that can neither properly be called the Word nor are they words of God as what the Serpent said to Eve Pharaoh to Moses false Priests and Prophets in the true Prophets dayes many things and accusations which the Jewes said to Christ Were these the Word of God Mayest thou not here see thy error and confusion Priest There is nothing so much commendeth the necessity of the knowledge of Scriptures and Learning as the horrid detestable absurdityes which men unlearned c. wresting Scriptures to their own perdition however they revile Study of Scriptures and Learning Answ. There is nothing more discommendeth things and the Priests Way of Learning and Studying the Scriptures as your perverting and abusing them for your own ends and turns and the Pâ—iest making a Trade of them by their Learning and must people depend upon the fruits of your Study and Learning to know the Scriptures And yet other whiles they must expect to find Eternal Life in the Scriptures to be made Wise unto Salvation by them What contradiction's here But if the Scripture given by Divine Inspiration be profitable to the man of God and by the same Inspiration be understood and make Wise to Salvation through Faiâ—h and that the Spirit of Truth lead into all Truth then wee 'l not be beholding to thee and such as thou art for your Learning and Study who deny the immediate Teaching of the Spirit and so are but still unlearnd as to the things of God And why doest thou villify us as unlearned and make a flourish as if thou art some Eminent Learned man This shews thy Shallowness Pride and Conceitedness And were not Peter and John unlearned men and so accounted by the Learned among the Jewes Yet were full of the holy Ghost and learned by it Wouldst thou and thy Companions limmit the Gift of God or a right understanding of Scriptures to your natural drossy Learning and imaginary Study O! The Lord hath raised up and brought to light that Life and Spirit which has brought many to see thorow you and your corrupt Learning and Babylonish stuff And whereas thou dost villify and jeer upon these words Viz. That the word which the Bereans received with all readiness of mind and the Scriptures which they searched are two things and sayest I purposely pass by that which follows Viz. Whether these things were so Answ. Are they not mentioned distinctly as two The Word they received c. the Scriptures they searched to see whether these things were so Now there was more in Preaching then bare words or Scripture For their gospel came not in word onely but in Spirit and in Power which when that had touched their hearts and they had received a sence of the Spirit and Life which the Apostles were Ministers of this prepared them for a further understanding of things and matters relateing to the Testimony of Truth and of the Scriptures when they searched them in that weak state wherein they were at first receit of Truth for a further or additional confirmation of their understanding of things declared upon Scripture account touching Christ but if according to thy sence the Word which they râ—ceived with all readiness of mind and the Scriptures which they searched to see whether these things were so were but one thing then Is it good Doctrine to say that when they received the Word with all readiness of mind they searched the Word to see if those things in it were true or to try the truth of them How then was it received with all readiness of mind Or was it the Scripture which they received with all readiness of mind and thâ—n when they so received them searched them to see whether those things where so Is this thy excellent Logick If so then thy Doctrine runs thus They received the Scriptrues with all readiness of mind and they searched the Scriptures to see whether the Scriptures were so or for proof that the Scriptures were true they must search the Scriptures to prove them true by themselves Will this be admitted of as excellent Logick in your Schooâ—es to prove an assertion by the same assertion and to beg the question in controversie If so then in all points asserted and disputed of it is so because it is so will serve for proof Priest The Word you say is one How can it be called those things Answ. If the Word which I say is one cannot be called those things thâ—n it proves what I said befâ—re that the Word and Scriptures are two things and that their receiving the Word with all readiness of mind was inward but the Scriptures are outward which they searched after they received the Word Priest Are the things written in the Scriptures and the Scriptures two things What excellent Logick is this Answ. If they be not two things and yet the Word which is but one and those things contained in them be two things How are the Scriptures the Word seeing the Word and those things are two Yet here again thou shâ—west very little Learning as professed by thee for the Writing and the things written of are two things as well as Scriptures and the things contained in them for there is the thing containing and the things contained according to the distinction of them and some of your selves Priest Or ye must take the Scriptures in the abstract for the writen Characters as distinguisht from the things that are writ so nothing can be either searched or found in a number of Characters Answ. I know of none that appear so ridiculous as to search them meerly as a number of Characters so abstract to prove things or matters but to search them for those things or declarations contained in them which appear to the eye of the understanding and not to the outward eye in the bare Characters and yet Scriptures signify Writings Priest Whereas ye ask whether I think none hath Faith so none shall be saved but those that hear the Scriptures by the outward ear or can read them What God may do or doth in an extraordinary is not the question for his absolute Soveranity in his dispensations of Grace is not tied c Answ. Then God and his dispensations of Grace are not limitted or tied as many other times thou and others of you seem to tye up all now to Scripture for Life Eternal for Faith c. other whiles to your Interpretations Learning and the fruits of your study but the way to God and Salvation is Christ And no man comes unâ—o the Father but by him nor none comes to the Son but by the Fathers drawings which are known in the Spirit and Light by which we have access to God Priest The Scriptures search the thoughts as an Instrument and Christ is the principal searcher Answ. That 's Christ or the Word of God which is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart that searches the heart And it s the Lord God of hosts that telleth unto man
for it to be otherwise then an imperfect creature Darknâ—ss Confusion and Contradiction to Truth Pr. The Grace of hope is imperfect Christ is the hope of glory Answ. These are one opposite to another but Christ is perfect who is the Grace and Life of all the Saints Graces Pr. Christs Word was his audible Voice speaking his mind Answ. Other whiles his Word is the Scriptures with thee as if the Scriptures and his audible Voice were both one which if this be true all that read them hear Christs audible Voice Is this Authentick Doctrine But Christs own words shall stand against it for Joh. 8.43 Why do ye not understand my speech even because ye cannot hear my word and we know that who hear the Son heareth the Father also But this is a mistery hid from the Carnal minded who Idolatrously pervert the Scriptures Pr. Though Christ and the Spirit be one yet he is not Christs Word for Christ is not his own word Ans. They that hear Christs Word and receive it receive of his own Virtue and Life in and the words he spake unto his are Spirit and Life thou hast here but cavilled which thou mightest as well have done against several Scriptures and against Johns saying In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God c Pr. I call the Scriptures the Word of God and the Gospel the Word of Reconcilliation The Word of God is distinguished from the Word of Reconcilliation Answ. Other-whiles the Scripture is the Gospel and the Word of God with thee now they are distinct the Word of God distinguished from the Word of Reconcilliation What confusion's here Is not the Word of Reconcilliation Gods God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself Pr. The Gospel are a part of the Scriptures and may be called one with them the Gospel is contained in the Scripture Answ. The Gospel is the power of God to salvation to every one that believes it was preached to Abraham and was before the Scriptures and is everlasting but thou hast spoken blindly here as before for Is the power of God contained in the Scriptures Then all that have the Scriptures have that power in them or from them which is not true Pr. Rom. 16.26 The Preaching of Jesus Christ according to the Revelation of the Mistery which was kept secret since the world began and by the Scriptures of the Gospel according to the Commandment of the Everlasting God made known to all Nations for the obedience of Faith Answ. But thou and such do not so preach Christ nor are so commissionated to preach at the Commandment of the Everlasting God who deny Revelation and his imediate Teaching now and this contradicts much of thy dark stuff for here the Revelation of the Mistery is prefered before the Scriptures and the Preaching according to them was from that Revelation of the Mistery which the Apostles had in them but were the Scriptures that Revelation and kept secret since the world began The Revelation of Christ was the Mistery Christ within the hope of glory a mistery hid from Ages c. How was it by the Scriptures made known to all Nations for the obedience of Faith if in many Nations there be neiâ—her the knowledg of Christ nor Scripture according to thy former And of that Rom. 16.26 which thou sayest is the Scriptures of the Gospel thou hast wronged the Scriptures herein for it is the