again and is at the Right Hand of God in our Nature as the great Object of their Faith But this the Inspirations of the chief Teachers of the Quakers have led them not to regard In the whole System of his Orthodox Principles the Substance whereof he tells us he has given there is not one intire Article of the Creed commonly called the Apostles Creed mentioned nay nor so much as implyed And indeed he cannot nor any of his Brethren by any real Evidence convince any Man that their Inspirations have taught them so much as one intire Article of that Creed in the true Sense generally received by true Christians and according to their Principles they must not say that the Spirit has given or wrought the Faith of the Articles of the Creed in them by the medium or means of the outward Word for that is contrary to G. Fox's Doctrine above delivered and as expresly contrary to the Doctrine of G. Whitehead in his Brief Discovery of the dangerous Principles of John Horne G. W's brief Discovery p. 18. pag. 18. who blames J. Horne and T. Moor for having affirmed that the Scriptures are the medium of Faith i. e. the means by which Faith is wrought in Believers There is no such Scripture saith G.W. as saith the Scriptures are the Medium of Faith Note seeing the Quakers have not the Faith of Christ as he was outwardly crucified and died for our Sins and rose again neither by the Light within them nor by the medium of the Scriptures as the Instrument of the holy Spirit as other true Christians have it it is a plain case they have no Faith of it at all other than a meer historical Faith as they have of any common History and indeed many of them have not that G. Whitehead in his Quakers Plainness p. 70. brings a quibbling Distinction betwixt a means and the means he grants The Bible may be a means instrumentally as God bestows a Blessing upon or accompanies the serious reading thereof as it directs to Christ Jesus or to his Light and Spirit which openeth the Vnderstanding in the holy Scriptures And a little before he saith Mark the Difference betwixt a means and the means as between the Bible and Christ that may be a means which is not the means Christ being the absolute way and means by way of Eminency for Man to come to know God But to shew the Fallacy of this Quibble By the means are generally understood the instrumental and subordinate Causes to the principal Agent and Efficient which ought not to be confounded Christ is the Author and principal Efficient of our Knowledge of God and the Bible i.e. the divine Oracles and Testimonies contained therein are the means and to say the means or a means is equivalent among all that know true English as when we say Food and Raiment are the means to preserve our natural Life or a means the Sense is the same But it is proved already out of G. F's Gr. Myst p. 243. that G. F. denyed that the things of the Gospel and of the Spirit are attained by an external means will G. W's Distinction here serve him Will he again distinguish betwixt a means and an external means But let us apply this subtile Distinction of G.W. to the Words of G. F. in Saul's Errand p. 6. who being charged that he said He was the eternal Judge of the World he confesseth it and brings several Proofs as he thinks to prove it as that the spiritual Man judgeth all things and the Saints shall judge the World Now seeing G. W. will needs have a Distinction betwixt a means and the means why not also betwixt a Judge of the World and the Judge yea the eternal Judge of the World as he professeth himself to be It was not enough that G. F. should be a Judge of the World but the Judge yea the eternal Judge of the World and by G. W's Logick G. F. was not a Judge but the Judge by way of Eminency yea the eternal Judge of the World But G. F. after his manner of frequently corrupting the Words of Scripture as well as his Opponents Words doth corruptly and falsly argue from that Scripture 1 Cor. 6. 2. Do ye not know that the Saints shall judge the World Note the Words shall judge in the future which G. F. corruptly applyeth to himself in the present or preterit Tense that he was or is the Judge yea the eternal Judge of the World Lastly To come yet more closely to G. W. himself I will shew you how he denyeth the Scriptures to be a means for the Conversion of Jews and Heathens to the true Faith in Truth defending the Quakers by G. W. qu. 35. pag. 51. And what is that the Gospel must be preached to in the Heathens that will receive it And whether they that preach to Turks and Heathens ought to preach out of a Text and prove their Doctrine by Scripture to them as the Priests do in England yea or nay Note By this Query he not only excludes the Scripture from being the means but a means for converting Turks and Heathens nor will his common Excuse of saying it was but a Query help him This sort of querying being the strongest way of denying or affirming both in Scripture and all other Writings Next let us hear W. Penn 's Confession concerning means in his Key printed 1699. p. 12. pervers 8. The Quakers assert the Spirit of God to be the immediate Teacher and that there is no other means now to be used as Ministry Ordinances c. He answereth They never spake such Language ... for they never denied the use of means but to this Day from the Beginning they have been in the use of them but then they are such means as are used in the Life and Power of God Note with what presumptuous Confidence W. P. dareth to say they never spake such Language when G. F. their great Apostle had plainly said as above-quoted that the things of the Gospel are not attained by AN external means That they have been all along in the use of some means as preaching writing and reading is but to say their Practice contradicts their Principles which is very common to them But to cover their Error their way is to mistate the Question as W. P. doth here which is not whether outward means can truly profit without the inward Aid and Assistance of the Spirit for this is generally granted that they cannot which is equivalent to his Phrase that the means then only profit when used in the Life and Power of God And in very deed their holding the Light within every Man sufficient to Salvation without any thing else as they do commonly teach destroyeth all necessary use of outward means as who should say a Man has that within him that is sufficient to carry him to America without any thing else as Boat or Ship should be understood to say he can walk
are sprung forth of the corrupt Tree which now is to be burned and its Fruit rejected Now these are all the Books and Catechisms published by any others but themselves Again in p. 23. they say And though some have known him viz. Christ after the Flesh yet henceforth know they him so no more as say the Scriptures of Truth Note Here they pervert the true Sence of Paul's Words as they commonly do in their Books and Preachings giving Paul's Words for a Reason why they do not preach Faith in Christ as he came in the Flesh died and rose again c as necessary to Salvation because say they VVe are no more to know Christ after the Flesh whereas it was the great Subject both of Paul's Preaching and of all the Apostles to wit Jesus Christ as he came in the Flesh died for our Sins and rose again and ascended c. insomuch that they did with one Accord declare That the Gift of the Holy Ghost with all the saving and sanctifying Graces of the Spirit do come to Men by Christ through Faith in him as he came in the Flesh died rose and ascended and that this Faith was wrought in Men by hearing the VVord outwardly preached Again in p. 23. they say Now Children the Scriptures of Truth do declare of God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth which are one but the Scriptures cannot bring you to know God and Christ and the Spirit of Truth And yet they say concerning this Primmer and the Contents of it p. 2. That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn that they may be turned unto the Light which is the Gift of God Here they seem to prefer their Primmer to the Scriptures for they say of the Contents of their Primmer That they are very useful for Children and others to Learn To learn what Surely some Knowledge of God and Christ they will say and yet they will not allow so much to the Scripture and on a diligent Search I find not in all this Primmer one simple Direction to Children and others to read the Scriptures and what they have quoted of Scripture in it is but little and much even of that grosly perverted and misapplied as in p. 44 45. they say They that hear the Light that is in all Men and common to all Men they hear God for God is Light and they that hear God they hear Christ also for God and Christ are one as saith the Scripture and they that hear Christ hear the Author of the true Faith and so hear the Saviour of their Souls and the Light is that Prophet which all that hear not him are to be cut off Here we see how grosly they pervert that Place of Scripture Deut. 18. 15. Acts 3. 22. 7. 37. which is not to be understood of the common Illumination given to all Mankind but of the Man Christ as he outwardly came in the Flesh and did execute his prophetical Office on Earth by preaching and teaching and as he doth now still execute his prophetical Office in his Church by his Word outwardly preached and his Spirit inwardly accompanying it to make it effectual Again p. 82. they run into the same wild Notion that others Familists and mad Enthusiasts run into of the Blood of Christ within them For say they and all wait together in the Light viz. as it is common to all Mankind Infidels Jews Mahumetans Heathens for so they understand it and believe in it that ye may be the Children of the Light and therein watch unto Prayer and one over another and this will beget ye into unfeigned Love and walk in the Light ye will have true Vnity and Fellowship one with another and the Blood which is the Life of Jesus Christ ye will feel cleansing you from all Sin and so ye will come into Vnity with God Note By this it is evident as will more fully appear on a particular Head following that by the Blood which they call the Life of Jesus Christ they meant not his Blood outwardly shed or his Life that he outwardly laid down viz. the Life of his Manhood without us for the Remission of our Sins and cleansing therefrom But according to their usual Cant and Phrase The Blood that is the Life and the Life is the Light within So that they make the Blood the Life and the Light within them to be one and the same thing but neither in this Primmer nor in any other of their Books do I find the least Direction to Faith in the Blood of Christ as it was outwardly shed on the Cross therefore in this Primmer and in their other Books they give Poison to poor Children to suck or receive instead of wholesome Food George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS PART II. Containing the Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the fifth Head concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul Body and Blood And on the sixth Head concerning the Souls of Men. Read at the second Meeting at Turners-Hall January 19. 1699. W. P. in Serious Apology p. 146. saith That the outward Person which suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny This is expresly contrary to many Texts of Scripture and to a great Fundamental Article of our Christian Creed yea in a manner it overthrows the whole Christian Creed See the following Scriptures Mat. 16. 13 16. Luke 1. 32. Mat. 14. 33. Mark 1. 1. John 1. 14 34. John 9. 35. 10. 36. Acts 8. 37. Rom. 1. 4. Mat. 27. 54. G.W. in his Truth and Inn. p. 52. excuseth W. P ' s Words thus Here I take him to mean the Son of God in respect to his Divine Being as he is of one Substance with the Father which his Body that suffered Death was not though he was truly the Son of God as he took upon him that Body and as made of a Woman Gal. 4. 4. Being conceived by the Holy Ghost and born of the Virgin Mary The Fallacy of this is easily detected the Question in Debate betwixt W. P. and his Opponents who were Presbyterian Ministers in Ireland was not whether the Body was the Son of God abstractly considered from the Soul of Christ and his Godhead for no Presbyterian ever held that neither will any Socinian that denyeth the Godhead of Christ say that that meer Body without his created Soul was the Christ or Son of God But the true State of the Question was and is whether he that outwardly suffered Death without the Gates of Jerusalem whom W. P. calls that outward Person in Distinction from the Light within which the Quakers will have to be the whole Christ according to G. Fox's Doctrine was and is not properly the Son of God which all sound Christians say according to Scripture he was and is being both God and Man and yet one Person one Christ one Son of God having his Godhead-Nature and his Manhood-Nature so united as
And tho' the Blood of Christ that both justifieth and sanctifieth is without us yet the application by Faith is within both for our Justification and Sanctification Note again That as G. W. doth fallaciously state the Question concerning Men's being Cleansed i. e. Justified and Sanctified by the Blood of Christ as is above-shewed so he argueth most fallaciously for his false Notion of a Blood of Christ within Men to be the Atonement by the merit whereof they are Cleansed from Sin as because the Operation of the Spirit of God is within Men whereby he applieth to them the Merit Virtue and Efficacy of Christ's Blood which application by a Metaphorical Speech is call'd in Scripture A sprinkling the Conscience that therefore the Blood of Christ is Inward which is the like Sophistical and Nonsensical Argument with that of G. F. The Saints eat the Flesh of Christ therefore they have it in them Thus they both argue from a Metaphorical Eating and Sprinkling or Cleansing to a Literal or Material as because what Men eat of Material Food they receive it into them so because they eat Christs Flesh they have it in them and because the Blood of Christ Sprinkles the Hearts and Consciences of the Faithful therefore that Blood is in them not considering the application here both with respect to Eating and Sprinkling is not Material but Spiritual by Faith as Christ hath plainly explained it that to eat Christ is to believe in him to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood is sincerely to believe with the Heart that Christ gave his Body of Flesh to be broken for us and his Blood to be shed for us for the Remission of our Sins and both for our Justification and Sanctification and eternal Salvation Joh. 6. 35. He that cometh to me shall never hunger he that believeth in me shall never thirst and verse 40. This is the will of him that sent me that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlasting life and I will raise him up at the last day Again Whereas they say in that Printed Paper above-quoted signed by G. W. and Thirty more We do highly value his Death Sufferings Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind That all this is extremely Fallacious doth largely appear from what is above-quoted Do they highly value his Death and Sufferings when some among them have Printed as above-quoted That when they come to the Operation of the Spirit or Light Within them they will cease remembring Christs Death at Jerusalem Do they value Christ's Sufferings and Death c. who deny it to be the Gospel that Christ impowered the Apostles to Preach for which hear what they say in their Book above-quoted call'd A Testimony for the true Christ c. p. 16. Their Opponent they quote saying p. 16. Christ impowered the Apostles to go forth to Preach the Gospel to the ends of the Earth which Gospel was his Sufferings Death and Resurrection Baptizing in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost c. To this they Answer The Gospel which they Preached was Everlasting it was the Power of God to Salvation to as many as Believed both of Jews and Gentiles But were his Sufferings Death c. Everlasting Is this good Doctrine say they So that according to them it is not good Doctrine but bad to Preach Christ's Sufferings Death c. to be the Gospel either in whole or in part for their reason is of equal force against that Doctrine either in whole or in part The Gospel is Everlasting but Christ's Death and Sufferings c. Note the c. which both the Opponent and they add is not Everlasting for that they say was Temporal therefore Christ's Death and Sufferings is not the Gospel and by this their profound Logick or rather beggarly Sophistry nothing is the Gospel but that which is Everlasting i. e. was from Eternity to Eternity and thus according to them nothing is the Gospel but the Light Within because that is Everlasting the Power the Spirit the Light is Everlasting and therefore that only is the Gospel But tho' the Spirit and Power and Light was and is Everlasting yet it was not within them from Everlasting because they were not from Everlasting and therefore by their Logick as the Light or Spirit is in them and as tâ—â— Gift of God to them it is no more the Gospel than Christ's Death and Sufferings c. because they had it not within them from Everlasting if they will acknowledge themselves to be Creatures Created and Made by the Great Creator in Time But they quibble Sophistically upon the word Everlasting for tho' Christ's Suffering and Death were not Everlasting yet both the Merit Virtue and Efficacy of them both for procuring Remission of Sin and the Holy Spirit with the sanctifying Gifts and Graces thereof was from the beginning of the World and will continue to the end of the World yea and to all Eternity and the Doctrine of it in some measure was Preached from the beginning as God revealed it first to our first Parents and then successively to others of his Holy Prophets and was held forth both by Prophecy Promise and Sacrifices to the Faithful Again They are grosly Fallacious when they say in that Printed Paper We do highly value and esteem his Sufferings Death Precious Blood and whole Sacrifice for Sinners Works Offices and Merits for the Redemption and Salvation of Mankind But what do they mean by Christ's Merits Do they mean the Merits of what Christ hath done for them without them suffered without them his Righteonsness without them his Blood shed without them so as thereby to be justified Nay The following Quotations will sufficiently evidence the contrary viz. That not the Righteousness or Merits or Blood of Christ shed without us but the Merits of Christ within them his Righteousness wrought in them his Blood shed within them the Blood of his Divinity or Godhead but not of his Humanity or Humane Blood by which they are justified for further proof of which hear what G. W. saith in his Voice of Wisdom p. 48. where he blames T. Danson and chargeth it on him to be false Doctrine held by him That there were two Righteousnesses of Christ the one without the Saints to justifie them and the other within the Saints that did sanctifie them And in p. 26. he chargeth T. Danson with Ignorance for his asserting two Righteousnesses of Christ the one without us for Justification the other within us for Sanctification And in p. 35. He argueth against Justification by a Righteousness of Christ without us thus If it be the same Christ that justifies and Janctifies then it 's but one and the same Righteousness which effecteth both these in and for the Saints And in p. 19. he expresly defends that Popish Argument used by S. Fisher the very same Argument is used by Bellarmin De Justif That because evil
ever Again a little after So Isay the Devil false Prophets Antichrists Deceivers Beast Mother of Harlots none of these can witness an infallible Spirit But being out of the Spirit that Christ the Prophets and Apostles was in that gave forth Scriptures they are not infallible as they were but with that they are all judged out II. Great Mystery pag. 98. And thou and you all that speak and write and not from God immediately and infallibly as the Apostles did and Prophets and Christ but only have gotten the Words you are all under the Curse in another Spirit ravenned from the Spirit that was in the Apostles Saul 's Errand to Damascus pag. 7. They are Conjurers and Diviners and their Teaching is from Conjuration which is not spoken from the Mouth of the Lord and the Lord is against all such and who are of God are against all such Truth defended by G. F. and Rich. Hubb p. 104. Our giving forth Papers or printed Books it is from the immediate eternal Spirit of God to the shewing forth the filthy Practices of the World's Teachers c. George Whitehead Voice of Wisdom pag 33. his Opponent Th. Danson having said As for our Want of Infallibility 't is no valid Plea against our Ministry G.W. answers His Falshood here appears plainly for they that want Infallibility and have not the Spirit of Christ they are out of the Truth and are fallible and their ministry is not of the Spirit seeing they speak not from the Spirit but from their own Hearts which are deceitful where they want Infallibility so out of the Abundance of the Heart the Mouth speaketh Note Jos Wyeth in his Switch for the Snake p. 87. states the Question concerning their Infallibility fallaciously in three several Particulars 1. That the holy Spirit of God is infallible c. This is no Part of the Controversie 2. That the holy Spirit leads all such who obey him infallibly into all Truth necessary to Salvation This is wrongly stated the true State of the Question being Whether the Holy Spirit leads us into all Truth necessary to Salvation without the external Doctrine externally delivered in the holy Scriptures by preaching and reading and without all external means This they affirm as shall hereafter be proved but this all sound Christians deny who yet grant that all the Faithful are infallibly led into all Truth necessary to Salvation by the infallible Spirit in the Use of the holy Scriptures which contain the infallible Truths of the Gospel 3. That the Ministers who are sent forth in the Work of the Ministry have or may have if they diligently attend to the Voice of the infallible Spirit speaking in them a certain infallible Knowledge and Assurance of the Truth of what they so deliver This also is wrongly stated the true State is not what they have or may have but what they really have in all they preach and write as is clear from the above given Quotations of G. F. and G. W. their great Leaders To say they may have implies that they may not have and in that case they are fallible and so by their own Verdict are under the Curse Conjurers Deceivers Note that their great Teachers and Leaders G. F. and G. W. have taught that the infallible teaching of the Spirit is not by the medium or external Means of the Scriptures and that Faith is not given by the external Word doth appear from their Books 1. G.F. Gr. Myst pag. 350. Ye tell People of an outward ordinary means by which Christ communicates the Benefit of Redemption The means of Salvation is not ordinary nor outward but Christ is the Salvation who is eternal 2. Gr. M. p. 133. His Opponent T. Moor having said The Scripture is the absolute Rule and Medium of our Faith In pag. 134. he answereth The Scriptures is not the Author nor the Means of it nor the Rule but Christ who gives it and he encreaseth it 3. Gr. Myst pag. 243. And the things of the Gospel and of the Spirit are not attained by an external means 4. Gr. Myst pag. 320. His Opponents having said God works Faith in us inwardly by his Spirit and outwardly by his Word He answers Here thou goest about to make the Spirit and the Word not one is not the Word Spiritual and Christ called the Word Gr. Myst p. 168. Them that never heard the Scripture outwardly the Light that every Man hath that cometh into the World being turned to it with that they will see Christ with that they will know Scripture with that they will be led out of all Delusion come into Covenant with God with which they will come to worship God in the Spirit and serve him Note the Quakers that say they are turned to the Light yet are not led out of all Delusion but many of them are under great Delusions and Error concerning the great Truths of the Gospel as doth evidently appear by these and the following Quotations A Quotation being brought out of Gr. Myst in the Snake of the Grass G. Myst p. 213. Switch pag. 79. Thou cast not know the Scriptures but by the same Degree of the Spirit that the Prophets and Apostles had Jos Wyeth saith in his Switch By the Error of the Press the Word ALL is left out For which he quotes Gr. Myst pag. 212. In answer to this hear what G. F. saith in Gr. M. pag. 120. And he that hath found the true Record the Spirit of God with that he shall know ALL the Scriptures and is come within the Book where all things are written and which writes all things forth the Spirit Note G. F. no doubt and G. W. did think they had found the true Record the Spirit c. and therefore they knew ALL Scripture and had the same Degree that the Prophets and Apostles had G. F. G. M. p. 222. The Light c. is the Substance of all Scriptures opens all Scriptures and that all Scriptures ends in Le ts see all Scripture But that the Quotation of the Switch G. M. p. 212. is lamely made the following Words prove that some of the Quakers at least did understand as they thought ALL Scripture The Passage is this But they cannot know all Scriptures but as they vttain to the full Measure of the Spirit of the Prophets and Apostles and to the Measure and Stature and Fullness of Christ And if they do not attain to all this they are not able to know all the Scriptures and the Work of the Ministers of God was to bring People to this to the Measure and Stature and Fullness of Christ. Note that they thought their Ministry had brought some of the Quakers to this we shall see hereafter and no doubt they judged they were come to it viz. G. F. and G. W Gr. M. p. 47. The Light which every one hath that cometh into the World is sufficient to Salvation without the Help of any other Means or Discovery But which
