pitched his knee against mine and his elbow against my breast leaning upon me with his weight and I having no liberty to give way my breath was in danger of being forced out of my body and my shirt wet with

works page 47. That is no Command from God to me which he commands to another Neither did any of the Saints we read of in Scripture act by the Command which was to another c. They obeyed every one their own Command 4. If it be a sin as the Quaker saith To take any Oath how comes it then to pass that the Quakers do frequently go to Law with their Neighbours and employ men yea give them money to come in and swear for them And also when others cannot be accepted in their stead Why do some of the chief Quakers in London take Oaths themselves Surely if your Principle be true both these Practices are Abomination to the Lord. Now with what face of Truth or Honesty can these men censure others and do the same things themselves 5. How can the Quakers tell what Spirit it is they must receive must not quench the motions of must be taught and instructed by and that those things it teaches them are true What Rule is there to distinguish it from all false Spirits that so all men may know what Spirit they are to follow and what to reject If these things be not discovered by the Light of the Holy Scriptures how can they be known If they must be examined by the Light thereof then the Scriptures must be acknowledged to be our Rule and the Commands therein binding to us notwithstanding all that the Quakers say to the contrary 8. Pagan Principle THe Eighth Charge is That Justification by that Righteousness which Christ fulfilled for us wholly without us is a Doctrine of Devils W. P's Answer is thus And indeed this we deny viz. Justification by the Righteousness which Christ fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us And boldly affirm it in the name of the Lord to be a Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which doth now Deluge the World Will. Penn. Serious Apol. p. 148. Will. Lud. saith This makes a great noise surely somewhat more than ordinary moved W. P. to write at this rate Herein he confesses the Charge so that T. H. is no Forger But first saith W. L. let us calmly consider the terms whereupon he doth express himself in favour of W. P. W. L. This one word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves for Justification and Righteousness all along the New-Testament so that when we are said to be justified it is all one in my understanding as to be made just or righteous Reply I will speak something to this before I proceed any further And first whereas he saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 serves for Justification and Righteousness all along the New-Testament I hope he doth not intend that there is no other words used to express it by for I think that word is but seldom used in the New-Testament upon that occasion but most frequently other words to express the Spirits meaning by as in Rom. 5. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore being justified by faith vers 16. it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But the free gift is of many offences unto Justification v. 18. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 unto Justification of life And Mr. Leigh in his Critica Sacra p. 69. saith thus upon that very word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Justitia i. e. Justice in which sense he saith the word is often used and brings in Cornelius à Lapide speaking thus Justitia ea quae est in nobis and a little after Est ipsa animi integritas sanctitas innocentia per quam sancti vivimus placemus Deo vel bonis viris So that it must be understood to respect that Integrity Holiness and Innocency of the souls of good men by which they live a holy life and please God But this cannot be done without their persons be first acquitted of their former sins by the Justification they receive from Christ through believing 1. But here I do distinguish between a Legal Righteousness so as to obey perfectly all that God requires at all times both in thought word and deed 2. An Evangelical Righteousness which is a sincere endeavour of the Soul to do all that God requires although by reason of the pravity of his nature he cannot attain it which is accepted with God for Christs sake as if he had perfectly done it 3. And that Righteousness which Christ fulfilled for us in his own Person wholly without us which was his keeping the Law perfectly in our stead and his suffering death for our sins 1 Cor. 15. 3. Christ died for OVR sins according to the Scriptures Now this is imputed to us if we believe Rom. 4. 5 6 7 8. 22 23 24 25. And Christ is made unto us Righteousness 1 Cor. 1. 30. And in this sense he is called The Lord OVR Righteousness Jer. 23. 