THE Holy Scripture Owned, AND THE Athenians Injustice Detected, By the Abused QUAKER.  
THeir charge (in their Mercury of June 11. 1692.) upon the Quakers, as speaking contemptibly of tae Bible, is contradicted by themselves in their not only saying, they equal Apocrypha with Scrptare, but also in accusing Samuel Fisher, for esteeming some of those Books called the Apocrypha of as Divine Original, as those called Canonical; and for saying, if such Synods as shouldered out all those Books from sharing with the other writings, in what they lay just claim to had been spiritually discerning, they would have seen cause to have joined some, at least, of these Apocryphal Scriptures to an equal Participation of the Plea of Divine Original, and Inspiration with the rest: And further that whatever is truly to be predicated of the one, or can be pleaded solidly on the behalf of the one, which you call your Canon; as to the Divinity of their Original, the same may be pleaded on the behalf of not a few of the other, instancing 2d of Esdras, Epistle of Jer. Ecclesiasticus, Wisdom of Solomon.  
From all which observe, that Samuel Fisher is so far from speaking contemptibly of the Bible, that he confesses the Scriptures which are esteemed Canonical, to be of Divine Original and Inspiration, and argues for Some, at least of those Apocryphal Scriptures to participate of the Plea of Divine Originaul and Inspiration (and so does some of your own Doctors). How should he then contemn the Bible? Or with the Papists invalidate the Authority of those Writings, as charged, when he confesses them to be of a Divine Original and Authority? The Apocryphal Scriptures he modestly owns some of them, to be of the same Authority which these men deem Popery, so that it seems the Bible is more magnified by Samuel, Fisher, than by these pretended Athenians.  
And 'tis observable that after they have instanced Sam Fishers Book, for some Apocryphal Scriptures to be of Divine Original, they dare not in plain words deny, nor do they refute what he says in that Case; but conclude with a scornful Reflection, and false-infinuation, viz. Whence we may judge, whether he traveled to Rome for nothing. And yet we presume they dare not say, that none of the Apocryphal Scriptures, were given by Divine Inspiration.  
Their other false charge, against the Quakers in general, on Samuel Fishers account is, viz. Lastly, They use the same detracted Expressions concerning it, with the Papists and Jesuiss, calling it a Nose of Wax, a Lesbian Rule, a dead Letter, etc. and bid us see S. Fisher, p. 48, of Rusticus ad Accidemicos, And we would have them see it better. 1st, That there is no proof against the People called Quakers, that they call the Scripture, a Nose of Wax, etc. Secondly, Nor doth Samuel Fisher so call it with the Papists and Jesuits (as falsely charged) But that in its meanest, and most altered, and adulterated Capacity, as wrested and torn, and like a Nose of Wax; twisted and twined into several Shapes by men's untrue Transcripts, Variety of Lections, and Senses through Misrendering, corrupt Copying, Correctings, and Commenting, &c— With more of the same Import, naturally depending thereupon, in all which he does not appear upon his own Judgement and Principle, to give the Holy Scripture the Title of a Nose of Wax. etc. But infers it as the consequence of such men's Abuse of it, who altar, adulterate, wrist, twist and twine it: Therefore you pretended Athenians have dealt very disingeniously in this matter. First, In thus charging the Quakers in General, from a Particular. Secondly, In perverting Sam Fishers Words and Sense to an evil End, never designed by him; that he should one while own the Holy Scripture to be of Divine Original and Inspiration, aed another while contemptibly term it a Nose of Wax; is so monstruous that 'tis incredible to rational men, especially to such as knew him, his Sobriety and Learning, which he himself set little by in Comparison of the Excellency of the Divine Knowledge of Christ Jesus, which God in Mercy made him a Partaker of.  
