Selected quad for the lemma: cause_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
cause_n	death_n	grace_n	sin_n	2,826	5	5.1233	4	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47124	The arguments of the Quakers, more particularly, of George Whitehead, William Penn, Robert Barclay, John Gratton, George Fox, Humphry Norton, and my own arguments against baptism and the Supper, examined and refuted also, some clear proofs from Scripture, shewing that they are institutions of Christ under the Gospel : with an appendix containing some observations upon some passages in a book of W. Penn called A caveat against Popery, and on some passages of a book of John Pennington, caled The fig leaf covering discovered / by George Keith.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1698 (1698)	Wing K142; ESTC R7322	106,695	121

hath got a late Patron and Assistant a Clergy Man of the Church of England formerly though not in present Office one that calleth himself Edmund Ely's who hath Printed lately two half Sheets in Vindication of G. Whitehead's vile Error and blaming my Christian Assertion The Title of one of his half Sheets being this G. Keith's saying that the Light within is not sufficient to Salvation without something else proved to be contrary to the Foundation of the Christian Religion These two half Sheets are printed and sold by T. Soule the Quakers Printer next door to their Meeting-house in White-heart Court in Grace-church-street 1697. By which it appears they are very fond of this Patron to their Cause and particularly that G. Whitehead is so by the Commendation he gives of him in his late printed Antidote However this may seem to some an improper Digression yet if they well consider the occasion of it they will if Impartial acknowledge it both proper and convenient SECT XII AND hereby it may easily appear what Spirit hath Acted the first Teachers that appeared among the Quakers as chiefly G. F. and G. W. to oppose so keenly and earnestly the practice of those two Divine Institutions of Water-Baptism and the Supper namely to draw People into a forgetfulness of all Faith in Christ without us as he dyed and rose again and is Ascended into Heaven for the proper Memorials of Christ Crucified being rejected and laid aside as well as the Doctrin it self not only not Preached but opposed as contrary to the Scripture the drift and aim of that Spirit that hath Acted them both against the one and the other is plainly manifest and how it s opposing the Doctrin of Faith in the Man Christ without us is the great cause of its opposing these external Practices which are such proper means together with the Doctrine to propagate and preserve the true Christian Faith in the World And indeed upon that Hypothesis or Foundation laid by their principal Teachers that there is no need of Preaching Faith in the Man Christ without for Remission of Sin and eternal Salvation but the only thing needful is the Light within as it universally enlightenth all Mankind either to be Preached or Believed as a late Writer against them hath well observed these outward Practices of Water-Baptism and the outward Supper are useless and insignificant Formalities for they were never appointed to signifie Remission of Sin Justification and Salvation only by obedience to the Light within excluding the necessity of Faith in the Man Christ without us whose alone Obedience unto Death for us is the only meritorious Cause of the Remission of our Sins of Justification and eternal Salvation and of all that inward Grace and Virtue of the Holy Spirit whereby we are inwardly Sanctified and made meet to receive that eternal Inheritance But though the Spirit that first appeared to Act in these Men the first Teachers and Leaders of that People did prove it self to be Antichristian by opposing the Memorials of Christ without us yet many simple and honest hearted People knew nothing of this design and however in part leavened with that Spirit in respect of its opposition to these outward Institutions of Baptism and the Supper yet by God's great Mercy were preserved from being prevailed upon by it to oppose the Doctrine and Faith of Christ as he outwardly Suffered Dyed and Rose again and is in Heaven our Intercessor among whom I can justly and uprightly number both R.B. and my self both of us having been preserved sound in our Faith as touching the Faith in Christ without us however otherwise hurt and byassed by them in relation to these two outward Institutions of Baptism and the Supper and my Charity leads me to believe that if R.B. had lived in the Body to this day to see the ill effects that his Writing against these Divine Institutions have had and the bold opposition that many have of late more than formerly made to the necessity of the Faith in Christ Crucified and the Preaching of it even here in Christendom since the Question hath been more distinctly stated betwixt my Opposers and me touching the necessity of the Faith asserted by me and opposed by them he would have plainly