not neither can be understood of Man's Answ. 1 own Nature which is Corrupt and Fall'n but of that Spiritual Nature which proceedeth from the Seed of God in man as it receiveth a new Visitation of God's Love and is quickened by it By what Nature the Gentiles did do the things of the Law which clearly appears by the following words where he saith These not having a Law i. e. outwardly are a Law unto themselves which shews the Work of the Law written in their hearts These Acts of theirs then are an Effect of the Law written in their hearts but the Scripture declareth that the Writing of the Law in the heart is a part yea and a great part too of the New Covenant-Dispensation and so no Consequence nor part of man's Nature Secondly If this Nature here spoken of could be understood of man's own Nature which he hath as he is a Man then would the Apostle Answ. 2 unavoidably Contradict himself since he elsewhere positively declares That the Natural Man discerneth not the things of God nor can Now I hope the Law of God is among the Things of God especially The Natural Man discerneth not c. as it 's written in the heart The Apostle in Chap. 7. of the same Epistle saith vers 12. That the Law is holy just and good and vers 14. That the Law is Spiritual but he is Carnal Now in what respect is he Carnal be as he stands in the Fall Vnregenerate Now what Inconsistency would here be to say that he is Carnal and yet not so of his own Nature seeing it is from his Nature that he is so denominated We see the Apostle Contra-distinguisheth the Law as Spiritual from Man's Nature as Carnal and Sinful Wherefore as Christ saith There can no Grapes be expected from Thistles nor Figs of Thorns Matth. 7 16. so neither can the fulfilling of the Law which is spiritual holy and just be expected from that Nature which is Corrupt Fall'n and Vnregenerate Whence we Conclude with good Reason that the Nature here spoken of by which the Gentiles are said to have done the Things contained in the Law is not the Common Nature of men but that Spiritual Nature The Gentiles Spiritual Nature in doing the Law that ariseth from the Works of the Righteous and Spiritual Law that 's written in the heart I confess they of the other Extream when they are pressed with this Testimony by the Socinians and Pelagians as well as by us when we use this Scripture to shew them how some of the Heathens by the Light of Christ in their heart come to be saved are very far to seek giving this Answer That there were some Relicks of the Heavenly Image left in Adam by which the Heathens could do some good things Which as it is in it self without proof so it Contradicts their own Assertions elsewhere and gives away their Cause For if these Relicks were of force to enable them to fulfil the righteous Law of God it takes away the necessity of Christ's Coming or at least leaves them a Way to be saved without him unless they will say which is worst of all That thô they really fulfilled the righteous Law of God yet God damned them because of the want of that particular Knowledge while he himself withheld all Means of their Coming to him from them But of this hereafter § III. I might also here use another Argument from these words of the Apostle 1 Cor. 2. where he so positively Excludes the Natural Man from an Vnderstanding in the things of God but because I have spoken of that Scripture in the beginning of the Second Proposition I will here avoid to Repeat what is there mentioned Referring thereunto Yet because the * Socinians exalting the Light of the Natural Man Socinians and others who exalt the Light of the Natural Man or a Natural Light in man do Object against this Scripture I shall Remove it e're I make an end Object They say The Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ought to be translated Animal and not Natural else say they it would have been 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From which they seek to infer That it is only the Animal man and not the Rational that is excluded here from the discerning the things of God Which shift without disputing about the Word is easily Refuted neither is it any wise consistent with the Scope of the place For Answ. 1 First The Animal Life is no other than that which man hath Common with other living Creatures for as he is a meer man he differs no otherwise from beasts than by the Rational Property Now the Apostle deduceth his Argument in the foregoing Verses from this Simile The Animal Man is the same with Natural That as the things of a man cannot be known but by the spirit of a man so the things of God no man knoweth but by the Spirit of God But I hope these men will Confess unto me that the Things of a man are not known by the Animal Spirit only i. e. by that which he hath Common with the Beasts but by the Rational so that it must be the Rational that is here understood Again the Subsumption shews clearly that the Apostle had no such Intent as these mens gloss would make him to have viz. So the things of God knoweth no man but the Spirit of God according to their Judgment he should have said The things of God knoweth no man by his Animal spirit but by his Rational spirit for to say The Spirit of God here spoken of is no other than the Rational Spirit of man would border upon Blasphemy since they are so often contra-distinguished Again going on he saith not that they are rationally but spiritually discerned Answ. 2 Secondly The Apostle throughout this Chapter shews how the Wisdom of man is unfit to Judge of the things of God and Ignorant of them Now I ask these men whether a man be called a Wise man from his Animal Property or from his Rational If from his Rational then it is not only the Animal The Rational Man in the Natural State excluded from discerning the things of God but even the Rational as he is yet in the Natural State which the Apostle Excludes here and whom he Contra-distinguisheth from the Spiritual vers 15. But the spiritual man judgeth all things this cannot be said of any man meerly because Rational or as he is a Man seeing the men of greatest Reason if we may so Esteem men whom the Scripture calls Wise as were the Greeks of old not only may be but often are Enemies to the Kingdom of God while both the Preaching of Christ is said to be Foolishness with the Wise men of this World and the Wisdom of this World is said to be Foolishness with God Now whether it be any ways probable that either these Wise men that are said to account the Gospel Foolishness are only so
no man therefore judge you in Meat or Drink Is not Bread and Wine Meat and Drink But why Which are a Shadow of things to come But the Body is of Christ. Then since our Adversaries Confess 'T is but a Sign and Shadow they confess that their Bread and Wine is a Sign or Shadow therefore according to the Apostle's Doctrine we ought not to be Judged in the Observation of it But is it not fit for those that are Dead with Christ to be subject to such Ordinances See what he saith ver 20. Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the Rudiments of the World why as though living in the World are ye subject to Ordinances Touch not taste not handle not Which all are to perish with the Vsing after the Commandments and Doctrines of Men And which do perish with the Vsing What can be more plain if this serve not to take away the Absolute Necessity of the use of Bread and Wine what can it serve to take away Sure I am the Reason here given is applicable to them which all do perish with the using since Bread and Wine perisheth with the using as much as other things But further if the use of Water and Bread and Wine were that wherein the very Seals of the New Covenant stood and did pertain to the Chief Sacraments of the Gospel and Evangelical Ordinances so called then would not the Gospel differ from the Law The Law was Meats and Drinks not so the Gospel or be preferrable to it Whereas the Apostle shews the difference Heb. 9.10 in that such kind of Observations of the Jews were as a Sign of the Gospel for that this stood only in Meats and Drinks and divers Washings And now if the Gospel-Worship and Service stand in the same where is the difference Object If it be said These under the Gospel have a Spiritual Signification Answ. So had those under the Law God was the Author of those as well as Christ is pretended to be the Author of these But doth not this contending for the use of Water Bread and Wine as necessary Parts of the Gospel-Worship destroy the Nature of it as if the Gospel were a Dispensation of Shadows and not of the Substance whereas the Apostle in that of the Colossians above-mentioned argues against the Vse of these things as needful