is much more than that of Degrees G. F. tells of them that were come to that which is above Degrees Gr. Myst pag. 281. And the Blood of the Seed it cleanseth from Sin the Power and Stain of it and then the Guilt is gone of it and where this is known the Seed that destroys Death and him that hath the Power of it which is the Devil the Fullness is known which is above Degrees that which Degrees ends in Again G. Myst pag. 318. For who comes to the Spirit and to Christ comes to that which is perfect who comes to the Kingdom of Heaven in them comes to be perfect yea to a perfect Man and that is above any Degree Note by this it appears G. F. thought himself and some others of the Quakers come above any Degree and that is beyond and above the Apostles themselves who were but in the Degrees but they were come to the Fulness it self that is to be equal with Christ himself But let us next hear G. Whitehead 's Excuse of G F's Saying None can understand Scripture but by the same Degree of the Spirit the Prophets and Apostles had In his late Book called Truth and Innocency pag. 19. But if any true Knowledge of the Scripture be received that must be by a Degree of the same Spirit as I suppose the Words before-cited should be so transposed and so intended Note If this Liberty be allowed to transpose Words in a Sentence the falsest Assertions may be made true and the truest made false as Acts 12. It 's said Herod killed James by transposing James killed Herod Is not this a rare Evidence of G. W's Truth and Innocency or rather of his shameful Sophistry But whereas he saith the Words were so intended the above Quotations prove that G. F's Intention was that some of the Quakers and to be sure HE for one were come to the same Degree yea which is more to the Fullness and that is above any Degree But it 's no wonder G. F. thought he was come to such Height of Perfection when he said in his Battle-door All Languages are to me no more than Dust who was before Languages were This Passage Jos Wyeth quotes lamely Switch pag. 149. leaving out the Words which were chiefly offensive who was before Languages were What saith Jos Wyeth to this Snake pag. 85. And why did he not fully quote it as it was objected in the Snake It seems he found Difficulty to give a plain Answer to it therefore made a lame Quotation The like or rather more blasphemous Assertion is in a Book of J. Parnel called The Watcher p. 37. But to the end of all Disputes and Arguments I am come for before they was I am and in the Light do them comprehend and judge to be out of the Light in Babylon c. But here again let us note that the Author of the Switch acts the dull Sophister very manifestly Switch p. 453 465. when on the one hand he seems to be highly pleased with the Doctrine of the Church of England in the Point of Inspiration and saith He is glad that so essential a Truth as is the Inspiration of the holy Spirit is owned by her And on the other hand for blaming the Author of the Snake for his contradicting himself by his approving the Inspirations owned by the Church of England and yet faulting the Quakers Pretences to Inspirations The Author of the Snake had sufficiently cleared this in his Book called the Snake c. pag. 322. what sort of Inspiration the Church of England owned which is that of sanctifying and saving Graces but for the extraordinary and miraculous Inspirations of Prophecy and Tongues she doth not pretend to nor teach that they are commonly given or that they are to be sought there being no need of them The manner of prophetical Inspirations which the Prophets and Apostles had was such as they had given them by the Spirit without all outward teaching of Men or Books and beside this they had the ordinary Inspirations of the Spirit given in the use of the external means in God's ordinary way to wit the sanctifying and saving Graces of the Spirit inspired into them Here is a plain Difference betwixt the Inspirations which the Quakers pretend to given them without the external means of hearing reading c. and the Inspirations given in the use of the ordinary means of the written Word both preached and read that the Church of England lays claim unto which makes the Sophistry of the Author of the Switch very manifest and also his great Injustice to the Author of the Snake so to charge him without ground But let us hear what great matters the Author of the Switch pretends that the Inspirations of the Light within Switch pag. 38. will teach them who attend upon it It will saith he fully teach them their Duty to God and enable them to perform it It will discover to them a System of Principles truly Orthodox with more Certainty than Counsel or Synod can not taught by it for be is indeed a wonderful Counseller It will first fully and truly beyond any Casuist shew unto Man what is his Sin and if Man despile not this Discovery but close with it it will beget in him a Loathing of his Sin and then proceed to work in him a Repentance from dead Works which if unfeigned you see he is very cautious but why If unfeigned Can the Light within work any other Repentance but that which is unfeigned It will go on to sanctifie him and when Man by this Light Spirit or Grace is sanctified it will then witness to his Spirit that he is justified so will Man come truly to be redeemed This he saith in short is the Substance of what hath been by us declared concerning this Divine Light Christ in Man and which is not more than is witnessed of it in the Holy Scriptures Note By this plain Confession we see what sort of System of Divinity the Inspiration the Quakers plead for doth or will give them who attend upon it to wit a-Scheme of Deism or refined Paganism In all this Substance of his whole System not one word of Faith in Christ as he outwardly dyed for our Sins his being the great Sacrifice for the Remission of our Sins by Faith in his Blood outwardly shed But the Inspirations of the holy Prophets and Apostles taught them this Faith and the necessity of it as well as of Repentance for the Remission of Sins And seeing the Quakers Inspiration teacheth them nothing of such a Faith and the necessity of it it is a plain case tho the Quakers pretend to the same Inspirations that the Prophets and Apostles had yet they have them not nay nor the ordinary Inspirations that common true Believers have in and by the means of the external Doctrine contained in the holy Scriptures that lead them to regard Christ outwardly as he was crucified and raised
on the Sea or flie in the Air to that remote Place The next thing in reference to their Infallibility is their Pretence to the infallible discerning of Mens Hearts without respect to their Works good or bad This is differently stated by them and wherein we shall find a real Contradiction among them G. F. in his Gr. Myst pag. 89. had said Here thou hast shewed that the Quakers have a Spirit given to them beyond all the Forefathers which we do witness since the Days of the Apostles in the Apostacy and they can discern who are Saints who are Devils and who are Apostates without speaking ever a VVord they that be in the Power and the Life of Truth This discerning of Mens Hearts G. VVhitehead had formerly placed upon outward Signs in the Countenances of wicked Men or Women which he still justifieth in his Antitode pag. 69. Proud and haughty Looks wanton and scornful Eyes envious and fallen Countenances are rendred in Scripture as outward Signs or Marks of such wicked Hearts which also the Gift of discerning perceiveth and gives to see many times through such outward mediums Note G. VV. here layeth a great Stress upon outward Signs in the Countenance which he owneth to be outward mediums through which the Spirit of discerning perceiveth and giveth to see Mens Hearts but yet he will not allow the Scriptures to be the medium of Faith so preferreth outward Signs in the Countenance to the Scriptures but then he much throweth down this sort of discerning by Mens Countenances by saying many times for this leaveth their discerning to be many times fallible and though the Scripture and common Experience proveth that the Countenances of some openly vicious and extreamly wicked are Signs of their wicked Hearts yet the Scripture giveth no universal Rule in the Case but giveth us the Command of Christ Isaiah 11. 3. John 7. 24. Judge not according to Appearance but judge righteous Judgment and it was said of Christ He shall not judge after the Sight of his Eyes nor reprove after the hearing of his Ears But G. VV. will not take Christ in the case for his Example but he pleads further That the Gift of discerning of Spirits is given to some Members especially and still is continued in the true Church and from which discerning Satan cannot be hid however he transforms himself Here is another minching of their Infallibility of discerning that it 's given to some Members especially but he doth not allow it to all Members however he seems to plead for all the Ministers having it Truth and Inn. p. 12. for he makes it an Evidence of great Darkness in his Opponents to hold that a Minister that is fallible is in the Spirit a Minister of Christ and yet cannot discern another Man's State or Condition so as to give an infallible Character of him And he contends so earnestly for this infallible discerning in the Church that he saith If there must be no discerning of Spirits no infallible or certain Character to be given of other Men's States or Conditions by an inward Sense or discerning of Spirits then Christ's Sheep may follow Strangers VVolves Dogs c. and so be devoured contrary to his own Doctrine and below the Sense and Instinct of the very Sheep which leads them to shun Dogs and VVolves when they make at them whether they bark or howl or be mute Note By this manner of G. VV's arguing not only the Teachers but all and every one of the People if they be Sheep must have this infallible discerning whereas he pleads for the Ministers having it or some Members so it seems the People must rely on the Ministers discerning by an implicit Faith or if not be in danger of perishing But in plain Contradiction to this Doctrine of G.VV. who pleads for the infallible discerning of Men's Hearts to every Minister let us hear Jos VVyeth who saith Switch p. 95. But though this holy Spirit can discover unto one the Heart and Thoughts of another as of Ananias to Peter Acts 5. yet as that is not usual so neither is it necessary nor is it that which we pretend to nor hath G.F. in the fore-quoted Places pretended to it referring to the above-quoted Passage where he makes this Observation Switch p. 90. VVhich does very plainly shew that G. F. did not attribute this Knowledge or Discerning to the Quakers or any Man but to the Power and Life of Truth where it is manifested This Gloss as it is directly contradictory to G. Fox's Words which say They i.e. the Quakers that be in the Power and Life of Truth can discern so to the Words of G. W. who doth affirm That some of the Members especially have it But both G. F. and G. VV. hath carried this discerning farther than by the outward medium of Men's Looks and Glances so that they can know the inward States of their Hearers without looking to their Faces yea though their Backs be toward them and not only what they are at present but what they have been and shall be from Eternity to Eternity For Proof of this G. F. Gr. M. quotes his Opponents G. M. p. 229. saying VVill a discerning of the Gospel Mysteries prove a Power to discern the State and Condition of Souls what it shall be to all Eternity And after some Words he answers And so who are come into the Bishop Christ they are one Soul they know the Hand of God which the Soul lives in which is the Power and so knows it from Eternity to Eternity And so ye Priests which do not discern the Soul and its State to Eternity and from Eternity ye are not in the Mystery of the Gospel which gives Liberty to it neither have ye it And you five Priests have shamed your selves that do not know the Soul from Eternity to Eternity and on this horrid Presumption that they knew the State of Men's Souls from Eternity to Eternity Rich. Hubberth passes this severe Sentence on his Opponent Truth 's def pag. 92. Thou art ordained of old for Condemnation and for Perdition among the ungodly ones and art a Reprobate And p. 93. So here thou art cursed and cast out eternally Note this was only for his asking What is original Sin And here he speaks of the several States of the Soul as when the Soul is in Death and when it liveth and God hath Pleasure in it By which Soul he must needs understand the Soul of Man for of the Souls of Men his Opponents did speak Next G. VV. in his Truth defending the Quakers hath gone as far as G. F. with respect to his Infallibility in knowing Men's Hearts The Question being put to him in Truth def p. 24. qu. 54. Do not you G. W. blasphemously take to your self an Attribute of God while you pretend ordinarily to know the Hearts of Men. And tell Mr. Townsend of Norwich in the second Page of your Ishmael That the Light of God is
Fox makes him to have contradicted the Apostle and also the Assembly of Divines at Westminster and judged both himself and them This I think so evident a Proof that G. F. thought himself equal with the Father that neither G. W. nor Jos Wyeth nor any of their Brethren with all their little Craft and Sophistry can clear this Passage from that down-right Blasphemy That G. F. was equal with God for neither the Assembly of Divines at Westminster nor C. W. deny the Equality of the Son and of the Holy Ghost for G. Fox grants they owned it but the Equality which C. Wade cryed against was the Equality of G. F. or any of the Saints with the Father But here we find the Strength of G. Fox's Logick The Son and Holy Ghost are equal with the Father therefore G. F. is equal with the Father the Proof of which Consequence must be one of these two following Assertions the one is That G. Fox thought himself to be the Son of God or such a Son as was equal with the Father the other is That because the Son of God was revealed in G. Fox as he thought that therefore G. Fox was equal with the Father As to the first of these Assertions as it is utterly false that G. Fox was the Son of God to wit the only begotten Son of God the Word made Flesh so the other is utterly a false Consequence that because the Son of God was revealed in him that therefore he was equal with the Father but surely if the Son of God had been revealed in him that Revelation would have taught him not to utter such horrid Blasphemy But that C. Wade did not deny but own as much as the Scripture warranteth That God the Father as also Christ the Son were manifested or revealed in the Saints I shall quote a Passage in his Book being originally the Words of one T. Moor that wrote against the Quakers whom J. Nailer had charged That he would exclude God and Christ out of the World and that he should no more dwell in his People till Doomsday In Opposition to which C. Wade quotes the following saying of T. Moor which he approves pag. 23. of Quakery slain That the Majesty of God whose Throne is in Heaven is in his Inspections Influences and Operation every where and in his gracious and spiritual Presence and manifested Nighness in and through his Son dwelling in Sion even in the Hearts and Societies of his People Now let us hear what Jos Wyeth and G. Whitehead say in Defence of that blasphemous Passage above-mentioned quoted from Saul's Errand to Damascus p. 8. He that hath the same Spirit that raised up Jesus from the dead is equal with God Jos Wyeth doth plainly justifie it by the like false Consequence as G. Fox made Switch pag. 59. he saith For when Men are guided by the Holy Spirit they are certainly guided by God for the Father Son and Holy Spirit are one God and therefore equal and that which is equal as G. Fox he saith often expresseth it But doth it therefore follow that because the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are equal that therefore he that hath either the Son or the Holy Ghost is equal either with the Son or Holy Ghost or with the Father yet this is Jos Wyeth's blasphemous Consequence to justifie G. F's Blasphemy But G. W. hath found two other Ways to defend the above-said Blasphemy of G. F. in the Supplement to the Switch he saith p. 528. And if any among us have writ of them who are perfect in Christ Jesus being led by his Spirrt as in that Sense equal I understand equal only as like unto God or in Vnion with him being united unto him by his Spirit as he that is joyned to the Lord is one Spirit Note first The Word Equal no where that I know either in Scripture or other Books or common Speech in any Language signifieth only as like therefore this is a meer Force put upon the Word and a strained Sense But Secondly That could not be the Sense intended by G. Fox because as I have above shewed in a former Quotation he proves that he is equal with God the Father because the Son and Holy Ghost are equal with the Father Now will G. W. say That the Equality betwixt the Son and the Holy Ghost and the Father is only an Equality of Likeness as to say the Son and the Holy Ghost are only like the Father but are not really equal with the Father This was the Arian Heresie that the Son was like the Father but not equal or of the same Substance with the Father they said he was Homoiusios but not Homouisios But he hath yet another String to his Bow in his Truth and Innocency pag. 10. Therefore the Words He that hath in the said Instance should be left out being contrary to G. F 's and our Principle and to his own very Words and Confession a little before in the same Book quoting Saul's Errand p. 5 6. where G. F. saith It was not so spoken as G. Fox was equal with God but the Father and the Son is one But the Fallacy lyeth here he did not say George Fox to wit the Name George Fox or the outward visible Body that bears that Carnal Name as he somewhere calls it but the new Name that he hath that is the He that is equal with God because that He is the Son and as to what G. W. saith of Union with God that G. F. did not mean Union by Faith and Love but a personal Union appears from G. M. p. 100. He brings in his Opponent saying God dwells not in the Saints as a Personal Union In Opposition to which he answers How comes the Saints then to eat of his Flesh and to be of his Flesh and Bone Note it should be by a personal Union And God dwelling in them and have Vnity with the Son and the Father and to be of his Body which is the Church and Christ the Head Yea he blames his Opponent G. M. p. 258. for saying To say that God is substantially in Man as essentially one with him can be no other but the Man of Sin But whereas G. W. saith He that hath should be left out pray who put them in That they were G. Fox's Words the Book called Saul's Errand affirms if this Liberty be allowed to transpose leave out and add Words in a Sentence nothing so vile and blasphemous or atheistical but may be justified by G. W. who hath used all these three Methods to defend his and his Brethrens vile Errors But let us hear one Passage more of G. F. out of G. Myst p. 299. to let us know what Conceit he had of himself as being more than a Creature he tells That one had raised a grievous Lye against G. F. and said he said he was Christ p. 298. to the End This Man having so charged him and having told him
he had Witness to prove it G. F. told him He was a Judas and he went away and after a while hanged himself and Christ in the Male and in the Female if he speak he was Christ the Seed and the Seed was Christ but he did not speak it as a Creature Note he grants he spoke the Words That he was Christ but he did not speak it as a Creature therefore he thought he was something more than a Creature the Seed in him spoke it which was Christ and that was not a Creature but what Seed was in him or in other Quakers that was not a Creature I cannot find out any other in his Writings but his Soul or invisible Part that he makes to be Christ and a Part of God as will afterwards appear on a distinct Head But he has yet another Defence to save the like blasphemous Saying of F. Howgel They that have the Spirit of God are equal with God in Nature but not in Stature It having been objected against the Quakers that some of them have said They that have the Spirit of God are equal with God To this F. Howgel answers after some foregoing Words F. Howgel's Col. p. 232. He that is born from above is the Son of God and he said I and my Father are one and where the Son is revealed and speaks the Father speaks in him and dwells in him and he in thy Father there is Equality in Nature though not in Stature Here it is a plain Case that F. H. places this Equality in Nature but not in Stature betwixt him that has the Spirit of God who is born from above and God himself for to place it betwixt Christ as he was the Son of God before all Ages and God the Father were to say That the Son is equal with the Father in Nature but not in Stature which has a twofold Error in it first To make a Distinction betwixt God's Nature and Stature Secondly Suppose that Distinction That the Son is equal to the Father in Nature but not in Stature both which are most gross and blasphemous and no less gross and blasphemous it is to affirm That the Saints are equal with God in Nature but not in Stature Now let us hear G. VVhitehead's Defence Truth and Inn. p. 10. The Equality in Nature objected relates to the Divine Nature which the Child of God partakes of in Measure though not in Stature relates to the Child that Divine Nature is one and unchangeable but our participating of it and Growth in it is gradual until all i. e. Christ's whole Church and Body come into the Measure of the Stature of the Fullness of Christ But doth all this Saying of G. VV. prove that the Children of God are equal with God either in Nature or Stature The Saints are said in Scripture to be Partakers of the Holy Ghost are they therefore equal to the Holy Ghost Which yet is the Way of G. VV's reasoning the Equality in Nature he says relates to the Divine Nature but who is it that is equal to God in the Divine Nature but not in Stature was it the Son or Holy Chost that is equal to God in the Divine Nature but not in Stature Nay therefore it must be the Saints or Believers here a Proposition is framed They that have the Spirit of God are equal with God and then this Distinction is given They are equal in Nature but not in Stature This Proposition hath for its Subject They i. e. the Saints or Children of God In all Propositions all the Parts of the Predicate belong to one and the same Subject the which Parts are equal in Nature but not in Stature But it is an unaccountable Liberty that G. VV. takes in his Way of defending these Blasphemies not only to change the Signification of Words from all common Use but the unalterable Rules of right Reason as in the present Case like as if one should say G. VVhitehead is equal to A. B. in Nature but not in Stature Nature relates to G. W. but not in Stature relates to another but who is this other who can tell Or as if one should say G. W. is a Man but not honest Man relates to G. Whitehead but not honest relates to another It is a real Shame that such pittiful Sophistry should be used by G. W. to defend his and his Brethrens vile Errors and Blasphemies whereby he makes himself guilty of them and all to save his and their pretended Infallibility It were much more Manly as well as Christian fairly to acknowledge and retract those most erronious Passages and own their Fallibility and Error and be contented to be lifted among fallible Men for humanum est errare labi decipi and not only so but to be greatly humbled for the Presumption that being Men they should equal themselves to God But the general Conceit of their sinless Perfection as they are a Body of People is such that both G. W. and Jos Wyeth doth justifie W. P's objecting to the Church of England their praying from seven to seventy Lord be merciful to us miserable Sinners G. VV. saith in Truth and In. p. 15. Alas poor Sinners Is not a Sign of Laughter at â—hem but rather of Lamentation and Pity over their miserable Estate who are always 〈◊〉 but not forsaking their Sins The like Answer doth J. VVyeth give in the Note Is not this a plain Evidence of the great Pride that is among the Quakers concerning their sinless Perfection As a Body of People and their great Uncharitableness towards not only the Church of England but all others called Christians throughout the whole World yea all Christians in all Ages and the universal Church of God both under the old and new Testament who always used Confession of Sin and prayed for Forgiveness of Sin find as Christ taught his Disciples to pray daily for their daily Bread so to pray daily for Forgiveness of Sins So under the old Testament there were daily Offerings for Sin and the High Priest however so holy yet offered both for his own Sins and the Sins of the People Doth it therefore follow that their Confessions and Offerings were hypocritical But doth not G. VV. know that as there is a gradual going unto Perfection so there is a gradual forsaking of Sin and a putting off the old Man with his Deeds Must not they who feel themselves wounded with Sin seek for a Cure And should not the diseased come daily to the Phisician till they be cured And as to the Quakers Uncharitableness and G. VV's especially towards all in the Church of England whom he chargeth without Exception that they are still confessing but not forsaking their Sins How can he more prove this Charge against them than his own Society or himself Many both in the Church of England and other Protestants can compare with the best of the Quakers for Holiness of Life and exceed them in many Virtues especially in
