THE Baptist not Babylonish, OR THE QUAKERS TONGUE no Slander. Being a brief Reply To a Foolish and Scandalous Pamphlet called the Babylonish Baptist.  
Written by G.W. a Quaker-Teacher.  
Wherein his Malice, Insolence, and Ignorance is discovered and detected. And a Book lately Published, Entitled, Light from the Sun of Righteousness, is vindicated from those pretended Contradictions, and groundless Cavils made against it.  
H. G.  Job 6.25. How forcible are right words! but what doth your arguing reprove? 2 Tim. 3.8. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the Truth: Men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the Faith. 
London, Printed in the year, 1672. and to be sold by F. Smith, at the Elephant and Castle near the Royal Exchange.   

The Preface.  
Christian Reader:  
THere is, as the wise man saith, no end of making many Books; and thou mayst ('tis probable) conclude that to undertake in and about Controversies of Religion of this nature is a fruitless and wearisome work, especially to have to do with those captious People called Quakers. Truly were not the Glory of God, the Fundamentals of Christianity, and the everlasting well-being of the Souls of Men and Women of such high concernment, I should not have set Pen to Paper upon this account, nor in the least have troubled myself in opposing the vile and evil Doctrine of these foolish contradicting and confused People I am forced to have to do with at this time. If thou hast seen that little Book I lately published, entitled, Light from the Sun of Righteousness; thou mayest clearly perceive, what weighty Grounds and Arguments stirred me up to undertake that matter; and though thou mayst suppose that works of this kind do but tend to the feeding of that lying and deluding Spirit which is in these deceived People, yet have we some good ground to judge that God hath blessed some former undertake of this nature, to the great benefit and advantage of some poor Souls; and let none blame us for standing up in the defence of Christ and the Gospel, when the Foundation of true Religion and Godliness is thus struck at. But to be short, this I can say and testify in the presence of the great God (in opposition to what G. W. doth suggest) that I have not the least enmity nor hatred in my heart against the Persons of any of these People called Quakers, nor are we offended or troubled at their present Liberty, (as he seems to charge us) though we cannot deny but their Principles and unsound Doctrines tend to the wounding and grieving of our Souls, because we see daily, more and more, the dangerous and damnable nature thereof.  
And now as touching that foolish and ridiculous Pamphlet put forth by G. W. wherein he labours to make the World believe that little else is contained in that Book (before mentioned) save self-Contradictions, I have been stirred up to offer these few lines by way of Answer: wherein you have First, those things he calls Contradictions set down verbatim; and Secondly, some Reflections upon his absurd Animadversions on the same, and I shall leave the unprejudiced Reader to judge between us, and the issue to the Almighty.  
Farewell.   

A brief Reply To a foolish and scandalous Pamphlet, called the Babylonish Baptist.  
IT may not be amiss, in the first place to inform thee (whosoever thou art) concerning the Method G. W. hath taken in his Answer to the aforesaid Book, which is only a Collection of several things (in a confused and ridiculous manner) therein contained, which he saith are contradictory to each other; with some Animadversions upon them, which in Order I have set down exactly after his own fashion, as followeth.  
H. G. Saith (viz.) I utterly deny that this Light which all men have from the glorious Creator, is a saving Light, page 8.  
H. G. In Contradiction saith, I really believe that the Lord Jesus as the Eternal Word, hath given Light, or enlightened all Men and Women that come into the world, p. 8.  
G. W. his Animadversion. The Light, or Life of the Eternal Word, which is the Light of Men, John 1.4. is Spiritual and Divine, as is that Word, and therefore saving, etc.  
Reply. It seems to me, as if this Man had lost his common Reason. Can he make any rational person believe, that these two places he mentions first of all, are contradictory to each other: Because I deny that the Light which is in all Men is a saving Light, and yet say in the second place, I really believe all have a Light in them from Christ considered as Creator, doth this contradict the former? this can't be a Contradiction, unless he can prove there is no Light proceedings from the Eternal Word as Creator, but what is saying. What though it be granted that the Light which all men that come into the World are lighted with, flows from the Eternal Word, and so is Spiritual, must it needs therefore be a saving Light? Was not the Law given forth on Mount Sinai, a Light of, or which did come from the Eternal Word? And doth not Paul say, That the Law is Spiritual, Rom. 7.14? and yet doth he not call it a Ministration of Death, 2 Cor. 3.7? and that it killed? and doth he not, in Gal. 3.21. clearly show that it could not give life? And in other places, that there was no Justification by it? But I shall leave this to another time, and pass to the next thing you call a Contradiction, viz.  
