a true Minister without â—his discovery is vain he can by our Doctrine which is according to Scripture tho not by him which is altogether unscriptural our People therefore are left in no perplexity about it Sect. 2. His Assertion That No man can be a true Christian without Divine Inspiration is hither-to unproved by him and disproved by us and were it true as it is otherwise his Consequence viz. That without the same none can be a Gospel Minister is inconsequent nor is it any absurdity to say That a man may be a true Minister and yet not a true Christian i. e. he may be orderly called to the Office of the Ministry though yet he may not be savingly brought home to God There is therefore an Ambiguity in the word True which may be applied either to the Professors or to the Profession Sect. 3. He mistakes the Apostles meaning when he distinguisheth between the ministers of the letter and of the spirit 2. Cor. 3.3 6. for that whole Context assures us that by the Letter he means the Old Testament by the Spirit the New Testament and the Reason of his so Calling them is thence easie to be gathered His arguing the Necessity of Saving Grace because Spirtual gifts are requisite is altogether illogical nor doth it at all help him because these also were purchased by Christ for he hath purchased other things for us besides Grace That there is a specifical Difference between Gifts and Grace is certain though both may meet in the same man we seek for both in every Minister to the best of our discerning that these are separable is beyond doubt that a man may have Grace and yet not spiritual gifts G. K. implicitly at least acknowledgeth yet Christ purchased Gifts for men not meerly for the Salvation but mainly for the Edifying of the Body we are told Eph. 4.10 11. that therefore because a man must have spiriual gifts to make him a Minister he must have saving Grace is a Non Sequitur Sect. 4. And that these spiritual Gifts were discernable we deny not There is a fair easie Tryal to be made of them but his inference that therefore They could discern whether men were true or false Aopstles Teachers sincere or Hypocrites is to be better weighed That false Apostles might be proved by their false Doctrine is nothing dubious That Hypocrites might discover themselves by their fruits is also easy to acknowledge but that in themselves without any such Effects and meerly by their looks there was or is a spirit of immediate discerning them is utterly untrue neither hath he given us one Rule to direct us in it As to his Citation of 1. Cor. 4.19 to prove this discerning it helps him not for the Apostle speaks not there of their inward Grace but of the fruits and effects of their Ministry or of the Conformity of their Conversation to their Doctrine And whereas he censures us for Limiting one man to preach only it is not true we admit of one to preach one part of the day and another on the other part where they are to be had only we require that they be such as are fit for the Ministry and we would not have others to do it Nor did the Apostle intend that there should be any Confusion in this Affair 1. Cor. 14.29 c. and to very little purpose doth he quote 2. Tim. 3.5 6 7. though we see what he would be at for that is not appropriated to Teachers but applicable to all Professors nor did we ever plead that Scandalous Ministers whose Conversation is contradictory to their Profession Doctrine should be continued in that Function when once they are discovered to be such We therefore concede to him that there ought to be a Tryal of men and if he will too that it is not meerly whether what they preach be true Doctrine but a great deal more yet it must of necessity be either of his Doctrine his Ministerial gifts or his Life or rather all three beyond which we are to seek of what Tryal can be made by men for man judgeth and must judge according to what can be known and the Searching of the heart is GOD's Prerogative Sect. 5. That because we pretend not to Inspiration therefore we lay no claim to these spiritual gifts is an Argument as vain as the author Are there no Spiritual gifts but Inspirations are there not diversities of them see 1. Cor. 12.4 5. Rom. 12.6 7.8 His Inference That hence We plainly confess that we have no infallible Discerning who is gracious we assent unto and yet we do believe we can discern of this as much as G. K. or any of his friends and his Charge that we plead that all spiritual gifts are ceased is notoriously false for we try men by them and we are sure that these may continue notwithstanding the Cessation of Inspirations nor can he inferr the Contrary till he prove which he never will that all spiritual Gifts belong to the