Humility But do no not they better who confess their Sins and yet through humane Frailty find that they relapse into some Sins than such proud Pharisees among the Quakers who neither confess nor forsake their Sins such as their sinful Ignorance and Errors in the great Fundamentals of the Christian Faith their too high Esteem of themselves and Uncharitableness towards others calling all others but themselves The World and Idolaters and their Worship Idolatry And if any formerly among them come to a more sober Mind and to a more sound Understanding and Faith in Christian Doctrine and are more charitable towards others They call them Apostates as they do call me and others whom God in his great Mercy has of late recovered from the Errors and Uncharitableness that were and are among them so that for owning the Protestant Churches and that we can join in the Worship of God with them we are rendred Apostates by G. VV and his Brethren in their printed Pamphlets against us But if we be Apostates for this then by G. VV's and his Brethrens Sentence all the Protestant Churches are Infidels and Idolaters But if the Church of the Quakers be a sinless Church that need not to confess their Sins nor pray for Forgiveness of their Sins how doth this agree with the large Acknowledgments that G. VV. has made in his Christian Epistle to the People called Quakers of so many things amiss among them as above quoted Either such faulty Persons are owned Members of their Church or they are not if they are not why do not they disown them and excommunicate them or declare them to be none of them If they own them to be of their Church then their Church is not without Spâ—t Wrinkle or Blemish and consequently not the Church of Christ by G. F's Doctrine If it be said The Tares cannot be discerned oft times from the Wheat then where 's their Spirit of discerning whereby they can know who are Saints or Devils without speaking ever a Word Surely if they have such a Spirit of discerning their Sin is great to suffer such a Mixture among them as G. W. complains of in his Christian Epistle especially now that they reckon Eâ—oth's Prophecy is fullfilled in them Truth and Inn. p. 13 They i. e. the Quakers are the ten thousand of his Saints in whom the Lord is come to execute Judgment upon all Why do they not begin at home and first cleanse their own House and purge out the old Leaven from among them How is it that diverse unclean Persons even of their Ministry have been owned to preach among them while living in secret Uncleanness diverse of whose Names they know I can produce Why did they not discern them seeing they have as they pretend an infallible discerning of Mens Hearts Or if they did discern them why did they not discover them and get them cast out of the Camp As to the Instance above given of the daily Sacrifices for Sin which were offered under the Law If it be replyed That they grant the Law made nothing perfect but now a sinless Perfection is brought in by the Gospel I ask them what became of them all of that ancient Church who daily confessed their Sins and prayed for Forgiveness when they died Did they die in their Sins Or where were they cleansed from their Sins after Death Or did they all perish according to G. W's manner of reasoning against his Opponents in his Voice of Wisdom above quoted As to that Place in Scripture The Law made nothing perfect and other the like Places they are to be understood first Comparatively the Gospel State under the New Testament as to the general is a State of more Purity and greater Perfection than the State of the People under the Law Secondly The ceremonial Part of the Law as Circumcision and the Sacrifices did neither in whole nor in part give them the Remission of their Sins but were Types of Christ that alone Sacrifice by which Remission of Sin and Sanctification both then was and now is obtained It is on the Conceit that the Quakers have of their sinless Perfection especially their Ministers that they are not known to pray for the Forgiveness of their Sins in their publick Meetings which gave occasion to that Question in Truth defending the Quak. by G. VV. p. 8. Q. 11. Do not you think it needless to pray for the Pardon of your Sins To this G. Whitehead replies We have prayed for the Pardon of our Sins and the Lord who heard our Prayers hath pardoned and remitted our Sins by the Power of the World to come which we have tasted and do taste of as many witness But of late some of them have got a way to pray in the third Person plural in their Meetings as I have observed as thus If any here have sinned against thee give them Repentance and Forgiveness Or thus Pardon them that have sinned against thee Thus I have heard John Field pray but I never heard him or any here in England to the best of my Remembrance pray in the first Person plural Forgive us our Sins though Daniel and the best of the holy Men recorded in Scripture prayed Forgive us our Sins A Quaker said George dost not thou know that it is the manner of Friends if any have done amiss to deal with them and get them to confess and ask Forgiveness I said that was but as to particular Persons and private Offences but that was no Proof as to their general Confession and praying for Pardon of Sin Another Quaker stood on a Bench and began to read a Passage out of a Book of mine called The Way cast up printed in the Year 1677 containing some Words of Prayer which I said I had heard or Words to that effect used in our Meetings both to God the Father in the Name of Jesus Christ and also to Jesus Christ naming him by the Name Son of David This Passage that Quaker brought his Name as I am informed is John Whiting to prove that the Quakers prayed for Forgiveness of Sin for I was then a Quaker but what he read out of my Book not being well heard he was desired to hand the Book to the Minister that stood by me and read the Quotations which was done and the whole Passage containing a Prayer was read which is this VVay cast up p 121. Son of David have mercy on us O thou blessed Lord Jesus that wert crucified and died for our Sins and shed thy precious Blood for us be gracious unto us Thou that in the Days of thy Flesh wert tempted of Satan afflicted bore our Sins on the Cross felt our Infirmities and wert touched with them O thou our merciful High Priest whose tender Bowls of Compassion are not more straitned since thy Ascension but rather more enlarged and whose Love and Kindness is the same towards thy Servants in our Days as it was of old help us and strengthen
for would not the Quakers account it a great Sin and Trespass if any of the Church of England or Dissenter should sit in one of their Galleries where they stand to preach and kneel at Prayer and mend an old Doublet while they are preaching in their Meeting Places Surely they would greatly aggravate it and call it rude and unmannerly and profane Again whereas they query Where dost thou read in the Scripture that Men must do no Work on the first Day of the Week And this Query is made to justifie the Quaker's sitting on the Communion Table to mend an old Doublet on the first Day in time of Divine Service Is not this a great Shame to print and reprint such avowed Profanation of the Lord's Day and Worship also in the Face of a Protestant Nation that zealously profess to be against the Profanation of it and where are standing Laws against the Profanation of it Note here that whereas the Quakers affirm that what they speak and write is immediately and infallibly from God their professed Principle obligeth them to hold that what they speak and write is of greater Certainty and consequently of greater Authority than the Scriptures because they are certain of what they speak and write from the Spirit in themselves but they are not certain of the Writings of the Scriptures as W. P. argues in his Discourse concerning the General Rule They have not the Autographa the Copies differ and so do the Translations but they have their own Autographa and their Books and Writings are from the Original immediately Thus when G. W. sent me his Curse Thus saith the Lord c. and signed G. W. This had more Authority with him than the Scripture by his own Doctrine and if he please let him add simply considered as without the Spirit Proofs on the fourth Head Concerning the Holy Trinity GEorge Whitehead G. W's Truth and Inn. p. 50. in his Truth and Inn. and Jos Wyeth in his Switch pretends That it is not the Doctrine or thing intended that they deny i. e. the Father the Word and Holy Spirit which three are one And saith Jos Switch p. 184. Wyeth We own their Distinction in all the Instances of it recorded in Holy Writ The only thing they pretend to scruple at or deny is the calling them three Persons which they say are not Scripture Terms and they are wholly for keeping to Scripture Terms in Matters of Doctrine But to this I say ' first How many unscripture Terms do they freequently use Where do they find in Scripture the Term immediate Revelation immediate teaching of the Spirit immediate Word which they so commonly use Again where do they find in Scripture That see G. M. p. 324. the Seed to which the Promise of Salvation is is Christ within Several Papers c. p. 47. And that Expression where do they find it in Scripture That the same Spirit takes upon it the same Seed which is Christ now as ever c. That God the Father took upon him Humane Nature That the Spirit is the Rule and many more not only unscripture Terms but contrary to Scripture But why do they call them Three Witnesses as G. W. hath so expresly called them Where do they find them in Scripture so called That Place in John's first Epistle doth not call them Three Witnesses but Three bearing Record or witnessing But it is not only the Words Three Persons wherewith they are offended thâ— unjustly for personal Acts and Properties are given to them and therefore according to plain Consequence from Scripture they may be called Persons but the Doctrine or thing intended they deny for they allow not that they are distinct otherwise than in Manifestation see G. W's Divinity of Christ p. 94. he saith The Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit or the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one and inseparable no where in Scripture called three separate Persons nor finite in Personalities though Three in Manifestation and so testified of as Three Witnesses for the Confirmation of the Gospel Note Seeing G. W. doth not own them to be Three otherwise but in Manifestation this is not only to deny the Names or Words Three Persons but to deny that they were Three from all Eternity or before all Ages for there was no Manifestation either of One or Two or Three from Eternity His calling them Three in Manifestation is to call them three Manifestations and seeing all Manifestation has a Beginning with Time by his Doctrine there were not Father Son and Holy Ghost three any wise distinct from Eternity There was no God the Father from Eternity that did beger nor no Son from Eternity that was begotten nor Holy Ghost that from Eternity did proceed from the Father and the Son by G. VVhitehead's Doctrine And F. Hougil in his Collection p. 308. delivers the same erronious Doctrine He saith That the Holy Ghost is called another than Christ Another is not understood of another Life of another Substance but is understood of another Manifestation or Operation of the same God who subsists in the same Power in which the Father the Son and the Spirit subsist as I said unto thee before Another as to distinguish of the Operation and VVork of the Spirit and of the Son we do not refuse By this Doctrine of F. Hougil they are but distinct Manifestations Operations and Works Now if G. VV. or the Author of the Switch will say that there were three Manifestations Operations or Works in the Godhead from all Eternity It is absurd to suppose such Manifestations beside that they are unscripture Terms the same Arguments that they use against three Persons will as much and indeed much more be of Force against three Manifestations for if the Father be a Manifestation from Eternity of what is he a Manifestation Can he be a Manifestation of himself Or is he a Manifestation of the Son who as they say is a Manifestation Thus one Manifestation would be the Manifestation of another Manifestation but then what would the Holy Spirit be a Manifestation of And seeing in God there are no Accidents these three Manifestations are not three Accidents nor three Subsistences nor three Substances nor three Persons and consequently according to these Men they are nothing at all but their own Inventions But VV. Penn in his Sandy Foundation has not only argued against three Persons but against the Holy Three for he bringeth five Arguments against their being a Holy Three Page 12 13 14. one of which is this in express Words Since the Father is God the Son is God and the Spirit is God which their Opinion necessitates them to confess then unless the Father Son and Spirit are three distinct nothings they must be three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct Gods Now let his Argument be applied to the unscripture Terms three Manifestations and it will have the same Force or rather
to constitute one Christ which is by a miraculous and extraordinary Union that no other Creatures neither Angels or Men are dignified with and though Christ as Man was the Son of God miraculously conceived and born in Time and also as God was by a Generation from Eternity before all Worlds and Times yet he is but one Son of God and because of the personal Union of the Word with his Manhood both as God and Man he is properly the Son of God But there is yet another Fallacy in G. W's Words which is that neither the visible Body nor Manhood that was born of the Virgin was any Part of the true Christ or Son of God and first As to that visible Body of Flesh and Bones he denies that Christ consisted of it I distinguish said he between consisting and having Christ had visible Flesh and Bones but he did not consist of them Christian Quaker p. 139 140. This shews us the very Heart of their Heresie In like manner W. P's Rejoinder p. 299 to 307. W. P. argues for 16. Pages in his Rejoinder against Faldo That Christ never died for they will not have any thing properly to be the Christ but his Godhead which they make to be all one identically and essentially with his Heavenly Mandhood consisting of Heavenly Flesh and Blood that he had from all Eternity Here a Quaker called John Whiting opposed in Defence of W. Penn and said W. Penn did not deny that that outward Person was the Son of God I askt him whose Son was he properly He said The Son of Mary I replied Mary was his Mother but who was his Father properly He said He was conceived by the Holy Ghost I again replied But that 's no Answer to my Question who was his Father Every Son must have a Father and seeing Christ had no immediate Father but God then surely he was properly the Son of God as the Scripture plainly testifieth To this he made no Reply but opposed in Defence of G. W. I having said that G. W. denied that visible Body that hung on the Cross to be any Part of the true Christ I replied I have proved it already by the late Quotation here read wherein he says He denies that Christ consisted of Flesh and Bones I distinguish said he between consisting and having Christ had Flesh and Bones but did not consist of them as a Man has a Coat or Garment but doth not consist of it and that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem was Christ by a Metonimy saith VV. P. of the thing containing having the Name of the thing contained And at this rate VV. P. himself may be called Christ because he hath Christ in him The Excuse That Christ did not Meerly consist of Flesh and Bones signifies nothing for that was no Part of the Question betwixt G.VV. and his Opponent None ever said That Christ did meerly consist of Flesh Blood and Bones no Socinian will so affirm for that were to say Christ was meerly a Body of Flesh and Bones without a rational Soul whatever hath Parts doth consist of those Parts incompleatly of one or more Parts compleatly of them all The Foundation of the Quakers great Error on this Head lieth here That because Christ was before the Body was therefore that Body is no Part of him which is easily answered thus Christ was before that Body was but he was not compleatly and in all Respects fitted to be the anointed Saviour of the World until the Word was made Flesh i. e. until the Word did take our Flesh and whole Nature into a personal Union with himself the which was necessary to the compleat Performance of his Mediatory Offices of King Priest and Prophet and especially of his Priestly Office And not only G. VV. hath denyed Christ to have any created Body whereof he consists but he hath denyed that he hath any created Soul in his Answer to T. Danson ' s Synopsis p. 18. As to T. Danson's telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the Creation of his Body and Soul the Parts of that Nature he subsisted in c. To this I say if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both created doth not this render him a fourth Person For Creation was in Time which contradicts their Doctrine of three distinct increated coeternal coessential Persons in the Deity seeing that which was created was not so But herein whether doth not his and their Ignorance of the only begotten of the Father and their Denial of Christ's Divinity plainly appear yea or nay VVhere doth the Scripture say that his Soul was created For was not he the Brightness of his Father's Glory and the express Image of his Divine Substance But supposing the Soul of Christ was with the Body created in time I ask if from Eternity he was a Person distinct from God and his holy Spirit without either Soul or Body and where doth the Scripture speak of any Person without either Soul or Body T. Elwood to cover this gross Error of G.VV. in his pretended Answer to my first Narrative saith That G. W. only denyed that Christ had a created Soul as God But this was not the State of the Question for neither T. D. nor any other Man were ever so gross as to affirm that Christ as God had a created Soul And the like Evasion doth G. VV. use himself in his Antidote p. 191. This Question saith he is no Determination that it was or was not Christ as God his Soul was increated as Man his Soul or Spirit was not the Deity but formed and assumed by the VVord But it 's Evident that his accusing T. D. and others of Ignorance for saying it was created determines it sufficiently But as is above said G. W. and his Brethren will have only the Godhead to be the Christ which they call The Heavenly Man having Soul and Body Flesh Blood and Bones uncreated and existing from all Eternity which they call The Seed within them the Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Serpent's Head which G. F. as is above quoted denyeth to be a Creature What the Seed spoke in him he said he spoke it not as a Creature therefore that Heavenly Man or Seed consisting of Heavenly Flesh and Blood which they say is in them not being a Creature must needs in their Sense be from all Eternity and not from the Beginning of the World only This appears yet more fully from R. Hubberthorn When was that Christ created R. Hub. Coll. p. 49 50. which you say must as a Creature judge the World And if in Mary's Time who was Judge of the World till then Was not the Person of Christ Jesus before the World was Note here he owns Christ to be a Person and by G. W's Argument above mentioned he must being a Person have both Soul and Body before the World was And when had the Man Christ Jesus his Beginning If you can declare it how is