to those that are dead and arisen with Christ because they are but Shadows And since through the whole Epistle to the Hebrews The Law has Shades the Gospel brings the Substance he argues with the Jews to Wean them from their Worship for this Reason because it was Typical and Figurative Is it agreeable to right Reason to bring them to another of the same Nature What ground from Scripture or Reason can our Adversaries bring us to evince that one Shadow or Figure should point to another Shadow or Figure and not to the Substance And yet they make the Figure of Circumcision to point to Water-Baptism and the Paschal Lamb to Bread and Wine But was it ever known that one Figure was the Antitype of the other especially seeing Protestants make not these their Antitypes to have any more Vertue or Efficacy than the Type had For since as they say and that truly That their Sacraments confer not Grace Their Sacraments confer not Grace but that is conferred according to the Faith of the Receiver it will not be denied but the Faithful among the Jews received also Grace in the Use of their Figurative Worship And thô Papists boast that their Sacraments confer Grace ex opere operato yet Experience abundantly proveth the contrary § X. But supposing the Vse of Water-Baptism Opposers claim a Power to give their Sacraments from whence do they derive it and Bread and Wine to have been in the Primitive Church as was also that of Abstaining from things strangled and from Blood the Vse of Legal Purifications Acts 21.23 24 25. and Anointing of the Sick with Oil for the Reasons and Grounds before-mentioned Yet it remains for our Adversaries to shew us how they come by Power or Authority to Administer them It cannot be from the Letter of the Scripture else they behoved also to do those other things which the Letter declares also they did and which in the Letter have as much Foundation Then their Power must be derived from the Apostles either Mediately or Immediately but we have shewen before in the Tenth Proposition that they have no Mediate Power because of the Interruption made by the Apostasy And for an Immediate Power or Command by the Spirit of God to Administer these things none of our Adversaries pretend to it We know that in this as in other things they make a Noise of the Constant Consent of the Church and of Christians in all Ages Tradition no sufficient Ground for Faith but as Tradition is not a sufficient ground for Faith so in this matter especially it ought to have but small Weight for that in this Point of Ceremonies and Superstitious Observations the Apostasy began very early as may appear in the Epistles of Paul to the Galatians and Colossians and we have no ground to Imitate them in those things whose Entrance the Apostle so much withstood so heavily regretted and so sharply reproved But if we look to Antiquity we find that in such kind of Observances and Traditions they were very uncertain and changeable so that neither Protestants nor Papists do observe this Ceremony as They did both in that they gave it to Young Boys and to Little Children and for ought can be learned The Supper they gave to Young Boys and Children the Vse of this and Infant-Baptism are of a-like Age though the one be laid aside both by Papists and Protestants and the other to wit Baptism of Infants be stuck to And we have so much the less Reason to lay Weight upon Antiquity for that if we consider their Profession of Religion especially as to Worship and the Ceremonial Part of it we shall not find any Church now whether Popish or Protestant who differ not widely from them in many things as Daleus in his Treatise concerning the Vse of the Fathers well observeth and demonstrateth Daleus And why they should Obtrude this upon us because of the Ancients Practice which they themselves follow not or why we may not Reject this as well as they do other things no less zealously practised by the Ancients no sufficient Reason can be assigned I shall not nevertheless doubt but many whose Understandings have been Clouded with these Ceremonies have notwithstanding by the Mercy of God had some Secret Sense of the Mystery which they could not clearly understand because it was Vailed from them by their sticking to such Outward things and that through that secret Sense diving in their Comprehensions they ran themselves into these Carnal Apprehensions as imagining the Substance of the Bread was Changed or that if the Substance
Secondly they urge Rom. 13. where the Magistrate is said not to bear the Sword in vain Object because he is the Minister of God to execute Wrath upon such as do evil But Heresy say they is evil Ergo. But so is Hypocrisy also yet they confess he ought not to punish that Therefore this must be understood of Moral Evils relative of affairs betwixt Man and Man not of matters of Judgment or Worship or else what great absurdities would follow considering that Paul wrote here to the Church of Rome who was under the Government of Nero an impious Heathen and Persecutor of the Church Now if a power to punish in point of Heresy be here included it will necessarily follow that Nero had this Power yea and that he had it of God for because the Power was of God therefore the Apostle urges their Obedience But can there be any thing more absurd than to say that Nero had Power to judge in such cases Surely if Christian Magistrates be not to punish for Hypocrisy because they cannot outwardly discern it far less could Nero punish any body for Heresy which he was uncapable to discern And if Nero had not power to judge nor punish in point of Heresy then nothing can be urged from this place Since all that 's said here is spoken as applicable to Nero with a particular Relation to whom it was written And if Nero had such a power surely he was to exercise it according to his Judgment and Conscience and in doing thereof he was not to be blamed which is enough to justifie him in his persecuting of the Apostles and murdering the Christians Thirdly They object that saying of the Apostle to the Gal. 5.12 I would they were even cut off which trouble you Object But how this imports any more than a cutting off from the Church is not nor can be shewn Beza upon the place saith Answ. We cannot understand that otherwise than of Excommunication Such as was that of the incestuous Corinthian And indeed it is madness to suppose it otherwise for Paul would not have these cut off otherwise than he did Hymenaeus and Philetus who were Blasphemers which was by giving them over to Satan not by cutting off their heads The same way may be answered that other Argument drawn from Rev. 2.20 where the Church of Thyatira is reproved for suffering the Woman Jezebel Which can be no other ways understood than that they did not Excommunicate her or cut her off by a Church-censure For as to corporal punishment it is known that at that time the Christians had not power to punish Hereticks so if they had had a mind to it Fourthly They alledge Object that Heresies are numbred among the works of the flesh Gal. 5.20 Ergo c. That Magistrates have power to punish all the works of the flesh Answ. is denyed and not yet proved Every Evil is a work of the flesh but every Evil comes not under the Magistrate's cognisance Is not Hypocrisy a work of the flesh which our Adversaries confess the Magistrates ought not to punish Yea is not Hatred and Envy there mentioned as the works of the flesh And yet the Magistrate cannot punish them as they are in themselves until they exert themselves in other acts which come under his power But so long as Heresy doth not exert it self in any act destructive to human Society or such like things but is kept within the Sphere of those duties of Doctrine or Worship which stand betwixt a Man and God they no ways come under the Magistrate's power § IV. But Secondly this forcing of Men's Consciences is contrary to sound Reason and to the very law of Nature For Man's understanding cannot be forced by all the bodily sufferings another Man can inflict upon him especially in matters Spiritual and Supernatural 'T is Arguments and evident Demonstrations of Reason together with the power of God reaching the heart that can change a Man's mind from one opinion to another and not knocks and blows and such like things which may well destroy the Body but can never inform the Soul which is a free Agent and must either accept or reject matters of Opinion as they are born in upon it by something proportional to its own nature To seek to force minds in any other manner is to deal with Men as if they were brutes void of understanding and at last is but to loose ones labour and as the Proverb is to seek to