6. And therefore it 's said Christ was made sin for VS who knew no sin that we might be made the Righteousness of God in him 2 Cor. 5. ult He bare OVR sins in his own body on the tree 1 Pet. 2. 24. The truth is if Legal Righteousness and Justification THROVGH Christ according to the Gospel be the same thing then the Quaker is right in denying Justification by that Righteousness Christ fulfilled for us both Actively and Passively in his own Person wholly without us But then the Apostle Paul was mistaken who saith A man is not justified by the works of the Law but by the faith of Jesus Christ Even we have believed in Jesus Christ that we might be justified by the faith of Christ and not by the works of the Law for by the works of the Law shall no flesh be justified for if Righteousness come by the Law then Christ is dead in vain Gal. 2. 16 21. But by this I perceive That the Quakers rather than they will own Justification by that Righteousness Christ fulfilled for us wholly without us they will avoid that absurdity laid upon that Opinion by the Apostle i. e. That then Christ died in vain by affirming That Christ in respect of himself never died But why I may not from hence conclude The Quakers professing Christianity to be vain I know not If W. P. can demonstrate the contrary I desire he would But let us hear what W. L. hath to say further touching this thing W. L. Now that no man can make himself so or that he can be so without Christs Righteousness and also that this act of justifying us or making us just is of the free Grace of God through the Redemption that is in Jesus Christ I believe it is granted by us and them Answ If by Vs W. L. mean according to his former false Insinuation the Baptists and himself though indeed he is not one of that number neither can he be so accounted Then I answer That those words expressed by him if as honestly intended as plainly exprest is that the Baptists and other Protestants own But as I know the Quakers do not own it

which as it refers to men as by the scope of the place is evident it is not only an Vntruth but Blasphemy Neither will that relieve him to bring in W. P. saying That every such Illumination is not very God for if it were then W. P. must believe there were as many Gods as there are Men in the World because he faith that every man hath that Illumination For W. P. in his Reason against Rayling Page 56. saith Geo. Whitehead owns it in its own being to be no other than God himself where he approves of that saying and adds this to it himself We assert the true Light with which every man is enlightned to be in it self the Christ of God and the Saviour of the World Now if W. P. will contradict himself who can help that it's not T. H. his fault but his own Reader here he confesses the charge so that Mr. Hicks is no Forger 2. Pagan Principle HIS Second Charge is That the Soul is a Part of God and of God's Being without beginning and Infinite W. L. His Answer is What hurt is there in this if they do say so I never heard the Heathen were of this Opinion I see no cause to be offended much less to account them Heathen if the Quakers do count it a part of God Rep. Surely this Man is little Read in Heathen Authors that he can say he never heard the Heathen were of this Opinion that the Soul is a Part of God c. Let him but read Seneca I presume he hath learning enough to do it because he is a Schoolmaster and he will find him to be of this very Opinion These are his Words Quid aliud voces animum quam Deum in Corpore humano hospitantem What can we call the Soul saith he but God abiding in an humane Body And of the Reason wherewith the Soul of Man is endowed he affirms that it is Part of the Divine Spirit in Man's Body For these are his Words Ratio nihil aliud est quam in corpus humanum pars Divini Spiritus c. Seneca Epist 67. So that if I would trouble my self and you I could shew you that herein there is a great union between a Quaker and a Pagan in their Opinion about the Soul of Man the which may be most elegantly detected in the Words of a Learned Author of our times 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a little Deity guesting in a body of Flesh Thus Reader thou mayest see that T. H. is no Forger and also that W. L. though ignorantly hath rightly called this A Pagan Principle But W. L. saith The great Heat of disputes of that nature has caused a scoffing Poet to Rhyme thus of OUR Disputes These Disputants like Rams and Bulls Do fight with Arms that spring from Skulls And when they argue the greatest Part O' th Contest falls on Terms of Art Who would but think these Verses had been made upon the late Disputes between us and the Quakers as W. L. words it and yet I find that Hudibras is the Poet and the Title of the Book tells me it was written in the time of the late War and Licensed November 11. 