Besides he writ of the Scriptures under divers considerations, and considered it in its primitive, best, and purest Aspect, as at first given forth, declaring himself to be No Pander for the Papists, as belied, but a just, plain, and impartial Pleader for the Scripture; a Doer of right to those Holy Writings, which are egrediously wronged by both Papists and Protestants, and vindicates many, falsely supposed to be Slighters and Disowners' of the Scripture, i. e. (Our Friends) that they do own, value, honour and exalt the Scripture, both in ascribing all that to it which it assumes to itself, and in Preaching and practising that holy Life which is the end of it (Thus far S. F.) in his very Answer unfairly cited against him, p. 48, 49 of his Rusticus, and 2d Apologetical and Expostulatory Exercitation.  
Thus you may see how unjustly these men have misrepresented Samuel Fisher, and the People called Quakers, on his account, concerning the Holy Scripture.  
Their Charge that they not only equal the Apocryphas, but their own Writings with it, and indeed more than equal their own Writings unto them, for they plainly prefer them before 'em (i. e. the Scriptures) both which we utterly deny. First, That we so equal our own Writings. And secondly that we so prefer them, we make no such Comparison, but prefer the Spirit to the Letter, as Paul did. And we prefer the Scriptures before all other Books and Writings, extant in the world.  
And as for our believing, or affirming, that the Holy Ghost sometimes moves among us to speak, or prophesy.  
This our scornful Adversaries (instead of confuting) do scoff and deride, saying, they have learned to be God's Ape, which bespeaks their Levity and Profaneness, (if not Atheism) as well as Ignorance of God's Promises, for his pouring out of his Spirit in the latter days, and the Effects thereof: And pray what Scripture have they for their Style, in calling us God's Ape? These are the Persons that profess the Scripture to be their Rule, but seeing they will have it that, we equal our Writings with the Scripture, in saying, thus saith the Lord; and G. F. Junior saying, What I have written are the words which the Father gave me to write: Tho this be short of proving their Charge, yet it contradicts their falsely, saying we speak contemptibly of the Bible, for we do not speak contemptibly of our own Writings herein, when we believe any of them contain Words given us of God.  
Another charge is, That they will by no means allow, the Bible to be the Word of God. Whilst we allow the Bible to be what it saith of itself, that is, a book we prefer before all other writings and books, a book containining the Holy Scriptures, and words of God; first given by Divine Inspiration, as well as containing a true History of the Devils, and wicked men's Words and Actions, for warning against them. I think no honest man will condemn us either for contemning the Bible, or the Holy Scriptures on this account. And though the Bible, or Books, as made up of Paper, Ink, and Literal Characters, will wax old, decay and moulder in time (as S. F. saith) Yet the word of God, by which all things are upheld, together with those divine Truths, Doctrines, and Testimonies contained in the Holy Scriptures, will live and endure for ever; and this can be no contempt of Holy Scripture, nor contemptible speaking of the Bible, any more than to say, the Foundations of the Earth which God laid, and the Heavens which are the Works of his Hands (though a more copious book than the Bible) yet they shall wax old as doth a Garment, and they shall perish; but he (that word that made them) remaineth the same, and his Years fail not, Psal. 102.25, 26. Heb. 1.10, 11.  
But from W. P. in his Key of their Principles, p. 240, they Charge, viz. That the Quakers deny the Scriptures (or Writings) to be the Word, is because they never call themselves so, but denominate Christ by that Title, and that 'tis in reverence to Christ. Yea and not with any disesteem of the Holy Scriptures, nor any common Fallacy, as these Men falsely judge, which is their common course to recriminate, when they cannot give a fair Replication. But how do they desire the word of God with their Learning? They grant Christ is called the Word of God figuratively, because he proceeds from him, that the Scriptures are more properly his Word tho written, not the very Letters, which is ridiculous to suppose, and was never affirmed (how then is the Bible the Scriptures, or the Writing the Word? Thus inconsistent are these men). But the Sense and Divine Truths therein contained, and thereby conveyed unto us, and by the Co-operation of God's Spirit working in us Faith and Obedience, which come by Hearing and the Word of God. That its proper to call them the Word of God, though Christ is so also, (thus far Athenians.)  