Scriptures of the Prophets c. Pr. The Gospel and Mistery of Christ is made manifest by the Scriptures of the Prophets preached to all Nations not by a Light within If it were not in the Scriptures How could it be manifest and made known by the Scriptures Answ. If not by the Light within How by the Scripture without it Have all that hear Scripture read or preached the knowledg of the Mistery of Christ without the Light within How then doth the Apostles speak of the Revelation as before Did nor he preach from the Light within or Revelation of the Son in him Gal. 1.16 How ignorant hast thou shewed thy self in this matter Again the Mistery was not made manifest by the Scriptures alone or barely for both Revelation and Preaching is mentioned before and to tell of the Gospel and Mistery being in the Scriptures is as much as to say the power of God or Christ is in the Scriptures Pr. Doth not Mark chap. 1.2 call what he wrot the Gospel Where he saith The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ c. Have you a forehead that cannot blush that tells us that the Gospel is not Scripture What a feared conscience and shameless boldness have ye attained to Answ. It is not from any feared conscience nor shameless boldness for me to assert the Gospel was before the Scripture and if Mark intended his Writing or what he writ to be the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ then it follows that the Gospel of Jesus Christ did not begin before Mark wrot that ReveRevlation and then how doth he mention what was written in the Prophets and tell of the Gospel of Jesus Christ And did not Jesus Christ shew forth his power and preach the Gospel before that of Mark was writ But seeing thou hast taken the liberty both to give thy meanings to Scriptures and pretends to compare one Scripture with another I may have liberty to tell the other Scriptures in this case as in Luke 1.1 he saith Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things which are most truely believed amongst us and ver 3. It seemed good unto me also c. And Act. 1.1 The former Treatise have I made O Theophilus So what they writ it was a Treatise or Declaration of things spoken done and believed and much of which relates to the historical part of things and matters but if the written Declaration Treatise of things or Scripture without be the Gospel then hireling Priests may be silent and let people read them without spending their mony of them for their various meanings traditional Interpretations c. for the Gospel ought not to be added to nor another preached how-be-it there is a difference between true Preaching proceeding from the immediate Spirit and Power of God which Paul was a Minister of and the Scriptures or Writings outward without the Spirit or Life for Paul was not a Minister of the Letter but of the Spirit and New Testament And is not a living Ministry and Voice especially where it lives by vertue of the Power of God from whence it immediatly comes of more force and authority then the Letter or Writings which Scriptures signify Yea I do further affirm that the same Words or Dâ—clarations as immediatly proceeding from the Power or Spirit of God is of more force and effect then the same words would be as spoken onely from Scripture without Deny it you Priests if you can I can in
The Principal Controversies BETWEEN The Litteral Presbyters of the Kirk of Scotland and the Illuminated Members of the Church of Christ CALLED QUAKERS Truly Collected Stated and Opened in a particular Reply herein specified for general Information and undeceiving the deceived By an earnest Contender for the most Holy Faith which was once delivered to the Saints G. W. 1 Tim. 6.20 Avoiding prophane and vain babling and oppositions of science falsly so called 2 Pet. 2.12 But these as natural bruit Beasts speak evil of the things they understand not c. Vers. 13. Sporting themselves with their own deceivings Vers. 14. Having Eyes full of Adultery and that cannot cease from sin Printed in the Year 1672. A Brief Introduction Reader HErein is asserted the real sufficiency of Divine Illumination and Inspiration together with the Doctrine of the Saints Perfection in Christ and his Universal Light and Grace to Mankind and thereby the real Use and End of the Holy Scriptures made known and the pretious Truths therein Owned and Vindicated from the gross Errours Perversions Absurdities Reproaches manifest Confusions and Contradictions of some Rigid Presbyters of Scotland to whom this Tract containes a brief Reply in many short Paragraphs which was thus occasioned Viz. Some of the Presbyterian Priests or Teachers in Scotland having some years ago writ a great bundle against us the People of God called Quakers in a way of slighting and deriding some things of Truth which above ten years ago I wrote in Answer to a Paper containing a pretended Answer to 26 Queries of Geo. Fox's Junior with some Queries written by one Edw. Jamison in whose Name with two more the said bundle against us was conveyed in Manuscript to divers hands as a pretended Answer to mine which providentially after a long time was brought to my hands about four years ago which then I perused and collected the principal Heads and Passages in it both of Doctrine seeming Argumentation and their Objections which I have here inserted in their own very words as I have their Book in Manuscript to evince and I wrote a Reply to each particular for the clearing the Truth and to manifest his and their abuse thereof and their gross perversion of the holy Scriptures together with their self Contradictions which are very apparent and easie to be seen by any unbyassed And not only their weakness and defection appears but their enmity against the Doctrine of Perfection both as it relates to the truly Sanctified and to their Faith and graces which these Presbyters accuse not only with Imperfection but with Sin Their darkness against the Light of Christ within Their cruel partiallity against the free extent of Saving Grace their sinful unbelief against the Sufficiency of the Holy Spirits teaching their gross ignorance and scorn against Divine Inspiration and Immediate Teaching in these dayes their carnal mindedness for their Traditional Ordinances of men against the Spiritual Dispensation of the Gospel and New Covenant wherein the Antitype of all even the enduring substance and heavenly things themselves are enjoyed by the clear sighted Children of the day beyond and above all Types Shadows and outward Representations or Memento's whatsoever These and the like things are spoken to in my following Reply A Coppy whereof was sent into Scotland for those concerned soon after it was written whereof as I am informed Edw. Jamison had a Coppy but since I had no further Answer nor Reply from him And now since some of our Friends in Scotland considering that there would be a service in making the following Reply more Publick and knowing that the said Edw. Jamison with divers more of his Brethren are of contentious and boasting spirits and yet seem not ready or willing to take notice of such things as pinch them while not made Publick as in this Case divers of our Friends in Scotland have hereupon desired the Printing and Publishing of this my Reply And in Answer to their Requests I have given them my first Copy thereof to divulge desiring that all who Read it may weigh the things therein contained and that they eye and have regard to that Light of the Son of God in their Consciences which manifests those things that are reprovable and is able to endue the Creature with a Right Judgment between those things that are of God and those things that differ and so to try all things and hold fast that which is Good London the 22th day of the 6th Mon. 1672. From a Real Friend to all who desire to know the Way of Life and Peace George Whitehead THE PRINCIPAL CONTROVERSIES BETWEEN The Litteral Professors of the Kirk of Scotland and the Illuminated Members of the Church of Christ called Quakers c. Here are the Doctrines and Principles of some of the Presbyterian Priests of Scotland Collected out of a great Bundle in Manuscript Subscribed Edw. Jamison with other two Names on the outside viz. Oswald Harland Edward Orde Together with the Heads of many of his corrupt Reasons and perverse Arguments against the Truth and Scriptures which are here detected and the People of God called Quakers vindicated from his and their Aspersions Calumnies and false Accusations therein The Priest YOV Have renounced Learning as Antichristian Answer That 's false For not Learning in it self simply considered do we renounce but the absurd and corrupt Idolatrous Use of it by men of corrupt mindes who have not Learned of Christ but in their Antichristian Spirit deny his Immediate Teachings Priest Absurd arguings against clear and abundant Scripture-Proofes which have been held forth by far more able than I am Therefore that my Answers have not Converted you is not to me either Strange or a Disappointment Answer False again I argue not against clear Scripture c. but against thy abusing and perverting of it as will yet further appear and much unprofitable labour thou mightest have spared and forborn whilst thy end was not to convert us what was it for to insult and boast over us And yet art far short of some that have dealt with us if we were conquered and confuted before hadst thou a mind to shew thy vallor over us thou hast missed of this end also Priest I have born witness to the Truth against your way Answ. Thou hast born witness to his work who is the Father of Lies against the Truth as will further appear to the shame of thee and thy confederates Priest There can hardly be brought any absurdity grosser for defence of your Cause then it self c. Answ. Then it was gross and absurd in thee to make raise and forge so many absurdityes upon our Cause as thou hast done though they be very groundless light frothy and frivilous as in this sequel will appear and become more obvious to the impartial spectators Priest The Light the Spirit Kingdom within are taken in a dangerous unsound sence by Quakers in an enthusiastick sence as communicate without Scripture Answ. It s both dangerous and