wash the Black-More white By that course indeed Men may be made Hypocrites but can never be made Christians and surely the products of such Compulsion even where the end is obtained to wit an outward Assent or Conformity whether in doctrine or worship can be no ways acceptable to God who desireth not any sacrifice except that which cometh throughly from the heart and will have no constrained ones So that Men so constrained are so far from being members of the Church that they are made ten-times more the Servants of Satan than before in that to their errours is added Hypocrisy the worst of evils in matters of Religion and that which above all things the Lord's Soul most abhors Object But if it be said Their Errour notwithstanding is thereby suppressed and the scandal removed Answ. I answer besides that this is a method no ways allowed by Christ as is above proved surely the Church can be no ways better'd by the accession of Hypocrites but greatly corrupted and endangered for open Heresies Men may be aware of and shun such as profess them when they are separated from the Church by her Censures but secret Hypocrites may putrify the body and leaven it ere Men be aware And if the Dissenters prove Resolute and suffer boldly for the Opinions they esteem right experience sheweth that such sufferings often tend to the commendation of the sufferers but never of the Persecutors For such suffering ordinarily breeds compassion and begets a curiosity in others to enquire the more diligently into the things for which they see Men suffer so great losses so boldly and is also able to beget an opinion that it is for some good they do so suffer it being no ways probable that Men will venture all meerly to acquire fame which may as well be urged to detract from the Reputation of all the Martyrs unless some better Arguments be brought against it than a Halter or a Faggot But supposing this principle that the Magistrate hath power to force the Consciences of his Subjects and to punish them if they will not comply Very great inconveniencies and absurdities will follow and even such as are inconsistent with the nature of the Christian Religion For First it will naturally follow that the Magistrate ought to do it and sinneth by Omission of his duty if he do it not Will it not then hence be inferred that Christ was defective to his Church who having power to force men and to call for
Worship God according as we Preached And therefore they said that He to wit God had wholly neglected the Salvation of all their Predecessors in permitting that these Miserable Souls should altogether be destitute to their utter Ruin of the Knowledge of Saving Truth This most odious Thought did much draw them back from the Worship of the True God but by the help of God this Error and Scruple was taken from them For we first did demonstrate unto them that the Divine Law was the Oldest of all yea before any Law was made by the Ancients Taught by Nature not to Kill c. The Japans knew by the Teaching of Nature that it was unlawful to Kill Steal Forswear and other things contained in the Ten Divine Laws as was evident in that when any of them Committed these Crimes they were tormented by the Pricks of their Consciences That hence Reason it self doth teach to flee the Evil and follow the Good and therefore was Implanted in the minds of all Men by Nature So that all have the Knowledge of the Divine Law from Nature and of God the Author of Nature before Discipline be added Of which were it doubted Trial might be made in some body altogether Void of Discipline who has been Educated in some Mountain or Wilderness without any Knowledge of the Laws of his Country For if such an one thus altogether Ignorant and Unacquainted with Humane Discipline were asked Whether to Kill a Man to Steal and these other things which the Law of God forbids were Sinful or not Or if it were not right to forbear these things Truly I say such an one utterly Ignorant of Humane Discipline would so answer that it would easily appear that he were not Void of the Law of God From whence then shall we judge he has drawn his Notion unless from God himself the Author of Nature If then this be manifest in Barbarous Men how much more in Men Civiliz'd and well-Educated Which being so it necessarily follows that the Divine Law was Implanted in Man's Heart before all Laws made by Man This Reason was so manifest to them that they were fully satisfied and so being delivered from these Snares did easily subject themselves to the sweet Yoak of Christ. Thus far Xaverius Thus it may seem that to satisfy these Japonians that their Fore-fathers were not all necessarily Damned and to shew that the Vniversal Love of God reached unto them to put them in a Capacity of Salvation This Cunning Jesuite could not find another way than by Asserting this Principle Albeit it be no ways Congruous to the Doctrine of the Church of Rome For these Antient Japonians could not be esteemed Members of the Church of Rome and as not being such according to the Romish Principle who say There is no Salvation without the Church that is without the Church of Rome must needs have been Damned II. That by vertue of that Light Men may be Converted and become Members of the Church without which is no Salvation Secondly That Notion and Definition of a Church which naturally arises from this Principle and is accordingly believed by the Assertors of it doth also both very well Agree to and Establish this Doctrine of Vniversal Love For by vertue of this Seed and Light Extended by Christ unto the Hearts of all it being supposed That Men may thereby be truly Converted and consequentially Vnited to Christ it naturally follows That such may become Members of the Church Else none of Old but the Families of the Patriarchs and of the Jews could have been judged to be Saved nor yet any during all the Time of the Apostacy Which as it is false in it self will be hardly affirmed by any And therefore since such might be Saved they must be esteemed Members of the Church without which in this large Sense there can be no Salvation as including the whole Body of Christ Of which Body who are not are certainly Excluded And therefore it is that the Church Catholick or Vniversal is not so confined to any Sect Form or External Profession as that those that are not Initiated in those Forms are Excluded absolutely from being Members of the Church unless it be upon Refusal or Resistance of the Will of God really manifest to them as drawing them to the Practice of particular Things For it hath pleased God at several Times to Require several things both of particular Churches and Persons which he has not of others As to the Jewish Converts To Abstain from things Strangled and Blood and to the Churches of the Gentiles Not to Circumcise which was permitted to the Christian Jews for a Time And from particular Persons many particular things have been Required Which albeit they were not general Obligations upon all Christians yet in so far as Manifested to and Required of them were sufficiently Obligatory And their Disobedience to them should have been in them a Breach of their General Obligation of Obedience which we owe to God in all things He Requires and consequently pernicious however others to whom they have never been Revealed nor Required might have been Saved without them III. That God by his Spirit Reveals his Will Immediately in the hearts of all true Christians Thirdly As the Asserting of Principles which commend the Love of God and shew the Great Extent of it to Mankind do most agree with Vniversal Love so this People in another Chief Principle of theirs do greatly shew it For as by the Preaching of this Vniversal Principle of the Light they shew the Extension of God's Love to all so by Preaching that God both doth and is willing to Reveal his Will Immediately by his own Spirit in the Hearts of all those that Receive his Light that so they may be guided acted and led thereby and know the Mind of God thus Inwardly Immediately in themselves they hold forth the Intension of God's Love to all those that follow and obey him so that they neither bind up this being led by the Spirit of God only to themselves nor stint it to singular and Extraordinary Occasions but hold it forth as a Common and Vniversal Priviledge to all true Christians and Members of the Church Now this Doctrine greatly Commends the Love of God and Establisheth the Principle of Vniversal Love in that it shews how Vniversally God hath offered this Blessed Priviledge to all in that He hath given his Light unto all upon the receiving of which this Immediate Guidance of the Spirit followeth as a necessary Concomitant For such as deny this Immediate Revelation of God's Will by his Spirit in the Hearts of his Children to be a Common and Vniversal Priviledge to all true Christians and Members of the Church must needs suppose the Knowledge of his Will Necessary for them to be Communicated to them by some other External Means as by outward Writings and Precepts insomuch that all such as are robbed of this Benefit are necessarily Excluded from