head of Inspirations Hence neither doth it follow that we must deny an â—nward Call to the ministry since there are other Criteria by which it may be judged of a sufficient Directory for which we have in â—he Scriptures and have a power of Reasonâ—ng Judging without immediate Revelation For him therefore to urge That All that is â—ot by Inspiration Church Ministers Ordinances Worship must needs be of man 's making â—s insolent Must every thing that is not by Inspiration be Man-made Hath not Christ â—eft Institutions for His Church in His Gospel â—hat may sufficiently inform them in their Duty It is the Quakers that make Churches and Ordinances silent-meetings c. under a deluded pretence of Inspiration without any Scripture Warrant On the same blind and perverse notion it is that he chargeth us with plainly confessing â—hat we have no Assurance or Infallible Knowledge that we have the Spirit of God or any of â—hat Grace which is the operation of the Holy Ghost For First the Charge is false and all the world knows that we stand to maintain Infallible Assurance against both Papists and Quakers and who ever deny it And 2ly We are satisfied this may be had without Immediate Revelation A man may have the perception of such Operations in him which by Scripture Rules he may be able to judge of that they are of the Spirit of God he himself aiding them in this Examen and for what other end were all these Rules given but to help us herein Rom. 8.3 Heb. 12.14 1. Joh. 3.14 and many others His Cavil about Effective and Objective illumination is already answered and it is an odious Aspersion that he casteth upon us That we make men stones that have no inward perception of what is acted upon their hearts we beleeve that Grace hath a spiritual sense and when the Spirit of God Influenceth it it can feel it only there is Corruption in us too and the Spirit
is Duty depends on Divine Revelation we are Agreed That God did sometimes reveal His Will extraordinarily to His Servants of Old we deny not but that the Word of God in Scripture is that which to us in Gospel Times since the Canon was perfected Answers all the other wayes of Revelation is an Article of our Creed and we think we have Scripture-warrant for it 2. Pet. 1.19 c. As to the Case of Marriage which he talks of instanceth in the carriage of Abraham's servant it is quite aliene to his purpose for who ever asserted that God's providence is bound to follow Scripture Rules being supream arbitrary But still in our serving of this Providence and knowing how to use it to His glory and particularly to know what is the mind â—nd will of God to us in this Providence we have no other Rule to inform our selves by but the Scriptures and tho the Spirit must reveal it yet this is the thing Revealed Where as he tells us that Philip Peter and others were extraordinarily called to such and such services it is readily replied that That was extraordinary and without warrant for us ordinarily to expect the like moreover the things they were called to were such as the Scripture satisfied them to be according to God Finally We deny not but that the Spirit of God doth still put an impulse on the spirits of His people frequently but is it self-evident or must not the Warrantableness of it be tryed by Scripture-Rules Let G. K. if he can give an instance of a Quaker that ever had such a self-evidenceing extraordinary Call as Philip Peter c. had in former dayes How impertinently he quotes Jam. 4.15 to prove his Assertion 〈◊〉 if the Lord will may soon be seen He inâ—erprets it of a Will not to be known by the â—cripture but by the Spirit without it â—hereas any man of common sense may perâ—eive that the sense of that Text is this â—hat when a man is satisfied that his design â—s Lawful he is then to acknowledge that his â—ffairs are subject to the Ruling Providence of God who may either further or impede his Undertaking as He will and how comes he â—o be satisfied in this but by the Scriptures â—f Providence furthers him he is satisfied â—hat it was Gods Will to suffer it if He puts a stop to it it discovers the secret Will of God revealing it self in this particular â—ow to demean himself under this he hath alâ—o from the Word and what is all this to their inwardly feeling a Command or Permission which he idly talks of 5. Here we are told of God's Answering the returns of the Prayers of His people A Quakerism i. e. Nonsense And we have him at length concluding his impertinent fourth Paragraph with Assuring us That the Scripture promises applied by the Spirit are the inward Voice of God to His children but why hath he been all this while fighting with his own shadow if this be all he intends Sect. 