unsound in thee and thy fellows to oppose the Light and Spirits imediate teachings and Kingdom within which both teacheth sufficiently and opens the Scriptures and leads into all Truth and to Scoff at the true sence-hereof though under the term Enthusiastick or Enthusiasm however ironically and reproachfully rendred by you which if that be dangerous and unfound then is divinely inspired unsound Is this good Doctrine For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in quo Deus est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deus divine inspired Enthusiasmus an Inspiration it is the inspiration of the Almighty that gives understanding Is this dangerous No unless to the Priests to discover their ignorance And is not the Light Spirit Kingdom within communicated before the Scriptures are truly understood and opened What darkness and error hast thou here implyed and signified And doth not the Light and Spirit bring to the right use and end of the Scriptures which was given by inspiration Priest There is no man free from sin in this life c. Christ doth not totally subdue it in this life For that place 1 Joh. 3 of Christs being manifest to destroy the works of the devil if ye take it so may as well prove that Sathan shall not tempt a Child of God Aâ—sw This plainly enough shews thy confusion and ignorance of Christs manifestation and work and of his Vertue and Blood which destroyes the devils works cleanseth from all sin thorowly purgeth them that believe and follow him Secondly Thy Inference is gross and absurd To charge all with sin whom Sathan Tempts or to make his Tempting Gods Children a reason of their not having â—n totally subdued for Christ was Tempted yet sinned not for the Pâ—ince of darkness found nothing in him And he that abids in him sins not And we being made free from sin and become the Servants of God we have our fruit unto holiness Was not this the good end of Christs coming What sayes Antichrist Satan and his Agents and Sophisters to it Priest Neither doth these Scriptures 1 Joh. 3.6 Whoever is born of God sinneth not Or that ver 9. He that abids in him commits not sin and chap. 5.18 The evill one toucheth him not prove any thing c. Do they not prove any thing Sad Doctrine Is this divulg'd in the Kirk of Scotland Thus to oppose not onely Christs work but the words of plain Scripture and say they do not prove any thing when as they Viz. 1 Joh. 3.6 9. chap. 5.18 prove that Whoever is born of God sinneth not He that abids in Christ sins not The evil one toucheth him not Doth this prove nothing Doth not this equally reflect upon Christs Apostles as well as us And implicitly say they should have been silent and not so have pleaded Christs manifestation and the state of him that 's born of God against Sin Antichrist and Decievers whereas they John wrot to were plainly cautioned not to be decieved For he that doth righteousness is righteous even as he is righteous Priest It 's not the words of Scripture pickt out which explain the sence c. This is nothing but a silly and gross cavilling to insist upon bare words contrary to their sence Answ. Must we then go to the Priests for their sence contrary to plain Scripture where t is neither parable nor allegory who pick out and reject plain Scripture according to their own private imaginations and conceptions and yet other whiles in contradiction to themselves tell us the Scripture is the Rule Life is to be had in it and not communicated without it but yet such Scriptures as apparently contradict their gross and Antichristian Principles they can throw by and reject as proving nothing as this corrupt minded man hath Priest By this way a man may prove the grossest blasphemies as the Polythrites saying there are many Gods from 1 Cor. 8.5 yet in the next verse there is but one God c. Answ. First Not by our use of the Scriptures both fro maâ— right mind and for a good end namely against sin Secondly And if in the next verse after He that is born of God sinneth not thou hadst proved that he doth Sin in that he is Tempted thou hadst said somâ—hing to thy business of accusing all Gods Children with Sin term of life but herein the Scriptures own thee not Priest That 1 Joh. 3.6 9. is to be understood in a limitted sence namely that they do not continue in Sin wilfully and with delight without repentance Answ. That 's not Johns sence but thine which is as much as to say his was not true for do they continue in Sin and yet Sin not This is a contradiction or do tâ—ey continue in it and still repent of it Where 's then the fruits and effects of true repentance Or is there not a time of confessing repenting and time of forsaking Sin And casting off every weight and burthen and of being cleansed from all unrighteousness Priest They do not commit Sin with full consent without controuling of the motions The evil one toucheth them not to entangle them in such a way of sinning c. Answ. As much as to say they do commit Sin and the evil one doth touch them but thâ—y Sin not with full consent which is all one as to say John did not say true when he said Whoever is born of God sinneth not The wicked one toucheth him not c. he commits not Sin but we have ground to believe him before Sathans Messengers who thus have contended and disputed for his work Priest He is an Advocate for our Sins is meant of the Sins present and to come Answ. Not that Sin should allwayes remain in beliâ—vers but that they should be called and delivered out of it and become Gods Righteousness in him Priest His saying if we Sin implyeth as much as when we Sin Answ. Is this thy Learning thou hast boasted of Thus to pervert Scripture and the very plain sence of words as to make if we Sin as positive or absolute as when we Sin so if in other cases may as well be taken for when as if we say we have not sined we make him a liar is as much as when we say we have not sinned c. what an absurdity would this imply against the Apostles according to thy sence of him who but one impudent would not be ashamed thus grosly to abuse the Scriptures Which else where thou seemest to lay such great stress upon Priest We know in part is an imperfect degree of knowledge and so sinful Answ. As this intends the Apostle it s a false and erronious conclusion it s neâ—ther true morrally nor spiritually degrees vary not the property of the thing their knowledge they had by degrees was Gods gift to them and was spiritual from above an effect of Life and Truth which to say is sinful so accuseth the cause of it which is blasphemous and if the Apostles knowledg was sinful because in part
what his thoughts are and searcheth the heart who both can and doth spâ—ak what he pleaseth both of things declared in Scriptures and without them as he sees meet to the perticular states of men and persons and so to lay so much upon Scriptures which belongs to God and Christ and is properly their Work is unsound And Whâ—re provest thou the Scriptures search the thoughts And wherâ— say they so of themselves when they do not speak and direct to any perticular Person and shew him his thoughts and actions perticularly which the Light doth And the Spirit of Truth reproves and convinceth of the several evils whereof persons are guilty It s the Lord that sets their sins in order before them Priest It is false That any have a sincere supernatural Faith of the Scriptures that are ignorant of Christ c. They testify of him Answ. So then they must have some knowledg of Christ and from thence have a supernatural Faith of the Scriptures But how doth this agree with much more of thy work about searching the Scriptures for Life Eternal in them for begetting Faith c. Priest The foundation of the Saints and houshold of God are the Phrophets and Apostles Jesus Christ being the cheif corner-stone Eph. 2.20 Answ. Were not the Prophets and Apostles of that houshold of God If they were then they were their own foundation according thy to assertion here but thou hast wronged the Scripture for it was the foundation of the Propheâ—s and Apostles mark of the Prophets and Apostles they were built upon Christ Jesus the cheif corner stone Priest By the Prophets and Apostles that are the foundation is meant their Doctrine contained in the Scriptures not the persons Answ. Their Foundation was before their Doctrine or Scriptures Another foudation can no man lay then that which is already laid which is Christ But sure the Prophets and Apostles and Scriptures were not he Priest The Scripture makes known inward sins of thoughts and lusts Rom 7.7 Is able to makâ— the man of God perfect if they did not search into the thoughts of the heart discovering who are blind and carnal How can they make Wise unto Salvation Doth not the Scriptures make us Wise unto Salvation Therefore Are they not able to save us Christ as the principle cause of our Salvation is said alone to save us Answ. Thou meanest Christ as the principle searcher or the Spirit but the Scriptures as the instrument and then thou shouldest have said Christ makes known inward sins the Spirit searcheth all things And God Judgeth the secrets of men by Christ according to the Gospel without the knowledg of Christ there 's no supernatural faith of the Scriptures nor can any be made Wise unto Salvation but through that Faith And that Christ and the Spirit makes use of speaks and opens things contained in the Scripture many times Who denies that For then he speaks and opens those things immediately and thus the Law was made convincing to Paul not before it came thus and if on that account they be the instrumental cause then its Christ or the Spirit by hâ—s own speaking or teaching and openings that is the searcher