convince him that the reasonable Soul in Men did not sin What is that Soul that the wicked cannot kill Surely by this Query George Fox meant the Soul that the wicked cannot kill was not the Soul that could sin wherein he sheweth his great Ignorance for though the wicked cannot kill the sinful Souls of Men yet as Christ said in the following Words He is to be feared to wit God that can cast both Soul and Body into Hell Fire Now what Soul can be cast into Hell Fire but the Soul that sinneth But lastly By George Fox's Argument That if the sinful Soul be reasonable and the unsinful Soul be reasonable also then they are one in Unity which he would have to be a great Absurdity thus he hath plainly disclosed the Mistery of his profound Doctrine that is a Branch of Ranterism viz. that there are but two Principles one good in Man that never sinneth or doth evil the other bad that sinneth and never doeth good the one is God or a Part of God the other the Devil or a Part of the Devil And his denying that one and the same Soul doth sin at one Time and doth well at another Time clearly proveth that according to him there is not any Soul of Man but what is either a Part of God or of the Devil And he discovereth his great Ignorance in denying that the reasonable Soul is sinful the contrary whereof is true that no Soul but a reasonable Soul is or can be sinful for what is it that makes the Beasts uncapable of sinning but that they are not reasonable And whereas his Opponent had very well argued that the evil Spirits are both sinful and reasonable George Fox answereth This is a Lie for reasonable is not sinful unreasonable is sinful quoting 2 Thess 3. 2. And that we may be delivered from unreasonable and wicked Men for all Men have not Faith But this doth nothing favour his Manichean Notion he was so ignorant as not to distinguish betwixt the Faculty of Reason and the Act of Reason when Men that are reasonable and have reasonable Souls act contrary to Reason they are said to be unreasonable to wit in Act but still the Soul that sinneth is reasonable with respect to the rational Faculty nor could evil Spirits sin if they were not reasonable i. e. indued with rational Faculties Besides the Greek Word in 2 Thess 3. 2. is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and is not so properly translated Unreasonable but as it is on the Margin Absurd i. e. such who though they have Reason yet will not give place to Reason but act contrary to it and George Fox had he had the right Use of his Reason might have seen that it is no more an Argument against the Soul of Man being reasonable that it acts unreasonably than it is an Argument that the Soul is not enlightened by the Light within because it often acts contrary to the Dictates of it Again for a further Confirmation of George Fox's Doctrine That the Soul that sinneth is not the Soul that is to be saved and that therefore the Soul that is saved or is to be saved is only Christ the Seed within Men Hear what George Fox saith Great Mistery page 324. he quotes his Opponent saying That the Seed to whom the Promise of Salvation is made is or hath been Sinners This he opposeth saying The Promise of God is to the Seed which hath been laden as a Cart with Shaves by the Sinner which Seed is the Hope Christ that purifies even as God is pure So this Promise is not to Seeds as many but to one the Seed which is Christ Note In the same Paragraph he saith So here is the Creature come to know its Liberty amongst the Sons of God and the Seed Christ never sinned in the Male nor in the Female Note what he means by the Creature that comes to know its Liberty which hath not sinned and hath the Promise of Salvation seems not intelligible for he denieth that the Seed is a Creature and yet it is that to which the Promise of Salvation is to wit the Seed Christ in the Male and in the Female that never sinned but he grosly perverts that Place in Gal. 3. 16. for by the Seed Christ is there meant Christ as he came outwardly according to the Flesh out of Abraham's Loins to whom the Promise was that in him all Nations of the Earth should be blessed but this was not to a Seed within that needed Salvation Like to this is what he saith in Great Mistery p. 15. having quoted his Opponent saying There is nothing in Man to be spoken to but Man To this he thus opposeth How then Ministred the Apostle to the Spirit and Christ spake to the Spirits in Prison and Timothy was to stir up the Gift that was in him and the Spirit of the Father speaks within them and the Light it shines in the Heart Here the Scriptures are for Correction of thee and Reproof of thee who said there is nothing to speak to in Man but Man Again In Great Mystery p. 187 he quotes his Opponent saying It would be good News if the Quakers should go and preach to the Spirits in Hell To this he answers The Quakers have been among the Prisoners that be in Hell and ministred to that and the CORRUPTIONS shall go into the Fire that hath no End and they that do wickedly and forget God shall go into Hell and Death and Hell shall go into the Lake of Fire and there is more in these Words yet than thou canst receive for God is the Salvation of all Men but specially them that believe Note thus we see he is very charitable and the Quakers Ministers are very charitable that they have been among the Prisoners in Hell and preached to that But how is this great Charity consistent with his saying That that which sinneth is not saved unless he mean that Sin is not saved though the Creature is The very same Doctrine concerning the Soul I find asserted by Edward Burrough in his Works Coll. page 27. Thou sayest one of us told thee That that which sinned could not be saved I answer saith Edward Burrough It is out of the Reach of the Wisdom and thy vulturous Eye shall never see it I say as the Scripture saith The Soul that sinneth must die and every Man must die for his own Iniquity If thou hast an Ear thou mayst hear Thus we see the Agreement of these two great Teachers of the Quakers about the Souls that sin that they shall not be saved nor can be saved But how grosly doth Edward Burrough pervert those Scriptures to prove his most corrupt Doctrine that is plain Ranterism Because the Scripture saith The Soul that sinneth must die doth it therefore follow That it cannot afterwards be saved both from Death and Sin that is the Cause of it Indeed Sin hath brought a Spiritual Death
without us is the Allegory of his Blood within so his Blood within is the Allegory of Christ's Blood without this is as great Nonsense as who would say as Hagar and Sarah were an Allegory of the Two Covenants so the Two Covenants are an Allegory of Hagar and Sarah And thus G. W. and his Brethren stand justly charged with Allegorizing away Christ's outward Birth Sufferings Blood Atonement by making them the Allegory of his Birth Sufferings Blood Atonement made within Men tho' they deny not Christ's Birth Death Blood without simply as Historically related yet seeing they deny the Merit and Efficacy of his Death and Blood without and of what he did and suffered without us they are justly charg'd to Allegorize it away that is to make no other account of it than of the History of Hagar and Sarah and other Types Symbols and Allegories of the Old Testament Besides If Men will be wilful denyers of the Historical Truth of Christ's outward Birth Death Burial Resurrection Ascension according to G. W.'s and his Brethren's way and method of expounding Scripture we have no way to convince them of their Error If we bring Isaiah 9. 6. to prove that Isaiah Prophesied of Christ's Birth and that the Child that should be Born should be both God and Man and his Mother should be a Virgin according to Isaiah 7. 14. And if we bring Isaiah 53. to prove that Christ should be wounded for our Sins be killed be buried and make his grave with the wicked or That Christ should suffer without the Camp they may Answer All these and the like places are to be meant not of any Birth Death or Burial of a Christ without us but of Christ Born Slain and Buried in Men and for their Proof vouch G. W.'s Authority and his Brethren's to confirm it who as above-quoted have expounded these places of Christ Born Slain Buried within Men. But if G. W. will say these and other the like places have two meanings one Outward and Literal and the other Inward and Spiritual to this I say First G. W. in his Voice of Wisdom pag 21. hath severely blamed his Opponent T. D. for giving two meanings to one place I agree to the most Judicious and Orthodox Expositors of Scripture that the Scriptures have but one sense or meaning properly and strictly speaking viz. That the thing principally and properly intended is but one and what other senses or meanings may be put upon some places of Scripture besides that is rather an Allusion or Allegory than the real meaning which so far as we have Scripture warrant is allowed as Paul's calling Hagar and Sarah an Allegory but otherwise is dangerous and in the present case is most Heretical as in G. W.'s and his Brethrens making Christ's Birth Sufferings Death Burial without Men the Allegory and his Birth Sufferings Death Burial within the Reality and Substance or thing principally intended in these places of Scripture That the Spirit of God with his sanctifying Gifts and Graces is called Water of Life and Living Waters whereby God doth really Purify and Cleanse the Hearts and Consciences of the Faithful and that this Work of Sanctification is Inward and Spiritual in them is no part of the Dispute or Controversie for this is not only granted but earnestly taught and pleaded for against Pelagians and others who deny it or at least the necessity of such an inward and spiritual Operation Therefore G. W. in this as in most of his late Defences doth purposely mistake the true Case to hide his vile Heresie as if the debate betwixt him and his Opponents were only about the inward Operations of the Spirit of God for the cleansing and sanctifying the Hearts of the Faithful but this is his ordinary Fallacy The true state of the Question then is this Whether there is any Inward Blood or Water that Christ Crucified in Men lets out or is pressed out of him crucified within them that is the Blood of Atonement is the Price and Ransom and Meritorious Cause of the Remission of our Sins is the satisfactory and propitiatory Offering for Sin either in whole or in part Also whether any such supposed Blood or Water or Spirit thus flowing from Christ as Crucified and Wounded within Men is the meritorious and procuring Cause either of Men's Justification before God or of the saving and sanctifying Graces of the Holy Spirit and whether the Gift of the Holy Spirit given to Believers with the sanctifying Graces thereof proceeds from Christ Crucified within having made the Atonement and Satisfaction by his Blood shed within Risen and Ascended within Sitting at the Right Hand of God within Men making Intercession for them or from Christ as he was crucified without us having made the Atonement and Satisfaction without us by his Blood shed without us Risen and Ascended and sat down at the Right Hand of God without us and there Interceding for us This is the true state of the Controversie all true Christians say that all this is from Christ without us as outwardly Born Crucified Risen Ascended from him thus only considered as without us all Believers have the free gift of the Remission of Sins free Justification freely by God's Grace being the real effect of Christ's Purchase and of the Merit of his Precious Blood and also the Holy Spirit with the sanctifying Gifts and Graces thereof inwardly to renew and sanctifie them So that the Work of Christ or of the Spirit in Believers is not at all either in whole or in part to suffer for our Sins or to procure by way of Merit the pardon of our Sins and our Peace and Reconcliation with God for that 's wholly and only done by Christ without us but to work the sincere Faith of all that he hath done and suffer'd for us without us and give us the Spiritual Knowledge and Comfort of it in our Hearts and Souls The Plaister and healing Medicine of Christ's Body and Blood was prepared for us when he gave his Precious Body to be broken for us and his Blood to be shed for us this was once done and is no more to be doue again Christ having once dyed dyeth no more by the one Offering of himself once only offered without us his Soul Body and Blood he hath intirely and completely prepared the wholsom Medicine and Food of Life for us But now the work of Christ and his Spirit in us is to apply it effectually to us that is to enable us effectually to apply it to our selves for our Eternal Health and Salvation to give us a Spiritual discovery and sight of that living Food a Hunger and Appetite after it and to teach us spiritually by Faith to receive it and feed upon it to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood not by the bodily Mouth but by the Mouth of the Soul which is Faith a true and living Faith wrought in us by the powerful Operation of Christ in us or his Spirit
Now in Ver. 15. it 's said That we which are alive and remain unto the Coming of the Lord. Now I ask saith he if they did live and remain to a personal Coming of Christ in the Clouds yea or nay Or can it be reasonably thought to be a Coming that is not yet that they lived and remained unto Note How G. W. here most weakly but very plainly to discover his Infidelity argues against Christ's Coming at the latter end of the World and whereas in my First Narrative I did show That when Paul said We which are alive and remain to the Coming of the Lord he spoke by an Enallage Personae We for They we which remain i.e. such of our Brethren who shall be found alive at Christ's last Coming c. To this T. E. Answers in his pretended Answer to my First Narrative p. 162. Why might not the Apostle speak in the first Person We as supposing that great and extraordinary Appearance and Coming of Christ the certain time of which no Man knew Matth. 24. 36. was so near at hand that it might probably fall out in his Life-time and for this sense he quotes Heb. 1. 2 9 26. 1 Pet. 1. 20. 1 Joh. 2. 18. 1 Cor. 10. 11. 1 Pet. 4. 7. as because the times after Christ came in the Flesh are called the last times that therefore the Apostles thought the end of the World was not far off i. e. in his sense That Paul and the other Apostles thought that Christ would come to Judge the Quick and the Dead before they dyed This gross and absurd sense as it is contrary to G. W.'s words so it renders Paul to have spoke an untruth even by Divine Inspiration for said Paul This we say unto you by the word of the Lord. J. Wyeth in his Switch p. 297 298. and his Brethren their common excuse here and elsewhere that these were but Queries signifie nothing to defend them the very import of these Queries implying a positive denyal See this Fallacy of T. E. more fully detected in Satan Disrob'd being a Reply to his pretended Answer to my First Narrative Again G. W. in Light and Life p. 41. saith But Three Comings of Christ not only that in the Flesh at Jerusalem and that in the Spirit but also another Coming in the Flesh yet to be expected we do not read of but of a Second Coming without Sin unto Salvation which in the Apostles days was looked for And these words of Paul The dead in Christ shall rise first he expounds of an inward Death To this G. W. Answers very fallaciously in his Truth and Innoc. p. 61. But is this to deny or oppose Christ's coming to Judge the Quick and the Dead 'T was never so intended And questioning some Men's carnal Expectations of a fleshly coming of Christ to be seen with their carnal Eyes was this to deny his coming in the Glory of his Father with his Angels to reward every Man according to his works quoting Matth 16. 27. Luke 9. 6. no sure for that 's confessed and undeniable Note His and his Brethren's common evasion to hide their Infidelity is to quibble about the Word FLESH as if their meaning were only to deny That Christ is to Come in a fleshly Body subject to the like Passions it had in his state of Humiliation when upon Earth as Hunger Thirst Pain Death c. But this is no part of the Controversie betwixt the Quakers and their Opponents But why may not Glorified Flesh be taken to signifie Spiritual Flesh as distinct from Mortal Flesh as well as Glorified Body signifies Spiritual Body without any change of Substance But it is evident that G. W. not only denyed that Christ would Come to Judge the World in a Body of natural and passible Flesh but that he would not Come in the same Substance of that Body he had on Earth which was a mortal and passible Body of the same Nature with ours for he makes it most absurd That an earthly Body and an heavenly Body can be the same Substance as above-quoted Now That he denyeth that Christ was in Heaven in a bodily Existence or would come to Judgment as the Son of Mary in a bodily Existence to wit having any thing of that Body which he had on Earth is evident from his Nature of Christianity p. 29. Dâ—st thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou dost thou may'st look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him Note To excuse his great Infidelity he useth a gross Fallacy in his Truth and Innoc. p. 61. and giving a lame Quotation of his own words This is true in Fact saith he for those very Eyes decay and perish But this was no part of the Controversie betwixt G. W. and his Opponent who did not presume to say or think That Christ's coming to Judge the World in that bodily Existence would be before his Death but the thing earnestly asserted was That Christ as he was now really in Heaven in a bodily Existence at God's Right Hand so he would come in that very bodily Existence to Judge the World for which G. W. doth evidently oppose him as above-quoted The Phrase Thy Eyes will drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance is equivalent to this Thou wilt never see such an Appearance nor any other Man sor thee as that common Phrase at the Greek Calends And whereas he adds And Christ's last Coming in Power and great Glory in his Glorious Body accompanied with his mighty Angels at the Resurrection must be seen with stronger clearer and more celestial Eyes than perishing Eyes Here he still hides his vile Error What are these more celestial Eyes seeing he will not have Christ's Coming to be without Men in a bodily Existence For in his Light and Life he quotes Matth. 16. 27 28. and Luke 9. 26 27. in plain opposition to Christ's outward Coming saying When was that Coming to be Is it now to be looked for outwardly and seeing he is not to Come outwardly but inwardly these celestial Eyes in his sense must be inward Eyes But then how shall the Wicked see him for the Scripture saith Every Eye shall see him even they who have pierced him must they have celestial Eyes wherewith to see him And tho' the Wicked shall not see him in the same manner that the Godly shall see him yet certainly according to Scripture and the Faith of all true Christians all that ever lived as well as they that shall be found alive in the Body at his Coming both good and bad shall see him as an object without them yea Christ told the Chief Priest and the Jews Mat. 26. 64. Hereafter shall ye see the Son of Man sitting on the right hand of power and coming in the clouds of heaven At which saying the High Priest rent
George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL 1699. WE whose Names are under written having at Mr. Keith's Request and by the Allowance of the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop of London carefully examin'd the Quotations of this Narrative do testifie the Faithfulness of them and that they exactly agree with the Books out of which they are taken And as we commend his Integrity in retracting publickly his Errors and his Christian Zeal for the reducing of his Brethren who are yet entangled with them so we hope they will follow his Example and discern the Perniciousness of their Ways and be led by the Grace of God to the Acknowledgment of the Truth and to the Communion of the Church Z. Isham D. D. Rector of St. Botolph Bishops-gate W. Bedford D. D. Rector of St. George Botolph-Lane R. Altham B. D. Rector of St. Andrew Vndershaft Will. Whitfield Rector of St. Martins at Ludgate J. Adams Rector of St. Alban Woodstreet George Keith's FOURTH NARRATIVE OF HIS PROCEEDINGS AT TURNERS-HALL Divided into Three Parts Detecting the Quakers Gross Errors Vile Heresies and Antichristian Principles oppugning the Fundamentals of Christianity by clear and evident Proofs in above Two Hundred and Fifty Quotations faithfully taken out of their Books and read at three several Meetings the 11th the 18th and 23d of Jan. 1699. before a great Auditory of Judicious Persons Ministers and others More particularly discovering the Fallacious and Sophistical Defences of George Whitehead Joseph Wyeth and seven Quakers of Colchester in their late Books on all the several Heads contained in the printed Advertisement To which is prefix'd The Attestation of five Ministers of the Church of England to the Truth of the said Quotations And a POSTCRIPT By GEORGE KEITH LONDON Printed for Brabazon Aylmer at the Three Pigeons against the Royal Exchange in Cornhill 1700. Advertisement THIS is to signifie that it is my purpose God-willing and by his Assistance to be present at Turners-Hall in Philpot-Lane by Fanchurch-Street in London being our ordinary Meeting-place Licensed by Authority on the Eleventh Day of the Eleventh Month called January in the Forenoon there to detect and discover Gross Errors and Anti-christian Principles plainly repugnant to the Fundamentals of Christianity in the Books of the approved Authors and Writers of the People called Quakers by ocular Inspection presenting them in fair and full Quotations to as many as are willing to be present and make Inspection into them And also to lay open the great Fallacy and Sophistry of George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and some of their Brethren at Colchester which they have used in their late printed Defences of their Own and their Brethrens most Erronious Passages contained in their Books in order to Cloak and Hide their Antichristian Principles and vile Errors not only to the great Scandal of all true Protestants in this Nation of whom they pretend to be the more refined Part but of all true Christians any where And I do hereby desire George Whitehead and Joseph Wyeth and their Brethren of the Second Days Meeting at London who have approved their late Books to be present at the said Meeting for which I have Permission by Civil Authority or any others who think themselves concerned at the Time and Place above-mentioned to hear and see out of their own Books their Errors and Fallacies detected who if they have any thing to offer in their own or Brethrens Defence shall be fairly heard The particular Errors that I intend God-willing to discover them guilty of out of their Books and Authors are Concerning their Pretences to Infallibility and sinless Perfection Concerning the Scriptures Concerning the Holy Trinity Concerning Christ his Incarnation his Soul and Body and Blood his coming to Judgment at the Last Day Concerning Justification Concerning the Soul Concerning the Light within Concerning the Resurrection Concerning the outward Baptism and the Supper Concerning doing servile Work on the First Day George Keith London 18th 10th Month 1699-1700 A few Words of PREFACE TO THE IMPARTIAL READERS IMpartial Readers I have these few things to acquaint you with and recommend to your Consideration First that I found just and necessary Cause to recite diverse former Quotations given in my former Narratives and in other Books formerly publish'd against the Quakers Errors to detect the fallacious and sophistical Defences that they have made in their late Books in Vindication of those Quotations to cover their vile Errors Secondly Beside the former Quotations above mentioned I have brought many new Quotations which are neither in my former Narratives nor in any other Books that hitherto have been published against them which obviates the cavelling of the Quakers who would be ready to say There is nothing to be expected of new Matter but what is contained in other Books and which hath been already answered by them The contrary whereof will sufficiently appear to any that shall compare this fourth Narrative with any other Books before this published against them Thirdly Whereas the common Objection of the Quakers is That their Books are neither fully nor fairly quoted To remove the Ground of any such Objection I have got the Attestation of Persons of known Integrity and Judgment to the Truth of them as I got the like Attestation from some the former Year to attest to my third Narrative I have given the Quotations as fully and fairly as is requisite to satisfie any reasonable Persons But the Men I have to deal with for all this will I expect renew their unjust Complaint and will tell their Readers This and the other Passage going before or following should have been inserted in the Quotations whereas the not inserting of them makes not their Cause one whit the worse nor the inserting them makes their Cause one whit the better as could be shewed in many Instances and is shewed in their late Books for when so much is quoted out of any Book that gives the full Sense of the Writer whatever is more is superfluous Note for a Proof on the last Head That the Quakers deny the Moral Law or Ten Commandments to be a Rule to the Christian's Life and thereupon do not blame but justifie doing servile Work on the first Day yea and in the Face of a Congregation while the Minister was preaching See p. 28. of this Narrative G. K. George Keith's Fourth Narrative OF HIS Proceedings at Turners-Hall 1699. For the Detecting the QUAKERS ERRORS The first Part giving an Account of his Proofs on the first four Heads contained in his printed Advertisement viz. Concerning I. Their Infallibility II. Their sinless Perfection III. The Scriptures IV. The Holy Trinity Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the first Head concerning their Infallibility 1. GEORGE Fox Great Mystery pag. 105. For who witness these Conditions that they were in that gave forth the Scriptures They witness Infallibility an infallible Spirit which is now possessed and witnessed among those called Quakers Glory to the Highest for
