HAving met with a Sheet, Entitu­led, A Testimony for Truth against Error, Subscribed Thomas Budd, in which he Charges W. P. with denying some of the Chief Principles of Christianity: After Reading the Sheet, I was very desirous to get those Books of W. P's mentioned by T. Budd, that I might ex­amine the Quotations from which he pretends to draw this Charge of Error; accordingly I did (with some difficul­ty) get them, and have Examined the Pages refer'd to by T. Budd, and have [Page 4] just reason to be Amazed, that after such picking, leaving out, and sometimes forging W. P's Adversaries Words for W. P's; a Man should have so hard a Fore-head as to Entitule it, A Testimony for Truth; when in truth, it is a Te­stimony of as great Villany as one Man can be capable of towards another; and nothing but Malice and Apostacy could be the Parent of so Monstruous a Producti­on; which yet I know cannot at all in­fluence those who know, and imparti­ally consider the different Caracters and Qualities of W. P. and T. Budd: But to some who know them not otherwise, than as this Erronious Testimony against Truth represents, may (not having the Books to examine) take this Monster of a Draught for W. P's True Figure. For the Information of such (and now ha­ving the Books by me) as also to do Justice to W. P. I have undertaken this, wherein I shall do little more than to set down the places as they are quoted by T. Budd, and then subjoyn the places as they are in W. P's Books, & which will be found sufficient to prove, that W. P. do's not de­ny, The Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit [Page 5] to be God, nor that Christ was wound­ed for our Transgressions, and bore our Griefs; nor deny that Jesus Christ was the Son of God, that died at Jerusalem; nor that we are Justified through the Righteousness of Christ; nor that Jesus is the Messiah, the Christ of God; or the Resurrection of the Body; nor Under­value the Scriptures: All which Blasphe­my, Heresie and Error he pretends to find in the Books following, as they are Cited by him.

His First Quotation is out of Sandy Foundation, p. 12, 13, 15. If God, as the Scriptures Testifie, hath never been declared or believed, but as the Holy One, then will it follow, that God is not a Holy Three, nor doth subsist in Three distinct or separate Holy Ones; and since the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God: Then unless the Father, Son and Spirit are Three distinct Nothings, they must be Three distinct Substances, and consequently Three distinct Gods: Thus he. Now to give some Light in this matter, it may be convenient to give the Reader a Brief Account of the occasion of this Book and method which the Author W. P. [Page 6] has taken in the Writing of it: As to the first, viz. The occasion it was this, Thomas Vincent, in a Meeting of his, said, That the Quakers held Damnable Doctrines. George Whitehead being present, stood up, and as it was his place, willingly would have given the People an Information of our Principles; which, if Objected against, he was ready to defend them by the Authority of Scripture and Rea­son; which T. Vincent prevented, and put the following Question: Whether we owned one Godhead Subsisting in Three distinct and separate Persons? This was the occasion of this Book, next as to the method it is this, W. P. refutes the the Doctrine built upon the fore-going Question; first from Scripture, next from Right Reason; shewing many Irreligi­ous and Irrational Consequences flowing from that Doctrine; and all this inter­mix'd with many Informations and Cauti­ons concerning it. Now the two first Lines of T. Budd's Quotation are part of an Ar­gument drawn from Scripture by W. P. a­gainst the Doctrine in the Quotation above, and the rest of that Quotation is part of one of those Irreligious Consequences which [Page 7] W. P. shews in the Book before Cited, to be the result of the same Doctrine: But besides this abusive patching, and setting down as W. P's Sentiment; what W. P. sets down as an Irreligious Con­sequence. T. B. does not come up to the Terms of Question which is con­cerning Three distinct and separate Persons Subsisting in one God. If he can prove this from Scripture, then he proves what W. P. hath denied. But while T. Budd does only set down the Testimony of the Apostle, viz. That the Father, the Word, and the Spirit are the Three that bear Record in Heaven, and are One God. He does not at all shew himself to be­lieve the Question in the Terms W. P. denies it. And for such Holy Three, as is mentioned in Scripture, which have none of the Terms W. P. opposes, he hath sufficiently shewn his Belief there­of, not only in the Confession of Faith hereafter mentioned, but also in his In­nocency with Her open Face; and his Key. And many of his Books which do at all border upon that Point of Faith. This for T. Budd's first Charge.