H. G. The great darkness of these men who cry up Light and Power within, this wile of Satan and cheat of Antichrist, p. 31.  
H. G. Contra. The Lord Jesus, as the Eternal Word, enlighteneth all men. This Light is the substance of the Law, The Candle of the Lord. It doth convince sin, pag. 9 If Heathens followed it they would shine in just living. The work of Faith with power I do maintain that is required and must be wrought with power in the heart, pag. 15, 16.  
G.W. his Animad. What horrible blasphemy is it then to term our crying up the Light and Power of Christ within, the Wile of Satan, and Cheat of Antichrist, and how plainly hereby refuted! etc.  
Reply. This is the second thing you call a contradiction. I shall examine these places, that so your Lies and Ignorance may be manifested. I say, the darkness of these men who cry up Light and Power within is great; and I did say in pag. 31. I should make appear this Wile of Satan and Cheat of Antichrist (that is to say) The evil Doctrine and Principles of yours concerning the Light within, as it immediately followeth, and is declared in the same page of the said Book: And do I contradict this in affirming there is a Light in all men called the Candle of the Lord, and in owning the inward work of Faith with power upon the heart, & c? Because you seem so dark of apprehension, I shall show you your dishonesty and wilful mistake, and what little reason you have to cry down this for horrible blasphemy. (George) I did no where say, That it is great Darkness, and a wile of Satan, and cheat of Antichrist, to own a Light in every man, etc. For if so, thou mightest have had ground to have charged me with a Contradiction.— But your great Darkness, and that which I call a wile of Satan, and cheat of Antichrist, consists in your affirming that of this Light which is utterly false, and contrary to the Doctrine which is according to Godliness, mentioned in the same 31 page. Do not you say, That this Light which is in every man that cometh into the World is God, is Christ, is the Holy Spirit, or the Blessed Comforter, and a Saving Light, and that it will convince a man of every Sin and Transgression, and lead into all Truth, and cleanse from all Sin, and eternally save those who walk up to it faithfully? In this appears your great darkness, and herein you are beguiled and cheated by the Devil, to the invalidating of the meritorious Death and Sufferings of our Lord Jesus Christ; as if there were no need or his Blood to be poured forth, nor of his Intercession; nay, do you not hereby clearly deny his Humane Nature, or his real outward Existence at his Father's right hand in Heaven above? For, if he be nought else but Light and Spirit within, that of necessity follows:— But I shall proceed to that you call another of my Contradictions, viz.  
H. G. Observes from John 16.7. That the Spirit, or blessed Comforter cannot be the Saviour, Pag. 46.  
H. G. Contra. Till the coming of his Spirit and Grace with power in my heart for the binding of the strong man Satan, and killing my Corruptions, my Soul was not brought out of the horrible pit, page 16. having wrought this glorious work of Regeneration, page 17.  
G. W. His Animadversions. Then it's the Spirit and power of Christ that effects and works Salvation through the work of Regeneration, Titus 3.5. Which is not merely by Christ's outward Sufferings, though we cannot believe that Satan is bound in this man while he is in Satan's work, blaspheming Christ's light within, and belying us.  
Reply. What sober Christian man can find any contradiction here against H. G? Is not G.W. the Liar and false Accuser? I say the Spirit, or blessed Comforter cannot be the Saviour, or Mediator, and yet I own the work and office of the Comforter, and the work of Grace with power upon the heart; And is there any absurdity in this? Is this in the least inconsistent and contradictory to itself? Did I any where deny the effectual workings of the Holy Spirit, which in a wonderful nature works Faith in the hearts of the Regenerate, whereby he is enabled to apply the virtue of Christ's Blood and Merits to his own Soul? And art thou not able to distinguish between the Giver and the Gift, between the Fountain and the Stream? Doth not Christ say that he would send the Comforter, and that the Spirit of Truth should proceed from the Father and the Son? Are there nor three that bear record in Heaven? Answer plainly; Did the true Saviour die on the Cross or not? I affirm once again, That neither the Comforter, viz. the Holy Spirit, nor the Deity of our Lord Jesus, distinct from his Manhood or Humane Nature, could be the Saviour and Mediator which died on the Cross, or was crucified between the two Thiefs. But again it appears thou distinguishest not between the Meritorious cause of man's Salvation, and the Instrumental; the kill of the Sacrifice, and the sprinkling of the Blood; the price paid for the Captive, and the application of it; the work and the office of the Lord Jesus, our alone Saviour, who died to atone, make peace, and appease the wrath of God, so to redeem us; and the work and office of the Spirit which doth sanctify and renew us: but dost ignorantly seem to affirm, that such distinctions are lies, and contradictions. But I must proceed.  