seen and readily acknowledged his Error in Writing against these Divine Institutions There is yet another of their Teachers who is of late years become a Person of no small Note among the Quakers viz. John Gratton whom I cannot well pass without observing his Ignorant and Inconsiderate way of Arguing against these Divine Institutions especially as touching one of his main Arguments he hath framed from a most false and perverse Understanding of that place in Heb. 6.1 2. Therefore leaving the Principles of the Doctrin of Christ let us go on to Perfection where in his Book called John Baptist decreasing Printed many years ago and Re-printed in the year 1696 he layeth the Foundation of his Argument against Water-Baptism upon the word in that place LEAVING which he hath caused to be Printed more than once in his Book in Capital Letters for a Monument it will be of his gross Ignorance and yet bold Presumption thus to pervert the Holy Scripture from thence inferring that Water-Baptism is to be left off and laid aside for thus be argues p. 47. of the last Edition 1697. If they had been commanded by Christ to have been used to the Worlds end then why should Paul for so I call that Author have been so earnest at that day which was soon after Christ's Ascension to have had them then to leave them and to go on to a more Manful Powerful perfect State Ans At this rate of Arguing not only Water-Baptism but the Baptism of the Holy Spirit is also to be left for the Author mentions the Doctrin of Baptisms in the Plural Number which John Gratton most unfairly and falsly quotes in the Singular Baptism for Baptisms Also by the same Argument Repentance from dead works and faith towards God the resurrection of the dead and eternal judgment are all to be left off from being Preached or Believed But the true Sense is obvious of the word leaving i.e. not to Treat or Write upon these first Principles further at present but to Treat of other things as when a Man hath laid the Foundation of a House he goeth on to Build a Superstructure upon it And as Ignorant and Impertinent doth he discover himself to be in his other Treatise preceeding the other of Baptism and the Supper where from the Word Elements used in Gal. 4.3 9. he concludes that Water-Baptism is one of these beggerly Elements Paul opposed because Water is an Element and after this rate divers others of their Teachers have Argued but the Word Translated Elements there Gal. 4.3 9. hath no relation to the Water-Baptism nor to the Element of Water but to Principles and Doctrins of the Jews relating to the Jewish Rites and Ceremonies the Greek

Word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is applyed no less to the Principles of the Christian Doctrin of Christ and Oracles of God which therefore by his Argument being Elements are to be thrown aside As for his other Arguments in those two Treatises against the outward Baptism and the Supper they are no other that I can find but such as are above mentioned in my Reply to those of William Penn and Robert Barclay and therefore one Answer will serve both to them and him PART II. SECT I. The Arguments against the outward Supper examined and Refuted THus having finished my Examination and Refutation of the Arguments of the above mentioned Persons against Water-Baptism and the outward Supper in general I think fit to bring to the like Examination what R.B. hath more particularly Argued against the outward Supper as being not any longer to continue but until Christ's inward coming to arise in their Hearts and give a plain Refutation of the same In the beginning of the Chapter or Head wherein he discourseth concerning the Body and Blood of Christ although he saith truly that the Communion i.e. the Participation thereof is inward and Spiritual yet he was under a great mistake to affirm that the said Body and Blood of Christ whereof true Believers do participate is only inward which he afterwards explains to be that Light and Seed in every Man as he expresseth plainly in several places as p. 61 of the above said Treatise and p. 65 where he saith and that Christ understands the same things here viz. John 6. by his Body Flesh and Blood which is understood John 1. by the light hath enlighteneth every man and the life c. And p. 77. he chargeth it to be an Error to make the Communion or Participation of the Body Flesh and Blood of Christ to relate to that outward Body Vessel or Temple that was Born of the Virgin Mary and walked and Suffered in Judea whereas it should relate to the Spiritual Body Flesh and Blood of Christ even that Heavenly and Celestial Light and Life which was the Food and Nourishment of the Regenerate in all Ages as we have said he already proved Ans In this he was in a great Error to make the Eating or Participation of Christs Flesh and Blood to have no relation to Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood that was Born of the Virgin and Suffered Death for our Sins on the Tree of the Cross For the Regeneration of Believers and Justification