His Second is, The Denial of Christ's Satisfaction; for Proof of which T. Budd hath made a Quotation out of the same Book, viz. Sandy Foundation, p. 16, 18, 21, 22. W. P. saith, The Justice offended being Infinite, his Satisfaction ought to bear a proportion therewith, which Jesus Christ, as Man, could never pay, he being Finite; and from a Finite Cause could not proceed an Infinite Effect—Since Christ could not pay what was not his own; it follows, that in the payment of his own, the Case still remains equally grievous, since the Debt is not hereby absolved or forgiven, but trans­fer'd only; and by consequence we are no better provided for Salvation than before, owing that now to the Son which was once owing to the Father. It no way renders Men beholding, or in the least obliged to God, since by their Doctrine he would not have abated us, nor did he Christ the least Farthing. Hitherto T. Budd's Quotation, but the Doctrine which W. P. does in the Pages before Cited oppose, is menti­oned by W. P. in p. 14. of Sandy Foun­dation, and is in the Terms following:

AGainst this Rigid and Unscriptural Doctrine VV. P. brings about Fif­teen Texts of Scripture, and from them shews the great Forgiveness of God; after them in p. 17, 18. he refutes this Doctrine from Right Reason; shewing, [Page 10] why Jesus Christ, as Man, could not be a plenary Satisfaction; the place is thus, p. 18. 6. Tbe Justice Offended, being Infi­nite, his Satisfaction ought to bear a pro­portion therewith, which Jesus Christ, as Man, could never pay, he being Finite, and from a Finite Cause could not proceed an Infinite Effect; for so Man may be said to bring forth God, since nothing below the Divinity of Christ it self, can rightly be Stiled Infinite. Of this Reason T. Budd cut off the last Line. But to go on, W. P. having in this, and six or seven particulars more, shewn the contrariety of the Doctrine above, to Right Reason, he then numbers up nine Irreligious and Irrational Consequences from the afore Doctrine: The seventh and eighth Con­sequences in p. 19. runs thus, Since Christ could not pay what was not his own, it fol­lows that in the payment of his own, the case still remains equally grievous; since the debt is not hereby absolved or fogiven, but trans­fer'd only; and by consequence we are no better provided for Salvation than before; owing that now to the Son which was once owing to the Father.

8. It no way renders Man beholding, or in in the least oblig'd to God, since by their Doctrine he would not have abated us, nor did he Christ the least Farthing, so that the acknowledgments are peculiarly the Sons; which destroys the whole Current of Scrip­ture Testimony, for his good will towards Men. O the Infamous Portraiture, this Doctrine draws of the Infinite Goodness: Is this your Retribution? O Injurious Sa­tisfactionists. Of this, T. B. in his Quotation hath taken but about two Lines.

T. B's Third Charge is, That W. P. hath denyed Jesus Christ, the Son of God, that Died at Jerusalem; his Quota­tion is out of Serious Apology, in Answer to T. Jenner, p. 146. W. P. saith, He (T. Jenner) takes up a whole Chapter in his endeavours to prove, That we deny the Lord that bought us, because we deny that Person (the Son of God) that Died at Je­rusalem to be our Redeemer.

It will be convenient here, to give some Brief Account of this Book, before I give the Quotation out of it, in order to its bet­ter Understanding, which in short is this: This Book, Entituled, A Serious Apology, [Page 12] &c. was written by W. P. in Answer, and for the Clearing of the People called Quakers, from the Malicious Aspersions, Erronious Doctrines, and Horid Blas­phemies of Tho. Jenner and Timothy Taylor, in a Book of theirs, Entituled, Quakerism, Anatomized and Confuted: In which Book among other things they say, The Qua­kers deny the Lord that brought them, &c. In reply to this, W. P. in p. 146. of the Apology, says, 1st. He takes up a whole Chapter in his endeavours to prove, that we deny the Lord that bought us, though very falsly, and with equal insuccess. And here he brings in a Quotation out of Quakerism Anatomized, &c. p. 153, 154. The Quotation is thus out of Jen­ner, Because we deny that Person (the Son of God) that Dyed at Jerusalem to be our Redeemer.