H. G. The Ordinance of the Lords Supper you call Bread and Wine, Pag. 19  
H.G. Contrad. The Sign— The Shadow (speaking of these Ordinances) the substance being Christ, Pag. 53, 54.  
G. W. his Animadversion. Your pretended Lords Supper than is no more than Bread and Wine, the Sign, the Shadow; and therefore their continuation of no necessity in the true Church, which hath received Christ the Substance, etc.  
Reply. The Ordinance of the Lords Supper, which Quakers reproachfully and contradictingly, (as I have showed in Pag. 53.) do call Bread and Wine; doth remain in full force, and the practice of it to be kept up in the same manner as Christ, the night before he was betrayed, instituted it, and the Primitive Saints received it, Acts 2.42. & Chap. 20.7, 11. 1 Cor. 11.23, etc. I have clearly proved in the said Book, pag. 19, 20, 21. to which I refer the Reader; and the stress of my Arguments, thou mayst see, this man hath no ways weakened, nor said any thing to, but would (if he knew how) make Persons believe I contradict myself afterwards in calling it a Sign, and speaking of sitting down under Christ's shadow; and in calling the Ordinance of breaking Bread and drinking of Wine a Sign, is no contradiction: For doth it not signify the breaking of Christ's Body, and the pouring forth of his Blood, and clearly, as a Sign, hold forth his Sufferings, and show forth his Death until he come? which was one end of his instituting of it; and hath it not been called by many faithful men (long before his airy Notions were Midwived into the world by the Spirit of Antichrist) an outward Sign of an inward spiritual Grace? he took the Bread and blessed it, and said, This is my Body, (which the godly Martyrs sealed with their blood) to be a figurative speech, or that which was to show forth his Body broken for us, etc. 'Tis no marvel, Reader, these men cavil against this Ordinance, and deny it, who plainly deny him to be the Christ who is signified thereby, as hereafter will appear more fully. And again, I would know of this man where he reads of any thing called the Lord's Supper, but this which we contend for? and I do affirm that this (and all other Ordinances of Christ) is Spiritual, a●d Faith to be exercised by all that receive it. Moreover, let none conclude (whatsoever this man imagineth) because the Shadows and Services of the Mosaical Law ended when Christ the substance nailed them to his Cross, that therefore Gospel-Ordinances did then cease likewise: for the Ordinance of Water-baptism was given forth by Christ after his Resurrection, Mat. 28.20. And this of the Lord's Supper, I have in that same Book showed, Paul received of Christ some time after his Ascension, 1 Cor. 11.23. But to pass this, and come to the next thing he cavils against, viz.  
H.G. The end of this Ordinance doth remain notwithstanding the pourings forth of the Spirit, and therefore the Ordinance must needs remain, which is to confirm our Faith in the true Saviour, and to keep up our love to him, p. 21.  
G. W's Answer. What kind of Faith and Love are these of theirs which are confirmed and kept up by Bread and Wine, and what Idolatry and diversion from the Spirit doth their Doctrine tend to herein, surely the Holy Spirit can best supply the said end, Gal. 5.22.  