departed from his Conscience He answers I take no Attribute of God to my self but what God hath given me by whose Gift I witness that Promise fulfilled in me ye shall discern between the righteous and the wicked between him that serveth God and him that serveth him not Mal. 3. 18. This arrogant assuming of one of God's Attributes of knowing Men's Hearts being objected against him lately in a printed Sheet called An Account from Colchester c. In another late printed Paper signed by seven Quakers at Colchester called Some Account from Colchester they expostulate the Case with them who made the Objection Is it such an Error to believe or witness the fulfilling of this plain Promise Mal. 3. 18. How do you then believe in Christ in whom all the Promises of God are yea and amen Is the contrary good Doctrine for you our Acculers to hold that ye or Christians shall not return nor discern between the righteous and the wicked c. Do you not thereby prove your selves blind and in Vnbelief Note This in Mal. 3. 18. or any other Place of Scripture proves not that any Men shall have one of God 's Attributes given them to know Men's Hearts which is no where promised but Christ hath taught us to know Men by their Works and Fruits and not by his giving them one of God's Attributes whereby to know Men's Hearts for if they had that they should be as God himself to know without regard to the Fruits But that Place Mal. 3. 18. seems to have a plain Reference to the Day of Judgment wherein the Works of all Men however secret shall be made manifest and yet not by Men's having one of God's Attributes given them even then And as to G. VV's Argument for the necessity of this infallible discerning given to Ministers otherwise Christ's Sheep may follow Strangers and be destroyed This Consequence doth not follow for while they follow the Voice of Christ that is his Doctrine outwardly deLivered in the holy Scriptures and inwardly set home and applied to their Hearts by the holy Spirit they are safe and when they follow not that but Men of false Pretences who bring a contrary Doctrine and yet say they have the infallible Spirit as the Followers of G.VV. and his Brethren do they are in great Danger of perishing and though the true Sheep of Christ shall not finally be deceived nor finally perish yet they at times may be deceived and have been deceived by false Teachers and by none more than such false Teachers who falsly pretend to the Spirit of Christ and yet preach contrary to his Doctrine But that the Quakers did not only pretend to extraordinary Inspirations of the Spirit but to miraculous Operations I shall shew you out of G. F's G. M. p. 254. Some of them having asked the Question VVhether your Baptizers cast out Devils and drink any deadly thing and it not hurt you And whether the House where you meet was ever shaken And where he did give the Holy Ghost to you The Opponent calls this an unlearned Question to which G. F. replies This is to shew that you are not Believers nor in the Power that the Apostles was in Note By this it appears they lay claim to the same Power of working Miracles that the Apostles had as to drink any deadly thing and it not to hurt them and that the House where they meet was shaken I have both heard and seen that some of the Quakers Bodies were shaken in their Meetings but I never heard nor saw that the House where they met was shaken Note while I was giving my Proofs out of G. F. and G. W. their Books concerning their high Pretences to an infallible discerning Men's Hearts a Quaker called Samuel Miller as I am informed a Bricklayer stood upon a Bench and for a further Confirmation said with a loud Voice George I had a Vision concerning thee twenty Years ago that though thou didst preach the Gospel to others thou thy self should be a Cast-away This he gave to corroborate G. F's Pretense of his knowing the State of Men's Souls from Eternity to Eternity But if his and their bare Affirmation must be received for Truth without all external Evidence that I am an Apostate a Cast-away what Man howsoever innocent can escape their uncharitable Censure Another Quaker called Thomas Kent stood up and would have preached telling the Auditory He felt a Fire or Flame burn in his Breast he had a Consciencious Concern upon him but the People forbidding him to preach he cried out The Quotations were false but gave not the least Proof I told them he has been disowned by the Quakers and recorded out of the Unity these many Years for his Drunkenness and opposing G. Fox's Orders so after a short time he was silent Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the second Head concerning their Sinless Perfection IT being objected against G. F. that he had said He was as upright as Christ He answers Saul's Errand p. 11. Thâ—se VVords were not so spoken by me but that as he is so are we in this present VVorld that the Saints are made the Righteousness of God that the Saints are one in the Father and the Son that we shall be like him 1 Joh. 3. 2. And that all teaching which is given forth by Christ is to bring the Saints to Perfection even to the measure of the Stature of the Fullness of Christ this the Scripture doth witness and this I witness where Christ dwells must he not speak in his Temple It having been said by one of G. F 's Opponents G. Myst p. 282 They i.e. the Saints cannot be perfect here or hereafter in Equality but only in Quality G. F. answers Christ makes no Distinction in his Words but saith Be ye perfect even as your Heavenly Father is and be ye merciful as he is and as he is so are we and that which is perfect and merciful as he is perfect and merciful is in Equality with the same thing which is of God and from him G. Whitehead in Defence of this Passage in Truth and In. p. 14. saith Now where 's the Blasphemy pray Was it not Christ's own Doctrine Be ye perfect even as your Father which is in Heaven is perfect and Luke 16. 36. Be ye therefore merciful as your Father is merciful Now what Distinction doth Christ make in these Words and Precepts as in point of Purity and where 's the Perfection in Quality granted then and wherein must this Perfection consist Note It was not Christ's Doctrine to be perfect in Equality with God's Perfection for that were to command them to be God himself and though Christ expresseth no Distinction yet it is implied and whereas G. W. pleads for the Saint's Equality with God in point of Purity he is still blasphemous the Saint's Perfection in Quality is not an essential Perfection for what Holiness and Purity they now have they formerly had
not but God's Perfection is essential to him and so is his Purity his Purity and Perfection is himself and so is not the Saint's Perfection or Purity therefore there is an infinite Distance betwixt God's Perfection and all Creatures Perfection whatsoever Again G. M. p. 197. His Opponent having said He sums up all in this Be ye therefore perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect that is in Quality not in Quantity G. F. answers He that is perfect is perfect as his Heavenly Father is perfect is perfect as he is perfect If thou or any have an Ear to hear let him hear and lay away thy Qualities and Quantities and take the Words as they are and all that are come into Christ are come into Life from the Dust and Ashes and are spiritual Men. Note This he spoke in Opposition to his Opponent his calling Man poor Dust and Ashes here he magnifies himself above Abraham who called himself Dust and Ashes and yet was come into Christ and into his Life The like arrogant Expression he hath in G. M. p. 299. Such as be Saints through the immortal Seed are not Dust and Ashes for the immortal Seed lives and abides and endures for ever A Tittle of the Law is seen not to be broken G. M. p. 310. and this saith he is known in vs. VVho comes to the Kingdom of Heaven in them G. M. p. 281 318. 〈◊〉 to be perfect yea to a perfect Man and that is above any Degree Again Are you not worse than Lawyers and Physicians taking the Peoples Money and yet cannot make them perfect Men G. M. p. 268. Note By this reckoning all the deceased Quakers were perfect with a sinless Perfection before their Decease yea and all they not deceased by G. F's Doctrine above-quoted for in all these Plates G. F. means a sinless Perfection He blames his Opponent for saying One that is in the Kingdom of Grace groaning for Adoption ◠And p. 218. G. M. He will not allow any that 's translated into the Kingdom to have any Members to be mortified He judges his Opponents for saying That Pollution was in the Church and saith That the Church is without Spot or VVrinkle or Blemish on any such thing meaning surely the Quakers Church But that the Quakers Church or Ministry are not all such who are without Spot or Wrinkle or Blemish or any such thing G. VV 's General Epistle which he calls A Christian Epistle to Friends c. sufficiently sheweth in p. 4. He chargeth it upon too many Professors of Truth viz. among the Quakers their Negligence and Vnfaithfulness to Truth in themselves which hath caused a Decay of Love and want of Charity towards others and then instead of humbly waiting and depending upon the Lord some have exaled themselves in a self-will self-conceit and affection to Preheminence in Judgment over others until thereby Divisions and false Separations have been caused and stirred up by them to the great Grief of the Spirits of the upright Such were never throughly subjected into true Humility Mortification true Self-denyal or dying with Christ c. In that called G. Fox's Canons or Orders so did all that Party of the Quakers call them that joined with John Story and John Wilkinson two eminent Preachers of the Quakers in opposing them published by G. F. about the Year 1669 and signed or subscribed only by G. F. Pope-like indeed having this Title Friend's Fellowship must be in the Spirit and all Friends must know one another in the Spirit and Power of God At the Number 9 we have the following Words And also all Men that hunt after Women from Woman to Woman and also VVomen whose Affections run sometimes after one Man and soon after another and so hold one another in Affection and so draw out the Affection of one another and after a while leave one another and go one from another do the same thing these doings make more like Sodom than Saints and is not of God's moving or joining And in Number 10. And Notice be taken of all evil Speakers Backbiters and Slanderers and foolish Talkers and idle Jesters for all these corrupt good Manners And in Number 11. All such as are Tale-carriers and Railers whose VVork is to sow Dissention are to be reproved and admonished And in Number 12. And all such as go up and down to cheat by borrowing and getting of Money of Friends in By-places and have cheated several all such are to be stopped and judged as there is a VVoman tall in her Person freckled in her Face and also one John Harding who are for Judgment and to be condemned And in the Conclusion he sharply reproves them of the Quaker's Society who sit nodding in a Meeting for their Sleeping and Sottishness and Dullness and he saith Therefore be careful and watchful and let it be amended And last of all he adds Let this be read in all your Meetings On this I noted that these and other Faults he chargeth upon many of his Brethren owned to be Quakers evidently prove their visible Church and Society are not such a Church of Christ which he saith is without Spot or VVrinkle as above-quoted and that as a People they are far from that sinless Perfection they commonly boast of on which account they are not known as a People to pray in their publick Meetings for Pardon of Sin and yet where such Faults are were they sincere they would both confess and ask Pardon of God for their Sins I noted also that according to this Injunction these Orders on Canons of G. F. are duly read in their quarterly Meetings both here in Europe and also in America whereof I have been an Eye and Ear Witness But as he hath not in all his Canons enjoined the reading the holy Scriptures nor any Part of them in their Meetings so I said I never heard any Part of Scripture read in any of their publick Meetings either for Worship or Discipline and they cast great Blame on me for my reading some Texts of Scripture in our Meetings at Turners-Hall But let it be further noted that seeing G. F. and G. VV. have so strongly affirmed That the Quakers can give an infallible Character of Men to know who are Saints or Devils without ever speaking a Word what need had G. F. in his Canons to give such a Description of some by Name and Face whereby to know them to be Cheats Surely if they had such an infallible discerning as they pretend they need not to have such outward Characters of Deceivers Note Were not some of these above-mentioned Members of the Quaker's Church and are not such Evils as he has mentioned that were among them Spots and Blemishes and Sins Yea G. VV. doth own in his Voice of VVisdom p. 17. before that State of Freedom from Sin be witnessed There is a Time of Pain in Travel and of suffering in Temptations and Tryals Note do none of these belong to the
us and by the Power of thy divine Life and Spirit raise us up over all Tentations and indue us with a Measure of the same Patience and Resignation that dwelt so fully in thee and which thou didst so abundantly manifest in all thy Sufferings in the Days of thy Flesh Thou art the same that thou wert thy Heart is the same towards thy Servants as when thou wert outwardly present with them in the Flesh Thou art our Advocate and Mediator in Heaven with the Father Our merciful High Priest who is not untouched with the feeling of our Infirmities Thou even thou blessed Jesus thou knowest our most secret Desires and Breathings which we offer up unto thee in the Enablings of the blessed Life and Spirit that thou mayest present them unto thy Father and our Father that in thee we may be accepted and our Services also and for thy sake our Defects and short Comings our Sins and Transgressions that we have committed may be forgiven us The Prayer being read divers Ministers and others said it was a good Prayer but they never heard that any such Prayer was used in any of the Quakers Meetings A Quaker called Daniel Philips standing by near where I stood said that Book was approved by the second Days Meeting at London which was a great Untruth I told how I wrote that Book in Scotland and from Scotland sent it to a Correspondent in Holland who printed it there and when it came over to London in the Year 1678. it met with great Opposition from divers of the Preachers of the Quakers at London as Stephen Crisp William Shewen William Mede and Samuel Newton and one of the chief things they blamed in my Book was this very Prayer and especially that Part of it Jesus Son of David have mercy on us Some of them said it was half Popery for though G. K. would not pray to Mary the Mother of Jesus as the Papists do yet he was for praying to the Son of Mary Others said it was Common Prayer A larger Account of things relating to the Opposition I met with from the Quakers for that Prayer and some other things in that Book ye will find in the late Book called A Defence of the Snake in that called A Collection from p. 16. to 38. I further shewed that what I had delivered in that Book and others of my Books in former times when I was reckoned in Unity with the Quakers did plainly evidence that I held the Faith of the Fundamentals of Christianity with all true Christians though in some lesser Matters I was biassed and misled by them into divers Errors particularly in rejecting the Sacraments of Baptism and the Supper which I have since retracted and for my holding the fundamental Doctrines of the Christian Faith as appears by that Book and other Books of mine All the Time of my Quakerism a Quaker in Ponsylvania who was a Justice of Peace his Name was Arthur Cook said unto me George thou never was a right Quaker all thy Days but an old rotten Presbyterian The reading of that Passage in my Book containing the Prayer aforesaid which the Quaker brought to make against me had a far contrary Effect to what he intended for many some Ministers and others present said This makes for G. K. not against him let the Quakers bring any such Passage out of their Books to prove they were of that Faith with him Some of the Quakers that objected against that Prayer in my Book asked me in one of the Meetings that were appointed to hear the Objections against my Book and my Answers Where did I ever hear any English Friend of the Ministry pray after that manner Possibly said they some Scots Friends who were thy Proselytes thou hast heard to pray so I confess they guessed right they were some Scots Friends whom I had heard to pray so and so I had prayed and being at a stand to instance any English Friend that I had heard so pray W. Penn told them he had so prayed and that not long ago but he said It was in private G. W. said Let the Scripture decide it whereupon he calls for the Bible and reads in 1 Cor. 1. 2. What say ye to this Friends said G. W Ye see that Paul did approve the Corinthians that called upon the Name of the Lord Jesus Christ Their Answer was Paul was dark and ignorant in that thing as G. K. is for our Parts we know better Here note the Fallacy both of G. W. and W. P. who for all this seemingly owning Faith in the Man Christ Jesus by confessing they were to pray to him yet in their printed Books have opposed that Faith without any Retractation Proofs on the third Head First That the Scriptures according to the Dictates of their greatest Teachers are not the Word of God THat the Scripture is not the written Word see G. Myst p. 68 75. The Word not contained in Scripture p. 232. The Scriptures not the Word of Reconciliation but Christ p. 186. The Scriptures not infallible nor divine but humane p. 302. He chargeth C. Wade with Blasphemy for affirming the Scriptures are the Word of God G. M. p. 246 247. Thus the Church of England and all Protestants are guilty of Blasphemy by his Assertion Note This Controversie betwixt all true Protestants and the Quakers whether the Scriptures are the Word of God which the Quakers have formerly most earnestly denyed and fiercely disputed against though some now begin to acknowledge it and yet they are still the same infallible Men is not a meer Strife of Words but a most material and important Controversie for when many Places of Scripture are brought to prove that God's Spirit doth inwardly teach us by means of the Word and that Faith comes by the Word of God outwardly heard or read that we are born of the Word and sanctified by it and all spiritual Effects that are attributed in Scripture to God Christ and the Spirit as the principal Agent and to the Word as instrumental they will not allow of any instrumental external Word but makes the Word to be the Spirit to be Christ and God which is in effect to render them of no use to us at all seeing by denying them to be the Word they deny them also to be the external Means or Medium whereby the Spirit teaceth us by his inward Operation in our Hearts and works any saving Knowledge and Faith in us and this also they have denyed viz. that the Scriptures are the Means or Medium But that the Scriptures are the Word of God and the Word most frequently so called in Scripture is clear from abundant Places to wit the external Doctrine contained in the Scriptures Our Gospel came unto you said Paul to the Thessalonians 1 Thess 1. 5. not in Word only by Word here is meant Doctrine Isaiah 28. 13. The Word of the Lord was unto them Precept upon Precept Line upon Line Here the Precepts and
written Lines of the Prophets are called the Word of the Lord and Joh. 15. 25. there we find the Word written 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the written Word which was a short Sentence written in one of the Psalms but G. F. denyeth them to be the written Word G. M. p. 68 319. When Paul bid Timothy preach the Word it cannot be justly thought that he would have him only preach the inward Word or the essential Word or Light within but by the Word he meant the whole Doctrine of the Gospel The Quakers but trifle when they argue the Scriptures are Words and it is a Lye to call Words the Word which is not a Lye but a common Speech used by themselves who call an Epistle a Letter that yet contains many Letters And they do no less trifle when they argue to say the Scripture is the Word is to say the Scripture is Christ as if the Name Word did only belong to Christ whereas the Name Word as well as the Name Light is given both to Christ and other things Christ said to the Disciples Ye are the Light of the World and so said Christ of himself doth it therefore follow that they were Christ They say they call the Scriptures what they call themselves A Treatise but not the Word quoting Acts 1. the former Treatise but in the Greek it is Word the same in Joh. 1. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. the former Word where it is plain he calls all the Words written in the Gospel according to St. Luke the Word as each Oration in Isocrates or Demosthenes is called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. e. the Word Proofs that the Scriptures are not the Rule but the Spirit or Light within as is common to all Mankind G. F. G. M. p. 39 120. and in his G. M. p. 302. he saith The Spirit is the Rule that leads into all Truth so saith Christ Note Here he belyes and wrongs Christ's Words Christ did not say the Spirit is the Rule the Spirit is the Leader who leads us into all Truth by the Line or Rule of the holy Scriptures we not having those extraordinary Leading that the Apostles had Nor is this a meer Strife of Words but a most necessary Controversie which is the Foundation of their Deism and their overthrowing Christiany and yet this very Year they have reprinted W. P's Discourse concerning the general Rule of Faith and Practice who brings fourteen Arguments to prove that the Scriptures are not the general Rule of Faith and Practice to which I have answered in my late Book in Print called The Deism of W. P. c. Three of which Arguments of his are 1. From their Imperfection Switch pag. 46. 2. Their Uncertainty 3. Their Obscurity Yea Jos Wyeth in his Switch chargeth the Scriptures with Vncertainty This is a most dangerous Heresie for by this Principle they are not obliged to believe one intire Doctrine in the Apostles Creed as indeed I could easily prove by their Principles they do not believe one intire Article in that called The Apostles Creed G. F. G. M. saith The Apostle doth not tell us of a Creed but the Pope's Canon Book p. 355. yet the Quakers now say they believe that called The Apostles Creed For seeing by denying the Scriptures to be either the Medium or Rule of their Faith what account can they give for their Faith to believe one peculiar Article of Christianity If they say they have a peculiar Inspiration from the Light within to believe these peculiar Doctrines this in the first place throws down the common Illumination from being the universal Rule for common and peculiar are differing things But next It is a meer Fiction if they should say they have such a peculiar Inspiration without Scripture viz. to believe that Christ was born of a Virgin died for our Sins rose again the third Day W. P. grants the Light within doth not reveal these things to them nor is it needful and he grants the Scriptures are an historical Rule but he will not allow that the Belief of the History of Christ's Birth Death c. is necessary to our Salvation It is none of the absolute Necessaries he saith But they have not only denied the Scriptures to be the Word the Rule the external Medium of Faith but have given them Names of Contempt particularly G. F. who has called them earthly and carnal Death Ink and Paper Dust and Serpents Meat G. F's Truth 's Defence p. 14 102. See several Papers given forth c. p. 45 46. So Dust is the Serpents Meat their Original is but Dust which is but the Letter which is Death so these Serpents feed upon Dust which feed upon all these carnal things and their Gospel is Dust Matthew Mark Luke and John which is the Letter The cursed Serpent is in the Letter R. Hub's Words Truth 's Def. p. 102. Is not this to fright People from reading the Letter to tell them the cursed Serpent i. e. the Devil is in it Their common Defence is that G. F. meant all this of the Ink and Paper but none of all whom he calls Serpents that is the Protestant Churches did ever say that the Ink and Paper was the Gospel they meant the Doctrines and Truths declared by what is writ or printed with Ink on Paper As for the Switch Quotations out of G. M. to prove that some of his Opponents had said The Scripture is God yea the Letter of the Scripture is God Switch p. 15. and for Proof of this he quotes G. Fox G. M. p. 261. who affirmed that one Roger Atkinson affirmed That the Scripture is God but had this been so will that justifie G. F. â—his giving them such opprobrious Names if one or two Particulars did run into one Extream Will this justifie G. F. his running into the other Extream The bending a crooked Plant the contrary way will not serve his turn in this case But that G. Fox his Evidence is not to be trusted in his quoting his Opponents I shall clearly prove G. F. in his Great Mystery p. 247. quotes C. Wade for the same Trespass that he quotes Roger Atkinson for namely that Christopher Wade should affirm That the Scripture Letter was God and Christ for this he quotes his Book called Quakery Slain but no such Passage is to be found in all that Book and C. Wade in another Book of his entituled To all those called Quakers he charges G. F. with a Hellish Lye and Slander for affirming that he called the Letter God and Christ see this last Book of C. Wade p. 7. and compare it with his Quakery slain p. 16. and his Words in that p. 16. being That the Letter of the New Testament or Gospel containeth in it the mediate inspired teaching written VVord of Christ the VVord that was and is God which saith C. VVade is flat contrary to thy Lye And in his last cited Book the said C.
