The spirit of truth vindicated, against that of error & envy unseasonably manifested : in a late malicious libel, intituled, The spirit of the Quakers tryed, &c. / by a friend to righteousness and peace, W.P.

Scriptures Socinianiz'd.

I Shall now attend his Sophistication of several Scriptures, in which his Displeasure against G. F. comes not from his ardent Love to any common Principles, which he has hitherto seem'd to militate for; but his great Regard to Socinianism, both against G. F. and them.

The first is, his Exception to G. F's Citation of that Scripture, And have put on the New Man, which is renewed in Knowledge after the Image of Him that created him; where G. F. puts Them for Him, making the Saints the Antecedent to Them, whereas the New Man is the Antecedent to Him, and shows, that the New Man is created, which G. F. is not willing to allow; for he corrects

his Adversary for saying, The Light is a Creature; which is to say, Christ, who is called the Light, is here called, a New Man, and such a one as is created; and consequently is not God, but a Creature: A Doctrine that well becomes our Adversary.

To which I Answer, That the New Man, who is there said to be created, is put in opposition to the Old Man, mention'd in the Verse before, who is thus described by the Apostle, But now you also put off all these, Anger, Wrath, Malice, Blasphemy, Filthy Communication out of your Mouth: Lye not one to another, seeing that ye have put off the Old Man. Which shews he meant by the Old man, those Habits and Customs of Evil (which were almost become Natu∣ral) that they were before addicted to; and consequently, that the New Man was the inward Regeneration, or New Creation of the Soul, Mind and Spirit, with the Inclinations and Affections thereof; so that the Image of the New Man may be created or begotten in Believers, and on that account be called the New Man; but not that Christ Jesus is the created New Man: For, it is he by, their own Principle, That Creates all things New in the Heavenly World of the Gospel; who having all Power, begets his People into a New State, renewing them in all Divine Knowledge after the Image (or that they may be the Likeness) of him that created him; that is, that Image: for nothing can be renewed that was not lost; but Christ was never lost (to speak properly) in our Adversary's sense, as well as ours; but the Image of Christ has been lost, almost from the Foundation of the World; Therefore it is not Christ, but his Image, that is renewed and anew created: So that if G. F. did put Them for Him, it is not false; for to create them anew in his Image, or a new Image in them, is all one; and the words will bear it, that Christ creates new Men after his own Image; in which sense, the Image of Christ is by him renewed and created in right Believers, and they made new Creatures by bear∣ing his Image.

His next Perversion of Scripture is that in John, which he saith, G. F. often useth, and alwayes abuseth,

as he remembers: I doubt his Memory much; but let's hear it, And now, O Father, Glorifie thou me with thine own self, with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was. Thus the Scripture; but G. F. thus, Christ, who was Glorified with the Father before the World began. On which read his Comment. You will say perhaps, his words and Christ's are the same in sense; but doth God give G. F. his Infallible Spirit to correct his Son Christ's words. Sottish Igno∣rance, and Enmity with a witness! What, Is every Variation of a Word or Syllable a Wrong done to the Meaning of Scripture? And did ever Christ, his Apostles, or any sober Man living chide or reprove a Person, if through Defect of Memory, or for Brevity, or in a way of Paraphrase he did leave out, or put in, or change a Word, not in the least perverting the Sense? so uncharitable a Person I know not ever to have heard of, fitter to be severely reproved, then answer'd: and to whom Silence had been the best Confutation, had it not been more for the sake of others then his: To dare to conclude a Man a Lyar, Imposter, False-Prophet, and I know not what more, because he expresses the same mat∣ter with a small Variation in the Words; But I shall say more of this else-where.

He proceeds, Nay, doth not G. F. take his Phrase in a Divers Sense from what Christ intended by his; for (sayes He) it is manifest that Je∣sus prayed now to be glorified with the Glory wherewith He was not then glorified, but God was glorious before the World was, therefore Jesus intends by the Glory He had with the Father before the World was, the Glory He had given him in Decree, before the world was.