Whence it follows, that when they call the Bible (or those books) the Word of God, or when they call the Scriptures, written the Word of God, more properly than Christ: (It seems there's several degrees of Comparison in the Case. We are not to understand the very Letters, or writing in Ink and Paper, to be the word) (that's improper) but the Sense and Divine Truths therein contained, and thereby conveyed unto us by the Co-operation of God's Spirit working in us Faith and Obedience, etc. And surely this is more than the writings, books or Scriptures written, therefore they are not properly called the Word, but rather that which is the living Word, or Spirit of God, which worketh in us Faith and Obedience, and conveys unto us the Sense and Divine Truths of the Scriptures; and we are sure that this living Eternal Word is often mentioned the Scriptures, but never find that the Holy Penmen (or several of them) call their Writings the Word, much less that it may be so proved from one hundred places in Scriptures. For which we have but these Athenians bore say so, instead of any real Scripture proof, their calling the Writings the Word of God, we are gotten over, and that on their own self conttadicting Concession before. That the Divine Truths conveyed by the Co-operation of God's Spirit, working Faith in us (and not the very Letters or Writings) are the word of God, in these men's unstable Sense, from which they suddenly vary; for out of these pretended hundred places of Scripture to prove the Holy Penmen called their Writings the word of God; they only bid us take two or three, 36. Jer. 4. Baruch wrote from the Mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the Lord, v. 10 they are called the words of Jeremiah, and yet in the 2. and 11. verses the words of the Lord, add to these Verses, 6, 11, 13. 16. 17 18, 24, 27, and 32. Where they are called the words of the Lord, these words, and the words, etc. which were wrote with Ink in the Book or Roll, which the King of Judah burnt. But he could not burn the word of the Lord which came unto Jeremiah, for that remained when the writing was burnt, and after the King had burnt it, the word of the Lord again came to Jeremiah, and required him to take another Roll, and write in it all the former words that were in the first Roll, which Jehoiachim the King of Judah had burnt. 36. Jer. 27, 28. Therefore that word that came again to Jerem. could not be the Roll or Book that was burnt, but it was the word of the Lo●d which gave unto him these words which were written in the Roll. We could not have a more apt proof against our Opposers, for our Distinction between the word of God, (which came to the Prophets before they writ Scripture) and the say or words of the Lord, and of his Prophets written in the Scriptures) and this the People called Quakers profess, and will easily grant them. But this will not satisfy these conceited witty Athenians, for they will needs not only have it, that the Holy Penmen call their writings the word, but they will have this very place of Jer. ch. 36. for their principal proof.  
And what's their most pregnant proof therein pray? Not that these are the words of the Lord, nor that these are the words of Jeremiah, v. 6.10. for this we freely grant them. But now their Blow and Proof comes with a Bang upon the Quakers. Nor will their silly Evasion help that 'tis words not word, for in the first Verse of the same Chapter, 'tis said, this word came to Jeremiah from the Lord ... take thee a Roll of a Book, ctc.— But here they fallaciously leave out [saying] after [Lord] in which chapter there are the words and say, which the word that thus came to Jeremiah said. Surely this word which came to Jer. it was neither the Roll nor the Writing therein; for Baruch wrote it at the mouth of Jeremiah after the word of the Lord came unto him, and it was the same ' word of the Lord that came again unto him, after the Roll and Writing in it was burnt, that had the words of the Lord written in it, yea the very same word of the Lord, that caused all the former words that were in the first Roll, to be written again in another Roll; consequently that writing Roll or Book could not be the word that came to Jeremiah, and which was as a Fire in his Bones, and as a Hammer and a Sword, therefore he well distinguished between the word of the Lord, and the words of the Lord, as also where 'tis said Jer. 1.2. The words of Jeremiah, etc. to whom the word of the Lord came. And Ch. 51.64. Thus far the words of Jeremiah.  