5. Now he draws his Conclusion Therefore the Scripture doth not contain all thâ— Word or Words of God whereas we thoughâ— that if he had concluded from the premises he should have said Therefore it doth because all these are nothing but Scripture oâ—ther expresly or consequentially He bringâ— in Act. 12.24 The word grow multiplieâ— to prove his Assertion but we might ask him whether he intends its multiplying by new Inspirations or Revelations or by multiplied Efficacy Did not he himself resolve us that there was no new Doctrine and thence we infer that there was no new Word in the sence we are disputing Sect. 6. What have we here Christ His Apostles expounded the scriptures by Inspiration yet taught no new Doctrine Sure he forgets himself was not the whole frame of the Gospel Dispensation a New Model And hence there were new Institutions see Heb. 7.12 Chapt. 8.7 8. 13.10 for which things there was required extraordinary Inspiration therefore to his Demand Why may it not be so now we answer Because the Canon is perfected and whereas he asserts that it is so because some do at this day expound the scripture by the same spirit though it be impertinent for if it be the Scripture it is not a new thing revealed yet we have also to charge him with a Fallacy purposely used in the word Spirit if taken personally for the Holy Ghost it is beside the case if for His Gifts or the manner of His dispensing of Himself to by His servants we have but his word for it and that not very well agreeing to 1. Cor. 12.4 5 6. and if his own Rule be true viz. that such mens Exposition as have no infallible spirit cannot be the word of God he hath thrown himself as well as us and his book is to be little regarded being full of Mistakes Nonsense Lies had he been infallible he would not in his 12th Article against us have charged that upon us which we never believed much less professed Sect. 2. Here we have a great stir about the word Logos but indeed a meer Logomachy and lest he should not have senses enough to lose it in he falls into Tautologies Somebody might do well to ask him what different sense he finds between Communication Words Talk Speech But the knack is it signifies the Scripture only in a thirteenth rare improper sense and yet this is more than some of his friends will allow it But let that pass He hath two or three Queries to puzzle us withal though he takes upon him to answer them himself His first Quaery is Whether the Scripturâ— contains all the Word or Words of God and that he denies for the reasons already given which are none at all Well if they will not set us down he will try what Scripture Metaphors will do and now we must observe that The Word is compared to the Rain Dew Deut. 32.2 and to Bread Jer. 15.16 Now the drops of Rain dew and the small grainâ— of flower in bread cannot be numbred ergo the Scripture contains not all the Word of God But let us ask him if he may be spoken to after such a profound Revelation as this whether he allows it to be a good Interpretation of Scripture Allusions to apply all that is in the thing alluded to to that which it is compared with or is it more safe to restrain it to that particular thing for which the Comparison was made Why then may not the Word be Resembled to the Rain Dew for the fruitful Efficacy of it on the hearts of God's people and to Bread from the spiritual Nutriment it affords wiser men than G. K. have thought so As to his 2nd Question it is meer Quibling We directly say That The Scriptures are properly the revealed Will of God which was Metaphorically and Anthropopathos called â—is Words because God by them doth signifie to us His Mind as
we do ours to oâ—hers by words and this belongs to the Scriptures as they are written or spoken To his last Question We only say Let him first tell us whether he intends the Grammatical sense of the words or the Gracious sense of them upon the heart and we shall know what to say to him As for the sense in which he yields the Scripture to be the Word of God he talks idly confounding a Metonym Efficientis with a Metonym Signi Reflections on Cap. 2. of New Revelations and Inspirations The Fancy of New Divine Revelations and Inspirations being the Pillar of Quakerism it concerned him to treat the Scriptures with such caution as to leave room to introduce this Figment else he had undone his whole Cause and yet it will be found that he hath granted so much there that he must needs contradict himselfe here as will be made evident In this Chapter the Dispute is Whether new divine Revelations Inspirations of the Spirit of God he now ceased He undertakes the Negative against us but indeed the whole is nothing else but meer Legerdemain