with all the Spiritual Blessings of Life and Light and inward Divine Virtue and Might wherewith they are inwardly Refreshed and Nourished by Christ hath a most near and immediate Relation to Christ's outward Body and Blood and to his coming in that outward Body because that most Holy and Perfect Obedience of Christ which he performed in that Body and became Obedient to the Death of the Cross was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of all that inward Grace Virtue Light and Life whereby Regeneration was wrought in any in any Age of the World either before or since Christ came in the Flesh as well as it was and is the procuring and meritorious Cause of their Justification and the Remission of their Sins For Christ Died as well for the Sins of those who lived in the Ages before he came in the Flesh as since and they had the same Benefits by his Death and by his Body and Blood that we have the same inward Grace and Light to Regenerate them as the same Mercy and Favour to Justifie them and give them the Remission of their Sins which they received through Faith in Christ as he was to come in the Flesh without them and whole Christ is the Food of true Believers I mean Christ not only considered as the Word simply but as the Word made Flesh And having taken or assumed the Seed of Abraham and the true Nature of Man into such a high Union as that the Godhead of the Word and the Manhood assumed thereby is but one Christ and as such is the Food of all true Believers both as he outwardly came in the Flesh and as he is inwardly come the Light and the Life in them and Believers Eating of Christ is their Believing in him and by their Faith being United to him and he to them so that he dwells in them and they in him And though it may be owned that Believers Feeding upon Christ's Light and Life Metaphorically and Allegorically speaking that Light and Life may be called according to Scripture Meat and Drink and Flesh and Blood of Christ as it hath many other such Metaphorical Names such as Milk Honey Wine Marrow and Fatness Oyl c. All which Names are given because of Men's Weakness and that they have not proper Words to express Divine Things by yet that ought not to make us reject and lay aside Christ's outward Body of Flesh and Blood from having any Relation to the Saints feeding upon him Nor do the Arguments brought by R.B. here prove in the least what he intends as the following Examination of them will sufficiently I hope manifest He begins with a Quotation out of Augustine in his Tractat Psalm 98. The words which I speak unto you are spirit and life understand spiritually what I have spoken ye shall not eat of this body which ye see and drink this blood which they shall spill that shall crucifie me I am the living bread which have descended from heaven he called himself the bread which descended from heaven exhorting that they might believe in him c. Ans It is evident from these last Words that by Eating Augustine meant in one Sense Corporal Eating and in another Sense Believing as elsewhere Tract 25. ad cap. 6. Johan Hoc est opus Dei ut quid paras dentem ventrem crede manducasti Credere enim in eum hocest comedere panem vinum qui credit in eum manducat eum in English thus why preparest thou thy Teeth and Belly believe and thou hast eat for to believe in him is to eat the Bread and Wine who believeth in him eateth him Both these Quotations are good against the Papists who hold that Believers eat the Body of Christ Corporally with their Mouths but say nothing against this Spiritual Way of Eating Christs Body but plainly confirm it The plain Sense therefore of Augustin's Words Quoted by R.B. is this Ye shall not eat Corporally with the outward Mouth the Body of Christ which ye see but ye shall eat it Spiritually that is believe with a sincere Faith which the Spirit of God worketh in you that Christ shall give his Body that ye see speaking then to the Jews to be broken for you and his Blood even the Blood of that Body to be shed for you And in so Believing ye shall eat my Body and drink my Blood that is ye shall be united to me and I to you that I shall abide in you and

Christ's Death as he Dyed outwardly may be forgotten But if by the Lord's Death is understood his outward Death by as good reason by his coming is understood his outward coming SECT VII HAving thus shewn the Invalidity of his Proofs that by the Lord 's coming is understood his inward coming into their Hearts and not his outward coming I shall give some clear Reasons why it must be understood his outward coming at the general Judgment The first Reason is because the Reason of the Command continuing to his last outward coming the Command doth also continue for so long doth any Command continue in Force as the Reason of it continueth but the Reason of the Command Do this in remembrance of me c. doth continue to Christ's last outward coming which Reason is this that by that Practice they might remember the Lord's Death and not only remember it but shew it forth Publickly Declare