Reply. We love him because he first loved us, and gave himself for us: and this Ordinance is to be done in remembrance of him, and so tends to increase our love to him, and our Faith in him; and this is to be done also (as I have showed pag. 21.) to show forth his Death until he comes, and therefore the end remains, notwithstanding what you have said, unless you can prove Christ is come the second time without sin unto Salvation: Do you suppose there is no need of this Ordinance because the Spirit can best supply the said end? and is this Idolatry, and diversion from the Spirit? is it Idolatry to worship God according to his own Appointments & Institutions, and a diversion from the Spirit to be obedient to those Command's given forth by the Spirit, and by our Lord Jesus Christ? and what a piece of impudence and arrogancy is here? will you take upon you to instruct the Almighty? Is not Jesus Christ the only wise God? and did not he upon the consideration of the aforesaid ends, institute and give forth this Gospel-Ordinance, and darest thou say, the Spirit can best supply those ends without making use of the means God in his Word doth direct unto, and make us believe (if you could) that to obey Christ's Ordinances is Idolatry? The usefulness and sufficiency of the Spirit in fulfilling of its work and office, doth not disannul Christ's Precepts, or make his blessed Appointments of none effect, or needless things; ought not we to conclude, that whatsoever means Jehovah hath prescribed and enjoined for the effecting and accomplishing of such and such ends by himself propounded, do best tend to the supplying the said ends respectively.  
H. G. again is very fierce and rash for their Water-baptism, or plunging People in Water, where he saith, Whosoever brings any other Gospel let him be accursed.—  
Hereby he hath cursed all the People of God and sincere-minded, both Protestants and all others in the world, who oppose and come not under the Baptists Dipping or Plunging people in Water: Lord forgive him, he is very uncharitable herein, for our parts we cannot believe their Baptism to be either the Baptism of Christ, or Gospel, or of necessity, and available to Salvation.  
Reply. Thou hast further in this manifested thy imperfection and false Anti-christian Spirit: Hast thou no more care nor conscience, that thou goest about thus to reproach and belie the innocent? Have I in Page 24. or any where else, affirmed that Baptism, or Plunging Men and Women in Water, is the Gospel? Or can any such Conclusion or Consequence arise from what I have said, which thou dost affirm; viz. As to curse all the people of God and sincere-minded Protestants, and all others in the world, who oppose or come not under the Baptist's dipping? etc. or, have I said it is of necessity to Salvation? Others have read that Book as well as G. W. and they cannot find any thing in the least of that nature in it. And because this is a false charge and cursed slander, I shall repeat the occasion of 〈◊〉 mentioning these words of Paul, Whosoever brings any other Gospel let him be accursed: from whence this man doth infer those unnatural Consequences. Thou mayst see that in Page 24. of the said little Book, I having an occasion there to treat of Christ's Commission, Matt. 28. and of the Baptism there given forth by the Lord Jesus, thou mayst find these words, viz. Now the Baptism here commanded must needs remain to be practised to the end of the World, because whatsoever was there given forth by Christ, is given forth as he is King and Mediator of the new Covenant, and as part of his last Will and Testament; and his last Will and Testament stands in full force and virtue to the end of the World unalterable, and whosoever brings any other Gospel, let him be accursed: Is there any Ground from hence for him to affirm that which he doth of me. All that are accursed, by the authority and natural consequence, or tendency of my mentioning those expressions of the Apostle, are only those who bring another Gospel besides that which was given forth by Christ, as he is King and Mediator of the New Covenant, or is contained in his last Will ●●d Testament; and I doubt not but all sincere-minded Protestants are of my persuasion touching this matter, though we may differ about the form and subjects of Baptism; and though we plead for Baptism as it was dispensed and administered in the Primitive time, yet false it is and a slander to say, that we make it essential and of absolute necessity to Salvation, though we do believe it to be essential to Church-Communion.  
H. G. Denies the true Saviour to be the Light and Power: I affirm (saith he) that Jesus Christ is a man consisting of flesh and bone, p. 30, 31. Humane, p. 33. Finite, weak, subject to Passion as we are, p. 94. The inward power is not the Christ distinct from the Human nature, the true Christ consisting of a body of Flesh and Bone, p. 31-34.  
H. G. Contrad. John declared plainly, That Christ was before him, being from everlasting he was before Abraham, the Son of God by eternal Generation, truly God, David 's Lord, p. 35. The Lord Jesus the Eternal word. p. 8. The Emanuel, p. 32. Christ is the Son of the living God, p. 33.  
G.W. His Animad. Therefore it is un-Scriptural and absurd to assert, That Jesus Christ consisteth of a Humane body of Flesh and Bone, seeing he is before all things, and by him all things consist, etc.  