I suppose these Adversaries will not adventure to say, that the Bible came to Jeremiah, nor that all the Holy Penmens' writings in Scripture came to Jeremiah; or were that word which came to him. How short are they then of Scripture proof for their position, and charge? And what a hard (but impertinent) shift are they put to to prove it, when on Jer. 36.1. they allege, viz. Where are many more words than one, though the singular is used for the plural, a common scheme of speech in all Nations. A mere shift indeed, but they wrong the Prophet here also, for he does not here use that Impropriety of singular for plural, but speaks distinctly of the word of the Lord, which came to him, and the words of the Lord written with Ink in the Book or Roll; to conclude this point we are so far from contemning, or undervaluing the Holy Scriptures, that we grant them to be (or contain) the words of God, and ascribe Holiness to the Divine Truths therein contained (not to the mere Letters, Characters, or Writings in Ink and Paper) and we are conscientiously concerned in keeping to the Scripture Language, in calling them what they call themselves, and in calling him (Christ) the word of God who was before all Scriptures or Writings were.  
And however though they say Christ is figuratviely, the word of God yet he is so called more properly than so to call the Bible, Books or Writings from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of the Revelation, insomuch that many so frequently calling the Bible the word of God without distinction, and so little minding the Eternal, Internal living Word, that many People are kept so ignorant, that they know no other word, nor what they may so call but the Bible, Books, or outward Writings: 'Tis to be lamented to see the sense of the engrafted word in the Heart so much lost, by many poor ignorant Souls.  
To their loud clamorous and general Charge, That the Quakers term their own blasphemous writings the word of the Lord; and this more than once repeated, 'tis too gross and too general to be true, therefore in the name and behalf of the People called Quakers I deny their Charge, and suppose any one hath so termed any book, paper or papers of his (which ye● I may not grant till proved) this will be no proof of their general Charge upon the Quakers, that they so term their Writings, much less that they are blasphemous, and I do not believe any of us have so termed their Writings, Papers or Books, without reference to the internal word of Life, or immediane movings thereof to write, or declare.  
Their Charge and Accusation of Turning the most satred Truths of the Scripture into Jejune Allegories, we also sincerely deny, together with their subsequent Charge, of turning all, both our Saviour's Death Resurrection, Heaven and Hell into Allegory: Which is so gross ●n Untruth, that I never knew any before, that ever read our 〈…〉 objects so charge us, if these men have ●ead them they have done ve●● wickedly, thus souly and fals●y to charge us and if they have 〈◊〉, they have very blindly sought to smite us in the Dark, in their dark Envy, but miss their Blow; for the reality of these weighty matters aforesaid, of our Saviour's Death and Resurrection, etc. we have really believed as the Scriptures declare, and I am to examine these men's pretended proof, elsewhere, against us.  
These Athenians seem to make a great buzzing Noise against the People called Quakers, whom they very grossly and falsely accuse, for Idollizing and formally Praying to each other, for which general Calumny and Slander their chief instance is about two Letters, the one pretended to be Josiah Coals, and the other John audland's, for which they quote Faldoes' book, and Francis Bugs for their Authority; and then having taken their Citations upon trust they subjoined, viz. with all these Blasphemies when they were charged. Here they pretend to cite George Whiteheads Answer, though they cite but one Question out of it, quoting Innocency against Envy, p. 18 Wherein I must tell them they have dealt very disingeniously, by G. W. in this very matter; leaving out his previous Questions to Bugg about the said 2 Letters, as also his following Answer and Testimony, which were thus, viz. As to his Charge of Idolatry, if not Blasphemous Names and Titles given to G. F. p. 29. from two Letters, the one from Jos. Cole, and the other from J. A. We question whether he has truly cited them, and especially that from J. A. How proves he they are theirs as cited? And we are sure that the man G. Fox, did own himself a Servant of our Lord Jesus Christ, and did preach and pray in his Name, and to him, and not in his own; as many Thousands can testify.  