and Profess it and the inestimable Benefits they have by it Now put the case that any had so good and living Remembrance of it that they needed not the outward things to put them in remembrance thereof yet that is not enough to Answer the Reason and End of the Command which is by this outward Practice to shew it forth and declare it by a publick Profession that they owe Remission of Sin and Salvation to the Crucified Jesus and that they are not ashamed to own and confess him their Saviour their King their Priest and Prophet and in Token thereof they give Testimony of their Obedience to these his peculiar positive Laws and Institutions of Water-Baptism and the Supper for if these be rejected by the same Method Men may reject all other his positive Institutions relating to External Practice of Religion and so turn the Christian Religion into meer Deism and Pagan Morality The second Reason is that the end of this Institution being a solemn Commemoration of Christ's Death and Sacrifice which he offered up to God for our Sins above sixteen hundred Years ago and of the great Spiritual Blessings we have thereby there is the same Cause and End for it to continue to our Day and to the end of the World as when it was first appointed Had it been indeed only a Prenuniciative Sign of some things to come or of the hidden invisible Substance as W. Penn terms it meaning thereby the Spirit of Christ within at the coming of the Spirit within into their Hearts the Sign might have ceased as the Prenunciative Signs of Christ's outward coming in the Flesh were to cease after his outward coming and accordingly did cease But the Signs of Water-Baptism and the Supper as commanded by Christ and Practised by the Apostles were not such Prenunciative Signs of the coming of his Spirit within them but were chiefly Commemorative Signs of him as he had come for both of them were appointed by him when he was come and the Institution of Baptism was appointed by him after his Death and Resurrection the Institution of the Supper so near to his Death that it was in the very Night when he was Betrayed and at which time he had the great Sense and Weight of his Sufferings upon him and as then in great part begun and because the use of those Signs of Bread and Wine the Bread being broken and the Wine poured out was a Solemn Commemoration of his having given his Body to be broken for them and his Blood to be shed for them therefore he said Take Eat this is my Body that is broken for you he did not say this is my Spirit or this is the inward visible hid Substance that ye shall afterwards receive but this is my Body Take Eat and though they were not to eat his Body with the Carnal Mouth but only the Bread which signified it yet by Faith they were to eat his Body that is to say they were to partake of a Mystical Union with his Body and to have their Right and Interest in him confirmed to them by that Symbol by means whereof they were to receive plentifully of his Grace and Spirit as the Consequent and Effect of that Union with him Therefore they were not so to mind the Effect as to neglect the great Cause of that Effect which great cause was his giving his Body to be broken for them and his Blood to be shed for to mind only the Effect and neglect the Cause were like the Hogs that greedily run after the Acorns or Nuts but are unmindful of the Tree that beareth them But as the Spiritual Eyes of Believers are to be to the Graces and Gifts of Christ so especially and chiefly to him from and by whom they have them and their Faith and Love ought chiefly to act upon him and upon God the Father in and through him as also upon the Holy Spirit as principally residing in him from and by whom we derive our several Measures of the same The Third Reason is this when Christ gave the Cup he said this Cup is the new Testament in my Blood shed for the remission of the sins of many Now how is that Cup the New Testament surely no other ways but as an Obsignatory Sign of the New Testament obsignating to Believers remission of Sins by his Blood outwardly shed which New Testament hath in it the Force and Essence of the Covenant of Grace which God ●●keth with Believers through Christ the Mediator of it and as Christ hath confirmed this Covenant of Grace and Testament with his Blood that was Shed once for us so he hath given to Believers this obsignating Pledge of it by way of Investiture as when a Man has an Estate of Land conveyed to him and gets the Investiture of it it is by some outward Sign as here in England in some Places by delivering to him Twig and Turf and as Kings were Invested with their Kingly Power by having Oyl poured on them and as Aaron was Invested into the Office of Priesthood And indeed all Covenants that ever God made with any People have always been by some outward obsignatory things as in his Covenant he made with Noah he gave the Bow in the Cloud for the Token of that Covenant in the Covenant with Abraham he gave the Sign of Circumcision which by a Metonymy is called God's Covenant in Scripture Also the Sacrifices under the Law were Signs of obsignatory of God's Covenant with them who offered those Sacrifices And in all the Covenants that we read of in Scripture that any of the Fathers made with the Neighbouring Princes or Inhabitants there were obsignatory Signs and Pledges so that who rightly understand the Nature of a Covenant Transacted after any publick manner must acknowledge it cannot be without some obsignatory Pledge or Sign outwardly to be seen given by the one Party to the other insomuch that it seems to be a general Instinct in Mankind or at least the Equivalent of it an universal Custom received and practised even among