and saviour And then it were most proper to lay the stress upon him as the searcher and Saviour and not thus often tell of the Scriptures being the searcher of the thoughts and of having in them Life Eternal lest also that ignorant persons go Idolatrously according to the tendency of much of thy matter to put them in the place of Christ or seek to make them the Saviour seeing that Christ the principle cause of our Salvation as thou confessest is said alone to save us and if he alone save its sufficient people be directed to him for that end for in him all sufficiency is who can now immediately speak matters contained in the Scriptures as well as when they were first given by inspiration And it is the inspiration of the Allmighty that giveth the true understanding without which the right use and end of the Scripture is not known Priest The Scriptures of Truth not I make four Saviours Viz. The ingrafted Word Faith Scriptures Timothy c. Answ. To us there is but one God one Christ one absolute Saviour one Faith c. Priest There is a Faith of the Scriptures that is historical this is not sufficient but this Faith may be of Christ as well and yet they not be saved but who has saving unfeigned Supernatural Faith of Scriptures cannot waâ—t it of Christ. Answ. Well Then this saving Supernatural Faith of Scripture and of Chrâ—st must come fâ—om a Supernatural Light or Christ who is thâ— Light and Author of Faith Priest How shall they believe without a Preacher sent Joh. 20. verse last They must have the Scriptures who have the knowledge of Christ for without this they cannot be kept from hell Answ. Who must send them if there be no immediate Teaching or Revelation now How provest thou thy Call from Scripture and that thou art Comissionated by Christ to Preach Thou shouldest rather have said they must have Christ who truely know the Scriptures and without him they cannot be kept from hell Priest In thâ—se Commandments written is our Life Deut. 30.15 16. Answ. The Word and Commandment was nigh them in their hearts that they might obey it and walk in the Commandments and live see Verses 11 12 13 14 15. how herein thou hast diminished and wrested Scripture and that Word which was nigh in the heart the Apostles preached It doth not say in the Commandments written is your Life Priest But that all Nations have the knowledg of Christ It s in an Enthusiastical Bible c These places He enlightens every man that cometh into the world and hath no respâ—ct of Persons are far wide from this conclusion therefore all have the knowledg of Christ all the Turks Jewes Pagans c. Oh! What monstrous horrid Doctrine c. Answ. It is not our Assertion nor Conclusion that all Nations or People have the knowledg of Christ herein hast thou abused us and our Principle for though he enlightens all they all do not walk in the Light nor believe in it But all Nations and People that come ever to know Christ and be saved must walk in his Light Who is the Way the Truth and the Life Priest Christ as he is God equal with the Father hath planted some Light of a natural conscience in every man of the world Answ. In him was life and the life was the light of men And he was that light which enlighteth every man that comes into the world who is not natural nor his Light that shines from him in the Conscience And God is Light who enlightens the World and gave his good Spirit in the dayes of old to the Rebellious and sent his Son a Light into the World That whosoever believes on him might not perish but have eternal life And here is the power and
of Envy who were not sanctified for such a work Pr. Your reason that wâ—thout Christ we can do nothing is to be meant in a Supernatural way Answ. Is not that in a Supernatural way which is without Error and Jangling and good and acceptable to God Pr. If they believe them to bâ— true do they not know them Answ. No All that believe them to be true do not know them for thou hast granted an historical Faith of Scripture Pr. He that hath heard and learned of the Father cometh to him Joh. 6.44 Answ. But all that have read and heard Scripture have not heard nor learnd of the Father nor come to Christ. Pr. None can know the Truths of the Scriptures without the Sanctifying Knowledg of Christ. Answ. This is according to what I say and overthâ—ows very much of thy matter according as hath been largely proved before Pr. He will lead believers into all Truths this is the meaning That is he will keep them from a total and final defection from Truths necessary to Salvation and lead them into Truths which are thus necessary c. Answ. This acknowledges in part to the truth of what I have said also to the Spirits leading into all Truth yea into all Truths necessary to Salvation And then the Spirit of Truth is sufficient for us to depend upon for this leading and preservation Pr The Disciples all of them except Judas had received the Sanctifying Spirit Answ How hast thou excepted Judas from the Sanctifying Spirit when he had part of the Ministery which his transgression was the cause of his falling from Pr. They were all ignorant of the Resurrection and mistook the nature of Christs Kingdom as if it had been of this world Luk. 24.21 Act. 1.6 The Galatians who had received the Spirit yet were they led into Error Answ. If they that had received the Spirit might erre in these matters much more they that had no Sanctifying Knowledg which contradicts thy former of their preaching of Truths without Errors Pr. He did not tell them ye erre not having the Spirit but not knowing the Scriptures Answ. The Scriptures they could not truely know without some Sanctifying Knowledg of Christ as before confest or of the power of God to salvation so their ignorance of the Scriptures in a Supernatural sence was from their ignorance of the power of God which unvails the heart to read and understand them Pr. For what ye say we plead for sin it doth more duely fall on the Doctrine that saith believers may totally fall as you say Peter by his denial did and David likewise by c. Answ. Nay To say there are believers that may fall from Grace who are not yet come to an established and grown state in the Truth and Power of God is no pleading for sin as your Doctrine contending and disputing for sin in all term of Life especially whiles we exhort all to watch and look dilligently to Grace received and withal warn them c. that such a falling away may be prevented for it was no pleading for sin in the Apostles to warn the Churches by the example of some that fell or of such as made shipwrack of faith and a good conscience or of such as drew back to perdition denied the Lord that bought them and such whose latter end was worse then their beginning But to charge us with saying that Peter and David fell totally this is a slander and forgery against us as there are many more in thy bundle Pr. If our peace stood in our inherent Righteousness c. in our good works c. Answ. Inherent Righteousness are thy own words obtruded upon us in thy own sence as imperfect and so in that sence not Gods nor Christs for in Gods Righteousness received in Christ by faith our peace stands and of this the true believers are pertakers in them they being in that living Faith the Righteousness whereof is not devided from it Pr. Davids Peace stood not in the freedom from all sin but in that God did pardon his sin and did not impute the same Rom. 4.6 7 8. Secondly If none ever had or shall have Peace here on earth but such as are in this Life free from all sin then you alone may boast of it c. Answ. He whose Transgression is forgiven The man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity in his spirit there is no guile Psa. 32.1 2. And David bid Mark the perfect man and behold the upright for the end of that man is peace And blessed are the undefiled in the way they also do no iniquity c. And in this state stood Davids Peace contrary to what thou hast Erroniously spoke of him here Secondly And what thou hast said of our being free from all sin that we alone might boast of it this thou dost not believe of us and therefore hast ironically Scoffed and Jeered contrary to thy own thoughts and intentions And in implying none on earth free from all sin hast again erred and art herein sufficiently confuted allrâ—ady thou having herein implyed none here ever born of God none here to abide in Christ or come to perfect Holyness or to be washed from all sin by the Blood of Christ So thy Doctrine is contrary to the Apostles Pr. For none either of the Prophets Apostles or Saints that we find in Scriptures ever were thus quallified for Peace Answ. This seems to be a large and general charge against the Prophets and Apostles who generally contrary to this Doctrine testifyed unto the Peace of God which is perfect which attends the Righteousness or heavenly Image of God which is also perfect and known in the new Covenant whereby he takes away sin and establisheth his people in Righteousness and the Prophets could testify that the Lord was their Righteousness who wrought all their works in them and to the true Apostles Christ was made wisdom righteousness sanctification so thou you have shewn your selves ignorant of the Scriptures and of the Prophets and Apostles states and quallifications and what sin or sins they all had which they or any of them were not freed from before death is not yet proved by any of you who are found in the work of the old accuser of the Brethren Pr. Sin is remaining in part in all the faculties of Gods Children c. except ye had made appear that Pauls Will and Affections and Mind were perfectly against sin Some stain and inclination to sin by the contrary corruption still remained in some degrees in his Will Mind and Affections c. Answ. This is a sad accusation against all Gods Children againe and what is this but a pleading for sin and tending to strengthen the hands of evil doers What all the faculties of Gods Children having sin and corruption in them The Priests were wont to tell of a Regenerate part What part is it No faculty clean sad newes Thus to accuse Pauls Will Mind and Affections as having
corruption remaining still in them whereas his Will was to the good his Mind and Affections were on things above when converted and victory obtained and the viâ—e affections and desires mortified which they that are Christs have crucified and his saying With my mind I serve the law of God but with my members the law of sin related to the state of his Warfare and shewes an opposition in his mind against serving sin But thy Doctrine signifyes thus much as if he had said with my Mind I serve sin and with my Members I serve sin yea with my Mind Will and Affections I serve sin and the Law of God both this were a serving two Masters And then where 's the contrarâ—eâ—y and opposition thou speakst of afterward Pr. I said There was Flesh and Spirit in him so that neither the operations of the Flesh or Spirit were compleat and perfect because of the opposition they have one to the other the Flesh and Spirit are contrary one to another Ans. Thy making the opposition between the Flâ—sh and the Spirit and their contrariety one to the other thy reason to prove that neither the operations of the Flesh or the Spirit were compleat and perfect it proves the quite contrary for the Spirits opposition to the Flesh and its contrary operation proves that the Spirits operation is pure and compleat against that which lusts against it and so against the fruits and works of the Flesh which are absoluâ—ly also opposite to the fruits of the Spirit yet they through the Spirit came to mortify those deeds and works of the Flesh which were corrupt Pr. Ye cannot do those things that ye would because he could not Will them perfectly Ans. It s God that works in the believer both to will and to do and his Work is perfect and to whose Will mans Will ought to be subject Pr. If all the imperative faculties of the Will and Mind and inferiour of the affections be fully and strongly joyned for any action the members of the body cannot but be obedientially c. Ans. Then such as have the mind of Christ whose Wills and Minds are subject unto his as theirs whom he calls his Brethren and whose affections also are set upon things above such have unity with Christ and in their faculties as thou callest them and therefore their members must needs be obedientially subject as theirs who are sanctified throughout in Body Soul and Spirit Pr. What part of him did sin dwell in if neither in his Mind Conscience Affections c. Ans. He said In his flesh dwelt no good thing but it was not all his life time of continuance Pr. If you can find out any other faculty of the Soul which can be a seat for sin to dwell in then these three the Schooles will be beholding to you for your new Philosophy Ans. We may therefore see what Schooles and Discipline you have that would be beholding to us to find out some other faculty of the Soul for sin to dwell in but me-thinks thou shouldst intend better then thy words import and have said You would be bebeholding to us to shew you another which is no seat for sin and that you should not seek for more room for sin for it hath as much room amongst you as you can afford it in all the facultys both superior and inferior both in the Wills Minds and Affections But so it had not in the Children of the Light Pr. The pure Protestant Religion which is held out from Scriptures Answ. Is that your pure Protestant Religion that pleads for sin in all the facultyes of the Soul An impure Religion and Doctrine of the Ministers of sin pure Religion where it is there 's a keeping unspotted of the world Pr. There is a Righteousness of Christs Sufferings and Merit imputed c. which begets Peace which may consist with sin in a believer though thereby no Condemnation to him Answ. Christs Righteousness is known to be pure and perfect and not to consist with sin for they are inconsistant and the believer that 's come to a fellowship of Christs sufferings and a conformity to his death to know his Righteous Will by faith imputed he walks after the spirit not after the flesh and to such there 's no condemnation Rom. 1.8 Pr. Cleanse thou me from my secret sins Answ. Then let not secret sin remain in me all my Life time let not sin and corruption remain in all the faculties of my Soul so long as I live Pr. There is a Righteousness which is the same with Sanctification which is not perfect and compleat therefore no man by this inherent Righteousness is Justified Answ. What Righteousness and whose is it which is the same with Sanctification which is not perfect Is it Christs yea or nay And Is Sanctification imperfect in this Life And Is this that thou callest inherent Righteousness In this thou hast but acted the part of Sathans mâ—ssengers as hore-tofore and contradicted the Apostles Doctrine who preached to present men perfect in Christ and exhorted to purge themselves from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit and so to a perfecting of holiness in the fear of God And Was not Christ made unto them Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption And is he devided or imperfect in what he is to the Saints What grose and faâ—se stuff hast thou implyed and vented And it was they that were washed and sanctified that were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the spirit of our God See 1 Cor. 6.11 Pr. You do not admit of this Doctrine Your new Light you pretend is nothing but old damnable Popery Ans. Our new Light as thou callest it is the Light of Christ the same the Apostles preached and bears witness to their Doctrine against thine and the Priests who oppose it And its Blasphemous and Damnable in thee to deem this our Light nothing but old damnable Popery it will appear that thou art nearer Popery then we in thy contending for sin term of Life but onely thou tellest us not of a Purgatory Pr Paul had victory begun but not compleated except from the the Condemning Power of Sin but the Reigning Power and Defiling was not subdued totally c. Ans. Confusion And contrary to Pauls Doctrine and state to tell of victory and yet the Reigning Power and Defiling not subdued totally as much as to say his Enemy was conquered and yet Reigned still whereas he said He had fought the good fight of faith and had kept the faith he was more then a conquerer through Christ that loved him And they to whom there was no condemnation were in Christ and walked not after the flesh but after the spirit And was there not such as were compleat in Christ to whom Paul wrote and dost not believe that he had attained to as high a growth as any of them to whom he writ or preached consider it Pr. In the present time I am sold under sin
which the Light within would never have discovered if there had not been the knowledg of the Law contained in the Scriptures An. Are all unbelievers then and have no Light in them but who have the Scriptures Thy blindness in this is detected before And What contradiction is it to tell of some having no Light in them when before thou hast confessed all men to have a natural Light or the Light of a natural Conscience in them Secondly And was it the Scriptures or the Law as it is in the Letter that discovered to Paul his sins and desires or the Law inward For he had the Law outward before he knew or was turned to the Law in his mind or was clâ—arly convinced in himsâ—lf Pr. Did ever the Prophets or Apostles try the Doctrines of persons deluded by Satan with the Spirit without the Scripture Deut. 13. An. The Prophets and Apostles had the Spirit and knew its sufficiency before they gave forth Scriptures and these were not deluded by Satan as falsly thou hast accused us to be An. Have not some of your way been so blasphemous as to aver Jesus Christ to be a type as to call themselves the Messiah to whom Hosanna should be said An. I know none in our way that either calls themselves the Messiah or that own such a thing but coâ—fess to Jesus Christ as bâ—ing the substance and the end of types shadows and figures but as for those whom thou hints of about their saying Hosanna they were not in our way but testified against and some of themselves came after to see confess and repent of their error so to upbraid us with any one 's failings or miscarriage espetially when t is both disowned and testifyed against by us this is both unequal and unjust and wouldest thou be so dealt by if I should go to reckon up how many drunken and whoreing Priests thâ—re be and should charge all of you and your whole Kirk with their wickedness Wouldest thou take it well Which indeed I might better do whilest such are owned and upheld as teachers of others among you thâ—n thou mights accuse us with persons and actions that are cast out from amongst us Pr. What is the Rule whereby the motions of the Spirit are to be tryed whether they be such or the motions of Satan and our deceitful hearts Ye answer the Spirit is the Rule but this cannot be for the Spirit hath given the Scriptures Secondly Neither is that place which ye cite to the purpose Viz. The Anoynting teacheth all things for though he teach it is by this Rule An. Yes The Spirit of God is sufficient a Rule sufficient both to try the motions of Satan and your deceitful hearts it searcheth all things The Lord searcheth the hearts and tryeth the reines telleth unto man his thoughts And if the Anoynting within teacheth of all things Must the Scriptures be a Rule to the Anoynting that thou seemest to tye it to the Scriptures Or Is not the teaching of the Anoynting Scripture as well as it was in them that spoke Scripture from it Or Must not people believe the Anoynting till they have searched the Scriptures to try it by them If so then when the Anoynting would tell and shew them their perticular states and thoughts and motions which the Scriptures do not tell them nor perticularly charge upon them then they