The Clinch is Foolish, and his Consequence, False, and per∣nicious; For what if Christ was not then glorified, must it therefore follow, that He was not in being, much less glorified before the World was? Can He be so great a Stranger to the Apostles Do∣ctrine delivered in his Epistle to the Philippians, where we find him first Equal with God, as being in his very Form, or Essence; next, making Himself of no Reputa∣tion; then appearing in the Fashion or Likeness of Men; and lastly, that He humbled Himself, and became Obedient unto Death, even the Death of the Cross, which shews that he was in

an exalted and glorified Estate before He humbled Himself, else how was He humbled? And it is peece of Sacriledge and Ingrati∣tude I almost tremble to think on, that because He was pleased to descend in the Likeness of men, in order to the Salvation of Man∣kind (in which Our Adversary may also have his share, if He un∣feignedly repent) he should unworthily robb Him of all. Pre-exi∣stence in the Form of God, whilst He Himself thought it no Robbery to be Equal with God; So that though in his humbled Estate and Fashion of a Man, He could not properly be said to be glorified, and therefore prayed to be so, yet it is no right Consequence, that therefore He never was before; For that would be to say, be∣cause an Earthly Prince may for a certain time debase himself, and take upon him the Condition of an Inferior Person, for some great Benefit that He thereby designes to do his Country, if after having effected it, He desires to be received again into that Glory and Splendor he enjoyed before, that therefore he never had any before, only in Decree; If this would be both False and absurd, the other is much more. This is the great Mystery of the Socinians, indeed the Rock on which they split; they do not distinguish betwixt the Form of God, and Likeness of Men; that which came into the World to do the Will of God, and the Body He took, in which to perform it.

Nor does this Scripture at all make for his Opini∣on; for Jesus was not yet Glorified; since it might as well have been said, He has not yet dyed the Death of the Cross, neither is Risen and Ascended, which was the Period of that state; unto which He had from the Form of God Humbled Himself, even to the being of no Re∣putation, which he thus expresseth himself: I have Glorified thee on Earth, I have finished the Work thou ga∣vest me to do: And in another place, thus, I came forth from the Father, and am come into the World. Again, I leave the World, and go to the Father: where is the same Reason that we should believe he was with the Father before he came into the World, as that he did come into the World, and afterwards go to the Fa∣ther again; else, why is it again going to the Father. But now let

me ask him, if he can be so brazen'd as to think, that God allows him, not only to correct his Son Christ's words, but the very substance of his Prayer? Was it so great a Crime (in his account) for G. F. to say, who was Glorified before the World began, in∣stead of, Glorifie thou me with thy own self, with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was? And is it no wayes reprovable in him, in∣stead of the last clause, to turn it thus, Glori∣fie thou me ••••th thy own self, with the Glory which I had with thee, not actually, but in degree only, before the World began? That ever any man should undertake to Correct others in that which doth not deserve it, whilst the Beam is in his own Eye, and is himself most guilty! My Soul blesseth God, that our Religion is above these slight Shifts, and pittiful starting Holes: I would t••ll the man in his own words of us, though more seriously, That he, whom G. F. and all of us call Christ, by way of Ex∣cellency, was, in the Sense aforementioned, glorified before the World began: and if what he calls Christ, was not, it is to us a Proof, that he was not that True Christ, which both appeared to the Fathers of old (for the Rock fol∣lowed them, and that Rock was Christ) and in the fashion of a Man in these latter Times, humbling himself to the Death of the Cross. Thus much in the clearing of this place.

3dly, He is very angry with G. F. that he makes Christ speak these words by the Prophet Amos, Behold I am pressed under you, as a Cart is pressed with Sheaves; which, sayes he, belongs to the Lord or Jehovah. Grant it; Does it not therefore belong unto Christ, who is God over all Blessed forever; that said, Before Abraham was I am? But he gives us no reason to the con∣trary; and till he does, let this suffice, That as

Christ has been a Lamb slain through Sin and Iniquity, so also has he been pressed thereby as a Cart is with Sheaves, and that since the Foundation of the World.

4thly, He quotes G. F. thus, The Promise is to the Seed; the Seed is Christ; and Christ is all, and in all: To which he sayes, The Apostle has it thus, And when all things shall be subdued unto Him, then shall the Son also Himself be subject unto Him that put all things under Him, that God (not Christ) may be all in all: He could not have do•••• greater In∣jury to the Holy Spirit's words, then to put Christ for God.