the Woman that was Born of the Virgin Mary and what that Power effected and wrought in the Faithful in the Ages before Christ came into the Flesh it was with Respect to his coming in the Flesh and to what he was to do and suffer in his Body of Flesh for their Sins And what I said as Quoted by him page 35. out of my Book Way to the City of God page 125. Even from the beginning yea upon Man's Fall God was in Christ Reconciling the World to himself and Christ was manifest in the Holy Seed inwardly and stood in the way to ward off the Wrath of God from the Sinners and Unholy that it might not come upon them to the uttermost during the Day of their Visitation All this or what ever else of that sort I have said in any of my Books hath a safe and sound Sense rightly understood though this Prejudiced Adversary seeks by his own Perversion to turn them to the contrary The Word Reconciling Redeeming hath a two-fold Signification the one is to satisfie Divine Justice and pay the Debt of our Sins this was only done by Christ as he Suffered for us in the Flesh the other is to Operate and Work in us in order to slay the Hatred and Enmity that is in us while Unconverted that being Converted we may enjoy that inward Peace of Christ that he hath Purchased for us by his Death and Sufferings Now that the Light Word and Spirit gently Operates and Works in Men to turn and incline them to Love God to Fear him and Obey him to Believe and Trust in him that is to Reconcile Men to God and to ward or keep off the Wrath of God from them And thus God was in Christ Reconciling the World to him in all Ages But this is not by way of Satisfaction to Divine Justice for Men's Sins but by way of Application and Operation inwardly Inviting Persuading and as it were Intreating Men to be Reconciled unto God that so the Wrath of God that hangs over their Heads may not fall upon them for while God by Christ thus inwardly visits the Souls of Men inviting and persuading them to turn and live saying why will ye Dye the Wrath is suspended and delayed to be Executed upon them yet it is not removed but abides upon them until they Repent and Believe as the Scripture testifieth he that believeth not the Wrath of God abideth on him And though this inward Appearance and Operation in Christ in Men's Hearts stayeth the Execution of Divine Wrath and Justice yet that inward Appearance is not the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of Men's Reconciliation with God but the Means whereby what Christ by his Death and Sufferings hath Purchased is applyed for though Christ made Peace for us by his Blood outwardly Shed yet that Peace cannot be nor is obtained or received by any but as the Soul is inwardly Changed and Converted and so Reconciled unto God III. And the like twofold Signification hath the Word to Attone for as it signifieth to Attone or Reconcile God and us that wholly is procured by Christ's Obedience unto Death and Sacrifice that he offered up for Men on the Cross but as it signifieth the effectual Application of that great Attonement made by Christ for Men at his Death that is wrought by his Spirit and inward Appearance in their Hearts And I might well say at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to Attone and Pacify the Wrath of God towards Men as he Quotes me in my Book Way to the City p. 125. For taking Attoning in the first Sense the Virtue Merit and Efficacy of Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross did as really extend to the Faithful for Remission of Sin and bringing into Reconciliation and Peace with God from Adam's Fall as it now doth which this Prejudiced Author seems wholly ignorant of as well as his Brethren Again taking it in the second Sense for the effectual Application of the Attonment made by Christ's Death through his Meek and Lamb-like Appearance by his Spirit and Life in Men's Hearts it has a Truth in it And Christ may be said to be the Lamb of God that taketh away the Sins of the World both by his outward Appearance in the Flesh as he Dyed for us to Procure and Purchase the Pardon of our Sins and our Justification before God and also by his inward Appearance to Renew and Sanctifie us for as by our Justification the Guilt of Sin is taken away so by our Sanctification is the Filth of it removed Both which is the Work of Christ the Lamb of God respecting both his outward