VVade mentions no less than twelve particular Lyes wherewith G. F. had belyed him in matter of fact as to his Quotations all which I have considered and so may others if they have the Books and will find them indeed to be abusive Perversions and Lies of G. F. upon this C. VVade but I shall give only two Instances more that out of the Mouth of two or three Witnesses that is plain matter of fact G. F. is guilty of false Quotations and belying the Innocent and yet these impudent Men will defend his Infallibility one of them is that G. F. in his G. M. p. 246. chargeth C. VVade to say O Luciferian Pride to save Souls to this C. VVade fully and effectually answereth and plainly detects the Lie and Perversion in his second Book where he shews out of the seventh and eighth Page of his Quakery slain that his Words were His crying out against James Milner ' s Luciferian Pride to save Souls as Christ did C. Wade's second Book p. 4. because he pretended himself to be Christ and audaciously took upon him to save Souls as Christ did by his suffering Death and hereupon James Milner did in a juggling manner die and in a juggling inchanting manner with a Knife and a Bason he pretended his Blood was shed to save the Souls of two VVomen this manner of saving Souls only C. Wade blames which G. F. either justifies or renders himself a Lyer by blaming C. Wade See the Places themselves The other Lye and Slander which G. F. is guilty of against C. Wade is that in his G. M. p. 247. he makes C. Wade to say God limits the Supreme Holy One by the inspired Writings of the Apostles but C. Wade's Words were That the Devil limits the Supreme Holy One see C. Wade's second Book p. 5. compared with p. 13. of Quakery slain Note If either the Switch or G. Whitehead could prove the like Perversions and Lies against the Author of the Snake as C. Wade hath here proved against G. F. how would they have sentenced him as indeed they have for things of small moment in comparison of what is here justly proved against their infallible Apostle as they pretend he was G. F But I do not know one Quotation of the Author of the Snake out of their Books wherein he hath in a substantial matter wronged him as G. F. here hath wronged C. Wade not only in these three but many more There yet remains two Quotations out of G. W's own Book called Truth defending the Quakers which he most fallaciously and sophistically endeavours to justifie The Question being put Whether the Quakers did esteem their Speakings to be of as great Authority as any Chapter in the Bible Truth and Inn. p. 16. 'T is answered That which is spoken from the Spirit of Truth in any is of as great Authority as the Scriptures and Chapters are and greater This same Quotation is objected in a late printed Sheet called An Account from Colchester where the following Words are set down that G. W. blames the Norfolk Priests for leaving out which he calls the annexed explanatory Words and they are these As Christ's VVords were of greater Authority when he spoke than the Pharises reading the Letter and they in whom that Spirit speaks not are out of the Authority of the Scriptures and their speaking we deny But first These Words are not explanatory but a sophistical Argument to prove the former Assertion for G. VV. argues That because Christ's preaching was of greater Authority than the Pharisees reading the Scriptures that therefore what the Spirit speaks in the Quakers and by them is of greater Authority than the Scriptures which is both a false and foolish Consequence for it supposes that the Spirit of God speaks in the Quakers when they preach or speak in Meetings as it did in Christ and in the Apostles viz. by the same divine Inspiration in kind and manner immediately and infallibly which cannot be granted and the Falsehood of it appears by the many false things that they speak and write contrary to the Scriptures And though he mentions not Quakers yet that he does understand them and none else is clear from his own Words He saith They in whom that Spirit speaks not their speaking we deny This supposeth he grants that the Spirit spoke in some which they did not deny and who were these but the Ministers among the Quakers seeing they deny the Ministry of all others in our Days Next he has an impertinent Question as to the Division of Chapters and Verses Can these Men say that was done by Divine Authority But this is wholly from the purpose Another Evasion is That the Spirit of Truth immediately ministring in Man or by any spiritual Minister is of greater Authority Power or Efficacy than the Chapters are simply considered as without the Spirit But simply considered as without the Spirit is wholly remote from the Question and is no ways to be allowed for any true Vindication because the Spirit doth as truly and frequently accompany the Scriptures when read as when preached or whatever is preached by the Spirit 's Assistance if the Hearers in reading be as sincere as the Hearers in preaching But if the Hearers be careless suppose Men preach by the Spirit it doth not follow that carnal and careless Hearers hear by the Spirit more than that they read or hear what is read by the Spirit But if he will needs have the Words simply and abstractly considered without the Spirit be added to reading let them by the like reason be added to preaching what he adds of Christ and the Apostles living and powerful preaching being of greater Efficacy Power and Authority than the outward Writing or Scripture it self simply or abstractly considered as distinct from the Spirit As it was no Part of the Question nor Answer given by him in Truth 's Defence so it is altogether impertinent But he equivocates upon the Word Authority taking it for the effect it hath on the Hearers but that was not the Sense of the Word Authority in the Question asked but its Sense as it 's generally among all that treat of Scripture Authority above other Writings so taken the Obligation or Right that doth oblige or induce us to believe the Truth of them and that they are of divine Inspiration This is quite another thing than the Effect or Impression that Men feel in reading or hearing them read as well as when preached upon by way of expounding for whether the Effect or Influence and Impression be great or little as it is sometimes great and sometimes little and sometimes perhaps none upon hardned Hearts yet their Authority is still the same neither greater nor less at one time than another The other Quotation is taken out of his Truth defending and is objected against in that called An Account from Colchester to which a pretended Answer is given in that called Some Account from Colchester signed
by seven Quakers the Passage is this Is the Moral Law or ten Commandments a Rule to the Christian's Life Some Account from Colchester p. 9. to the End or is it not Ans Thou might as well ask if the moral Law as thou callest it be a Rule to Christ For the Christian's Life and Rule is Christ who is the End of the Law for Righteousness who came not to destroy but to fulfil it Note In their Answer they groslly equivocate in taking the Word Christian's Life in another Sense than was meant in the Query and is meant in common Speech By a Christian's Life is meant in the Query and common Speech a Christian's Practice and manner of Life with respect to his Thoughts Words and Actions Now though Christ is called in Scripture the Christian's Life by the Figure of a Metonimy being the Author of their Life yet he is not their Practice or Manner of Life their thinking speaking and acting and whereas they make it absurd to suppose that the moral Law was a Rule to Christ Here they shew their Ignorance and Error for the Man Christ had the moral Law for his Law and Rule and it did oblige him to Obedience and he fulfilled it in his own Person for he was made under the Law and though the Law is not a Rule to the Spirit of Christ in Believers yet it is a Rule of the Spirit whereby he rules them Next they say The said Answer appears not to be intended to make void the moral Law or ten Commandments but the contrary in asserting Christ to be the End of the Law for Righteousness and that he came not to destroy the Law but to fulfil it therefore the Righteousness thereof remains and is binding by the holy Spirit in every true Believer though not under the Law but under Grace which effectually teaches both to deny Vngodliness and worldly Lusts and to live righteously soberly and godly in this present VVorld Tit. 2. 11 12. which answers the Substance and End of the Law Note whereas they say The Righteousness of it remains and is binding by the holy Spirit in every true Believer how is it binding by the Spirit if it be not a Rule to every true Believer Doth the Spirit bind Believers to that which is no Rule or Law Again By their Limitation and Restriction of binding by the Spirit they make the moral Law as it is outwardly delivered in the holy Scriptures to have no Obligation upon Believers at all but only as it is inwardly revealed and given by the Spirit and thus Christ's Prophetical and Kingly Office as he outwardly delivered that Law to us is of no Force by their Answer whereas that Law and all the other Laws of Christ have their binding Authority over Believers from Christ the great Prophet and King and Head of his Church as without them delivered by him to them and sealed by his Spirit in their Hearts and though the Spirit of Christ in Christ himself and in the Prophets and Apostles was a Lawgiver to Men yet the Spirit is not a Lawgiver as in us because his Law is sufficiently given already by Christ and by his Spirit in Christ and in his Prophets and Apostles But the Work and Office of the Spirit in us and all Believers is to perswade us of the Truth and Authority of the Laws of Christ already given to enlighten our Minds to understand them and inwardly to strengthen us by his Grace and gracious Influences and Operations to obey them But to hold that the holy Spirit is any Lawgiver to Believers since the Days of Christ and the Apostles is of no less dangerous Consequence than to overthrow Christianity and introduce Deism and Mahumetism For indeed upon that Pretence the Laws of the Turks Alcoran are set up and by the same Pretence G. F. did throw down Christ's Institutions of Baptism and the Supper and Church-Government by Pastors and Elders and set up Laws and Rules that he pretended to have given him by the Spirit and this was the Pretence of the ancient Montanists Yea W. Penn on this very Pretence rejects Baptism and the Supper affirming That the same Spirit that led the Apostles to reject Circumcision hath led the Quakers to reject the outward Baptism and Supper Lastly whereas they say A Believer is not under the Law but under Grace this doth not justifie their vile Heresie That the moral Law is not a Rule of Life to Christians for though they are not under the Curse and Condemnation of it nor as it is a Law of Works so as thereby to be justified yet they are under it even as outwardly given by Christ and his Prophets and Apostles as a Rule of Life And thus as they disannul and make void the moral Law of the Ten Commandments so all the other positive Laws and Commands of the Gospel making the Gospel nothing but the Light within all Mankind and Gospel Commands nothing but what that dictates though they are not agreed about the Commands of the Light within either their Number or Duration or whether there are any new Commands given in this Age as G. F. pretends was given to him and by him to the Quakers But again How doth it appear that their Answer doth not make void the moral Law or Ten Commandments when they reject the Morality of the fourth Commandment and do not allow that one Day of seven is to be observed and to be sanctified by abstaining from servile Labour and giving that Day to religious Exercise as appears from another Quotation in that called An Account from Colchester taken out of G. W's Truth defending To which they pretend to give answer in that called Some Account from Colchester p. 11. Did that Quaker sin therein or not who brought lately on the Lord's Day an old Doublet into Dr. Gell ' s Church in London and sate upon the Communion Table mending it while the Dr. was preaching the Parishoners forbidding him In their Answer they expostulate with him as if it were Popery 〈◊〉 it a Crime Sin to work upon the Communion Table as if it were a more holy Place than another But though it have no inherent Holiness yet it being dedicated to that Use every sober Christian will say it was a great Sin by diverse aggravating Circumstances as done in Contempt of the Institution of our Lord himself who appointed the Practice of breaking of Bread and that there should be a Table is evident from Scripture that mentions the Table of the Lord. Secondly The doing of it while the Dr. was preaching Thirdly The wilful Offence designedly given to the People present upon Pretence of bearing witness against their Idolatry and idolatrous Practice as the Quakers were wont to censure it Fourthly The doing of it on the first Day of the Week set apart from servile Labour to the Worship of God Fifthly The Breach of that golden Law of Equity Not doing as they would be done by
greater but indeed it hath none at all against three distinct Persons for there is a plain Distinction of a Medium in created Beings betwixt Substance and Nothing the three Dimensions of a Body Length Breadth and Depth are neither three Nothings nor three Substances the Understanding Will and Locomotive Power of Man's Soul are neither three Nothings nor three Substances and yet they are but one Soul though all Creaturely Similitudes are improper to express this Mystery Beside how could a Manifestation become Flesh or take Man's Nature as the Son did And how could one Manifestation send another or beget another or a third Manifestation proceed from two other Manifestations But whereas Jos VVyeth saith in his Switch p. 184. VVe own their Distinction in all the Instances of it recorded in Holy VVrit In contradiction to this hear F. Hougil in his Collection p. 251. he calls it damnable Doctrine to say That Christ must be distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost Before in God and now from God their Quibble about separate doth not help them for some that have so called them have declared they meant nothing by separate but distinct and now if Jos VVyeth and G. VV. will have distinct to signifie separate seeing they pretend to own the Distinction of the Father and the Son they must own the Separation And whereas the Teachers among the Quakers profess they are not changed in any thing of Doctrine or Practice from what they were from the Beginning for Truth is one say they and changes not and as God is one and Truth is one and changeth not so his People are one Now let us compare the Doctrine of G. VVhitehead what it was in the Year 1659. when he writ his Truth defending the Quakers which he said was written from the Spirit of Truth concerning the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity and what it was in the Year 1697 when he wrote his Antidote against the Venome of the Snake In his Truth defending c. printed 1659. in p. 2. he saith VVhat the Scripture saith of the Godhead the Father the VVord and the Spirit which are one 1 Joh. 5. 7. we own but deny the Popish Term of three distinct Persons which you call God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost which tends to the dividing God and to the making three Gods Note here he not only denies the three Persons but the Orthodox and Scriptural Explanation of them of God the Father God the Son and God the Holy Ghost And thou who hast vindicated such a Dream could never prove it by the Scripture when thou wast put upon it And do not you Priests in your Divinity as you call it affirm that a Person is a single rational compleat Substance and differing from another by an incommunicable Property And art thou so blind as to think that there is such a Difference in the Godhead Seeing Christ is equal with his Father who is a Spirit then what incommunicable Property can he differ in from the Father that is not communicable to the one as well as the other Here we see he not only opposes the Terms Three Persons but the Distinction of the Three their incommunicable Properties which are these That the Father begot the Son from everlasting the Son was begot of the Father from everlasting and the Holy Ghost did proceed both from the Father and the Son from everlasting and surely the Father's Property is incommunicable to the Son and so is the Son 's to the Father and the Holy Ghost's Property to both for it cannot be said that the Son begot the Father or that the Son is the Father c. or that the Holy Ghost is either the Father or the Son But now let us hear his late Doctrine in his printed Antidote 1697. p. 139. Though 't is true saith he in one Sense the Father Son and Holy Ghost are not essentially distinct as to their divine Being which is but one they are but one God but in respect to their Properties of Relation as Father Son and Holy Ghost as such they are distinct but not divided nor separate either in themselves or VVork of the old or new Creation First G. VV. should tell us where doth he find in Scripture in express Terms that they are distinct in respect to their Properties of Relation Secondly Whether these Properties of Relation are communicable or incommunicable Properties Surely he must say incommunicable and that he did in his Book Truth defending expresly deny For if he should say these Properties are communicable such as God's absolute Properties are as holy wise good c. then the Son might beget and the Father might be begotten And lastly Seeing he now owns a Distinction of Properties of Relation though in unscripture Terms he must by good consequence own three Persons to be the Subjects of those Properties for no Properties or Predicates or Attributes can be without their proper Subjects for though it is the Father's Property to have begot the Son from everlasting yet the Father is not a Property but the Person or Subject that has that Property Thus we see how Proteus-like G. VV. has changed his Shapes in the Years 1659. and 1697. and yet there is no Shadow of Change in him for all this if we will believe him But further by some of his late Books we shall find him not only owning the Distinction of the three in respect to their Properties of Relation but advanced much nearer so far as to disown his former Opposition to the Terms Three Persons which in his Book called Ishmael that was his jointly with others he had charged his Opponent to have conjured out of one and told him that both they and he are shut up in perpetual Darkness for the Lake and this he doth in two several Books one printed in the Year 1690. called The Christianity of the People commonly called Quakers where he sets down the Words quoted out of his Ishmael more largely the other called Truth and Innocency printed this very Year 1699. where he leaves out the most offensive Words and puts an c. in their room as being I supose ashamed of them and well he might but he is not ashamed to affirm he is not changed in his Faith But let us hear how he excuseth what he writ in his Ishmael that was printed in the Year 1655. Truth and Inn. p. 51. Though his Name is at the Book yet he positively disowns the Words and affirms They are none of his and that he writ not that Part of the Answer to Townsend And in his Book called The Christianity c. above mentioned he saith He looks on the Words as wrong writ or wrong printed and that he raced them out or corrected them long since where he has met with that Answer But is not this a Piece of dull Sophistry to save the Credit of his Infallibility Had he not better more like a Man and a Christian
owned the Person of the Father G. M. p. 247. But thou saith Christ doth not dwell in them personally doth not Christ dwell in his Saints as he is in the Person of the Father the Substance And are not they of his Flesh and of his Bone Again G. Fox G.M. p. 248. owns expresly Christ's Person for first having cited his Opponent's Words It is a false thing to say Christ's Person is in Man in his Answer without finding the least fault with the Term Person he makes Opposition thus VVhich is as much as to say none are of his Flesh or of his Bone nor eat it nor had not his Substance By this it appears that G. F. did not find fault either with the Word Person as belonging to the Father or with Christ's Person but he will not allow them to be two Persons but one Person But if any will say he allowed them to be two Persons then by the Arguments both of G. F. and G. VV. they must be two Gods for if three Persons infer by Argument three Gods by the same Argument two Persons will infer two Gods The above mentioned Words of G. F. in G. M. Doth not Christ dwell in his Saints as he is in the Person of the Father the Substance Jos VVyeth in his Switch recites as quoted out of the Snakâ— Here the Switch finds no fault with G. Fox's owning the Person of the Father which were G. F's own Words but labors to prove that by that spiritual Oneness betwixt Christ and his Followers G.F. did not mean to make the Soul of the same Person and Substance with God which how ineffectual his Labor is in that may be shewn afterwards Note that the Switch doth justifie G. F. his Saying That God the Father did take upon him Humane Nature p. 190. and in Truth 's defence by G. F. p. 85. The Son's Body is called the Father's they are one not two viz. the Son and the Father But here once more on this Head let us take notice of G. VV 's Fallibility and self Contradiction in most evident manner In his Light and Life p. 47. he blames his Opponent VV. B. for these Words following concerning Christ Now as he was God he was Co-creator with the Father and so was before Abraham and had Glory with God before the VVorld was and in this Sense came down from Heaven To this G.VV. replies VVhat Nonsence and unscripture Language is this to tell of God being Co-creator with the Father or that God had Glory with God Doth not this imply two Gods and that God had a Father let the Reader judge Note how he calleth it Nonsence and unscripture Language to say That Christ as God had Glory with God and that he had a Father which is a plain Evidence that G. VV. denied the eternal divine Generation of the Son contrary both to the Nicene and Athanasian Creed and Scripture also But let us see how he excuses himself in his Antidote p. 188. But the Phrase God Co-creator with God I think still implies two Creators and consequently two Gods 'T is not the Particle Co with in this case will excuse the matter for Co or Con is simul together as Co-workers Co-partners which are more distinct Agents than one but the Creator is but one God one VVord one Spirit and so one Creator Note Here we see the Force of G. VV's Argument against Christ the Word being God Co-creator with the Father is that it would infer the Father and the Son to be Co-workers and consequently two Gods This Antidote he writ in the Year 1697. but in the Year 1674. wherein he published his Quakers Plainness in p. 24. he allows the Father and the Son to be Co-workers in the following Words That the Distinction of the Father and the Son is not only nominal as this Opposer implies against us but real in the divine Relation of Father and Son the Son as being the only begotten of the Father and also known as Co-workers in the Order and Degrees of Manifestation and Discovery where it is plain by his late manner of arguing in his Antidote against the Father and the Son being Co-workers that it doth infer two Gods that in his Saying in his Quakers Plainness as above quoted That the Father and the Son are known as Co-workers he has rendred himself guilty by his own Argument of holding the Father and the Son to be two Gods This is not only a Contradiction to himself but a severe Censure on himself that in the Year 1674. he was guilty of Idolatry in holding That the Father and the Son are two Gods Note Reader that the Quakers use to object two things against my charging Contradictions upon G. W. and other their principal Authors First That I have contradicted my self in my former and later Writings To this I have answered What in my later Writings I have retracted of my former Errors is no Contradiction for that 's a Contradiction when a Man holds contradictory Propositions to be both true simul semel without retracting his Errors But what a Man retracts he is no more chargeable with let G. W. and his Brethren retract their Errors and I shall cease to charge them with them or with Contradictions Secondly they object That I may find as many Contradictions in the Scriptures as in their Books Thus we see how they undervalue the Scriptures to be as contradictory as their Authors but I deny there are any real Contradictions in the Scriptures but there are many in the Quakers Authors Again further hear a Quotation out of the Primmer of G. F. junior and S. Crisp p. 24. And they that come to see and know the Son they come to see and know the Father also for the Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father as saith the Scriptures and they are called by one Name which is The Word or The Light For the Word is God and Christ is the Word and God is Light and Christ is the Light of the World and the Spirit of Life proceeds from God and Christ who are Light Note Seeing they hold that the Father and the Son are called by one Name which is The Word and that the Father is the Word and the Son is the Word it is evident they make no Distinction betwixt the Father and Son and therefore according to their false Doctrine seeing the Word was made Flesh and the Father is the Word the Father was made Flesh the Father was born of a Virgin the Father suffered Death on the Cross yea the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father which is a plain overturning the great Fundamentals of Christianity yet this Primmer is so highly magnified among the Quakers that almost every Family of them have it to teach it their Children and they call it in the Preface A Fruit of the Plant of Righteousness given forth for the removing the Vse of such Books and Catechisins as