The right Stating of the Controversie between us will abreviate and facilitate ouâ— work in animadverting on this tedious and insignificant Chapter In order to that thesâ— three Terms Inspiration Revelation New must be rightly understood Words are used to express our minds by are to be taken in the sense commonly used among men and when any are used aequivocally such as use them must have Liberty to interpret their own meaning As to the Word Inspiration it is vulgarly understood in Divinity to intimate an Inward extraordinary Discovery of the mind of God made by the Holy Ghost in the hearts of His servants so 2. Tim. 3.16 and so we difference it from those ordinary and mediate wayes in which we come to this acquaintance Revelation is applicable indeed to any way in which a thing is made known to us which we knew not before and so the word may be as sometimes in Scripture applied to any Discovery which is made to us of the Will of God But this word hath also attained a particular Appropriation to such a Knowledge of Divine Truths as would never have been attained by the best Improvement of natural light or reason without the Manifestation of the Spirit and this is either Immediate or Mediate the Immediate is the same with Inspiration â—â—e Mediate is that which is commonly calâ—d Illumination the Spirit of God helping us â—ith His Influences whenever we are in the â—se of meanes The word New may be apâ—lied either to the kind of the things revealed â—r to the Act of Revealing Here then our Beleef in this matter may be reduced to â—hese Heads We do believe 1. That Savâ—ng Illuminations of the Spirit influencing the â—earts of His people with the knowledge of Christ and His Truths are common needful to all Believers in all ages Rev. 8.9 2ndly That in this sence there are new Revelations made from time to time to God's Children i. e. subjectively 2. Pet. 3.18 3dly That such inspirations as the Prophets and Apostles of old had by which God discovered His mind to them immediately enabling them to declare these things to others were not common to believers in these times 1. Cor. 12.29 vers 10. 4thly That the Scriptures do so fully contain the mind of God in all things necessary for Faith and Salvation that there need no such Inspirations to be afforded to any and therefore they are now ceased 2. Tim. 3.16.17 with Heb. 1.1 2. 5thly That therefore there are no new Revelations made since the Canon was perfected of things or Doctrines which arâ— not contained in the Scriptures we arâ— therefore directed hither for our establishment against Seducers 2. Tim. 3.13 14. and not to abide by this is to make it appear that they have no light in them Isa 8.20 If now we examine what he opposeth to this Doctrine we shall find nothing but Fallacy and Foolery Sect. 1. His first charge here is upon the Assemblies Confession in the very first Article and truly If men lay the first stone wrong the whole Fabrick must be weakned thereby That which he alledgeth against them is they are admirably blind in their bringing in particular Citations of Scripture and we may retort that he is admirably base in perverting their sense and design in Citing of them They had asserted several things in this paragraph for proof whereof they directed to the Scriptures printed in the Margent which he perversly reflects upon as brought only to prove that one Assertion which is not totidem verbis made by them That all new Revelation is ceased They had said that God had pleased to commit His declared and revealed will of things which concern man's salvation wholly to Writing for which they alledge Prov. 2.19 20 21. and do not these Texts assure us that God has written His Word to us and that this Word tells us what God saith yea and to speak otherwise is an evidence that men have no saving light in them Which by the way tells us what to judge of the Quakers light and one would think this is to purpose and hath something of proof in it and to the same purport are Luc. 1.2 3 4. Rom. 15.4 Mat. 4.4 7.10 They had again told us That God had made Scriptures necessary and for the Evidence direct us to 2. Tim. 3.15 and can Impudence deny the Inference from that Text Finally they tell us That the Scripture being thus given to be a Rule for Faith and Manners and being completely sufficient to its ends The former ways of Gods revealing Himself are ceased for which they cite Heb. 1.1 2. 