It will not be hard to clear this Mistake in our Adversary, and that to his great Shame; For who will think him fit to mannage Controversies, that is ignorant in the very letter of the Scrip∣ture? It is evident, that he denies Christ to be all, and in all; and that G. F's so asserting him to be, is the Cause of his Cavil at him. Now hear what the Apostle sayes in the matter, Col. 3. 11. Where there is neither Greek nor Jew, Circumcision nor Vncircumcision, Barbarian, Scythian, Bond nor Free; but Christ is All, and in All: And if Christ be All, and in All, and he that is All, and in All be the True and Living God; then, because Christ is All, and in All, Christ is the true and Living God.

Now, who has done the Injury, G. F. to the Holy Writ, or this obstinate and peevish Adversary to Christ Jesus, the on∣ly Lord of Glory?

5thly, His next Socinian Clash at G. F's Citation of Scripture is in the same Page with the former; and it is at his saying, God is the Word, instead of, the Word was God; adding, That though the Word was made Flesh, (or was Flesh) yet no considerate man will say, that Flesh is the Word. A great deal of do, for fear Christ should be God; but from this notable Distinction of his we are not without a Relief: If the Word was God, and the Word be God, then God must needs be the Word; that is, If he that is called God, be the same Being with him that is called the Word, then God may as well be called the Word, as the Word may be called God; for instance, If Christ and Jesus agree equally to one and the

same Being, what is the difference betwixt saying, Jesus was Christ, or Christ was Jesus? Certainly we may justly say of him what he in a way of Reflection sayes of G. F. Methinks he is more Nice then Wise. And for his Instance about the Word's being made Flesh, that is; (sayes he) was Flesh: I deny his Pa∣raphrase; for it is neither properly to be read, was made Flesh, nor was Flesh; but rather, The Word took Flesh, and pitcht his Tent or Tabernacle in us: Thus Clarius; and almost all agree It to import a more Spiritual signification; so Erasmus, and Gro∣tius especially; and for the Ancients, they were positive, Ire∣neus, Justinus, Tertullianus, Origen, &c. but above the rest, Tertullian adv. Praxeam; but this is not so very material to the Point. However, if the very Word had become very Flesh, I mean visible to Carnal Eyes; it would not be inconsiderate in any man to say, then Flesh is or was the Word: and if our Ad∣versary understood himself, he would perceive, that there would be only a Transposition of words, and no material Alteration: For that which is now Flesh, or (as the Hebrews have it) Man, is the Word; as that which is God, is also the Word. But enough for this, only we may observe by the way, that the Man is not so hearty an Enemy to Transubstantiation as he would have us be∣lieve, pag. 44. who can think the Word was properly made Flesh.

6thly, His Objection against G. F. for joyning Christ with God, saying, His Father and He are grea∣ter then all, is Irreverent and Frivolous; For, who dares deny it? and what abuse is it to Scripture? Sure I am his saying so, and that without any Reason, shews him to be a man of Unreasonable Confidence.

7thly, He is angry that when G. F. mentions this Passage, To whom every Knee must bow, and Tongue confess to the Glory of God, that he adds not Father. I could not have believed, that any man, who loves Seriousness, should bestow his Time so idlely: Is this the earnest and deep Study ••e talkt of, by which he hopes to obtain Divine Knowledge? But sayes

he, Why did he not add the term Father to God, nor insert, that Jesus Christ is Lord? But the truth of this Scripture con∣sists not with their Doctrine, that the Father and Son are one. I confess it is somewhat hard to understand what he would be at; but let it suffice, that he who is called God, is called Lord above an Hundred times, therefore one; to which Christ Himself bears Record, I and my Father are one, my Fa∣ther worketh hitherto, and I work; for, whatsoever things he doth, those doth the Son. To us a Child is born, to us a Son is given, and the Government shall be upon His Shoulders; and his Name shall be called Wonderful, Coun∣cellor, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father, the Prince of Peace; the same Power, Spirit, Light, Life, Wisdom and Being forever.