And immediately W. P. subjoyns, which most horid Imputation has been Answered more (I believe) than a Thou­sand times; that is, That he that laid down his Life, and suffered his Body to be Crucified by the Jews, without the Gates of Jerusalem, is Christ the only Son of the most High God: But that the outward [Page 13] Person (or Body only, which is what VV. P. meant as appears by what follow) which Suffered was properly the Son of God, we utterly deny, and it is a perfect Contradicti­on to their own Principles; A Body hast thou prepared me, said the Son; then the Son was not the Body, though the Bo­dy was the Sons; this brings him more un­der the charge of making him but a meer Man, than us, who acknowledge him to be One with the Father, and of a Nature Eternal and Immortal; for he was Glori­fied with the Father before the VVorld was. The Patching and Horrid Forgery of T. Budd in this place is surely without Ex­ample, for here he has not been content only to pick a Line, but also to joyn to it (as VV. P's, a Quotation which VV. P. took out of his Adversaries Book to Answer as above. To this Forgery, he has also added Folly in that after pick­ing two or three Lines of the last Quo­tation, he has laid them down in his Sheet, as a Charge of a different Nature from the last mentioned, which he makes his Fifth Charge; but this his Folly, Blind Malice, and Forgery, falls back upon himself: Such is the Shame and Con­fusion [Page 14] of him, and all others; who, by Apostatizing from the Spirit of Truth, are become Darkness. I proceed now to T. Budd's Fourth Charge, drawn out of p. 148. of this same Book, and which is, That VV. P. denies Justification by an Imputative Righteousness

T. Budd's Quotation runs 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 brought us. In Answer to this VV. P. saith, 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 delude the whole VVorld. If Men may be Justified while Im­pure, then God quits the Guilty. Death came by actual Sin, not imputative in his Sense; therefore Justification unto Life, comes by Actual Righteousness, not Imputa­tive.

But in the Apology it appears: That VV. P. does in this Page of 148. bring a Quotation out of T. Jenner's Book, p. 155, 156, 157, viz.

TO this VV. P. subjoyns, 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 wbole VVorld. And then goes on, I shall not so much insist upon this, as I have not upon the other four particulars, they having been Ir­refutable Considered and Answered by my Friend and Partner in this Discourse, in the first Part of this Apology: Only this I shall observe and add:

First, No Man can be Justified without Faith (says Jenner)

No Man hath Faith without Works (any more than a Body can Live without a Spirit (saith James) viz. the Apostle.)

Therefore the VVorks of Righteousness, by the Spirit of Christ Jesus, are necessary to Justification.

Secondly, If Men may be Justified, whilst impure, then God quits the Guilty; contra­ry to the Scripture, which cannot be.

Thirdly, Death came by Actual Sin, not Imputative in his Sense; therefore Ju­stification unto Life comes by Actual Righ­teousness, and not Imputative.

There are Three more Conclusions which follow, and which for brevity sake, I omit, willing only to recite so much as may take in all that T. Budd has here and there pick'd to make up his Quotati­on, only next immediately after the Three Conclusions; which, I say, I have left out, there follows a short Confession of our Faith, which it may be of Service to the Honest-minded to publish; as also a Testimony against the Apostacy, Hypo­cricy and Envy of T. Budd, who could not but see it when he mangled that part of the Book, as he thought, for his Ser­vice: It is in p. 149. VVe do believe only in one Holy God Almighty, who is an E­ternal Spirit, the Creator of all Things.

And one Lord Jesus Christ, his only Son, and Express Image of his Substance, who took upon him Flesh, and was in the VVorld, and in Life, Doctrine, Miracles, Death, Resur­rection, [Page 17] Ascension, and Mediation, perfectly did, and does continue to do the Will of God, to whose Holy Life, Power, Mediation and Blood, we only ascribe our Sanctification, Justi­fication, Redemption and perfect Salvation.