2. Pet 1.19 which one would think if joined with the former especially 2. Tim. 3.15 16 17. might prove it Doth not the Apostle Heb. 1.1 2. renounce the former ways in the times of the Law to give place to this one and better in Gospel times and what can he do that comes after the King And does not the Apostle Peter in the fore-cited place tell us there is a surer way than an Immediate voice from heaven and what have stars to do when the Sun is risen In summe all these Scriptures arâ— brought to prove what G. K. confesseth Cap. 1. Sect. 1 2 3. nor do we see what absurdity would follow upon our granting that New revelations of any truth not before made known ceased before John the Apostle deceased though his other extraordinary gifts did continue Sect. 2. And pray what do we assert but what he seems plumply to grant here viz. That the rule to try all doctrines is compleatly contained in the Scriptures only the business is that this must in no wise prove the ceasing of new revelations or inspirations or prophecying Let it for the present suffice to say that he who goes about to confound terms which are used for distinction has some cheating trick to impose
Revelation at all It sufficeth that the lowest degrees of these Revelations were infallible and therefore one Scripture is not less so than another Nor shall we trouble our selves to prevestigate his Rabbinical Fopperies about the different degrees of Revelation by which no doubt he hath raised his credit much with the poor blind Quakers whereas indeed if a man had studied to make himself a Fool in print he could not easily have done it more effectually and though we grant That God revealeth Himself gradually to His servants and to some more than to others yet his Citatation of Exod. 6.3 proves not what he brings it for it intends not that the Fathers did not know the Name Jehovah we find the Contrary Gen. 22.14.26.24.27.20 but that He did in His providence rather exemplifie Himself by the name of Almighty in Protecting and defending of the Patriarchs but now He would most eminently display that of Jehovah in the compleating of the promises which He had made unto them In fine he confesseth p. 32. That the Quakers degrees are so low that they are not in the state of Perfection but they may by humane frailty in some measure or way more or less tread softly decline or depart from the pure infallible teachings of the spirit and then we hope this kind of spirit is not superior to that which spake infallibly in the Scripture and from which we are assured that the Prophets and Apostles in their Dictating or Writing the Scripture did not decline in any measure or way more or less When he infers from hence that their Doctrine is to be tryed by the Scripture and their spirit by the Spirit of Truth We would ask him what Difference he here puts between Doctrine and Spirit and let him if he can shew how their spirit is to be tried but by their Doctrine or what Spirit they can be tryed by which will carry Conviction but only that which breathes in the Scriptures and it would be a great stroke he would drive if he could reconcile our being led infallibly by the Spirit to our being mean while in the same things left to mistakes which is the very sense of his Words Sect. 3. Here also he will grant the Scripture or the Spirit speaking in it to be a Supreme Judge in a figurative sense so we do not restrain it hither but allow Him to speak something without Scripture But this hath been already detected of vanity for how shall we jugde of the Spirit but by the Scripture That the Spirit of God must open our Understandings to discern the spiritual meaning of the word of God we never doubted and that Prayer and Meditation are helps to it who questions But what 's this to the purpose In summe the Spirit is the Interpreter but to call Him the Rule is Nonsense Sect. 4. We had waited long to know the Reason why Cap. 1. S. 1. he calls the Scripture the Outward Rule and now he fairly tells us viz. Because the Spirit is the inward rule i. e. To determine all Controversies at least such as we have in our selves a debate about The Text alledged is impertinent for the Testimony of God there spoken of is the Scripture witnessed to by the Spirit and we must distinguish between the Testator the Testimony the latter of which can in any proper sence be called the Rule and let it here be well observed That the Scripture is a Judge in it self and doth alwaies carry the Determination in it whether we understand it or no so as to be able to make use of it as such And further That it is not necessary that we have a saving Illumination for the meer Doctrinal improvement of it since the Scripture is delivered in humane Language and there is a logical knowledge of it to be attained by Industry so far as to decide Controversies in Religion by such as are not savingly illuminated nor is it the spirit of the Disputant but the convincing light of the word of God it self which is to sway our Judgements and set them down satisfied as to the Doctrine Reflections on Chapt. 