the Church of Christ is not to usurp Authority over their Fellow-Members 229. decisive Judgment explained 243. true and false Decision 244. unsettled Men Judging 683 684. Charitable and uncharitable Judgment 686. God the Judge of conscience 516 517. he that is Spiritual Judgeth all things 795 see Church Justification the Doctrine thereof is and hath been greatly vitiated among the Papists and wherein they place it 364 365 380 382 Luther and the Protestants with good Reason opposed this Doctrine though many of them ran soon into another Extream and wherein they place it and that they agree in one 366 387 370. it comes from the Love of God 367 379 380. to Justify signifies to to make really Just not to repute Just which many Protestants are also forced to acknowledge 370 371 374 377. The Revelation of Christ formed in the Heart is the formal Cause of Justification not Works to speak properly which are only an Effect and so also many Protestants have said 364 380. we are Justified in Works and how 364 370 371 380 387. this is so far from being Popish Doctrine that Bellarmine and others opposed it 365 369 385 386. We are Justified by Christ Jesus both as he appeared at Jerusalem and also as he was made manifest and revealed in us 19 20. Justification by the indwelling of Christ is denied by the Papists 78. Primitive Protestants Belief concerning Justification 79. concerning Faith and Justification 129 166. a twofold Justification 25. it is the making a Man just by an Inward Righteousness 77. 811. the Doers of the Law Justified 806. Antinomians Imputative Justification refuted 812. J. B's gross Opinion of it 814. no Man is Justified before he be sanctified 816 The real Justification falleth under the inward sensation of the Soul 817. K. Keith G. K. vindicated from our Adversaries malitious Insinuations against him 621. Kingdom of God 459 511 517. Christ's Kingdom needs no outward protection 846. the Kingdom of God is within you 803. the Kingdom of God is in the Seed in the Hearts of all Men 354. Kirk the Greedy Kirk become a Proverb 437. Knowledge the Heighth of Man's Happiness is placed in the true Knowledge of God 467. Error in the Entrance of this Knowledge is dangerous 267 268. Superstition Idolatry and thence Atheism hath proceeded from the False and Feigned Opinions concerning God and the Knowledge of him 269. the uncertain Knowledge of God is divers ways attained but the True and Certain only by the inward and immediate Revelation of the Holy Spirit 269 271. it hath been brought out of use and by what Devices 272 273. there is no Knowledge of the Father but by the Son nor of the Son but by the Spirit 268 274 275. the Knowledge of Christ which is not by the Revelation of his Spirit in the Heart is no more the Knowledge of Christ than the pratling of a Parret which hath been taught a few Words may be said to be the Voice of a Man 276 277. The Objection that the Apostle prefers the Knowledge of Christ as outwardly Crucified to all other Knowledge answered 9. his Inward Knowledge preferred 67. the true and saving Knowledge of God 115 161. the Knowledge of the History saves none 355. many by the Light may be saved that have not the outward Knowledge of christ 356 of the true Ground of Knowledge 728 733. the Difference between Head-Knowledge and the partaking of the Divine Nature 763 764. Monopolizers of Knowledge 889. 428 see Clergy The Christian Religion consists not in the Historical Knowledge of Christ 895. see Indians c L. Labour they wanted nothing whom God sent they labour'd with their Hands 435. Laces and Ribbonds 873. Laicks 429 432 433. Laity 433 507. Lake of Bethesda 338 339. Lamb see Paschal Lamb. Language the plain Language used in the Scriptures 58. concerning our using Thee and Thou which is the Singular Number to one person 61. to use the Plural instead of the Singular Number to one Person is no Indifferent thing 3 4. see Number the Singular Number to one person used in the Latine 539. how the Word You came to be used to a single person ibid. the Word Thou a greater Honour to one than You 540. Scripture-Dialect the plain Language 541. Law the Law is distinguished from the Gospel 287 384. the Difference thereof 287 493. see Gospel under the Law the People were not in any Doubt who should be Priests and Ministers 408. see Minister of the Law Worship The Testimony Law and Word is inward in the Heart 15 71. the ending of the Law and beginning of the Gospel 187. wherein the Law and Gospel differ 298 393 484. the outward and inward Law 286. the Law of Christ more perfect than of Moses 558. the Divine Law was implanted in Man's Nature before all Laws made by Man 701. J. B's Proof for what is meant by Law and Testimony 756. his Asserting the Law of Nature against his former Reason 793. Law of Moses see Legal Rites Lawyers by Tricks and Intricacies foment Controversies 209 Laying on of Hands 511. see Hands Learned the Lord is angering the Wise and Learned 885 Learning what true Learning is 421 422. Humane Learning is not the Qualification of a Minister 140 305 703 730. see Literature Schools of Learning Leaven J. B's Objection against the Word Fermentum Leaven or Fermentation a Leavening answered 855. Legal Rites had a Command as well as John's Baptism 857. Leonisis a Sect they have a great Shew of Truth 532. in the Margent Letter The Letter killeth quickneth not 393. like Pharisees the outward Law so now Professors plead the Letter 15. How the Letter killeth 18 76. Levi a Figure of Christ 655 Leyden John of Leyden and Ignatius Loyola their Practices resembled by W. M. and his Brethren 58 Liars their Punishment 557 Libertines see Ranters Liberty the true Liberty in the Church 222. breach of Liberty begets Jars ibid. a false Liberty 224. a wrong Spirit of Liberty 246. what Liberty we claim in things Religious 516 520 524 Lies 276. lying Titles 535. Christians not to speak a Lie 875. J. B s refuge of Lies 877. Light The innate Light is explained by Cicero 361 362. Light of Nature the Errors of the Socinians and Pelagians who exalt this Light are rejected 310 311. Saving Light see Redemption is universal it is in all 330 331. It is a Spiritual and Heavenly Principle 333 334. it is a Substance not an Accident 334 335. it is Supernatural and sufficient 346 348. It is the Gospel preached in every Creature 349 350. It is the Word nigh in the Mouth and in the Heart 350 351. it is the Ingrafted Word able to save the Soul 353. Testimonies of Augustin and Buchanan concerning this Light 363. it is not any part of Nature or Reliques of the Light remaing in Adam after the fall 337. it is distinguished from the Conscience 337 338. It is not a common Gift as the Heat of the
as ascribe them to the Scriptures put the Scriptures in Christ's stead though W. M. be pleased to term it unworthy dealing Sect. 2. page 35. he says it is not difficult to prove that the Law and Testimony mentioned Deut. 8.20 was not an inward Law The reason alledged is Because the Prophet opposes what is written as no Light if it agree not to the Law and Testimony But what then The Law and Testimony inward doth this prove the Testimony here not to be inward He adds That let People pretend what they will to a Law within if it agree not with the Scripture-Word there is no Light in them and that the outward Law gets the name of the Testimony But granting him all this it doth not in the least follow that the Law and Testimony there mentioned was not inward It is more observably strange here than in any other place with what shameless confidence he asserts his own bare Assertions instead of Arguments After the like manner without answering a word of what I infer page 27. of mine against him and his Brethren from Joh. 7.49 he concludes That Scripture fits us better than them because of our known rash censuring Upon which Supposition of his own he condemns us as like to Pharisees without more ado still by way of Reply to me he says It is not probable that Christ checked the Lawyer in saying How readest thou Luke 10.26 not offering to add any further probation And as for what he subjoineth page 7. That Christ used the Scripture about Divorcement and in the matter of the Sabbath it doth no ways prove them to be the only Rule for