And we believe in one Holy Spirit, that proceeds and breaths from the Father and the Son, as the Life and Virtue of both the Father and the Son, a measure of which is given to all, to profit with; and he that has One has all; for those Three are One, who is the Alpha and the Ome­ga, the First and the Last, God over all, Blessed for ever, Amen.

T. Budd's Sixth Charge against VV. P. is, The Denying the Messiah the Christ of God; for which he Cites a Book, Enti­tuled, The Christian Quaker; written by G. VV. and W. P. against the Injurious Attempts of many Adversaries; and it will stand against the weak, though black, Attempts of this Man, who in this Quotation of his, has with a hardned Face, cut a Sentence a-sun­der in the midst, which I question whether any Spanish Inquisitor has yet done, when he willingly raked in a Book for Heresie; his Quotation is [Page 18] thus, Chr. Quaker, p. 96. Abraham saw my Day and Rejoyced: They still harping upon that visible Body, not Thirty Years Old, Replied, Thou art not yet Fifty, and hast thou seen Abraham? Taking that to be the Messiah the Christ of God, and Saviour of the World; he meant, which they saw with their Carnal Eyes. I shall now give the Quotation from the Book it self, but am obliged to Recite the whole Para­graph (the above Quotation being in the middle) and the whole being so de­pendant upon every part, that it can­not, without some hurt to the meaning of the whole, be separated; it is thus, Chr. Quaker, p. 96. Before I conclude, take this notable saying of Christ to the Jews, and what may be collected from it to our purpose, Before Abraham was, I am: Abraham saw my Day and Rejoyced, John 8. 56, 57, 58. which affords us briefly thus much: That though he was not so visibly come, yet it was the very same HE that came about One Thousand Six Hundred Years ago, who was with the Fathers of Old; and that Abraham, who Lived Nineteen Hun­dred Years before that outward Appearance, saw him, and his Day. If this be not the [Page 19] import of the place, I know none; for the Jews, not believing him to be the Messiah, thought it high Persumption for him to compare with Abraham; Art thou greater than our Father Abraham, who is Dead, and the Prophets are Dead? Ʋnto which he answered (that he might prove himself to be the true Messiah, the Christ of God) (the foregoing part of this Sentence, as also the explanatory Parenthesis T. B. cut off, and begins his here) Abraham saw my Day, and rejoyced: They still harped upon that Visible Body not Thirty­three Years Old, replied, Thou art not yet Fifty, and hast thou seen Abraham? Ta­king that to be the Messiah, the Christ of God, and Saviour of the World, he meant, which they saw with their Carnal Eyes. To which he rejoyned with a Verily, Verily, I say unto you, before Abraham was, I am; then took they up Stones to cast at him, &c. By all which it is most clear, that unless our Adversaries will deny him that so spoke (which yet T. Hicks's Anti-Scriptural Opinion doth imply) to be Christ, who singled and distinguish'd himself as the Messiah, the Christ of God, and Saviour of the World, from that Visible Body, not [Page 20] Fifty Years Old indeed; both Christ that spoke then must needs have been long be­fore Abraham's Time; and that such Ho­ly Ancients were not without a sight and prospect of him, and the day of his Glori­ous Appearance, or that most Signal Mani­festation of himself in that Body prepared for that Great and Holy Purpose, witness the exceeding Clear and Heavenly Prophe­cies, that were as so many Fore-runners or Introductions of the Evangelical State. This true Quotation does sufficiently shew W. P. to own and believe in the Messiah, the Christ of God.

I come now to T. Budd's Seventh Charge, viz. Christ, the Son of the Vir­gin, denied by W. P. to be the Seed of the Promise. In this Charge T. Budd has hid his head; he having made a Quo­tation, but named no Book, nor any Page where his (I doubt not) false Quota­tion may be found; therefore I pass it by without notice.

T. Budd's Eighth Charge is, The Re­surrection of the Body denied by W. P. The Book he quotes is W. P's Rejoynder to John Faldo, p. 369, 370. his Quota­tion runs thus: W. P. saith, But sup­pose [Page 21] J. F's Relative (it) to hold, I do deny that this Text (viz. It is Sown a Natural Body, it is Raised a Spiritual Body) is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's Carnal Body at all.—I say, this doth not concern the Resurrection of Carnal Bodies, but the two States of Men under the first and Second Adam.