All these recited Passages both Questions and Testimony, these Athenians have unfairly left out; although the said G. W. appears more positive about the 2 said Letters, pretended to be Jos. Coals, and John audland's, in his Treatise against Bugg, entitled, though Contentious Apostate, and his Blow Refelled, p. 23. G. W. Words are these (against Bugg) viz. He hath accused J. C. and J. A. (both long since deceased;) with Idolatrous and Blasphemous Names and Titles given to Man; Prayers given or offered to G. F. Deifying and Adoring him, etc. p. 7. in two Letters before mentioned, which I have not only questioned the Truth of his Citation thereof, but disowned. Especially the latter, as cited by F. B. who hath also varied in his citation thereof, nor hath he gone about to prove either that they are truly cited by him, but rather the contrary by his manifest variation therein, so that still it remains for F. B. (to whom I may now add, and for these Athenians) to prove that the Persons charged (i. e.) J. C. and J. A. were the Authors of the said Letters, as cited by him which I do not believe nor own, nor can I understand them to be Prayers, as he calls them, when there is not so much as the form of a Prayer in them. These things considered F. B.'s Clamours against us, of justifying Idolatry and Blasphemy, etc. do all fall to the ground, as mere empty and envious Raillery and Abuse.  
And now to you pretended Athenians, in the Case in hand: I am persuaded you'll have cause to be ashamed of F. Bugs Authority, which you have so cordially espoused. If you inspect how he has been detected and justly charged, as a self condemned Apostate; And since you have been so credulous of his, and John Faldoes', Authority about the two Letters aforesaid, I have reason to bring the matter more closely upon you. First, cause appears to us to deny both their and your Citation thereof, to be justly or truly made; Bugg varied in his in two differing Citations (and so have some of the Baptists lately) We do not believe eihter of them to be perfect entire Copies of the whole Original Letters, but rather corrupted, minced and perverted, designedly by the evil minded Persons (if not fictitious Forgeries) especially the latter. Both Prayers and Praises may be ascribed to God and Christ, in a Letter to a Friend, which by an Enemy, possibly may be easily perverted, and directed to the Person to whom the Letter is directed. How prove you they are true and perfect Copies, as cited? 2. You have made your Charge and Indictment, for Idollizing, and formally praying to each other; general against the Quakers, and 'tis high matter of Fact and Criminal. That is charged by you. It touches not only 2 or 3 particular Persons, but also the People called Quakers in general, in whose behalf I therefore plead not guilty, and your proof must either be as general as your Charge, or else you'll come off but faintly. 3. And if you'll place your General Charge on the said two Letters, as cited (though no just way of arguing) I am persuaded the first, (i. e. J. C's which you say Mr. Pen has it seems undertaken to defend, suppose it as it is, which yet I question), will not amount to any real or positive proof of their Charge against him in particular, much less against the People called Quakers in general, who are unconcerned in it Fourthly, Since you are so credulous, so general, and so loud in: your Charge; we may reasonably expect from you, exact and punctual proof of both the said Letters as cited, and as before proposed, either by producing the Originals to compare them by, or sufficient credible witnesses thereof ' that are no parties nor our professed Adversaries or Enemies, as both Bugg and Faldo are. 4. As for the latter, said to be J. A's we do positively deny it as it is cited in yours; and doubt not but we can easily clear both the men (and G. F. also) from your odious charge, and that upon their own professed Christian Principle, and declared intentions in their own books extant, and that they did not own or worship any other Lord Jesus Chrisi, than the very same, who is the only begotten of God, of whom the Holy Scriptures do testify: Nor could they ever intent to ascribe any Dignity of Glory that is only peculiar to Christ Jesus) to the person of any mortal upon Earth, according to their own professed principle. We knowing them also to be both understanding and honest men, fearing God and Ministers of Jesus Christ (the only begotten Son of God) in their day and time.  
The Reader may expect to hear further from us (if the Lord will) to manifest the Abuse of these Adversaries scandalous invective Libels, and to vindicate the People of God, commonly called Quakers, and the Truth professed by them, from their Ca● 〈…〉  
T B. ●. E. 〈…〉 S 〈◊〉