Reply. Reader, I do entreat thee observe how he hath abused me in his collecting in such a confused manner of those several Places, Words, and Sentences out of my little Book, which he would fain make earnings of; he regards not the occasion of my speaking upon these several accounts, nor yet the Texts they allude to, taking here a bit and there a scrap in a ridiculous manner: 'Tis an easy thing to take his way and example to set the Scriptures in contradiction one against another, as some profane Atheists have presumed to do. What is said Pag. 94. concerning Christ being weak, subject to Passion and Sufferings etc. is spoken in respect of what he was touching his Humane Nature, when He was upon the Earth, before his Resurrection and glorious Ascension into Heaven above: But to leave that, I hope now (Reader) thou mayst see what judgement and persuasion this man is of, and the blindness of his evil mind. Doth he not evidently declare to the world, that it is a contradiction, and absurd to assert that Jesus Christ is God and Man, subsisting in two real distinct Natures, being David's Root and David's Offspring because I said he is man, and that the Divinity distinct and apart from the Humanity is not the Christ, and yet also said he is God Everlasting, and the Son of God by an Eternal Generation? He says it is a Contradiction and absurd. The Lord deliver these poor Nations from such horrible Heresies, Delusions, and vile Impostures.  
H.G. The Principles of the Quakers concerning the Light within, the impurity and vileness of which Principles I may further make appear, p. 48.  
H. G. Contrad. The Word considered as Creator, is the true Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world, p. 48.  
G. W. his Animad. It is no less than Blasphemy to charge this Principle (to wit, the Light of the Eternal Word, the Creator) with Vileness and Impurity.  
Reply. Doubtless the Light in this man is almost quite gone out, for else he might see that what he here minds with unchristian reflections, is not in the least any contradiction. The Quakers Doctrine and Principles concerning the Light within, is impure and vile, and the same I do still affirm; and yet assert, That the Word considered as Creator, is the true Light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world; and is this any contradiction? Friend, do not mistake yourself, I do not charge the Light of the Eternal Word, or the Light in every man, with Vileness and Impurity; I acknowledge the Light which is in all, and do esteem it, and have a regard to it in its place, and do say it witnesses for God, and serves for the end and purpose (when obeyed) for which it was given unto man: yet that which you Quakers speak of it, is abominable, and to be detested by all good Christians: It was never bestowed upon man to be made an Idol of, and set up in the place of God himself: It is Blasphemy to say it is the Divine Essence; it is a vile and wicked thing to say it is the Lord Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God, the great Prophet God promised to raise up; it is a vile Error to say it is the Holy Spirit, or blessed Comforter; for that, Christ saith, the World could not receive: and abominable it is to say 'twill cleanse from all sin, and Eternally save those that obey it, which many of you affirm; and herein your Principle of the Light appears vile and impure.  
G. H. God forbid that I should ever own their Principle of the Light in all, that doth so clearly tend to the razing out the grand Fundamentals of the Gospel.  
G. H. Contrad. Praises and hallelujah to God for ever, who hath given us that Witness in ourselves, of which thou speakest, which Witness (his Sister spoke of) was the Light which reproves for sin, to own and believe in the Light, that enlighteneth every man that cometh into the World.  
G. W. his Animad. See what a sad pass these men are proven to, and what kind of Prayers they offer to God, against his own Light, or Witness within; and how contrary to the Gospel-Spirit and Light they are.  
Reply. G. W. should have perused the Letter I wrote that Book in Answer to, before he returned any thing by way of Answer to me: for he belies both Me and my Sister in what he saith here; for the Witness she spoke of in her Letter, is not that he affirms in his Pamphlet, viz. The Light which reproves for sin, which is in every one that cometh into the World; though I confess she bids me believe in the Light that reproves for sin, which lighteth every one that cometh into the World, as pag. 8. & 29. But chose she mentioned upon this occasion, the very express words of the Apostle John, 1 Joh. 5.10. He that believeth, hath the Witness in himself; and that Witness through Grace I in my measure do experience; not that I believe in that Light (which every man that cometh into the World is enlightened with) for Life and Salvation, for that is an insufficient Saviour, and such a Belief will fail, that is not the object, author, and finisher of my Faith; but it is the Lord Jesus Christ, who by one Offering hath perfected for ever all those that are sanctified, Heb. 10.14. And thus you may see that all those Contradictions, Lies, and Absurdities that G. W. charges H. G. with, are returned upon his own head, by which you may perceive that all the stir this man makes, is but like smoke and darkness, which the beams of true Light from the Sun of Righteousness doth vanquish and expel.  