In this, as in the former, he has plaid the Inquisitor, taking here and there a Line, as best liked him; only his pre­tence may be more fairly made for clipping this than any of the former; for they were all English, but here is a little Greek and Latin; yet of the English he has not taken all he ought and might have done. I will Recite the two Pa­ragraphs out of which he has pillaged his Quotation. The Greek Text is first set down, and then the Latin Translation, it runs thus, [...], 1 Cor. 15. 44. Seritur Corpus animale, resuscitatur cor­pus spirituale. i. e. A Natural Body is Sown, a Spiritual Body is Raised: That is, They lay down a Natural, and take up a Spiritual Body, or in lieu of a Natural receive a Spiritual Body; not that the [Page 22] Natural Body shall be Transubstantiated into a Spiritual Body, or that admitting of such an exchange, that the Spiritual is the same Numerical Body, that was the Natural; for so the Natural and Spiritual Body would be one and the same; but suppose J. Faldo's Relative (It) to hold, I do utterly deny that this Text is concerned in the Re­surrection of Man's Carnal Body at all. I will Recite it with the five following Verses as they lye in our English Translation.

It is sown a Natural Body, it is raised a Spiritual Body; there is a Natural Body, and there is a Spiritual Body; and so it is written, The first Man Adam was made a Living Soul, the last Adam was made a Quickning Spirit; howbeit, that was not first which was Spiritual, but that which is Natural, and after­ward, that which is Spiritual; the first Man is of the Earth, Earthy; the second Adam is the Lord from Heaven; as is the Earthy, so are they that are Earthy; and as is the Heavenly, so are they also which are Heavenly; and as we have born the Image of the Earthy, we shall also bear the Image of the Heavenly, Verse 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49. I say, this doth not [Page 23] concern the Resurrection of Carnal Bodies, but the two States of Men under the First and Second Adam, Men are Sown into the World Natural, and so they are the Sons of the First Adam. but they are Raised Spiritually, through him who is the Resur­rection and the Life, and so they are the Sons of the Second Adam, the Lord from Heaven, the Quickning Spirit. The very words of the Apostle undeniably prove this to be the Scope; how else could the First Adam's being made a Living Soul, and the Second Adam a Quickning Spirit, be a Pertinent Instance to prove Natural and Spiritual Bodies; upon which follows, that the Natural was First; that is, the First Adam; and then that which is Spiritual, which is the Second Adam, the Quick­ning Spirit, the Lord from Heaven, who came to raise up the Sons of the First Adam, from their Dead to his Living, their Natural to his Spiritual, State.

Having now given the Paragraphs intire, out of which T. Budd had pickt his Quotation, and which does sufficient­ly Confute the wrong Suggestions there­of, I may not well omit to take some little notice of his Reply to the above [Page 24] Quotation: It is thus, Therefore let P. W. know, &c. (he has forgot to place the Letters right) I can assure T. Budd that W. P. does know, and believe the good Doctrine of Christ's Crucifixion, and the advantages of a true Christian upon it; and I can also assure T. Budd, that I look upon him no more Cordial an Adviser to W. P. than Satan was to our Saviour, when he repeated the Text to him, And he hath given his Angels Charge over thee, &c. T. Budd hath done with Advising, and now Threatens: And if he thinks to stop our Testimony, &c. And I do tell T. Budd, that if he thinks to go on without Opposition in Forgery and Wresting, then I think he will find himself mistaken, since we have Solo­mon's advice for to use the Rod: And in­deed the Night is so far spent, and the Day so dawned, as sufficiently discovers where to apply it. But now T. Budd would appear one that can Calculate Mysteries, and point at a Beast by its number; but if he will take the Nu­merical Letters of his own Name, he will find he makes up Three times that Beast, and Seven to spare. As for what [Page 25] he Promises for the Year 1700 and 1750, I can without such Calculation tell him, That let the freedom of the Upright-hearted and Faithful towards God be as in his Divine Wisdom he shall see meet; yet T. Budd, with all that Apostatize from the Spirit of Christ, and turn their backs upon his Holy Law, will still be in severest Bon­dage.