4th of Ministerial Gifts c. It will be superfluous to quarrel with him about his method since we are necessitated to follow him in his own path Sect. 1. He hath cased us of some Trouble by acknowledging that the things contained in this Chapter have a close connection with the matter of the praeceding i. e. if his Doctrine about Revelation Inspiration will not hold neither will the ensuing there will therefore having already detected the Fallacy of those be need of little more than brief touches at the things here asserted His Charge in this Section that we assert Natural and acquired gifts of letter Learning without a divine Inspiration to be sufficient to qualifie a Gospel Minister and that Grace or true Piety is only accidental may look black at the first view but let our Judgement in that point be fully weighed and we shall have no reason to be ashamed of it That a man may be so Qualified as to be capable of being Called to the Office of a Minister by a Gospel Church and yet not truly pious we fear not to assert but still we believe that no man can discharge any Office of Trust acceptable to God without saving Grace We here presume and shall have occasion to prove it anon That there 's a mediate Call necessary to introduce a man into the work of the Ministry since the Apostles times and they who are to call them must have some rule of discerning to regulate their Call by which must be something discernible that their piety cannot be discerned as such he will anon put us upoâ— proving If therefore this were necessarâ— to the Essence of the Officer we could neveâ— know who is or who is not a Minister Buâ— de facto Christ Himself condemns the Scribe and Pharisees for Hypocrites and yet acknowledgeth their Office Mat. 23.2 3. Chrisâ— Himself made Judas not only a Minister buâ— an Apostle we shall shortly see what he hatâ— to say against this As for his Asserting thaâ— by divine Revelation a Quaker can infalliblâ— know a mans spiritual estate it is precarious presumptuous and false for tho' Goâ— knowes all mens hearts yet that He gives 〈◊〉 infallible Rules to know them by ordinarilâ— or immediately cannot be evidenced the Apostles themselves never pretended to it buâ— were often mistaken Judas was not suspected by his fellow-Apostles Simon Magus past for a while till he discovered himself Demas went long unsuspected waâ— in high credit with Paul We acknowledgâ— that men may discover themselves by sucâ— things as are inconsistent with saving Grace and by this way we have too much Cause tâ— be perswaded by Scripture Rules that G. K is an Apostate and an unsanctified man but all mens sins do not like his go before to Judgement His Inference then That Hence a man â—annot be known to be
of the Spirit with them to give it and that is voluntary and the very notion of a sufficient Efficacy of meanes used without the Effect wrought in them with whom they are used is an unintelligible Quakerism In p. 77. he tells us that Election goes before Reprobation and is not coaetanous with it and yet a little before pag. 75. he owns Reprobation though Conditionally to be eternal and who taught him to make Periods in Eternity Yea Reason it self tells us that in the very nature of Chusing some before others these others are in that very Act and instant necessarily left out which is Reprobation Sect. 6. Here he undertakes the Patronage of poor Infants and it is pitty but they who cannot speak for themselves should have somebody to speak for them whom he finds sadly exposed by this Doctrine of absolute Reprobation and is in no little passion for them to think that we should insinuate that some of these are by the decree left finally to perish but though we may and ought to commiserate them yet we cannot help them beyond what God hath purposed concerning them His main Labour in this paragraph is to free Rom. 9.11 12 13. from a true interpretation and force it to accept of a false one and let us see what he hath to say against our glosses upon it He tells us that the Apostles design is to shew that God had chosen the line of Jacob before the line of Esau and that only to be His Church in the peculiar dispensation of the Mosaical law That Paul is here treating of the Doctrine of Election and Reprobation hath been fully evinced by many learned Orthodox That he makes way to this by asserting the Soveraignty of God is cleer in the Chapter That his Instance of Jacob and Esau did historically intend what G. K. alledgeth we deny not But here it is to be noted that there was a Typical Representation of greater things in these instances it is the Apostles manner to argue