are not at all in such cases to believe nor follow the Anoynting according to thy Doctrine and what is this but to set up the Scriptures above the Anoynting and the Letter above the Spirit which is a gross error and bespeaks great ignorance Pr. In the Synod at Jerusalem Act. 15. the Apostles searched the Scriptures for what they determined before they said it seemed good to the holy ghost and us An. Where provest thou that they searched the Scriptures for what they determined before they said it seemed good to the holy ghost and us Doth not this plainly confute thee that what they said was from the holy ghost And Was not its teaching their Rule then And What Scripture had they then to forbid Circumcision as they did Nay Had they not Scripture raâ—her for it If then they had not Scripture to forbid it they should not have dâ—nied or forbid it nor have believed the holy ghost in this case by thy Doctrine what silly work hast thou made on 't and How hast thou broken the neck of thy own cause Pr. The gift of discerning of Spirits was a peculiar gift given but to some but this was not for tryal of Doctrine None who had that gift of discerning of Spirits did try any Truths or Doctrine or practice but by the Scripture An. This is a strange Doctrine that they must onely try Spirits by the gift or Spirit of Truth and not any Truths or Doctrine Whether is greater the tryal of Spirits or of Doctrines Whâ—reas the Spirit searchâ—th all things and is a Spirit of true Judgment that giveth true understanding but according to thy false Doctrine that none who had discerning of Spirits did try any Truths or Doctrine or practice but by the Scriptures Then by this when the Apostles in their Epistles writ divers things that were not before in the Scriptures they were not to be believed by them in the Churches that had the gift of discerning and when the Spirit of Truth shall lead to speak or prophesie concerning a perticular Place People or Nation that which they have no Scripture for this therefore is not to be believed for want of Scripture to prove it by Thy ignorant and sottish stuff which also excludes all those Books and Prophesies of the holy men of God spoken of which are not recordâ—d in the Bible And those of our Friends which foretold of the late calamities befallen the City of London both that of the â—lague and that of the Fire which were both fore-seen and fore-told yet they had no Scripture to prove it but alass such as thou are silly and shallow in these matters being but as those Seers and Watchmen that are blind who would insinuate into people that both Prophesying Visions and Revelations are ceasâ—d and lay all upon the Scriptures and then how know you the Doctrine contained in them to be true without the Spirit Pr. Ye say Must the Scriptures be the Rule to discern or try false Spirits when they speak Scripture Ans. When the Devil spake Scripture to Christ he confuted him by Scripture which shewed he had perverted them and so he confounded the Scribes and Pharisees alwayes An. But could not Christ discerne the Devils spirit without the Scriptures What gross error and ignorance is implyed and couched in this thy impertinent answer Thou tellest us Christ confuted him by the Scripture which was when the Devil brought Scripture words to back his Temptations withal which is not an answer besides the Devils tempting Christ in these words Command that these stones be made bread and Cast thy self down
c. were not Scripture but he falsly went about to have backed them with Scriptures contrary to the end and intent of the Scriptures Pr. You answer blasphemously that they thought to have Eternal Life in the Scriptures as if our Lord Jesus Christ was fomenting them in a deceit of their own hearts in bidding them search the Scriptures for to find him in them and so Eternal Life An. Thy charge against my answer is false and I vallue it not that Christ should bid them search the Scriptures to find him in them this is a strange Doctrine and worse then the former to lay that upon Christ which he never intended nor spake his words were not that they might find Christ in the Scriptures nor Eternal Life but in them ye think to have eternal life whereas they would not come to him that they might have Life and so Doest thou think that Christ that dyed at Jerusalem was to be found in the Scriptures Pr. That Christ has paid a ransome for those that wilfully trample under foot the blood of the Son of God those places are understood by you of every individual person in the world that he tasted death for them is false contrary to the Scriptures and maketh the death of Christ to be vain and exalteth free will An. what we understand of those places of Scripture is neither false nor contrary to the Scriptures as falsly and erroniously thou hast accused us for that Christ died for all that were dead in sins tasted deaâ—h for every man gave himsâ—lf a Ransom for all is the propitiation not for our sins onely but for the sins of the whole world is plain in the Scriptures which ignorantly thou quarrels against Pr. If Christ did pay a Ransom for the Soul of Judas he hath Redeemed him those for whom he hath given himself he Redeemed from all iniquity but the damned and reprobates are not Redeemed Those for whom Christ came he is a Saviour unto and saveth them from their sins How are they lost if he came to save them But this argueth either defect of wisdom that he did not foresee such an intention of his death would prove frustrations or else want of power to effectuate his intention of saving them An. Christs absolute intention and will is not made voyd nor wants he power to effect it but such an intention we did not lay upon his death to save all And as for the death of Christ and his intention of saving being made vain and frustrations either from defect of wisdom or want of power these are both false for his intention therein consists with his good will and freeness towards all for I did not say that his intention was absolute to save all but I do say it was an intention of good to all according to the good will of God towards all who willeth not the death of sinners but rather that they may return and live But Christ in his suffering and death was passive and the putting forth of his power to save such as are saved stood not barely therein though his good will therein appeared but we are saved by his life But are the damned and reprobates such because ordained of God so to be or because Christ died not for them according to thy Doctrine And so Must the cause of their destruction be laid upon God and Christ or upon them for rejâ—cting free Grace resisting the councel of the Lord not liking to retain God in their knowledg and trampling under foot the blood of the Son of God as thou hast confessed before to thy own contradiction who so much hast cavilled against us for confessing to the free Grace of God and Christs dying for all or every man But this is like your pitiful narrow and partial Presbiterian Spirit and Principle that would so limmit God in the dispensation of his Grace and tye it up in such a narâ—ow compass and What was the cause of Judas his fall And Who was the Authour of his Transgression Was God or he to be blamed therein And Had not he Grace given him before seeing that by Transgression he fell Will thy telling us so often of Judas clear thee or confute us How silly aâ—d weak hast thou shewed thy self in this matter Pr. Those all for whom he dyed cannot be meant of every individual person for they live to him and not to themselves but the wicked that perish live not to Christ. Secondly Neither would Christ evâ—r give himself his blood a Ransom for them for whom he would not pray but he saith he prayeth not for the world Joh. 17. An. Thou hast herein wronged the Scripture and erred for it is not all for whom Christ died that live to him for 2 Cor. 5. chap. ver 14 15. If one died for all then were all dead and that he died for all that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves but unto him which died for them and rose again Now they which live unto him are not those all for whom he died And Christ praying not for the world at that time 2. John 17. is no argument that he did not give himself a Ransom for all for though at that time he prayed not for the world but for the disciples or such as were chosen out of the world who were in the world before they were chosen out of it yet at other times he did pray for his persecutors and such as were of the world as also exhorted his to pray for their enemies and persecutors c. Pr. Judas never got saving Grace nor that same Grace that Peter got and therefore could not reject it An. Judas had part of the Ministry that the other Apostles had and Did not that proceed from saving Grace Or What Grace How blind art thou And wherefore was Judas condemned then Was it because God refused to give him saving Grace or for his own transgression Pr. The Scriptures import that Christ is a propitiation for all the Elect which are called all the world An. John said He is the propitiation for our sins and were not they the Elect and not for ours onely but for the sins of the whole world Must we believe thy meaning contrary to the very words of Scripture or were the whole world all the Elect How hast thou wrested plain Scripture herein Pr. Who is it that hath put the difference betwixt Peters believing from Judas mis-believing Whether it be Gods Grace to Peter denied to Judas An. Where provest thou it was denied to Judas or that Judas had no part of the same Grace For before thou sayest wicked men have the common work of the Spirit but in contradiction sayest which is not supernatural from Rom. 2.14 Were thâ—y then wicked men spoken of there Which did by nature those things contained in the law and shewed the work or effect of the law written in their hearts What then are they that Rebel against the law if they that