I now come to his last Charge against W. P. which is, That he hath Ʋnder­valued the Scriptures. The Book T. Budd quotes, is Christian Quaker, p. 144. 142. (I am not to account for his Folly in Postponeing the bigger number) his Quotation is thus: Christ left nothing in Writing, as the Rule that we hear of; and doubtless had he intended the Rule of his Followers to have been a Written Rule, he would have left it upon Record with all Punctuality; this must be believed, and that done on pain of Eternal Death. If the Scriptures were the Rule of Faith and Life, &c. then because they cannot be the Rule in their Translations, suppose the An­cient Copies were exact, it cannot be the Rule to far the greatest part of Mankind; [Page 26] indeed to none but Learned Men. In this part of the Book G. W. and W. P. come to speak concerning the Scriptures, which were asserted to them, to be a General and Perfect Rule of Faith and Life (viz. to all Men) they have divers Argu­ments to shew the contrary; their Eighth Argument lies thus: 8. Furthermore, if the Scriptures were the Rule of Faith and Life, &c. then because they cannot be the Rule in their Translations, suppose the Antient Copies were exact, it cannot be the Rule to far the greatest part of Man­kind, indeed to none but Learned Men; which neither answers the Promise relating to Gospel times that is Ʋniversal, nor the necessity of all Mankind for a Rule of Faith and Life. (Here he cut off the conclusion of this Argument) In p. 144. There is another Objection thus, But if the Law engraven and delivered to Moses was a Rule to the Jews, why should not the Law delivered by Christ, and writ­ten by his Apostles, be the Rule to Chri­stians.

To this it is Answered,

Answ. Christ left nothing in Writing as the Rule, that we hear of; and it is [Page 27] not to be thought he was less Faithful in his House than Moses (This last Sen­tence T. Budd cut out) and doubtless had he intended the Rule of his Followers to have been a Written Rule, he would have left it upon Record with all Pun­ctuality, This must be believed and that done, on pain of Eternal Death (what follows T. Budd has cut off) Nor did his followers Write in the Method of a Rule, as the Law was Written; nor did they so Call or Recommend what they Writ.

Having now done with all the False Charges of T. Budd upon W. P. and put the several Quotations in their true Light, from whence the Unprejudiced Reader may make a Solid Judgment of them. I shall in few words bespeak the Readers Patience, while I more parti­cularly speak concerning this T. Budd, who was in Unity of Profession with W. P. divers Years after all the Books afore-cited by him were VVritten; and in which he now pretends to find such Errors and Heresies, and I doubt not was acquainted with all, or a great [Page 28] part of them: But now (like Eve) his Eyes being opened, he is become a Man of Gath, one who gives Information to all (as himself says) who seek after Truth and Righteousness; but which, I am sure, is not to be found in this his Testimony, nor in any Testimony that ever was given forth by the Spirit of Apostacy, in which he is. He calls him­self A Servant of Christ. To this his Claim it may be proper to ask him the Question which was put to the Man in the Gospel; Friend, how camest thou hi­ther? It is but a few Years since he made publick Profession of what he now calls Errors and Heresies; and the di­stance is very great betwixt the Erroni­ous and Heretick, and him who is tru­ly a Servant of Christ; and we have not seen any marks of Repentance and Recantation, in order to this his pre­tended Restoration; and it is not to be allowed in the Nature and Order of Conversion, for a Man who hath through Ignorance embraced Error, and through the viciousness of his VVill fol­lowed Heresie, to become reallya Servant of Christ, and a True Member of a [Page 29] Christian Society without deep Sorrow, hearty Repentance, and great Acknow­ledgments of God's Goodness, and his own former Vileness and Ignorance; of all which we have heard nothing, but have often heard, that like the Pha­risee, he is crying out, I am more Righ­teous than thou; from whence I con­clude he is at great distance from a true Possession of this Claim. I shall now, honest Reader, give thee a Dis­miss, only desiring that the Quotations truly made may be to thy Edification, as the Detection of T. Budd's Fraud will be, I hope, to thy Satisfaction.