as is said we are willing to try Doctrines by them Page 37. He saith It is false to affirm that the Divine Authority of the Scriptures cannot be prov'd other ways than by the Spirit 's inward Testimony adding There are other Arguments whereby it can solidly and convincingly be proved and for this he instanceth one which he says is excellently approved by R. Baxter What then because W. M. thinks that Argument of R. Baxter will prove the Scriptures Authority without the Spirit must we therefore be of the same mind I doubt very much if R. Baxter think so much himself Now W. M. his deceit is very remarkable Joh. Calvin's Testimony concerning the Scriptures in quoting some words of John Calvin where he says If he were to deal with Arguments he could produce many to prove the Laws came from God for that I never imagined these Arguments could convincingly prove the Scriptures Authority without the Spirit which is the thing in debate it appears in the very following words Lib. Inst. 1. c. 7. Sect. 4. But if we will well look to our Consciences that they be not troubled with doubts and stick not at every scruple it is requisite the Perswasion whereof we have spoken be taken higher than human Judgment or Conjecture viz t. he secret Testimony of the Holy Spirit And a little after in direct Opposition to wit his words he adds This Word shall not obtain Faith in the hearts of Men if it be not Sealed by the Inward Testimony of the Spirit It is necessary then saith he that the Saints Spirit which spake by the mouth of the Prophets enter in our Hearts and touch them livingly to perswade us that the Prophets have faithfully delivered that which was Commanded them from on high and a little after This then is a Perswasion which requires no Reasons And again This is a Perswasion which cannot be Begotten but by a heavenly Revelation And in the beginning of the next Chapter he adds If we have not This certainly higher and more firm than all humane Judgment in vain is the Authority of the Scriptures proved by Arguments This doth abundantly shew how contrary W. M. is to Calvin in this matter and not to him alone but to the whole Reformed Churches of France who in their Confession of Faith agreed upon by the first National Synod they ever had at Paris Anno 1559. say thus The Synod at Paris concerning the Canonical Books in Scripture Art 4. We know these Books to be Canonique not so much by the common consent of the Church as by the Inward Testimony and Perswasion of the Holy Spirit And whereas he adviseth me to read Calvin his 6 th Chap. but that it would prove too long a Digression I could easily shew that we are no such Contemners of the Scripture as those he there speaks to And what if he contradict the Truth which we and himself elsewhere acknowledge I make use of his Testimony against W. M. and his Brethren even as he did the Testimony of Augustine Gregory and others of the Fathers against those of Rome whom nevertheless he spared not to reject some times Read Inst. lib. 1. cap. 11. Sect. 5. lib. cap. Sect. 4. and in many other places Thus also is added that which he adds about Pasor whose Translation he says We follow in one thing but not in another for we are not bound to follow him further than he follows the Truth Nor doth W. M. here produce any Argument to prove that these words Joh. 5.39 should be Ye search the Scriptures c. 2 pl. praes Ind. See Pasor Search the Scriptures and not Ye search the Scriptures but his own bare Assertion adding That Christ did not check them when he said In them ye think to have Eternal Life Whereas the very following words clearly Import a Reproof Ye will not come to me that ye might have Life He says not Seek for Life in the Scriptures ye do well to think to find it there but thus Ye think to have Eternal life in the Scriptures but will not come to me that ye might have life He ends this Section asking Seeing I grant the Scriptures are profitable for Doctrine Correction Reproof c. Why I deny them to be a perfect Rule But I never denied them and I told him also they were thus profitable not to every man but to the man of God The Scriptures profitable to the man of God i. e. he that 's led by the Spirit of God Now to this he replys nothing only tells me The man of God is most commonly understood of the Ministers of Christ Jesus which though I should grant him what he either can or would Infer from it against my Argument he hath left unmentioned Sect. 3. Page 40. He alledgeth The Voice and Testimony of the Father which Christ speaks of to the Jews not to have been inward desiring the Reader to look to the place and thereupon he cites Joh. 5.36 where Christ speaks of his Miracles as a greater Witness than that of John But his deceit is here abundantly manifest for the place mentioned by me was 1 Joh. 5.10 For this is the witness of God which he testified of his Son he that believeth in the Son of God hath the witness in himself Now this
the fall of the first Adam He being put on by us as the new and heavenly Adam of which the Apostle Ye have put on Christ put him on I say as a Form i. e. the Wisdom Righteousness and Life of God And Pareus de Just. Cont. Bellar. lib 2. cap. 7. pag. 469. We saith he neither ever spoke nor thought the Righteousness of Christ to be imputed to us that by it we were and might be named formally Righteous as we have oft now shewed for surely that should no less fight with reason than if one quite absolved in Judgment should say he were formally Righteous by the mercy of the Judge These are the plain and positive expressions of several famous Protestants though W. M. reckons G. Keith's words mentioned by him page 55. as Popish which are nothing different from these And of late R. Baxter whom W. M. page 37. terms A Judicious Servant of God holdeth this Doctrine throughout in his Book termed Aphorisms of Justification who page 80. saith That some ignorant Wretches gnash their teeth at this Doctrine as if it were flat Popery not understanding the nature of the Righteousness of the New Covenant which is all out of Christ in our selves though wrought by the power of the Spirit of Christ. Page 195. he saith How this differeth from the Papist he need not tell any Scholar who have read their Writings Hereby the Intelligent Reader may observe how ridiculous if not malitious W. M. is in making such a noise as if we were in this matter either going with Papists or opposing Protestants In his second Section page 58. though he would be making a great bussle of our speaking of Justification by Works yet in the very entry he cannot deny but he is for it according to the true sense and meaning of the Spirit And therefore it remains to prove that ours is not so His alledging from some words of Samuel Fisher where he speaks of Works having Merit saith nothing for the Question recurs concerning the signification of the word Merit which we use in a qualified sense for we say That Works are no other ways Meritorious Works are Meritorius by the promised Reward upon Conditions than as they are Rewarded Merit and Reward being Relative terms as I told him in my last to which he returneth no Answer And thus is solved Sam. Fisher's using of that Argument mentioned by him page 60. to whom he foolishly supposes I cannot reconcile my self without being of a higher strain than for a Reward of Merit to wit That as Condemnation is the reward of evil works so Eternal Salvation and consequently Justification is the reward of good works Now Merit in a qualified sense doth not import an absolute desert according to strict Justice as on our part but a sutableness agreeableness or congruity according to these Scriptures Matth. 3.8 Bring forth fruits worthy of Repentance the Greek word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth Meritorious or Worthy and the same Greek word is used in these other Scriptures 1 Thess. 2.12 Walk worthy of God 2 Thess. 