obey it be wicked Whereas the Apostle saith before That the doers shall be justified See how thou hast brought forth one error and falshood upon another Pr. Is not the Father distinct from the Son and the Spirit in the personal subsistance An. Where learnedst thou these words the Father distinct from the Son and Spirit in the personal subsistance these are not the words of Scripture or the words of Scripture clearly conferred together as thou sayest after but in contradiction after thou sayest although the Scripture doth not in so many words make mention of three Persons who are one God and three distinct Persons and that these cannot be three if they be not distinct for where there is no distinction there is perfect oneness c. What 's the consequence of this but that therefore there is not perfect oneness in the Deity or God-head because three distinct Persons or three distinct one from another in personal subsistance Is this good Doctrine Is not that oneness between the Father and the Son perfect And Did not Christ say I and my Father are one and prayed that his might be perfect in one as he and his Father were one And though thou hast said you disalow all Traditions or any written rule which is not Scripture and yet thou wilt use words and distinctions which are not Scripture according to thy own confession What confusion art thou â—n For whereas I answered thee that we own what the Scriptures of truth assert of the God-head Viz. That there are three that bear record in heaven the Father the Word and the Spirit and these three are one c. and thou thy self in the next Page sayest that both the Father the Son and the holy Ghost are a Spirit howbeit my honest answer in Scripture words would not satisfy thee but thou hast villifyed and abused me in this matter in several reproaches and slanders as with shameless rayling and deriding c. with grose evasion with not being able to answer thee with not owning what the Scriptures assert and with blaspheamous fancyes blaspheaming Jesus Christ c. All which accusations I utterly deny as thy malitious lies and slanders against me and thy bundle is stuffed with many more of like nature and if thou didst not propound any of those quarrels as not knowing the answer of them as thou sayest c. then Didest thou propound them to cavil and get some advantages to carp at For thou hast shewed thy self in prejudice against us and hast reckoned me or us as wanting Learning c how-be-it thou hast shewed such Learning as thou hast to confute me with broken School phrases and words with some few fragments and traditional distinctions patched up together which we can have no Scripture for but thy consequences which much might be said to shew the weakness and shallowness thereof Pr. Those who had Christ the living bread yet were partakers of the outward bread as the disciples were Were not the Corinthians Saints c. An. That the disciples had outward bread Who denies But that it was to continue alwayes of necessity as an Ordinance after Christ the Living Bread and Life was received in them which is the substance that 's not yet proved that the disciples were to shew forth the Lords death till he come in the observation of the Bread and Cup or supper I grant Now what and when that coming was is the matter in controversie Christ came after when he was arisen was apparent he also spiritualy came and was more fully revealed within the Saints and was their Living Bread and Life as thou grantest now when he was with the disciples at supper before he was Crucified he intended by his coming a third coming till which they were to do it which coming not being in their dayes nor is yet by your Doctrine this is no where proved in Scripture as we know Pr. Were not the Corinthians Saints called in Christ And yet the Apostle 1 Cor. 11. he gave them the Bread and Cup which Christ gave to his disciples the night he was betrayed Secondly And whereas ye say that Christs coming again was when he rose again how false is this and absurd c. An. That 's very strange Doctrine that the Apostles gave the Corinthians the Bread and Cup which Christ gave to his disciples the night he was betrayed Where was it kept in the mean time that they both should have the same Bread and Cup the one so many years after the other Where hast thou learned this amongst the Popish Traditions and Reliques But t is probable thou meanest other-wise then thy words import Secondly And Is it false and absurd to say that Christs coming again was when he rose again Did he not come again after he rose And must that be reckoned for no coming And a third coming which is not yet and Was that an outward coming till which the disciples and Corinthians were to continue the Bread and the Cup whereas that coming is not yet according to thy Doctrine The Apostle to the Corinthians told them what Christ did and spoke to the disciples in the case but we read not that he imposed it upon them to continue it all their time or till a supposed coming of Christ which is not yet come for he said to them The cup of blessing which we bless is it not the communion of the blood of Christ the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ And Was not this the substance Where then remained the necessity of the shadow or outward Representations or Mementoes as some calls them And When was the Church to shew forth the Life of Christ and by what if all their time they must needs and people still shew forth or represent his death and him as suffered as thou sayest by Bread and Wine Doth not the substance end the shadows And Where have you any example in Scripture for the manner of your administring Bread and Wine at certain times a year and calling it a Sacrament The Lords Supper c. Pr. The Apostle telleth that the Corinthians were to shew forth his death till he came again so it behoved to be such a coming again as was yet future and unaccomplished in the Corinthians time the Bread and Cup spoken of to the Corinthians behoved to be outward Bread as shewing forth his death Secondly Because it was the same that Christ took and devided and gave to his disciples An. What confusion's here Were they to use the outwaâ—d Bread and Cup after they were dead then If they were to observe it to a coming unaccomplished in their timâ— And if it was the same that Christ devided and gave to his disciples Was that the outward bread so given to both Or Was there not more in Christs words then the outward observation What was his Body and his Blood and the Cup of the New Testament in his Blood and the fâ—uit of the
vine in the kingdom Was it not spiriritual a mystery which the outward Bread Cup and Passover were but as signs or shadowes of Pr. There is no such passage written that Christ appointed it to be taken away by his suffering An. As oft as they did it it was to shew the Lords death till he came What coming and when was it or is it to be he intended Wa' st a first or a second or a third And was it inward or outward Pr Neither is the Bread and Wine a shadow Secondly For he being present and it representing him as suffered it cannot be called a shadow as of things to come An. Is the Bread and Wine the substance Then this is popish thus to deny the â—read and Wine to be a shadow and worse then the Episcopals that tell us of their Sacraments being outward and visible signes of an inward and Spiritual Grace Secondly If Christs being present makes Bread and Wine no shadow or not figurative then by the same reason the Passover which the disciples prepared to answer that part of the Law was not a shadow nor Circumcission Offerings c. when done either for Christ or in his presence which to affirm and make that the reason were grose and absurd whereas the mystery substance or end was not so fully manifest when Christ was outwardly present before his being offered up as after when they were indued with power from on high received the promise of the Comforter came to eat his flesh and drink his blood which saying the disciples for a time when he was with them were troubled at and counted hard Pr. It concerneth all who own the Doctrine contained in the Scriptures though they be for baptizing with sprinkling to propound a query to men that do with sacrilegious boldness take away the Ordinances instituted by Christ unto believers An. Is it not then sacrilegious boldness for thee and the Priests to teach or impoâ—e sprinkling Infants which is neither a Doctrine contained in Scriptures nor a baptizing believers howbeit such a great stress hath been laid on the Scriptures before as being the rule and means for Faith and Salvation revealing the Mystery for receiving Life Eâ—ernal in them Christ in them c. yet we find not sprinkling Iâ—fants in the Scriptures neither by command nor practice though so much pleaded for by one here that tels us Pag. 35. they disallow all Traditions or any unwritten rule which is not Scripture but sprinkling Infants is not Scripture but onely a Tradition of men And one main plea for it is that Infants baptisme was approved and practised in the Orthodox Church of Christ c. which is just like the Papists and Jesuits plea to believe as the Church believes taking it for granted that the Church is pure as he saith Orthodox in all her Traditions whether they be Scripture yea or nay whereas before all Traditions or any unwritten rule which is not Scripture are disallowed but instead of Scripture for proof in this matter we have mention made of the Teachers and Guides of the Church as he calls them as Tertullian Cyprian who lived about 247. after Christ and Lactanctius that lived about the year 317. As also the latter sound Fathers as he calls them as Augustin Jerom Bassil Viz. their being for Infants baptisme but what proves all this from Scripture if it be as he sayes they did Must we take it up upon an implicite faith because such and such approved of it And yet at other times lay such a stress on the Scriptures as the perfect rule of