mean Jesus of Nazareth who is both God and Man the Word made Flesh as is clear from the foregoing Words even Christ crucified as being the Author of those Graces Blessings and Virtues unto all sincere Believers in him by bestowing on them his holy Spirit to indue them with Wisdom and Sanctification and freely imputing his Righteousness that he wrought in his own Person without them for their Justification and Redemption Also David in calling the Lord his Light and Salvation had a Respect to God in Christ even the Man Christ who was to come out of his Loins as the Object of his Faith for Redemption and Salvation But the whole Tendency of W. P's Discourse in that Passage and in other Passages going before and following is to perswade that Men are Christians if they have these moral Virtues without Faith in Christ as he was outwardly crucified for in the Enumeration of these Virtues he has not the least Word of Faith in Christ crucified as necessary to Christianity but pleads for a false Notion of the Christian Faith p. 118. At he that believes in Christ believes in God so he that believes in God believes in Christ Thus making Faith in Christ to be nothing else but a Belief in God as a Creator without any Respect to Christ crucified And p. 119. a little after that scandalous Passage above quoted he saith Christians ought to be distinguished by their Likeness to Christ and not their Notions of Christ which is likewise scandalous as implyâ— That Men may be like Christ without true Notions of him and Faith in him 〈◊〉 Christ Jesus of Nazareth that died and rose again yea he pleads p. 118. That a meer just Man ought not to be excluded the Communion of Christians and that to exclude him is partial and cruel And at this rate professed Infidel Jews and Mahumetans if they be but meer just Men are to be received into Christian Society as good Christians indeed good enough to be Members of the Quakers Church But now let us see how the following scandalous Passages quoted out of G. VV's own Books are defended by the Colchester Quakers in that they call Some Account from Colchester Some Account from Colchester p. 11. When you tell us you have Faith in Christ do you mean Christ whose Person is now ascended into Heaven above the Clouds or do you mean only a Christ within you Ans saith G.VV. Here thou would make two Christs a Christ whose Person is above the Clouds and a Christ within but how provest thou two such Christs VVe have Faith in that Christ that descended from the Father who is the same that ascended far above all Heavens and this Christ we witness in us who is not divided Note in their Vindication of this Passage they say This Answer appears pertinent to detect and reprehend an impertinent and foolish Question which whether it does not imply two Christs let the serious judge from the natural Import and Sense of the Question in the disjunctive Part of it or do you only mean a Christ within you Here their pretended Grammatical Skill of the Term disjunctive fails them To ask the Question disjunctively implies no more two Christs than it implies two George VVhiteheads to ask Is George VVhitehead a Londoner born or a North Country Man born in the North of England this doth not imply two G. Whiteheads But if one should say George Whitehead was born in the North of England some 64 Years ago and since that was born in London this would import two G. Whiteheads very plainly And no less indeed do the Quakers wild Notions that many of them have printed even the Men of great Note among them import not only two Christs but many Christs even thousands and they have no way to extricate themselves of this Difficulty but sophistical Evasions for if ye ask them Was that the true Christ who was born at Bethlehem of a Virgin called Mary above 1600 Years ago and do they believe in that Christ They will tell you yea but they have this sophistical Sense that he was the Light within that Person that was outwardly born who is by a Metonimy called Christ the thing containing for the thing contained See W. Penn's Rejoinder p. 304 305. But that that outward Person was properly the Son of God we utterly deny said W.P. as above quoted But the most true and proper Christ is the Christ born in them and growing up in them from a holy thing or Seed to a Child born and then to the Mighty God which three Steps are orderly set down by W.B. in his printed Collection p. 291. See third narrative p. 37. And he tells who is the Virgin in whom this Child is born not the Virgin Mary but every Quaker who is converted to the Light within And because this Child is not born in them all at once but at different times as they witness the Work of Regeneration and as many as come to witness Regeneration as many regenerated Persons there are in the World as many times Christ is born and though they say Christ is one in all and would defend their so saying by Scripture yet they mean not as the Scripture means for Christ as he is God is the same in all and as he dwells in all the faithful by his Spirit and by Faith yet not so as that Christ is really and truly begotten and born in regenerate Persons without any Alleâ—â—â—y as they hold for they make Christ as both without the Figure and Allâ—â—â—â—â— and Christ as born within c. the Substance and on Supposition that the◠〈◊〉 so many real Births of Christ it is impossible they could be one Christ otherwise than specifically one though consisting of many Individuals as many Individuals of Men are called Man but they are not one numerical Man no more can Christ be one numerical Christ but many if he were really begotten and born in many as they say he is It 's true the Scripture speaks of Christ being formed in Believers but this is a metaphorical Expression and allegory even as the Image of Caesar on Gold or Silver is called Caesar so the true lively Image of Christ is called Christ in true Believers and that is the meaning of Christ formed in Believers so that if they would be content with the allegorical Sense of the Word Christ formed within begotten and born within as sound and sober Christians understand it none would blame them and that they laid no more Stress upon it than they should but the contrary they do so as to make the Christ thus born within the greater Reality and Mystery than Christ born without and to make that inward Birth to have no Dependence on Christ as born without us and as he died for our Sins and rose and ascended into Heaven in the true intire Nature of Man consisting of a created Soul and Body and so as to witness the inward Work of Regeneration to
not witness the Word to be made Flesh once but art one of the Antichrists and Deceivers which John speaks of that are entred into the World which cannot confess Jesus Christ come in the Flesh and therefore thou queriest whether the Word was made Flesh any more or oftner than once Which Query comes from thy dark polluted Mind who is out of the Light And p. 30. And when thou canst witness the Word to be made Flesh once then thou wilt know whether the Son of God was made of a Woman any more or oftner than once But thou art the Dragon that would devour the Man-child which the Woman has brought forth who shall rule all Nations with a Rod of Iron Note some Expositors on the Book of the Revelation have by the Woman understood the Church and by the Man-child the Life of Christ or Christ formed in true Belidvers by way of Allegory and Metaphor only as is above noted but they never understood that Christ strictly speaking without-all Allegory or Metaphor was ever begotten or born in time but once or was ever made of a Woman but once viz. when he was conceived by the Holy Ghost in the Womb of the Virgin and born of her But the chief Teachers among the Quakers such as G. F. G. W. and W. P. and E. B. hath made Christ's Birth of the Virgin Mary and his Death and Sufferings and Blood shed without them the Type and Allegory and Christ born within crucified within them risen and ascended within them the Reallity and greatest Mystery as is above proved Like to this is another Passage in G. Whiteheads Jacob found in a desert Land p. 6 7. And in Simplicity I was made to wait upon God and to endure the Cross of Christ though for a Time and Times the Enmity of the wicked one was strong against me within and without seeking to devour that Seed which thro' the Word of the Lord was begotten in me And the Misteries of God and his Kingdom was revealed in me who brought me out of Darkness through the Wilderness where the Man-child was preserved for a Time and Times and half a Time from the Wrath of the Dragon who would have slain the Man-child But now is he arisen in his Power and Zeal and the Prince of the World is cast out and he is born which is the everlasting Counseller the Prince of Peace quoting in the Margin Isa 9. 6. who hath sent War and the Fire and the Sword into the Earth Note This I find was generally their manner of preaching and writing both at their first Appearance and long after to tell People that Christ was begotten in them born in them crucified dead and buried risen and ascended into Heaven within them and that every one in order to eternal Salvation must know Christ thus begotten and born in them crucified dead buried risen and ascended and this inward Conception and Birth of Christ c. they made the greatest Mistery and Reallity whereof Christ as born without in the Flesh was the Figure and a facile Representation to use W. P's Phrase in the case of what is to be transacted in us thus they did represent the inward Work of Regeneration to be a greater Mistery than God manifest in the Flesh viz. in that Body of Flesh that was born at Bethlehem as W. P. hath expresly affirmed as is above quoted And by this high sublime Doctrine which they gave forth to be given them by immediate Revelation from Heaven though it was no other but what G. F. had from some old Ranters and Familists who had it long before him They did mightily magnifie themselves above all others and cried out against all others as dark ignorant Sots Deceivers and Antichrists who denied Christ come in the Flesh because they did not receive this wild Notion they had got from Ranters and Familists That Christ was born crucified dead buried risen and ascended in them and though while I was with them I was not altogether ignorant that they had such Phrases and Methods of Speech as I had read in some of their Books yet I thought they understood it only by way of Allegory and Metaphor as Origen Augustine c. Some others of the Fathers both Greek and Latine used the like allegorical Phrases and which I my self have partly used in some of my former Books only by way of Allegory and Metaphor But I appeal to all who shall but impartially consider what I have above quoted out of their Books whether they will not judge and say that these Teachers of the Quakers whose Words I have quoted plainly import quite another thing than an allegorical Birth Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ in them even that which is real without an Allegory Metaphor or Figure for as G. F. said in Saul's Errand Christ's Flesh is a Figure and Christ in his People is the Substance of all Figures and consequently of that Figure also Besides if they meant it only by way of Allegory and Metaphor why did they cry out against all others as Antichrists Deceivers blind and dark Sots who did not receive this their Notion but opposed it as antichristian But if they had plainly told that they meant it not otherwise but by way of Allegory and Metaphor I know none that would have opposed them in that case But as in some other things after the Quakers have made a great Compass and yet return to say the same with others from whom they differed so in this very thing after all that G.W. as much as any had formerly contended for Christ begotten and both within suffering within his Blood shed within being a Sacrifice within Men to appease the Wrath of God and giving much more to Christ thus born within suffering within his Blood shed within than to Christ born without this Blood shed without being a Type of his Blood shed within Yet in his Judgment fixed printed 1682. which was 26. Years after his Jacob found in a desert Land printed 1656. above quoted he turns all that he had formerly writ and contended for Christ born within suffering within desiring to be freed from Sin into an Elegancy of Speech the Property and Effect being put for the Cause which is no more nor other than what all Christian Teachers and Expositors affirm For this hear what he saith in answer to his Opponent Jeffery Bullock who charged the Quakers with false Doctrine in saying That God's Appearance is to his Son Jesus Christs and for the begetting and bringing him forth in the Sons and Daughters of Men the which Doctrine said J. B. I do deny To this G.W. after some foregoing Words answereth in his Judgment fixed p. 330. This innocent Birth which God by his Spirit brings forth in the Sons and Daughters of Men who truly believe relate to them and their Souls as begotten and born of the immortal Seed by the living Word so that this Birth is not Christ Jesus What say the
Quaker Zealots to this flat Denial of his own and his Brethrens former Doctrine and yet this without any Change in him he is the same infallible G. W. still for he is that incorruptible Seed and Word of Life which begets Forms and brings forth the Soul of Man into his own Nature and Image and so he renews his own Image in Man that believes in his Power and so Christ may be said to be formed in us as in a misterious and elegant way of speaking the Property and Effect being put for the Cause for Christ in himself hath all Power in Heaven an Earth given to him and it hath pleased the Father that all Fullness should dwell in him Again in Judgment fixed p. 322. We deny the Doctrine that the Word GOD is in Bondage or Captivity in the Sons and Daughters of Men but only that there is a Seed of God and of Christ that is opressed and suffers in many by reason of Transgression A Seed of God is commonly our Phrase and Terms in this case And p. 124. These are certain Allusions and Elegancies Note this is expresly contradictory to what he hath frequently printed in his other Books particularly to what is at great length quoted above out of his He-goat◠Horn p. 8. and his Brief Discovery p. 21. where he calls the Seed that suffers within People and that desires to be freed from Sin Christ and the Lamb that was slain that is worthy to receive Power and Wisdom and Riches and Strength and Honour and Glory and Blessing Now if by Christ the Lamb that was slain within the Seed that suffers within and desires to be freed from Sin c. G. W. does not mean Christ really and strictly speaking but will have it to be a misterious and elegant way of speaking the Property and Effect being put for the Cause so that by the Seed Christ in Men according to his Explication in Judgment fixed just now given he meaneth only the created Souls of Men as begotten and born of the immortal Seed then how will this agree with his making the created Soul as begotten and born of the immortal Seed to be the Lamb that was slain who is worthy to receive Power and Riches and Wisdom and Strength and Honour and Glory and Blessing Rev. 5. 12. which is a Doxology of divine Praise and an Act of divine Worship given to that Lamb by Angels and Saints and seeing according to G. W's Explication here given in his Judgment fixed the Seed that is born in them suffers in them slain in them is neither God nor Christ and yet had divine Worship and Honour given thereto by Angels and Saints It follows that according to G. W. divine Adoration is due to regenerated Souls of Men or at least to something in the Souls of regenerated Men that is neither God nor Christ but a meer Creature which is abominable Idolatry and yet justified here by G. W. in his Judgment fixed compared with his He goats Horn. I cannot understand how G. W. can clear himself here unless he should tell us of another elegant way of speaking that is to give to this Allegorical Christ Jesus born within them the Lamb that was slain within them an allegorical divine Adoration and Worship and that it was only this allegorical divine Adoration that the Saints and Angels gave to this Lamb slain within Men Rev. 5. 12. But how nonsensical and idle any such Gloss would be I need not shew and yet I suppose it is the best he can find But again that not only a Seed of God suffers in Men by their Sins but that God and Christ as God suffers in Men by their Sins in plain Contradiction to what he has delivered in his Judgment fixed is evident from his Divinity of Christ p. 55. 5◠where he hath these following Words in Opposition to T. Vincent who had affirmed That Christ as God did not suffer but only as Man VVhereas saith he T. V. had affirmed That Christ as God could not suffer As to his saying That God cannot suffer is in one Sense not true though he intended as to Death yet the Spirit of God hath suffered and hath been grieved by Man's Transgressions And for this he cites Isa 63. 10. Amos 2. 13. Hos 11. 8 9. Psal 95. Gen. 6. 6. Psal 78. 40. Isa 1. 7 13. and Isa 43. 24 25. Note Here the State of the Controversie betwixt G. VV. and T. V. was not about a metaphorical suffering of God but a real which is here affirmed by G. VV. in Contradiction to what he has said in his Judgment fixed as above quoted And because G. VV. in his Judgment fixed p. 322. blames Jeffery Bullock for his dealing unfairly and fallaciously with charging it on the Quakers for preaching and printing That the Seed Spirit Word or God is both in Prison Bondage and Captivity and to be quickned raised c. withal adding That the said J. B. hath not produced any Book of ours or our Friends wherein this Doctrine is printed Surely G. VV. had a very treacherous Memory or writ this against his own Conscience seeing he had writ so expresly himself in his former Books as is above quoted out of his He-goats Horn his Brief Discovery and his Divinity of Christ all which were in print before J. B. gave this Charge against them And as to his Distinction betwixt God or Christ and a Seed of God or Christ that is oppressed and suffers in Men by their Sins as if it were not either God or Christ that thus suffers in Men by their Sins this is contradictory to G. W's own former Doctrine who brought Amos 2. 13. to prove that God suffers in Men by their Sins viz. not metaphorically by that Figure commonly called Anthropopathia but really which was the only State of the Controversie Behold I am pressed under you as a Cart that is full of Sheaves Now seeing this must be understood literally and strictly according to G. W. it must be a very great Suffering that he thinks God suffers in Men by their Sins that may be said to amount to an Oppression which yet he denies is applicable to God in his Judgment fixed And seeing the Seed within that is slain he would have it in his He-goats Horn to be the Lamb that was slain Rev. 5. 12. to whom the Angels gave divine Worship he must needs own that Seed to be Christ and that Christ to be God and consequently not only that God suffers in Men by their Sins but is slain in them or else confess Idolatry to be lawful But that the Seed that is within Men that W. Penn will have to be the promised Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Head of the Serpent is Christ and God over all blessed for ev̄er more Take his express Words in his Christian Quaker p. 97 98. The Seed of the Promise is an holy and spiritual Principle of Light Life and Power that being
more which might be quoted out of them and others it evidently appears that the greatest things that are written of Christ either by Prophecy in the Old Testament or fulfilled in the New Testament his outward Birth his Incarnation his taking hold not of Angels but the Seed of Abraham his Sacrifice and Offering his Blood Death Burial Resurrection Ascension yea his being tempted by Satan in the World is all applied to the Seed Christ within as the great Mistery of Godliness yea as greater than God manifest in Flesh without as is quoted out of W. Penn and as concerning Christ's Flesh without that 's a Figure but Christ within is the Substance Now to apply all this in way of Allegory to Christ incarnate within the Seed that the Spirit takes hold of to use G. F's Words that looks like an Incarnation of the Holy Ghost in G. F. and his Brethren is too rash and goeth beyond the Bounds of Sobriety But to turn it all to the greatest Reallity and all that 's said of Christ without to be the Allegory and Figure of the Substance within as is effectually proved is a plain overthrowing the Christian Faith But it 's very hard to conceive how this Seed Christ within as G. F. holds it forth was or could be tempted of the Devil to lust after the Creature seeing as he will have it it is no Creature it self can it be supposed that the Devil would or could tempt the Godhead to lust after the Creature and what this Seed can be which G. F. calls Christ that 's buried in the wicked and elsewhere the Spirit and Spirits in Prison yea the Prisoners in Hell that the Quakers have preached to that 's no Creature nor God nor any Part of the divine Essence for that cannot be divided into Parts is unaccountable There yet remains three or four Passages which were objected in a printed Sheet called An Account from Colchester against G. W. and E. B. to which these seven Quakers in Colchester have given their Reply by way of Vindication but all grosly fallacious in that they call Some Account from Calchester as we shall see in what follows It was objected against G. W. out of his Truth defending the Quakers page 65. Christopher Wade affirmeth That our blessed Saviour doth instruct Men to lay fast hold of and to abide in such a Faith which confideth in himself being without Men. To this G. W. answereth That 's contrary to the Apostles Doctrine who preached the Word of Faith that was in their Hearts and the Saints Faith stood in the Power of God which was in them Their Defence is That George White head 's Intent in this Answer was not against C. Wade's excluding Christ's spiritual Appearance and Work of Righteousness out of his Saints by affirming That our blessed Saviour doth totally condomn all such Faith which doth trust that Men are righteous in their own Bodies by what Spirit soever either from Heaven or elsewhere that Righteousness is wrought in Mens Bodies p. ibid. Whereby â—e opposed Christ's Work of Regeneration in true Believers as also his affirming that the true Christ doth prove himself not to be a Spirit To this I say suppose C. Wade had erred on the one hand this doth not justifie this most scandalous Assertion of George Whitehead That it is contrary to Rom. 10. to confide in Christ without Men whereas Rom. 10. 8 9 10. teacheth us That to to believe in Christ without us and so to confess him is necessary to our Salvation It 's observable how both they and G. W. himself waves giving a plain and positive Answer to this great Objection They say indeed in page 21. As there is one Lord Jesus Christ and one true Faith in him this Faith respects Christ both as without us in the Heavens and as he is in the Hearts of his Saints But they do not tell what they mean by Christ as without us in the Heavens not one Word of their Faith in Christ as he is both God and Man and who as Man consisting of a created Soul and Body the same in Nature with the Nature of other Men but without Sin is in the Heavens in our glorified Nature This being the thing that is mainly objected on this Head and which they will not nor dare not give a plain Answer unto nor G. W. either for it will detect his and their gross Error or if they or he give a sound Answer it will prove they are changed and that will reflect on G. W's Infallibility But they grosly abuse C. Wade for his sound Doctrine which G. W. has not fairly nor duely represented for C. Wade in that very Page doth clear himself both against a lying Charge first in G. F. who charged him That he did totally exclude Works without any Distinction G. M. p. 298. And the like false Charge doth G. W. load him with That he opposed Christ's Work of Regeneration in true Believers which is an extremely false Charge against him as he sheweth at length but he did only exclude them from being the meritorious Cause of our Justification and the Foundation of our Faith so that though Sanctification and good Works are necessary and none can be either justified or saved without them yet we must not trust in them nor make a Saviour of them But it 's no Wonder that G. W. blames this Doctrine who in his Voice of Wisdom pleads for the Meritoriousness of good Works in Men as grosly as the grossest Papists yea and much more grosly as we may see in its proper Place But this is G. W. and his Brethrens common Work to misrepresent their Opponents to hide their own vile Heresies And as for C. Wade's saying Christ proved himself not to be a Spirit to wit a meer Spirit as he explains himself he quoted for it Christ's own Words Handle me and feel me for a Spirit has not Flesh and Bones as ye see me have and was not that a sufficient Proof that the Man Christ was not a meer Spirit Proofs on the sixth Head Concerning the Soul Whether the Soul of Man is a Part of God G. VVhitehead is at great Pains in his Truth and Innocency page 7. and 9. to prove that when George Fox said The Soul was a Part of God and of God's Being he did not mean the rational Soul of Man and which he calls the reasonable Soul or Spirit formed in Man but that divine Inspiration or Breath of Life whereby Man became a living Soul as the great and universal Soul of Mankind even the Soul or Life of the Soul as some phrase it And Joseph VVyeth in his Switch page 53. pleads That he meant not That the created Soul was a Part of God and will have it that George Fox held That the Soul of Man was created But none of them give the least effectual Proof out of his Books where George Fox mentions any created Soul to be in Man that is not a
work by the Spirit 's help that are meritorious of Justification But this will not excuse them from Popery for even Bellarmine a great Popish Author and the other Popish Authors plead only for the merit of such good Works which merit by Condignity as wrought by the help of the Holy Spirit assisting them And his Sophistry is as dull in his drawing an Argument from 1 Cor. 1 30. That Christ is made unto us of God Wisdom and Righteousness and Sanctification and Redemption therefore that Believers are justified by an Infinite Righteousness wrought in them and that Christ is formed in them Gal. 4. 19. And thus he will have Christ as held forth in that Text 1 Cor. 1. 30. not to be Christ God-Man without us from and by whom we receive Justification and Redemption and also divine Wisdom and Sanctification by his holy Spirit that he sendeth into our Hearts and by his holy Doctrine outwardly taught us but Christ formed in us he will have to be all this unto us Judgment Fixed p. 330. and Christ formed in us is the Seed and the Seed is God over all blessed for ever as above-quoted both out of G. W. and W. P. But what then is become of his Exposition that he gave in his Judgment Fixed above-quoted That this Birth viz. Christ formed in true Believers is not Christ Jesus for he is that incorruptible Seed and Word of Life which begets forms and brings forth the Soul of Man into his own Nature and Image and so Christ may be said to be formed in us in a Mysterious and Elegant way of speaking the Property and Effect being put for the Cause Thus we see how he wavers to and fro betwixt So and No and No and So sometimes This and sometimes That and sometimes neither This nor That a Phrase that S. F. used to some of his Opponents but very justly apply'd to G. W. But differing senses and meanings are more tolerable for a Man to put on his Words than plain contradictions and especially in Matters Fundamental as these are Next let us hear what W. P. hath said on the Doctrine of Justification and how J. Wyeth in his Switch defends him W. Penn in his Serious Apology p. 148 gives the charge of his Opponent thus That we deny Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and therefore deny the Lord that bought us W. P. Answers And indeed this we deny and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which does now deluge the whole World What saith Jos Wyeth that hardy Champion to this Switch p. 238. Yes it is still true and that we do deny and boldly affirm to be the Doctrine of Devils and for our so denying and affirming we have the warrant of Holy Writ wherein is abundantly testifyed of the Spirit of Christ in Man to which he must be obedient in order to his Justification for which he quotes Rom. 3. 24 28. Rom. 5. 1. Titus 3. 7. and concludes then not wholly without us Note Here J. Wyeth acts the dull Sophister as much as his Elder Brother G. W. by perverting the true state of the Question as is their frequent manner The Question is not What is necessary by way of Instrument or Instrumental Application or Preparatory Condition in order to Justification such as Faith and Repentance for such are granted to be necessary in order to Justification as the stretching out the Hand is necessary to receive an Alms or free Gift and the opening the Mouth is necessary to receive Food but the true state of the Question is What is the procuring and purchasing Cause of our Justification before God by way of Merit or the Meritorious Cause of our Justification whether the Righteousness of Christ that he wrought without us by his Active and Passive Obedience above Sixteen Hundred Years ago Yea or Nay If Yea surely that is wholly without us but this says W. P. and J. W. is a Doctrine of Devils and G. W. chargeth T. D. with ignorance and false Doctrine for affirming it as above-quoted and yet it is the very plain Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures Isa 53. 4 5 11 12. Rom. 3. 21 22 23 24 25 28. Rom. 4. 4 11. Rom. 5. 18. Gal. 3. 22. 2 Cor. 5. 21. There are other Arguments which W. P. useth in his Serious Apology some of which I shall mention not to refute them for the least Child in Christianity may do that but to show his Error one of which is Death came by actual Sin not imputative therefore Justification unto Life comes by actual Righteousness and not imputative Another is This speaks Peace to the Wicked Another is Men are Dead and Alive at the same time by this Doctrine Note He perverts the state of the Question his Opponents do not say That Wicked and Unsanctified Persons are justified but if none be justified but who are Perfect vvith a Sinless Perfection and have not the least impurity then neither W. P. nor any Quaker ever vvas or is justified for vvhatever they boast of their Sinless Perfection their vile Errors Pride and Uncharitableness as vvell as other their Imperfections demonstrate the contrary Another of his Arguments is against our Justification by Christ's Righteousness without us Our rejoycing must be in our selves and not in another thus perverting Paul's Words Gal. 6. 4. But let every Man prove his own work and then shall he have rejoycing in himself and not in another But doth this exclude our rejoycing in Christ Jesus our Head who to be sure is another O sad How contrary to this is Philip 3. 3. For we are the Circumcision which worship God in the Spirit and rejoyce in Christ Jesus and have no confidence in the Flesh by this Argument of W. P. he for himself and his Brethren whose Faith he pretends to deliver renounces all Rejoycing as well as Faith and Righteousness in Christ without us yea and in Christ within them also for Christ within them if he be within them is Another Dare W. P. or G. W. say Christ in W. P. or G. W. is W. P. or G. W. But whereas G. W. in his Printed Paper above-quoted call'd A Few Positions c. saith We highly do value and esteem his Christ's Sufferings Death Precious Blood and whole Sacrifice for Sinners For a Proof of his Insincerity and Sophistry in this I shall produce some following Quotations what G. W. means by his Precious Blood and whether he put the due value upon Christ's Blood that was outwardly shed or upon another sort of inward Blood I cannot say of his and his Brethrens inventing but what they received from Familists and Ranters tho' they pretend to have it by immediate Inspiration to wit an inward Blood that is the Atonement and Sacrifice for Sin which Blood G. W. will not allow to be the