and inward Appearance in his outward being a Sin-offering for us and a Sacrifice in a strict Sense in his inward Appearance of his Divine Life in us being as a Peace-offering and Sacrifice of sweet smelling Incense before God not to Reconcile God and us as is above said but to apply effectually to us the Reconciliation made for us by his Death on the Cross IV. And that I said as he again Quotes me the Seed hath been the same in all Ages and hath had its Sufferings under by and for the Sins of Men in them all for the Removing and Abolishing them This I still hold that there is a tender Suffering Seed or Principle in Men that suffers by Men's Sins and by its gentle Strivings prevails and gains the Victory at last in all the Heirs of Salvation But this suffering Seed or Principle I never held it to be God nor was I ever of that Mind that God did really and properly Suffer by Men's Sins although I have known divers to hold such an absurd Opinion as G. Whitehead hath plainly declared to be his Opinion in his Divinity of Christ p. 56. which is as really Repugnant both to Scripture and sound Reason as to hold that God hath Bodily Parts and Members because the Scripture in many places in condescension to our human Capacities speaks of God's Suffering Repentance being grieved as it doth of his Face Eyes Ears Hands and Feet all which ought not to be properly but Allegorically understood And though I hold that this tender Seed suffers in Men by their Sins that so by its gentle Strivings with them it may overcome them and Slay and Crucifie the Body of Sin in them Yet I hold not that Suffering to be the Procuring and Meritorious Cause of our Justification and Pardon of Sins before God nor do I remember any where that I have so said or writ if any shall shew me where I shall readily Correct and Retract it or any thing in any of my Books that looks that way And if any Query whether I hold that Seed to be Christ that doth so suffer in Men by their Sins I Answer It is not the Fulness of Christ but a Measure proceeding from the Fulness that was and is lodged in the

Man Christ and because the Fulness is not in us and never was or shall be in any Man but in the Man Christ Jesus alone that was Born of the Virgin therefore he and he only because of the Fulness of Grace and Truth that was and is in him was Ordained and Appointed to be the Great and only and alone Sacrifice for the Sins of the World being the Head of the Body which is his Church it was only proper that the Sufferings that should be in the Head only should be that compleat only and alone Satisfactory and Propitiatory Sacrifice for the Sins of Men As the Arguments above mentioned in my Queries to G. Whitehead and W. Penn do plainly demonstrate And though in Christ when he Suffered for the Sins of the World at his Death his Godhead did not Suffer yet all that was in him the Godhead excepted did Suffer Note again Reader That although I find no cause to give an Answer to the Book of John Pennington above-mentioned called The Fig-Leaf Covering c. Because I had said in my second Narrative p. 33. that very Book being a pretended Answer to my Book of Explications and Retractations is such a plain and evident Discovery of his Unjust and Unfair Proceedings against me whereof the whole second Days Meeting who hath approved his Book is Guilty and of his Ignorance and Perversness of Spirit in Perverting my Words that I see no need to give any other Answer to him or direct to any other Answer either to his Fig-Leaf c. or his Book Keith against Keith or any other his Books but his own very Book and Books compared fairly with my Books Quoted by him and particularly that of my Explications and Retractations yet because I find divers Passages in that Book of his plainly prove him and his Brethren of the second Days Meeting extreamly Erroneous in the great things of the Christian Doctrin some of them being Fundamental therefore I shall take notice of the following Passages partly to give the Reader a tast of his Unfair Dealing towards me and partly to shew his being still Erroneous in some great Fundamentals of the Christian Faith together with his Brethren of the second Days Meeting who have approved his Fig-Leaf In his 19 and 20 Pages he will needs fasten a Contradiction on me That one time by the Flesh of Christ John 6. I mean an inward invisible Substance and the Eating an inward invisible Eating But now in my Retractations I Assert that to believe in Christ as he gave his Body of Flesh outwardly to be broken for us is the Eating of his Flesh as well as the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us And to confirm the Contradiction he Quotes me saying Immed Revel p. 258. This Body of Christ of which we partake is not that which he took up when he came in the Flesh outwardly but that which he had from the beginning Ans First It is no Contradiction to say the Eating of Christ's Flesh John 6. is to believe not by a bare Historical Belief but by a living sincere Faith Wrought in us by the Spirit of Christ that Christ gave his outward Body to be broken for us and also that it is the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us as it is no Contradiction to say Christ is our Intire and compleat Saviour both as he came outwardly in the Flesh Dyed and Rose again c. And as he cometh inwardly by his Spirit into our Hearts and dwelleth in us by Faith And as concerning that Quotation Immed Rev. p. 258. by this Body in that place I did mean that which is only Allegorically called his Body to wit that Middle of Communication above mentioned that is indeed a Spiritual and invisible Substance owned by R.B. as well as by me and many others And I say still this invisible Spiritual Substance in the Saints is not that visible Body of Christ which he assumed when he came in the Flesh outwardly yet this is not to make two Bodies of Christ because the one is called his Body only in a Metaphorical Sense Ans 2. In my Book of Retractations p. 25. I had plainly Retracted and Corrected that Passage in p. 25. Recor. Corr. That by Christ's Flesh and Blood John 6.50 51. He meaneth only Spirit and Life acknowledging that it was at most an Oversight in me but how doth this prove me a Changling in an Article of Faith As he infers very Injurously May not a Man change his Judgment concerning the Sense of a particular place of Scripture without changing an Article of Faith That such a Change may be without a Change in an Article of Faith is acknowledged by all Sober Writers and Expositors of Scripture Yea there are many places of Scripture that some understand one way and others not that way but another and others a third way and yet all have one Faith in point of Doctrin Ans 3. What a Man Retracts in one Book or part of a Book he ought to be understood to Retract the same Passage where it can be found in another Part or Book of his nor ought he to be Charged with Contradiction in what he hath Retracted For as I have formerly said in Print they are only Chargable with Contradictions that without Retractation holds Contradictory Assertions simul semel i. e. both together Page 22. He will not permit me to use that Distinction to say I had not my Knowledge from them viz. The Scriptures as being the efficient Cause but I did not deny that I had my Knowledge by them Instrumentally to wit the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith I had of Gospel Truths he Quibbles upon the Word from as if it could not signifie sometimes the efficient Cause and sometimes the Instrumental whereas a School Boy knoweth that it hath these several Significations and more also And seeing what I then Writ in my Book of Immed Rev. was owned by the Quakers it plainly followeth That according to J.P. the Words of Scripture are not a Means so much as Instrumentally to our Knowledge of the Truths of Christian Doctrin But how will he Reconcile this to W. Penn who doth acknowledge that the Scriptures are a Means to know God Christ and our selves See his Rejoynder p. 115. where he expresly saith We never denied the Scriptures to be a means in God's Hand to Convince Instruct or Confirm By we its plain W. P. meant all the Quakers and consequently G. K. being then owned to be one of them Page 39. He will not allow that what I have Quoted out of my Immed Revel p. 243. to p. 247. proves that I did then hold the Man Christ without us in Heaven to be the Object of our Faith though he grants my Words that I said The Man Christ who Suffered in the Flesh at Jerusalem is the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow into our Souls and that he is to be Prayed unto which he saith none of us

this is as Similes seldom go on all four so neither must Parables be pursued too far I Answer Though every Circumstance of a Parable is not to be pursued yet every necessary part of it is whoever Expounds the Parable is bound to Expound what the nine Pieces are as well as what the tenth was But he thinks to pinch me with great Difficulties in my Exposition As first He demands whether there be no difficulty to find who the Woman is that had ten Souls kept nine and lost one Ans There is no difficulty in this more than in finding who the ninety nine Sheep were that were not lost and who the Elder Brother was in the other two Parables And who they were I had formerly shewn but that his Prejudice blinds him that he will not see Many Angelical Created Rational Spirits did not Sin so were not lost but the Souls of Men did Sin so were lost And the number nine in the one Parable and ninety nine in the other answer one to another the Definite Numbers being put for Indefinite as is ordinary in Scripture But he thinks it a mighty difficulty according to my Exposition to tell what the House was which in effect has no difficulty at all the House where the Soul is as Buried under a great heap of Filth and Sin is the Body wherein the Soul is Lodged and the Animal and Natural Faculties with which also the Soul is Defiled so the House to wit the Body and Animal and Natural Faculties being Swept and Cleansed by him