from the Type to the thing signified see Gal. 4.24 c. but what further needs G. K. p. 79. acknowledgeth that this was a figure of another thing to be spiritually fullfilled and this is it that the Apostle useth it for so that we may safely argue the thing Typified from the Allegation it therefore hurts not our case that he saith ibid. that this doth not infer Esau's personal Reprobation as to his eternal state it is enough that there was a Reprobation in the same sense that there was an Election If therefore he grants an eternal Election to be typified in it as he seems to do the Reprobation must be of the same kind else there is no parallel It therefore concerns not us to dispute whether Esau himself were saved or not though his Text cited Heb. 11.20 proves it not for there were temporal as well as spiritual eternal blessings but this whole discourse is aliene and makes nothing to the purpose and whereas p. 84. he asserts that the whole passage of Jacob and Esau is a figure of two seeds none of which were reprobated but the other preferred is a contradiction for there can be no Election without Reprobation chusing it out of diverse and necessarily argues a Leaving Sect. 6. p. 84. Here we are challenged to prove that there are Reprobate Infants or such as go to hell for Adam 's sin only to which we reply 1. He himself grants p. 88. that men generally and why not universally are Children of wrath by nature and he will not deny but that by Nature is intended thaâ— natural condition they were born into the world in and then it must needs concern Infants aâ— well as others and this too is by Adam 's sin transferred upon them and his corrupt Imagâ— communicated to them 2. That hence Childreâ— in their natural birth are under a sentence of Condemnation to dye is a necessarâ— Consequence 3. That God hath nowherâ— revealed to us that He hath accepted of the Satisfaction of Christ for all that dy in their Infancy and where there is no Revelation there is no ground for Faith 4. That there is merit enough for Damnation in them else it would be unjust that they should be under Condemnation 5. That this Sentence hath been actually excecuted upon some Infants Rom. 5.14 they never sinned actually and yet they died and it was the same death spoken of vers 12. If therefore the Text which some of ours use 1. Cor. 7.14 should not prove it it follows not that no other can and yet we suppose there is thus much in that too Viz. that till Parents do openly profess the Gospel and submit to it or as long as they abide in their Gentilism their Children were also unclean and so apparentâ—y lying under guilt and lyable to eternal Death And then he chargeth some of our Church Covenant for glorying that none of â—heir children were Reprobates while Infants we â—eclare it to be a slander we never affixed Election to a visible Relation to the Church â—f Christ And how strangely doth he prevaricate â—hen he tells us p. 85 That it is plâ—inly â—evealed and declared in Scripture that the â—ondemenation is not simply because Adam had sinned because of what Christ saith Joh. 3.19 he might have read vers 18. that he that beleeveth not is condemned already The Case stands plainly thus In the first Covenant we stand condemned for the breach of the Law either as Adam's sin is ours by imputation or as we have actually broken the Law Where the Gospel comes Christ is offered a way is discovered to life by Him Now this is the proper Gospel Condemnation that men despise Him and will not follow this Light and this is added to the former they were before condemned by the Law and now the Gospel condemns them too What he saith p. 86. That All have an Opportunity or Possibility to be converted and become the Children of God is ambiguous if the word Possibility be exegetical of the former viz. Opportunity it is Nonsense for these two are Dispartes if he intends them disjunctively we deny not a possibility for all Mankind are salvable but for an Opportunity we renounce that for where the meanes of Salvation are not there is no opportunity But what is all this to the purpose or what doth it make against the Reprobation of Infants We must be led a wild-goose chase if we follow him in all his absurd Digressions As for the Contempt which in the same page he casts upon Foederal Holiness it argues his ignorance and as little as he counts the Interest of Children in the visible Covenant worth we shall not cease to bless God that ours stand so related and when he grants an Holiness i. e. a capacity of holiness in time to come in some not all of our children we believe if we had talked so wildly nonsensically and Self-contradictorily we should have heard of him To call a