1.5 That ye may be counted Worthy of the Kingdom of God And thus R. Baxter speaketh of Merit in the Book above-mentioned page 90. In a large sense saith he as promise is an obligation and the thing promised is called debt so the Performers of the Conditions are called Worthy and their Performance Merit Though properly it is all of Grace and not of Debt Moreover whereas Augustine Bernard and others of the Fathers use the word Merit in this qualified sense W. M and his Brethren can give it the right hand but where we use it notwithstanding we tell them the simplicity of our meaning we must be upbraided with Popery It is here observable how he turns it to my Reproach That I seem to draw near in the least to any of the moderate sort of Papists And yet as to things wherein I charged him of Affinity with them he returneth no solid Answer Papists and W. M. agree but says I must not be credited Yea he plainly not only draws near but fully acknowledges his agreement with them saying They hold some things common with the Orthodox His third and fourth Section containeth not any thing of a solid Reply to that which is writ from page 36. to 44. of my last which the Reader by comparing them may easily observe He begins alledging That Rom. 3.28 Gal. 2.19 must exclude all Works even the Works of Christ in us And that because the Apostle must be supposed to exclude either evil or good Works not evil therefore good And consequently the Works of Christ in us But as I told him in my last some Works may be good materially The Works of the Spirit of God and those of Man 's own Spirit differ which proceeding not from the Spirit of God but Man 's own Spirit are therefore excluded And thus the Case of Abraham doth not answer who though a godly man was capable sometimes to have done Works from his own Spirit It is here observable how he seeks to shift that which I inforce upon him from Tit. 3 5. alledging He mentioned it in opposition to Justification by Works as the Meritorious cause thereof But of this there was not one Word where he cites in his Dialogue page 20. Nor doth he answer any thing for that which I infer from this Scripture shewing page 37. of my last to which I refer the Reader he having wholly omitted it that by this Scripture where the Apostle says According to his Mercy he saved us by the washing of Regeneration the Apostle includes Good Works as to Justification now all this he shuffles over as Insulting Triumphing Words and yet notwithstanding he himself insults here as though he had found us guilty of Popery though what we say in this matter be no other than what is clearly asserted by these famous Protestants above-mentioned and more particularly by R. Baxter in his Book aforesaid The Works of the â—aw excluded from Justification not the Works of the Gospel from page 185. to the end where he says That we are Justified by Works in the same kind of causality as by Faith viz. as causae sine quibus non Conditions or Qualifications of the New Covenant requisite on our part in order to Justification shewing how the Apostle Paul in the places above-mentioned excludes only the Works of the Law from Justification and never at all the Works of the Gospel as they are the Conditions of the New Covenant and there he refutes W. M's Exposition upon Isa. 2.12 As if our Justification were only Justified by Works or we declared Just by them before men And seeing W.M. hath declared he hath so good an Esteem of R. Baxter I refer him to read how he is Refuted by him as being too large to be here inserted Pag. 65 66. To overturn that which is said by me concerning the Faith Knowledge and Obedience
of Reason And Thirdly as to Reason I shall not need to say much for whence come all the Controversies The Debates hence arising betwixt the old and late Philosophers Contentions and Debates in the World but because every man thinks he follows Right Reason Hence of old came the Jangles betwixt the Stoicks Platonists Peripateticks Pythagoreans and Cynicks as of late betwixt the Aristotelians Cartesians and other Naturalists Can it be thence inferred or will the Socinians those great Reasoners allow us to Conclude Because many and that very Wise men have Erred by following as they supposed their Reason and that with what diligence care and industry they could to find out the Truth that therefore no man ought to make use of it at all nor be positive in what he knows certainly to be Rational And thus far as to Opinion the same Vncertainty is no less incident unto those other Principles Anabaptists for their Wild Practices and Protestants and Papists for their Wars and â—loodshed each pretending Scripture for it § XIV But if we come to Practices though I confess I do with my whole heart abhor and detest those wild Practices which are written concerning the Anabaptists of Munster I am bold to say as bad if not worse things have been Committed by those that lean to Tradition Scripture and Reason wherein also they have averred themselves to have been Authorised by these Rules I need but mention all the Tumults Seditions and horrible Blood-shed wherewith Europe hath been Afflicted these divers Ages in which Papists against Papists Calvinists against Calvinists Lutherans against Lutherans and Papists assisted by Protestants against other Protestants assisted by Papists have miserably shed ane onothers Blood hiving and forcing men to kill one another who were Ignorant of the Quarrel and Strangers to one another All mean while pretending Reason for so doing and pleading the Lawfulness of it from Scripture For what have the Papists pretended for their many Massacres acted as well in France Tradition Scripture and Reason made a Cover for Persecution and Murder as elsewhere but Tradition Scripture and Reason Did they not say that Reason perswaded them Tradition allowed them and Scripture commanded them to persecute destroy and burn Hereticks such as denied this plain Scripture Hoc est Corpus meâ—m This is my Body And are not the Protestants Assenting to this Blood-shed who assert the same thing and encourage them by burning and banishing while their Brethren are so treated for the same Cause Are not the Islands of Great Britain and Ireland yea and all the Christian World a lively Example hereof which were divers years together as a Theatre of Blood where many lost their lives and Numbers of Families were utterly destroyed and ruined For all which no other Cause was principally given than the Precepts of the Scripture If we then compare these Actings with those of Munster we shall not find great difference for both Affirmed and Pretended they were Called and that it was lawful to Kill Burn and Destroy the Wicked We must Kill all the Wicked said those Anabaptists that we that are the Saints may possess the Earth We must burn obstinate Hereticks say the Papists that the holy Church of Rome may be purged of Rotten Members and may live in peace We must cut-off seducing Separatists say the Prelatick Protestants who trouble the peace of the Church and refuse the Divine Hierarchy and Religious Ceremonies thereof We must kill say the Calvinistick Presbyterians the profane Malignants who accuse the holy Consistorial and Presbyterian Government and seek to defend the Popish and Prelatick Hierarchy as also those other Sectaries that trouble the Peace of our Church What Difference I pray thee Impartial Reader seest thou betwixt these If it be said Object The Anabaptists went without and against the Authority of the Magistrate so did not the other I might easily Refute it Answ. by alledging the mutual Testimonies of these Sects against one another The Behaviour of the Papists towards Henry the third and fourth of France Examples of Popish Cruelties Their Designs upon James the sixth in the Gun-Powder Treason as also their Principle of the Pope's Power to depose Kings for the cause of Heresy and to absolve their Subjects from their Oath and give them to others proves it against them And as to the Protestants Protestant Violences and Persecutions in Scotland England and Holland how much their Actions differ from those other above-mentioned may be seen by the many Conspiracies and Tumults which they have been Active in both in Scotland and England which they have Acted within these Hundred Years in divers Towns and Provinces of the Nether-Lands Have they not often times sought not only from the Popish Magistrates but even from those that had begun to Reform or that had given them some Liberty of Exercising their Religion That they might only be permitted without trouble or hinderance to exercise their Religion promising they would not hinder or molest the Papists in the Exercise of theirs And yet did they not on the Contrary so soon as they had power trouble and abuse those Fellow-Citizens and turn them out of the City and which is worse even such who together with them had forsaken the Popish Religion Did they not these things in many places against the Mind of the Magistrates Have they not publickly with Contumelious speeches Assaulted their Magistrates from whom they had but just before sought and obtained the free Exercise of their Religion Representing them so soon as they opposed themselves to their Hierarchy as if they had regarded neither God nor Religion Have they not by violent hands possessed themselves of the Popish Churches so called or by force against the Magistrates mind taken them away Have they not turned out of their Office and Authority whole Councils of Magistrates under pretence that they were Addicted to Popery Which Popish Magistrates nevertheless they did but a little before acknowledge to be Ordained by God affirming themselves obliged to yield them obedience and subjection not only for Fear but for Conscience sake To whom moreover the very Preachers and Overseers of the Reformed Church had willingly sworn Fidelity and yet afterwards have they not said That the People is bound to force a wicked Prince to the observation of God's Word There are many other Instances of this kind to be found in their Histories not to mention many worse things which we know to have been acted in our time and which for brevities sake I pass by I might say much of the Lutherans whose Tumultuous Actions against their Magistrates not professing the Lutheran Profession are testified of by several Historians worthy of Credit Lutheran Seditions against the Reformed Teachers and Assault upon the Marquess of Brandenburgh c. in Germany Among others I shall propose only one Example to the Reader 's Consideration which fell out at Berlin in the year 1615. Where the