the Light within is not sufficient to Salvation or not sufficient without something else the which Proposition seeing he blames as false he must hold the contradictory to be true That the Light within is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else yea G. W. hath granted in his Antidote p. 28. That Christ as outwardly considered is that something else which G. K. meant This is an evident proof beside many others above-given That it is G. W.'s and his Brethren's Principle That the Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed on the Cross is not a meritorious Cause of our Salvation nay not so much as in part and that Faith in that Blood is not necessary for our Justification expresly contrary to Scripture Rom. 3. 25. Hence it is that neither in their Books nor Preachings is any thing generally of this Doctrine Preached That Christ God-Man as without us as he Died for us c. is the object and foundation of our Faith for remission of Sin and for our Justification and eternal Salvation but there is much to be both read in their Books and heard in their daily Preachings against the necessity of any such Faith The farthest that they go at this day is to Preach a little of him Historically and as an Example but to Preach him as without us in the true nature of Man to be the great Object of our Faith Love and Adoration they think is hurtful as above-proved yea W. Smith in his Primmer gives it as a mark of distinction whereby to know true Ministers from false They that are false Preach Christ without and bid People believe in him as he is in Heaven above Jos Wyeth's excuse of this in his Switch p. 220. is extreamly fallacious he thinks he may supply the defect in W. Smith's Words by an Ellipsis telling us The Church hath given abundant encouragement to supply Elliptick defects by her example and practise in the holy Scriptures and what is so familiarly done with holy Writ surely me may do with our Friends Books But to detect this fallacy what Elliptical defects the Church has supplied in some places of the holy Scripture she had ground so to do from other places of Scripture more full that taught her to make that supply but the case is far otherwise here it being so far from being the Quakers way generally to preach Faith in Christ without Men for Salvation that they oppose it and call them Reprobates who profess any such Faith and this their great Apostle G. F. has taught them by his Example so to do in his G. M. p. 248. he saith to C. Wade The Devil was in thee and thou saith thou art saved by Christ without thee and so hath recorded thy self to be a Reprobate and ignorant of the Mystery of Christ within thee for without that thou dost not know Salvation And yet this same C. Wade hath fully owned the Mystery of Christ within Switch p. 205. as above-quoted Jos Wyeth's excuse for G. F.'s saying to C. VVade The Devil was in him He saith Was for his stuffing his Book with Lyes but of this he gives not one Proof though I have given several evident Proofs That G. F. did grosly bely him To the other part of G. F.'s charge Thou art saved by Christ without thee Jos VVyeth Answereth It doth plainly contradict the Doctrine of the Apostle Thus we see what value he and all his Brethren have in whose Name he writes for Christ without us that he saith it plainly contradicts the Doctrine of the Apostle but by his so saying he palpably bewrays his and his Brethrens Infidelity and Heathenism and hath prepared a Rod for his own Back instead of a Switch for the Author of the Snake To suppose that C. VVade meant that he was saved by Christ without him without the inward Operation of Christ by the holy Spirit to Sanctifie him is great injustice done to him for he hath sufficiently cleared himself of that charge as I have above-quoted him But that Faith in Christ without us as he Died for our Sins c. is no part of the Quakers Faith or Systeme of Doctrine is evident from Jos VVâ—â—h's plain confession as above-noted it is none of the Systeme of Principles truly Orthodox or Substance of the Doctrine which the Light within has taught them for he wholly passeth it by p. 38. and yet tells us he has given us the Substance of what the Light within has taught them Besides who will consider W. Smith's Primer out of which the above given Quotation is taken will find that his Words wanted no Ellipsis to explain his sense for he gives it very fully to be his sense that the Light within is the only Foundation and that there is not another see this more largely quoted in my Third Narrative p. 11. Proofs out of the Quakers Books on the following Heads viz. Christ's Coming to Judgment The Resurrection of the Body The Light Within Baptism and the Lord's Supper Eighthly Concerning Christ's last Coming to Judgment G. F. in his G. M. p. 9. quotes J. Bunyan saying That the Place where Christ shall come to Judgment is at the Mount of Olives at the East-side of Jerusalem to this he Answers Thou hast put him far enough off from thee and hast not yet judged thy self and Christ is come to Judgment and so art one of the false Prophets who bids People look for him beyond the Sea lo here lo there but who are come to Christ the Light the Life they need not go forth who abide here are sealed by the Spirit puts not off the good and evil Day Note Waving that Question over what place on Earth Christ shall appear at his last Coming we see here That G. F. opposeth not only to the place of his Coming but to any outward and personal Coming yet to be and chargeth J. B. to be one of the false Prophets for asserting it and saith Christ is come to Judgment as if there were no other for that 's the true state of the Controversie betwixt J. B. and him J. B. did not deny that Christ was inwardly Come to reprove and judge for Sin but he asserted his Coming personally to Judgment without us also G. W. in his Light and Life p. 40. 41. Disputing with W. B. about Christ's outward Coming in his Glorified Body to Judge the Quick and the Dead answereth to the several Scriptures that W. B. brought for Christ's outward Coming at the end of the World and carries them all to his inward Coming already fulfilled such as 1 Thess 4. 15 17. and Acts 1. 9 10 11. Acts 2 32 33 34. Matth. 24. 30. and Verse 26. 14. and opposeth W. B. in his understanding them of his outward Coming in Glory at the end of the World And as to that 1 Thess 4. 17. saith G. W. which W. B. brings to prove that Christ shall come in the latter end of the World from Heaven above the Clouds
Ministers have most justly charged them concerning God Christ and the holy Scriptures 11thly and 12thly Concerning Baptism and the Lord's-Supper IN a Book call'd Some Principles of the Elect People of God in Scorn call'd Quakers p. 75. The Baptism we own which is the Baptism of Christ with the Holy Ghost and with Fire but we deny all other for there is but one Lord one Faith one Baptism one God and Father of all add they who would have one Baptism outward and another inward would have two Baptisms when the Scripture saith the Baptism is but one and whosoever hath the Baptism outward are the same they were before but the Baptism of Christ makes a new Creature And now I see the other to be formal Imitation and the invention of Man and so a meer Delusion and all are Heathens and no Christians who cannot witness this Baptism Matth 15. 4. who can witness this DENIES ALL OTHER for the Scripture saith the Baptism is but one And in p. 76. And are without feeding upon the Husk and Shadow which is carnal for the Bread which the World breaks is Carnal and Natural and only feeds the outward carnal Body and goeth into the Belly and so passeth out into the Dunghil and so likewise the Cup which they drink and so the Communion and Fellewship of the World passeth away but this is no nourishment to the Soul but still the Soul lies in Death and here is no Commnnion but natural outward and carnal of several Minds and Hearts full of Filthiness and Uncleanness which IS THE TABLE OF DEVILS Eating and Drinking their own Damnation not discerning the Lord's Body which is Spiritual which the natural Man discerns not W. P. in his Reason against Railing p. 108. I affirm by that one Scripture Heb. 9. 10. Circumcision is as much in force as Water-Baptism and the Paschal Lamb as Bread and Wine they were both Shadows and both elementary and perishable And we can testifie FROM THE SAME SPIRIT by which Paul renounced Circumcision that they are to be rejected as not now required neither have they since the false Church espoused and exalted them ever been taken up afresh by God's Command or in the leading of his Eternal Spirit and the Lord will appear to gather his People out of them but never to establish or keep People in them Note Notwithstanding the severe Censure that the Quakers have passed on the outward Administration of Baptism and the Lord's-Supper in the former Quotation and W. Penn in this latter Quotation in the one they say Baptism with Water and the Lord's-Supper with Bread and Wine are to BE DENYED WE DENY say they ALL OTHER and in the other W. P. saith they are to be REJECTED and this he saith they can testifie from the same Spirit by which Paul renounced Circumcision yet W. Penn in his Key Printed at London 1699. saith Hence it is that the People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them viz. the outward Administration of Baptism and the Supper that is saith he too hard a Word But they leave them off as fulfilled in Christ who is in them their hope of Glory Is there not here a palpable contradiction betwixt W. Penn and his Brethren He saith in his Key p. 28. The People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them that 's too hard and yet in the former Quotation they have used that very same Word WE DENY ALL OTHER say they and call it the Invention of Man and so a meer Delusion But it is fearful Delusion in them to call these so solemn Institutions of our Blessed Saviour expresly enjoyn'd to the end of the World and his coming to Judgment by such Names yea and the like contradiction is found betwixt W. P. in his Reason against Railing in the Year 1673. and the same W. P. in his Key Printed 1699. In the former he saith We can testifie from the same Spirit by which Paul rejected Circumcision that they are to be rejected In the latter he saith The People call'd Quakers cannot be said to deny them that 's too hard a Word yet we see they have denyed them both by Practise and verbal Confession yea and rejected them and with no less pretended Authority than the same Spirit by which Paul rejected Circumcision Where is now the Unity they boast of seeing in this as well as in divers other things of great weight they are so contradictory and unconstant to themselves and yet without all change if we will believe them And notwithstanding the severe Censure that the Quakers in general and G. W. in particular have passed on Baptism and the Lord's-Supper outwardly Administred calling them the Invention of Man a meer Delusion and Idolatry and the Lord's-Supper The Table of Devils and the Cup of Devils yet G. W. in his Antidote p. 114. Printed 1697 pretends a great deal of Moderation and Charity to some who practise them but without any change in him And tho' too many now are very Formal and Superstitious in those outward Observations and Shadows laying so much stress for Salvation upon them that they neglect the Substance yet others being more conscientiously tender in the observation thereof we are the more tender to these so as not to censure or condemn them meerly for practising that which they believe is their Duty either in breaking of Bread or Water Baptism yet desire they may see further Note What can this smooth Language of W. P. and G. W. concerning Baptism and the Supper now of late Years import or signifie to all impartial Persons but that thereby they seek to deceive the weak and simple seeing they will not acknowledge that they are changed in any respect from what they were in the beginning either in point of Perswasion or Charity They mean the same now as when they called them universally and without exception beggarly Elements worldly Rudiments Idolatry Invention of Man and meer Delusion But seeing they are not changed in their Faith and Perswasion concerning Water Baptism and the Supper they cannot with any good Conscience be changed in their being more charitable now then formerly so that G. W.'s saying they do not censure or condemn them who are more conscentiously tender in the observation thereof meerly for practising that which they believe is their duty is a meer fallacy Do they not condemn all visible Christian Societies but their own and call them Apostates the World Idolaters Worshippers of Baal and the Preachers belonging to those Societies Priests of Baal c. Do they not censure them who practise Idolatry and Man's Invention and meer Delusion as they have past Judgment on those outward practises to be such And if People's practising what they believe is their Duty being misled by an erring Conscience and Ignorance of Mind as the Quakers think all are so misled who practise the outward Baptism and Supper can excuse them from censure according to G. W.'s way of Argument they may extend
received into the Heart bruiseth the Serpent's Head and because the Seed which cannot be that Body viz. that was outwardly born of the Virgin is Christ as testifie the Scriptures the Seed is one and that Seed Christ and Christ God over all blest for ever But when is it that the Seed in Men is the Mighty God Is it at its first being received into the Heart according to W. P' s Notions Hear himself unriddle the Mistery in his Christian Quaker p. 98. And though particular Persons might arrive at great Attainments even to a beholding the Day of the Seeds compleat Redemption and Conquest over all its Oppressors Mark this G. Whitehead That the Seed which is Christ and God over all is for a time oppressed and suffers under its Oppressors which yet thou hast the Impudence to deny that any of thy Friends use any such Phrase when what was but in Condition of a Seed or new-born Child should become the only Son the wonderful Counseller the Mighty God the everlasting Father and Prince of Peace of the Encrease of whose Government there should be no End as speaks the Prophet yet it is granted through that good Vnderstanding the Lord has given us in these weighty things that the Generality were but weak dark and in Bondage as saith the Apostle under carnal and beggerly Elements not clearly seeing through those outward Services which if I may so speak God held them in Hand with condescending to their Weakness that he might both keep them from gadding after the pompous Invention and idolatrous Worship of other Nations and point out unto them under their great Carnality that more hidden Glory and spiritual Dispensation which should afterwards be revealed to wit the compleat Redemption of the Soul and Reign of the Holy Seed from the Child born and the Son given to the wonderful Counseller the mighty God the everlasting Father and Prince of Peace of the Increase of whose Government there should be no End Note Thus we see he wholly applies that most excellent Prophecy of Isaiah 9. 6. concerning the holy Seed and Child Jesus born of the Virgin whose Name is The Wonderful Counseller The Mighty God c. to a Seed or Principle within which groweth up from a Seed to a Child and from a Child to become the Only Son and so to become the Mighty God which exactly agreeth with that blasphemous Notion of W. Baily in the Collection of his Works p. 292 293. Be thou but the Virgin the Power of the most High shall overshadow thee and that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God this was Christ's Name in the VVomb read within and then had other Names as Jesus and Emanuel But the Virgin is subject to the Power of the Most High where Christ is known to be first a Holy Thing then a Child given and a Son born which is Emanuel God with us a Saviour the wonderful Counseller the mighty God the Prince of Peace Thus we see according to these Men's Doctrine God sows a Seed in Men the which Seed as Men attend to and obey it they are the Virgin in whom this Seed comes to be a Child born and that Child becomes the only Son the wonderful Counseller the mighty God And a Preacher in Pensilvania of the Quakers did illustrate this great Quaker Mistery to another Quaker in Pensilvania who told it me after this manner by this following Similitude A Hen lays an Egg sits and hatches and brings forth a Chick and that Chick becomes a Hen equal to the Mother Hen which I confess is a very plain and intelligible Explication of the blasphemous Notion of G. VV. VV. P. and VV. B. above mentioned Thus God in every regenerate Man begers God and the God begotten is equal in Power and Might to the God that did beget The Quakers Name that gave this Similitude is Jacob Talner a Dutch-man who began to speak at the Beginning of the first Meeting at Turners-Hall but saying nothing pertinent to the purpose and confessing he had no Deputation from any of the Persons properly concerned was desired by the Auditory as well as by me to be silent that the Service of that Meeting might not be hindred I proffered to give him a Meeting at that Place any other Day if he had a mind to dispute but he did not agree to my Proposition This very Person is a frequent Preacher in the Quakers Meetings here in London Note I find in VV P 's Christian Quaker p. 100. that he acknowledgeth that Christ is called Light by a Metaphor And whereas he saith the Light in Men has been resisted grieved and as it were slain The VVord Slain is also metaphorical yet be contends it suffers in Men and hath been deeply wounded in wicked Men yea he makes the Sufferings of Christ's Godhead to have been the greatest p. 102. Nor was his Manhood insensible of it he saith and a little after he saith As outwardly he gave his outward Life for the World so he might inwardly shed abroad in their Souls the Blood of God that is the holy purifying Life and Virtue which is in him as the VVord God and as which he is the Life of the VVorld Thus we see the mistick Notion of the Blood of God For a Close on this Head I shall produce a large Quotation out of Truth 's Defence p. 48. 49 50. giving a plain Contradiction to G. VV. his denying the Word God to be imprisoned or in Bondage c. It having been queried by his Opponent VVhether there be a Possibility to hide Christ the Son of Righteousness quite under a Cloud where be really is G. F. thus answers Thou Enemy of God thou dost hide the Talent in thee under the Clod of the Earth in thee If thou hast an Ear thou maâ—st hear 1 Pet. 3. 19. The Ministers of God they speak to the Spirits in Prison and the Prisoners shall come out of Prison The Son of Perdition is above all that is called God in thee 2 Thess 2. 2. Thou blind Hypocrite was not be in Egypt while Herod was King and out of Egypt have I called my Son saith the Lord VVho hast thou preached all this while Thou art one that keeps the Light in Prison in thee And in Answer to another Question VVhether the Devil is stronger than Christ the Flesh than the Spirit or where dost thou find he was ever a Prisoner in Satan's Chains Ans VVe witness he was in Satan's Chains and is in thee else how could they crucifie him a fresh This with much more after the same Strain is found in the Pages quoted and which was read at the second Meeting Is not this a great Perversion as well as nonsensical Exposition of G. F. on this Place of Peter to prove that wicked Men imprison Christ in them The Spirits in Prison whereof Peter writes in that Place were sometimes disobedient in the Days of Noah
as the following Words expresly declare But how could Christ in them be disobedient not only Spirits but disobedient Spirits This is that Apostle of the Quakers of whom VV. P. saith in his Preface to G. F's Journal He had an extraordinary Gift in opening the Scripture he would go to the Marrow of things saith VV. P. Is not this a rare Instance of it Upon the reading these Places Samuel Jobson one of the Quakers Elders said George doth not the Scriptures say that some crucifie Christ a-fresh I answered It is said in Scripture they crucifie him to themselves but it is not said they crucifie him to himself or in himself by crucifying him there is understood their rendring themselves guilty of his Death and depriving themselves by their unworthy Life and Practises of the Salvation purchased by him I asked him did he believe that wicked Men by their Sins do really wound Christ in them and kill him and let out his Blood in them and that that Blood is the Blood of Atonement He said The Scripture saith If we walk in the Light c. the Blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all Sin I asked him Whether that Blood was the Blood of Christ without us that was shed on the Cross He said The Blood was the Life But I asked again Was it the Blood without us or the Blood within us He said It was spiritual Blood But being much pressed not only by me but some Ministers present to answer whether it was Blood without him or Blood within him He waved any direct Answer and I shewing the Auditory that the Notion of G. F. and other Teachers of the Quakers who had learned it of him was That the Blood by which we are cleansed from Sin is the Blood within which he calls The Blood of the Seed as is more fully afterwards to be proved and this Seed is Christ and is not a Creature Another Quaker said Is not the Seed Christ and is not Christ within the Seed of the Woman that bruiseth the Head of the Serpent At this some of the Hearers said Here is Proof enough of their Error The Seed of the Woman it the Seed within them I answered Christ is called the Seed of the Woman and the Seed of Abraham as he came in the Flesh without us and was made of a Woman and was the Son of Abraham And though I own Christ within by his Godhead Presence and by his common Illumination in all Men and by his special Presence and special Illuminations in the faithful yet I deny that the Seed of God in Men is either Christ or God I own that there is a Seed of God in the faithful but I deny G. F. his Notion of it That it is not a Creature I asked Daniel Philips what he said to my former Question Did Men by their Sins really wound God in them as some of their Teachers have affirmed After some Demur he said he would not give a positive Answer but take it into further Consideration whereupon some of the Auditory did commend him I said it was better so to do than to assert such a vile Error however by this it appeared how uncertain they were and how little agreed about some of their chief Principles Having thus given an Account of G. W's wild Notions concerning Christ the Seed within that the Power takes hold of and raises up I will proceed to shew the like by some new Quotations out of G. F. referring to other Quotations given in my third Narrative especially on the same Subject See my third Narrative p. 25. G. F. in his G. M. p. 324. quotes his Opponent saying That the Seed to whom the Promise of Salvation is made is or hath been Sinners Ans The Promise of God is to the Seed which hath been laden as a Cart with Shaves by the Sinner which Seed is the Hope Christ that purifies even as God is pure and here is the Creature come to know its Liberty among the Sons of God and the Seed Christ never sinned in the Male nor in the Female in the Jew nor in the Gentiles And of this Mystery was the great High Professors ignorant of that stood at a Distance from the Gentiles that Christ had no room among them though they talked of him but in the Stable in the Manger and in their Mouths to talk of him with their Lips and such Christ calls Graves and Sepulchres and whited Walls and the Wall is not the Seed but the Seed is Christ and not the Sepulchre nor the Grave so this Promise is not unto Seeds as many but to one the Seed which is Christ. Note these gross Perversions of Scripture Again p. 171. G. M. Now they feel not the Comfort nor the Benefit but by the Faith of Christ Jesus the one Offering in which God is pleased with all which is acceptable which is Christ's Offering his Sacrifice his Flesh his Blood his Life his Word must be manifest and received within before they come to Justification Sanctification and Redemption P. 173. And where Jesus Christ is within the Word is there and God is there and this is the great Mistery of Godliness Again G. M. p. 158. Of this Body which is that by which Christ reconciles unto God are all the Professors Protestants and Papists ignorant of this Seed that breaks the Enmity P. 159. And by Faith is every one justified in the Blood of the Seed the Flesh of Christ the Lord from Heaven shed for the Sins of the whole World The Blood of the Seed which is the Life that cleanseth and this Blood is felt within for it purgeth the Conscience from dead VVorks to serve the living God and here is the great Mistery of God and the VVisdom of God Note This Flesh and Blood that he saith is the great Mistery which neither Papists nor Protestants know is that Flesh which was crucified in Adam when Adam sinned and the Blood that was then shed in which is the Belief that takes away the Sin as I have shewed in a large Quotation out of another Book of his in my third Narrative p. 25. For a Close upon this Head I shall quote a Passage of G. F. in that called Several Papers given forth c. by G. F. who is there called Minister of the eternal VVord of God p. 47. Now to all dear ones and dear Hearts I speak the same Seed which it Christ the same Spirit takes upon it now as ever yea the same Temptations the same Devil and the same VVorship of the VVorld is winding into another Form and Colour but Jesus Christ is the Way the Truth and the Life And the same Seed passing into the Wilderness and there is tempted to lust after the Creature you that are in the Wilderness witness this with me and the same Tentations even to Despair and make themselves away Note here all along from the Passages above quoted out of G. F. and G. W. and many