obedience of faith c. How hath E. I. undervallued the Scriptures in this matter and spoyled his own cause touching them And Do not the Papists plead for their Traditions and Ceremonys against Protestants and others in like manner as he hath done in this cause And Would he be willing to accept their Arguments against Protestants when they are of the same nature and bear the same face with his in this point Pr. That the Covenant Abraham and his Seed was under was the same in substance with that which believers now and their Seed are under and therefore the Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant as Abrahams were An. Where provest thou by Scriptures that sprinkling Infants is the Initial Seal of the Covenant Or that ti 's so called thou herein doest but beg the question and takest it for granted that it is the Initial Seal of the Covenant of Grace which I deny and then from thence fallatiously drawes thy inference and conclusions for its being to Believers Seed as Abrahams Children to wit the males were Circumcised and that the Covenant Abraham and his Seed was under was the same in substance with that which believers now and their Seed are under But what of this if it be granted it was Gods Covenant or Promise Must they therefore be under mans tradition which sprinkling Infants is To plead for it from believers being baptized is to ground it upon that you Priests are out of the practice of so as to that it 's not pertinent to dispute with such about it who own it not in practice but onely talk of it for a cover to a popish tradition and thereby shew their hypocrisie the more and Must now sprinckling Infants stand for the substance or antitype instead of Circumcision Or Was Circumcision the type of Infants Baptizme so called Whereas sprinckling Infants hath neither the true form nor matter of Baptisme outward in it for in the next page it 's confessed that the word in the first Language signifying Baptisme is rendered washing Mar. 7.4 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 afterwards it 's said that being washed all over best signifies our inward renovation and burial with Christ and thus contradictions and confusions are heaped up in many places And to my saying that it s not commanded under the New Covenant to Baptize Infants thou replyest the Apostle Peter Act. 2.38 39. sayes That those to whom that promise that God would be their God and the God of their Seed should be baptized but to Believers and their Seed he saith that promise belongeth c. Now let the Reader but peruse that Scripture mentioned by thee and compare thy fallacious arguing from it for Peter said Ver. 38. Repent and be baptized every one of you c. Were they Infants such as the Priests sprinkle that he bid repent How grosly hast thou perverted Scripture And Ver. 39. The promise is to you and your Children and to all that are a far off even as many as the Lord our God shall call Now What can be inferred from hence for sprinkling Infants Were all they whom God should call Infants when called Or Did Peter intend they should all have their Children sprinkled before they were called But in contradiction afterward thou sayest though there be no express command yet it s of divine institution and warrant if it be drawn
the Father the word and the spirit and those three are one Then we own what the Scriptures assert of the Deity oâ— the Father Word and the Spirit which are one this is no blasphemy no fancies as malitiously we are accused Except ye call all the words of Scriptures clearly confered together a cavilling Viz. touching three distinct Persons in the Deity c. Although the Scriptures do not in so many words make mention of the three Persons c. who are one God we disalow all Traditions or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture Then three dictinct Persons in the Deity distinct in the personal Subsistance are not the words of the Scriptures but a Tradition and why do you then alow of that which is not Scripture but that There are three that bear record in heaven and these three are one is Scripture The Apostles telleth that the Corinthians were to shew forth Christs death till he came again The Bread spoken of to them behoved to be this of outward Bread c. It behoved to be such a coming againe as was yet future and unaccomplished in the Corinthians time Were the Corinthians then to eat and drink outwardly after their time or so long after their deceases What absurdity and grosness is here Infants Baptism was approved by the Orthodox Church and the Renouned Teachers and Guides thereof and sound Father as Tertullian Ciprian Lactant Augustine Jerom Basil c. It s derived from the Church when pure We disallow all Traditions or any un-written Rule which is not Scripture whether they be under pretence of Revelation which Enthusiasts hold or Traditions as Papists in this agree Then Infants Baptisme not being Scripture but a popish Tradition is therefore to be disalowed of Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant as Abrahams were Circumcision was the Seal of the old Covenant and it was administered on Males onely page 35. Circumcision of the Males onely was in its time Commanded of God which is no proof of sprinkling Infants both Males and Females which was never cammanded of God pa. 38. The Fathers or Isralites who fell into gross sins professed the same Doctrine of Salvation to profess Christ is called a drinking of Chrâ—st c Abraham and his Seed under the old Covenant had the same Mediator which is Jesus Christ he was the same yester-day to them that he is to day to believers Their having the same Mediaâ—or Jesus Christ the same c. And drinking of Christ was more then to profess him or the Doctrine of Salvation And Did such fall into gross sins What fell they from if not from Grace Ye say thereis no express command for sprinkling of the Infants of believers pa. 36 But we disalow all Traditions or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture pa. 35. You ' have confest what I said that there is no express command for sprinkling Infants therefore in alowing of it you contradict your selves Though there be no express command yet it s of Divine Institution and Warrant if it be drawn by good consequence from the Scriptures Truths and Doctrines is to be tried by the Scriptures so far as can be found in the Scriptures page 29. Christ bid search the Scriptures they reveal the Misteries page 27. I deny any immediate teaching by God page 14. Although a great stress and necessity is laid upon the Scriptures and immediate teaching so confidently denied yet no Sprinkling Infants to be found or required in Scripture and whilst any imediate teaching is denied How is it of Divine Institution Surely Edward Jamisons consequence herein is not Divine who denies any immediate teaching pa. 37. If I had said it Viz. Infants Baptism brought them to the Church those places and many others do hold it as Gal. 3.27 it s the ordinary way of putting on Christ c. I said not that it did bring them into the Church but that it is a Seal of our entry into the Church page 26. sprinkling of water is enough to signify inward washing If it doth not bring into the Church it is but a signe of inward washing it s not a putting on Christ neither can the Scripture prove it when there is no Scripture for it and were the Scriptures deemed the ordinary way and means but now sprinkling Infants What ignorant and gross contradictions are these Ye say Baptisme doth not bring them into the Church it s a bold Sacrilegious usurpation in detracting from the words of the Book of God which shall be punished with all the curses of that Book Though there be no express command for sprinâ—ling Infants yet it s of Divine Institution if it be drawn by good consequence pa. 36. See what Curses these Priests have laid upon them that deny the Infants Baptisme their Scripturles Tradition to bring into the Church and are not they herein evidently Guilty of Sacrilegious usurpation and adding to the words of the Book of God by their false consequence Baptizing of Children or others a standing Ordinance of Christ which he hath appointed to continue to the end of the world Mat. 28. and ordinary means for Salvation Maâ— 16.16 There be no express commands for sprinkling Infants Act. 2.38 repent and be baptized Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved They to whom Repentance and Faith was preached were not Infants such as the Priests sprinkle of a few dayes old which is not the Baptisme that saveth but that of the Spirit or the answer of a good conscience is saving Page 37. That many Ministers baptize the Children of those who are prophane and drunkards and so not believers They that profess the Gospel though they be not sincere believers yet they are in this sence accounted belivers Page 85. The Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant to believers and their Seed that promise belongeth those to whom that promise That God would be their God and the God of their Seed should be baptized Viz. Infants who are in the Covenant with God Page 36. It seems these Priests can make believers at an easie rate whilst they can take the prophane drunkards for believers upon their professing the Gospel but surely God is not the God of the prophane and drunkards nor are they in Gods Covenant as true believers are but under Satans power and their taking it for granted that the sprinkling Infants is the Initial Seal of the Covenant is false and but a beging the question Those who are under the profession of the Gospel are to be reputed as in Covenant pa. 39. Unbelievers who have a profession and yet have not sincere faith c. are not Righteous nor Holy c. Then it is not the profession of the Gospel that makes them believers or in Covenant with God An Arminion and Popish Doctrine that believers may fall from Grace The Fathers many of them fell into gross sins as is cleared from the Histories of