Seditious Multitude of the Lutheran Citizens being stirred up by the daily Clamours of their Preachers did not only violently take up the Houses of the Reformed Teachers overturn their Libraries and spoil their Furniture but also with reproachful words yea and with stones Assaulted the Marquess of Brandenburgh the Elector's Brother while he sought by smooth words to quiet the Fury of the Multitude they killed ten of his Guards scarcely sparing himself who at last by Flight Escaped out of their hands All which sufficiently declares that the Concurrence of the Magistrate doth not alter their Principles but only their Method of Procedure So that for my own part I see no Difference betwixt the Actings of those of Munster and these others whereof the one pretended to be led by the Spirit the other by Tradition Scripture and Reason save this that the former were rash heady and foolish in their proceedings and therefore were the sooner brought to nothing and so into Contempt and Derision but the other being more politick and wise in their generation held it out longer and so have Authorized their Wickedness more with seeming Authority of Law and Reason But both their Actings being equally Evil the Difference appears to me to be only like that which is betwixt a simple silly Thief that is easily Catched and hanged without any more ado and a Company of Resolute bold Robbers who being better guarded though their Offence be nothing less yet by violence do to evite the danger force their Masters to give them good Terms From all which then it evidently follows that they Argue very ill that despise and reject any Principle because men pretending to be led by it do evil in case it be not the natural and consequential Tendency of that Principle to lead unto those things that are evil Again It doth follow from what is above asserted that if the Spirit be to be Rejected upon this account all those other Principles ought on the same account to be Rejected And for my part as I have never a whit the lower Esteem of the blessed Testimony of the Holy Scriptures nor do the less respect any solid Tradition that is answerable and according to Truth neither at all despise Reason that noble and excellent Faculty of the mind Let none reject the Certainty of the Vnerring Spirit because of false Pretenders to it because wicked men have abused the name of them to cover their wickedness and deceive the simple so would I not have any reject or diffide the Certainty of that Vnerring Spirit which God hath given his Children as that which can alone guide them into all Truth because some have falsly pretended to it § XV. And because the Spirit of God is the Fountain of all Truth and sound Reason therefore we have well said That it cannot Contradict neither the Testimony of the Scripture nor right Reason yet as the Proposition it self Concludeth to whose last part I now come it will not from thence follow that these Divine Revelations are to be subjected to the Examination either of the outward Testimony of Scripture or of the humane or natural Reason of man as to a more noble and certain Rule and Touch-stone for the Divine Revelation and inward Illumination is that which is evident by it self forcing the well-disposed understanding and irresistibly moving it to Assent by its own Evidence and Clearness even as the Common Principles of Natural Truths do bow the mind to a Natural Assent He that denies this part of the Proposition must needs Affirm That the Spirit of God neither can nor ever hath manifested it self to man without the Scripture or a distinct discussion of Reason or That the Efficacy of this Supernatural Principle working upon the Souls of men is less Evident than natural Principles in their common Operations Both which are false For First through all the Scriptures we may observe that the Manifestation and Revelation of God by his Spirit to the Patriarchs Prophets and Apostles was Immediate and Objective as is above proved which they did not examin by any other Principle but their own Evidence and Clearness Secondly To say The Self Evidence of the Spirit that the Spirit of God has less Evidence upon the mind of man than natural Principles have is to have too mean and low thoughts of it How comes David to invite us to Taste and see that God is good if this cannot be felt and tasted This were enough to overturn the Faith and Assurance of all the Saints both now and of old How came Paul to be perswaded That nothing could separate him from the love of God but by that Evidence and Clearness which the Spirit of God gave him The Apostle John who knew well wherein the Certainty of Faith Consisted judged it no ways Absurd without further Argument to Ascribe his Knowledge and Assurance and that of all the Saints hereunto in these words Hereby know we that we dwell in him and he in us because he hath given us of his Spirit 1 Joh. 4.13 and again John 5.6 It 's the Spirit that beareth witness because the Spirit is Truth Observe the Reason brought by him Because the Spirit is Truth Of whose Certainty and Infallibility I have heretofore spoken We then Trust to and Confide in this Spirit because we know and certainly believe that it can only Lead us a-right and never Mis-lead us and from this Certain Confidence it is that we Affirm The Spirit contradicts not Scripture nor Right Reason That no Revelation coming from it can ever Contradict the Scriptures-Testimony nor right Reason not as making this a more Certain Rule to our selves but as Condescending to such who not discerning the Revelations of the Spirit as they proceed purely from God will Try them by these Mediums yet those that have the Spiritual Senses and can savour the things of the Spirit as it were in primâ Instantiâ i. e. at the first blush can discern them without Natural Demonstrations from Astronomy and Geometry or before they Apply them either to Scripture or Reason Just as a good Astronomer can Calculate an Eclipse Infallibly by which he can Conclude if the Order of Nature Continue and some strange and Vnnatural Revolution Intervene not there will be an Eclipse of the Sun or Moon such a day and such an hour yet can he not perswade an Ignorant Rustick of this until he Visibly see it So also a Mathematician can Infallibly know by the Rules of Art that the Three Angles of a Right-angled Triangle are Equal to Two Right-Angles yea can know them more certainly than any man by measure And some Geometrical Demonstrations are by all acknowledged to be Infallible which can be scarcely discerned or proved by the Senses Yet if a Geometer be at the pains to Certify some Ignorant Man concerning the Certainty of this Art by condescending to measure it and make it obvious to his Senses it will not thence