1662. Hudibras Part 1. page 267. Canto 3. But I perceive he can allow himself a liberty to say any thing yea rather than T. H. shall go free he will jeer his Friend W. P. also for if the Author of the Quakers Quibbles be not much mistaken the great fault which made that Dispute so fruitless lay in W. P. and his Friends for in page 10. he asks W. P. this question When thou camest to the Reasoning and Disputative part how many shuffles and put-offs How many pittiful Evasions and poor shifts didst thou make how many delays how much loss of time I was not only ashamed to see it but admired thy self and Friends did not blush at it to see you make yourselves and party so ridiculous in the Eyes of others What Rayling instead of Reasoning What Clamour What Noise What Tautologies What Disorder What Discord and Confusion No Argument to me more fully proved you to be no Christians than your Unchristian carriage in that Meeting And he that speaks this is an Indifferent Person neither Quaker nor Baptist As for the abuse he hath done to the Poet in repeating the two first lines otherwise than they are in Hudibras I question not but Hudibras knows how to right himself better than I can direct him in the mean time I would advise W. L. to take that good advice nosec tripsum to study the knowledg of himself more and then he will not be at so much leisure to pry into the lives and espouse the Quarrel of other Men had he been so imployed when he wrote this Book he had saved me this pains for I can assure him that I don't use to imploy my Time after this sort nor would I have done it now only I hope God may have some Honour by detecting his folly and it may be I may be made Instrumental to bring him to a sight of it I had thought to have passed over this Head but the man makes such a stir about an impertinent Question that I am minded to say something to it lest my silence should prove his prejudice Quest But Why saith W. L. may not we aswel say God hath given us a Part of himself as a Part or Measure of his spirit which hath no beginning nor ending Ans I answer as it is in the Question and relates to the Soul of Man I will tell you why we may not so speak because there is a great Disparity betwixt the Soul of Man and the Spirit of God As 1. The Soul of Man is a Creature made by God Isaiah 57. 16. For I will not contend for ever neither will I be always wroth for the Spirit should fail before me and the Souls which I have made 2. But the Holy Spirit is increated and of the same Essence with the Father as the Quaker himself confesseth and from thence takes occasion to confound the Personal Existence of all the Three Now though I may say God hath given us a measure of his Spirit because we are made to partake of the Gifts and Graces thereof yet I may not affirm that therefore the Soul in which they do reside is a part of God and of God's Being without Beginning and Infinite But says W. L. That Man hath an Immortal Soul we all grant and yet before he is got ten lines forward he saith if the Soul be a Created part of Man coming by Generation then as I have heard it argued it must be Mortal and a little after This is a great Mistery and we must wait till another Seal of the Book of Life be opened before we shall know what the Breath of Life was which God Breathed into Adam Gen. 2. He saith Philosophers and Divines have made a great Bustle about the Soul but to define what it

is Because no one of them singly nor the whole Body conjoyned know how to clear themselves of those things he hath charged upon them without rejecting the chief of their Ministry whose Tongues and Pens have so often asserted these pernicious Doctrines But that I perceive they are not yet willing to do But let us hear how well W. L. can bring up the Reer in excusing their denial of that great Fundamental Principle of the Christian Religion The Resurrection of the Body W. L. saith Of all the Articles against the Quakers none hath made many honest serious People more afraid of them nor the vulgar more rail at them than this 1. As for the vulgars railing it concerns not me they should have forbore divulging such dangerous Notions 2. But whereas he saith This Principle of theirs in denying the Resurrection of this Body that dies hath made many honest serious People more afraid of them than any other Article they hold I think it hath not been without just cause from the perniciousness thereof And I have good Authority to justifie me therein for the Apostle Paul saith If there be no Resurrection of the dead then is Christ not risen And if Christ be not risen then is our Preaching vain and your Faith is also vain and ye are yet in your sins Then they also which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished And if in this life only we have hope in Christ we are of all men most miserable These are some of those evil and dangerous Consequences charged by the Apostle Paul upon this very Doctrine as maintained by the Quakers in denying the Resurrection of this Body from the dead as you may see at large in 1 Cor. 15. 