8thly, His next Antichristian Cavil is at G. F's making the Holy Spirit as well to proceed from the Son, as from the Father: The Scripture runeth thus, But when the Comforter is come, the Spirit of Truth, whom I will send unto you from the Father [even] the Spirit of Truth, which proceeds from the Father, He shall testifie of Me: But, sayes he, according to G. F. thus, Christ is in the Father and the Father in Him, and He will send them the Comforter, that proceeds from the Father and the Son: and for this quotes an Epistle writ by G. F. and J. S. and prefixt to G. W's Book of the Divinity of Christ. It is past my skill to understand the Difference, unless it be this, That the Spirit he makes to pro∣ceed as well from the Son as from the Father, and so it doth if I understand Scripture; for the place it self saith it: But when the Comforter is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father; which shews, that not only God, but Christ also, sends forth the Holy Spirit into the Faithful. Also, But if I depart, I will send Him unto you: He shall not speak of Himself, but whatsoever He shall hear—He shall glorifie me and shall shew it unto you—And when he had said this (Peace be unto you; my Father hath sent me, even so send I you) He breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive

ye the Holy Ghost. In short, If the Holy Spirit be sent by Christ, and received of Christ, and is breathed on His by Christ, then the Spirit must needs proceed or come from Christ; and conse∣quently, what G. F. said is sound and Scriptural, and our Ad∣versary's Clamours are Vain and Envious: For, whilst he quotes G. F's calling upon Vincent, Danson, and others, for plain Scripture, and would suggest, because doth proceed is men∣tioned instead of is sent, that he himself is Unscriptural, He omits to tell the World what it was G. F. made that Demand for, viz. to prove Three Distinct and Separate Persons in the God∣head. Now whether there is the same Reason for the one as for the other, I leave to all sober Men to judge, yea, to our Adver∣sary himself, if he dare be just.

9thly, His last Socinian Objection to G. F's Ci∣tation and Application of Scripture, is this, That whereas the Scripture sayes, For this End Christ both dyed, and rose, and revived, that He might be Lord both of the Dead and Living: He sayes, That he might be God both of the Dead and Living. Also, where the Scripture sayes, Let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly: G. F. has it, Let the Word of God dwell richly in you: By all which it is easie to observe, how averse he is from allow∣ing Christ the least share in an Eternal Divinity, making it, his Business to abstract from every Scripture that may in the least Favour such a thing, and imperiously rant it over us in the abusivest termes, as Impostor, Lyar, False Prophet, Forger, void of all Reason, with abundance of the like Complexion, the proper Language of Brutish Malice, and not a True Di∣sciple.

But let us answer to his Objection, If Christ be God over all, as saith the Apostle, then why not God both of the Dead and of the Living, as well as Lord both of the Dead and Living; and likewise, why not, let the Word of God, as well as let the Word of Christ dwell in you richly; for if the Word of Christ be the Word of God, and if God, be the Lord, and the Lord, God, then why not God in both places as well as Lord? First, I am well assur'd that God is called Judge of Quick and Dead, and if so, then

because Christ is Lord of Quick and Dead, Christ the Lord is God of both Quick and Dead, unless there be more Lords of the Living, and the Dead, then the One Almighty God and Lord of Heaven and Earth.

Besides, methinks this Critick might have consider'd, that it is not expresly in the Greek, that He might be Lord, but that he might Raign over the Dead and the Living, so saith the Arabick; but the Aethiopick has it, That he might judge both the Dead and the Living. In short, Christ is called both God, Lord and Judge; and since there is but one only True God, Lord and Judge of right Christi∣ans, we therefore believe, Christ to be that only True God, Lord, and Judge of both Quick and Dead.

And here let me caution the Man of his eager Opposition to Christ's Divinity, since supposing it should not be true, there can be no Detraction; and if it should prove true, as he may one day know, he will be guilty of robbing Christ of that, for which he thought it no robbery himself to be equal with God; that is, to be the only true God Himself.

Notes

• Page 9. Col. 3. 10.
• Col. 3. 8, 9.
• Read John 1. 16.
• Pag. 11, 12.
• John 2. 17. 5.
• Phil. 2. 6, 7, 8.
• John 7. 39.
• John 17. 4.
• John 16. 28.
• Remember the Prophet Mi∣cah, chap. 15, 2. But thou Bethlehem E∣phratah, though thou be little a∣mong the Thousands of Judah, yet out of thee shall be come forth unto me that is to be Ruler in Israel; whose Goings•• forth have bin from of Old, from Everlast∣ing.
• Page 15.
• Read Mal. 3. 1. & 4. 5. & observe, that Christ is called Lord by way of Excellency.
• Page 15.
• Page 15.
• Page 16.
• Page 17.
• John 15. 16.
• Isa. 9. 6.
• Page 17, 18.
• John 16. 7, 13, 14.
• Chap. 20. 21, 22.
• Page 20.
• Rom. 9. 5.
• 2 Tim. 4. 1.
• 1 Pet. 4. 5.