who hath his Fan in his Hand purely to Purge his Floor to wit Christ signified here by the Woman he finds the lost Soul for as he said himself he came to seek and to save i. e. that which was lost For Christ had not lost Christ nor God had not lost God but they had in a Sense lost the Souls that had Sinned as the Souls had lost God and Christ Page 45.46 In Opposition to me he will needs have all these Places 1 Cor. 2.2 Rom. 66. Gal. 2.20 Heb. 6.6 To be understood of Christ's being Crucified in Men else why doth he oppose me with his Queries and at this rate we shall not find any place in the New Testament where Paul Preached Christ Crucified without Men but only within for by the same Liberty he may Expound all other Places only of Christ Crucified within But there is no reason why any of these places should be understood of Christ's Crucifixion in Men the Crucifying the Old Man is so far from being joyned with the inward Crucifying of Christ that it is rather a Sign and Effect of Christ's Power Triumphing Victoriously in Man than of his being Crucified in Man The Crucifying Christ afresh is not so much the Crucifying him within Men as its Men Acting so Unworthily as if they did Act over again the Jews Part in Crucifying him outwardly Page 47. His base Reviling me for my Retracting some things in my Book of Universal Grace used by way of Argument unduly by me ing Thus in him is verified the saying of the Apostle James 1.8 A double minded Man is unstable in all his ways By this means he will allow no Man to Amend or Correct his Faults or Retract his Errors however truly convinced of them if he does he is Condemned by J. Pennington and not by the Apostle James to be a d●uble minded Man But what if perhaps G. Whitehead or W. Penn should find cause to Retract or Correct some Passages in their Books which formerly they thought Divine Openings must they also be judged double Minded Men c. Is it not more an Evidence of Sincerity to Retract an Error than to persist in it Have not many good Men done it Yea have not the Quakers commended some for Retracting and Condemning some things which formerly they reckoned to be Divine Openings Must all that Retract from their Errors be Reputed double Minded Men Oh unfair Adversary full of deep Prejudice and Spite I pray God give him Repentance and Forgiveness Page 50. He is so Ignorant and Blind as not to understand my distinction betwixt Essentials of true Religion Indefinitely and Essentials of the true Christian Religion in Specie Cornelius's Religion being Gentile Religion was true in its kind before he had the Faith of Christ Crucified but I say the Faith of Christ Crucified in some degree is Essential to the Christian Religion and otherwise to Assert its plain Deisme yet that Faith may be where the knowledge of the Circumstances of Times Places and Persons may be wanting Page 52. He blames my saying upon Supposition that any suchh thing can be found in my Books I Retract and Renounce it viz. That any are saved without all Knowledge and Faith of Christ Explicit or Implicit this he saith is Childish all over And for a Proof he Querieth Can a Man Retract and Renounce a Passage upon Supposition and not know what the Passage is But his Query is Impertinent and hits not the Case a Man may Retract a Saying upon Supposition that he had said it yet not knowing that ever he said it as if he were accused that he had said B. is a Dishonest Man and replyeth I know not that ever I so said but on Supposition that I so said I Retract it This is not Childish but Manly and Christian if he had no cause to say B. is a Dishonest Man It seems J. Pennington never Repented of his Sins of Ignorance he thinks that 's Childish all over I pity his Childishness Page 54. His blaming me for saying in my Retractations The breaking of the Union betwixt Soul and Body is more properly a Death than the breaking the Union betwixt the Life and Spirit of Christ and the Soul of Man is the Death of Christ in the Soul For of that I was Tr●a●ing and at this rate of his blaming me when Christ Dyed upon the Cross that was not so proper a Death as when he is Crucified in Men by their Sins and consequently his Death in Men is the only proper Sacrifice for that Mans Sins His Death without being not so proper a Death is not a proper Sacrifice by his most Ignorant way of Reasoning But my Reason for my Assertion holds good and which he has not touched for when a Man Dyeth his Soul leaveth the Body and ceaseth to Act in it nor is the Body any more sensible but Christ Acteth in a Dead Soul and the Soul though Dead is oft made in some degree sensible of the Spirit of Christ Acting in it in order to its being further quickned as frequently comes to pass in Thousands and Millions of Souls Besides as I Argued the Union of Soul and Body is a Personal Union whereby what the Body doth is chargable upon the Soul but the Union betwixt the Spirit of Christ and Men is not a Personal Union otherwise when those Men Sin their Sin would be chargeable upon Christ Page 61. He