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 c. But let us hear W. L. speak his thoughts about it W. L. saith But to tell you freely my thoughts about it there is less cause for it upon this account than any of the former Reply I hope those that read this will be fully satisfied that there is no more difference between the Quakers and W. L. in this Article than there is between Four-pence and a Groat which with us in England is the same piece of Money But hath W. L. no way left to excuse his Friends at the last gasp now their Cause is expiring Yes yes don't think you shall find him without a shift 1. W. L. Flies to what he supposes the Charge suggests viz. That there is no Resurrection insomuch saith he that I have heard lewd men swear and curse them for denying the Resurrection Reply But here W. L. evades the Question which is so plain that it needs none of his Suggestions to darken it Why don't he answer to that For the Quaker saith This Body that dies shall not rise again Speak out and be not afraid to answer now it comes to the point 2. But saith W. L. Doth not their exposing themselves to all the miseries of this life confute the charge Answ I answer No For the Sadducees were men that professed Religion in opposition to the common received Opinion among the Jews and so consequently were exposed to sufferings and yet they denied the Resurrection of this Body and the Being of Angels which are Spirits c. Acts 23. 8. For it 's evident a man may give all his goods to the poor and his body to be burned and have no love to God nor be truly Religious 1 Cor. 13. 3. And what think you of the Esseans a Sect among the Jews of whom Josephus reports That nothwithstanding they denied the Resurrection of the body saying that it is corruptible and that the matter thereof is not perpetual Yet could they not be forced to revile their Law-maker or to eat any forbidden meats by breaking off the members of their bodies fiery Torments and all kind of Tortures which were laid upon them Nay in the very midst of their griefs and pains they scoffed at their Tormentors and laughing joyfully yielded up their Souls as though they hoped to receive them again Joseph Of the Wars of the Jews Lib. 2. p. 616. 3. Whereas it may be objected That they would be more Immoral in their lives if they expected no Resurrection of the body Answ I answer That the Sadducees were men of such strict lives that it 's reported they had their name Sadducees from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tzidek which signifies Just or Righteous and yet they deni'd the Resurrection from the dead Matth. 22. 23. And for those Esseans before-mentioned if he will read Josephus he may find that they were exceeding zealous for the Law and stricter in their lives than the Quakers are by many degrees It 's too long to be here inserted But if W. L. will take the pains to read that Book of Josephus I have mentioned Chap. 7. he will find what I say to be true Besides it 's well known that there were men among the Heathen full of Moral Vertues and men of great strictness in their lives and yet agreed with the Quakers in this That this body shall not rise again Quest If that be not the Resurrection intended what then is it that shall rise from the dead W. L. answers The Apostle has given us as good an account of this Doctrine as we may desire and to that they refer us But suppose saith he they should tell us This very Body should not rise what care I c. Reply 1. I am well satisfied with the account the Apostle Paul gives of the Resurrection in 1 Cor. 15. but not at all informed of the Quakers meaning about it by their referring us thither because I know they can Allegorize some of the plainest Texts in the Bible and why may they not be supposed to do so by this 2. I cannot possibly understand that the Quakers intend the same Resurrection the Apostle doth in 1 Cor. 15. for he tells us That the same body that is buried which he calls sown in corruption shall be raised in incorruption Which agrees with the saying of our Saviour The hour is coming in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth They that have done good to the Resurrection of life and they that have done evil to the Resurrection of damnation John 5. 28 29. As also with the Prophet Daniel And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake some to everlasting life and some to shame and everlasting contempt Dan. 12. 2. with many more that might be alledged all which do plainly prove the Resurrection we contend for But the Quaker saith Such a Resurrection is inconsistent with Scripture Reason and the Belief of all men right in their wits Will. Penn. Reas ag Rail p. 133. 3. But what doth W. L. mean when he saith He is willing to part with this Body for a better and that he will never be angry with him who promiseth and assures him a pound