Reader, G. W is pleased to say pag. 6. that there are more absurdities and false accusations against them in that Book, called Light from the Sun of Righteousness, and doth also proceed to instance in one or two, viz. in saying they deny the Man Christ and the Resurrection. I cannot but admire at the insolency of these Men, who though they are found daily in the sight of all persons denying that Man to be the Christ who was born of the Virgin, and was crucified on the Cross, yet would fain have men to believe they are falsely accused: But that this is a true charge, I suppose these very lines may serve to inform thee; For if it be absurd to say, Christ doth consist of a Humane body, of Flesh and Bone, or is Man; or to say the Deity, Divine nature, or Godhead was not the Christ considered distinct and apart from the Humane nature; must it not needs follow from hence, they deny the Man Christ Jesus? Doth he not positively assert, that it is a contradiction to affirm the Lord Jesus Christ is God and Man? Doth he not deny his humane Nature, and the glorious Hypostatical Union? If this comes further to be controverted, we shall be able (God assisting) to make it appear yet more plainly. Have not some of them said, That Christ was never seen with an outward eye, nor heard with an outward ear; and that they cannot call the bodily Garment the Christ, but that which dwelled in the Body. See a Book styled, Some Principles of the Elect people of God called Quakers, Page 116. And now, Reader, I hope thou wilt find that what this man hath yet said in Answer to my little Book, hath been just nothing; for that he cannot prove it mere contradiction, confusion, and darkness, as with the tongue of Infamy he is pleased to call it. And I appeal to thee, Do not the Quakers appear to all Men to be Babylonish rather than H.G. and other Baptists, which he doth reproachfully call so? G. W. saith, he hath writ a full Answer unto the said Book. Thou mayest perceive by this what a bundle of confusion the rest will prove, for I never saw yet any distinct solid Answer given by him to any Book which hath come out against them. The Lord deliver Christ's poor Lambs from being preyed upon and devoured by ravening Wolves, Matt. 7.15. and grant them Repentance, who have not sinned the unpardonable Sin.  
Farewell.   

POSTSCRIPT.  
ANd since G. W. would make us believe, that the Quakers own the man Christ, and the Resurrection of the body: I shall only ask him a few Questions, desiring a direct, distinct, and plain Answer to them, and conclude.  
First, Was he the Christ, and true Saviviour, that was born of the Virgin; yea, or nay?  
Secondly, If you say he was, I Query, whether that same Christ, be in the heart of every Man and Woman?  
Thirdly, Whether he that you own to be the Christ and true Saviour, was put to death, or crucified on the Cross?  
Fourthly, Whether you believe there is any other Christ, than what is in the heart of Man, yea, or nay?  
Fifthly, If that Body that was nailed to the Cross, was but as a Garment which the true Christ did wear, or as a House in which he did dwell, why may not any other Man, in whose flesh Christ is manifested and doth dwell, be called the Christ, as well as Jesus of Nazareth?  
Sixthly, If you own the Man-Christ, why do you affirm it is a contradiction to say, he is God of the Substance of the Father, and yet truly Man, made like unto us in all things, Sin only excepted? for either he must be mere Man, or mere God, else it cannot be any Contradiction; and if you say he is mere Man, than you seem to side with those Jews that accused our Saviour for blasphemy, in that being a Man, he made himself God, John 10.33. and if you say he is mere God, doth it not then clearly follow, you deny the Man-Christ?  
Seventhly, I Query, whether you own any other Resurrection, than what (you say) you experience within?  
Eighthly, Whether you believe that that Body of flesh and bone which is laid in then Grave (respecting the matter or substance of it) shall by the mighty power of God b●… raised from the dead at the last day?  
Ninthy, Whether that Man (whosoever he be) doth not deny the Resurrection of the dead, who doth deny the same IT which is sown, (and shall rise) mentioned, 1 Cor. 15.38. to intend the same Body (respecting the matter or substance of it) which was buried and laid in the Grave? Answer plainly, without Equivocation.  
FINIS.