harder to understand their Expositions than the Things which they go about to Expound what may We say then cosidering those great Heaps of Commentaries since in Ages yet far more Corrupted § VI. In this respect above-mentioned then we have shewn what Service and Vse the Holy Scriptures as managed in and by the Spirit are of to the Church of God wherefore we do account them a Secondary Rule Moreover because they are commonly acknowledged by all The Scriptures a Secondary Rule to have been written by the Dictates of the Holy spirit and that the Errors which may be supposed by the Injury of times to have slipt-in are not such but that there is a sufficient clear Testimony left to all the Essentials of the Christian Faith we do look upon them as the only fit outward Judge of Controversies among Christians and that whatever Doctrine is Contrary unto their Testimony may therefore justly be rejected as False And for our parts we are very willing that all our Doctrines and Practices be Tried by them which we never refused nor ever shall in all Controversies with our Adversaries as the Judge and Test. We shall also be very willing to admit it as a Positive Certain Maxime That whatsoever any do pretending to the Spirit which is Contrary to the Scriptures be accounted and reckoned a Delusion of the Devil For as we never lay claim to the Spirit 's Leadings that we may Cover our selves in any thing that is Evil so we know that as every Evil Contradicts the Scriptures so it doth also the Spirit in the first place from which the Scriptures came and whose Motions can never Contradict one another though they may appear sometimes to be Contradictory to the blind Eye of the natural Man as Paul and James seem to Contradict one another Thus far we have shewn both what we believe and what we believe not concerning the Holy Scriptures hoping we have given them their due place But since they that will needs have them to be the only certain and principal Rule want not some shew of Arguments even from the Scripture it self though it no where call it self so by which they labour to prove their Doctrine I shall briefly lay them down by way of Objections and Answer them before I make an End of this matter Object 1 § VII Their first Objection is usually drawn from Isaiah 8.20 To the Law and to the Testimony if they speak not according to this Word it is because there is no Light in them Now this Law Testimony and Word they plead to be the Scriptures To which I Answer That that is to beg the thing in Question and Answ. 1 remains yet Vnproved Nor do I know for what Reason we may not safely Affirm this Law and Word to be Inward But suppose it was Outward it proves not the Case at all for them neither makes it against us For it may be Confessed without any prejudice to our Cause that the Outward Law was more particularly to the Jews a Rule and more principally than to us seeing their Law was Outward and Literal but ours under the New Covenant as hath been already said is expresly Affirmed to be Inward and Spiritual To Try all things by what So that this Scripture is so far from making against us that it makes for us For if the Jews were directed to Try all things by their Law which was without them written in Tables of Stone then if we will have this Advice of the Prophet to reach us we must make it hold Parallel to that Dispensation of the Gospel which we are under So that we are to Try all things in the first place by that Word of Faith which is preached unto us which the Apostle saith is In the heart and by that Law which God hath given us which the Apostle saith also expresly is Written and placed in the Mind Lastly If we look to this place according to the Greek Interpretation of the Septuagint our Adversaries shall have nothing from thence to Carp yea it will favour us much for there it is said That the Law is given us for a help which very well agrees with what is above Asserted Their second Objection is from Joh. 5.39 Search the Scriptures c. Object 2 Here say they we are commanded by Christ himself to search the Scriptures Answ. 1 I Answer First That the Scriptures ought to be Searched we do not at all deny but are very willing to be Tried by them as hath been above declared But the Question is Whether they be the only and principal Rule which this is so far from proving that it proveth the Contrary for Christ Checks them here for too high an Esteem of the Scriptures and neglecting of him that was to be preferr'd before them and to whom they bore Witness as the following words declare For in them ye think ye have Eternal life Search the Scriptures c. and they are they which testify of me and ye will not come unto me that ye may have Life This shews that while they thought they had Eternal Life in the Scriptures they neglected to come unto Christ to have Life of which the Scriptures bore Witness This Answers well to our purpose since our Adversaries now do also Exalt the Scriptures and think to have Life in them which is no more than to look upon them as the only Principal Rule and Way to Life and yet refuse to come unto the Spirit of which they Testify even the inward Spiritual Law which could give them Life So that the Cause of this People's Ignorance and Vnbelief was not their Want of Respect to the Scriptures which though they knew and had a high Esteem of yet Christ testifies in the former verses that they had neither seen the Father nor heard his Voice at any time neither had his Word abiding in them which had they then had then they had believed in the Son Moreover that place may be taken in the Indicative Mood Ye search the Scriptures which Interpretation the Greek word will bear and so Answ. 2 Pasor translateth it which by the Reproof following seemeth also to be the more genuine Interpretation as Cyrillus long ago hath observed § VIII Their Third Objection is from these words Acts 17.11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica in that they received the Word with all readiness of Mind and searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so Here say they The Beroeans are commended for Searching the Scriptures Object 3 and making them the Rule I Answer That the Scriptures either are the Principal or Only Rule Answ. 1 will not at all from this follow neither will their searching the Scriptures or being Commended for it infer any such thing for we Recommend and Approve the use of them in that respect as much as any yet will it not follow that we Affirm them to be the Principal and Only Rule Secondly It is to
neither doth his Worship consist in it or need either the Wisdom Glory Riches or Splendor of this World to beautify or adorn it nor yet the outward Power or Arm of flesh to maintain uphold or protect it but it is and may be performed by those that are spiritually minded notwithstanding all Opposition Violence and Malice of men because it being purely Spiritual it is out of the reach of Natural men to interrupt or molest it Even as Jesus Christ the Author thereof did enjoy and possess his Spiritual Kingdom while oppressed persecuted and rejected of men and as in despite of the Malice and Rage of the Devil he spoiled principalities and powers Triumphing over them and through death destroyed him that had the power of death that is the Devil so also all his Followers both can and do Worship him Col. 2.15 not only without the Arm of flesh to protect them but even when oppressed For their Worship being Spiritual is by the Power of the Spirit defended and maintained but such Worships as are carnal and consist in carnal and outward Ceremonies and Observations Carnal Worships cannot stand without the Arm of Flesh. need a Carnal and outward Arm to protect them and defend them else they cannot stand and subsist And therefore it appears that the several Worships of our Opposers both Papists and Protestants are of this kind and not the true Spiritual and New Covenant-worship of Christ because as hath been observed they cannot stand without the Protection or Countenance of the outward Magistrate neither can be performed if there be the least Opposition For they are not in the Patience of Jesus to serve and worship him with sufferings ignominies calumnies and reproaches And from hence have sprung all those Wars Fightings and Blood-shed among Christians while each by the Arm of flesh endeavoured to defend and protect their own Way and Worship and from this also sprung up that Monstrous Opinion of Persecution of which we shall speak more at length hereafter § XV. But Fourthly The Nature of this Worship IV. True Worship in Spirit Establisht by Christ. which is performed by the Operation of the Spirit the Natural man being silent doth appear from these words of Christ Joh. 4.23 24. But the hour cometh and now is when the true Worshippers shall Worship the Father in Spirit and in Truth for the Father seeketh such to Worship him God is a Spirit and they that Worship him must Worship him in Spirit and in Truth This Testimony is the more specially to be observed for that it is both the first chiefest and most ample Testimony which Christ gives us of his Christian Worship as different and contradistinguished from that under the Law For first he sheweth that the Season is now come wherein the Worship must be in Spirit and in Truth for the Father seeketh such to Worship him so then it is no more a Worship consisting in outward Observations to be performed by man at set Times or Opportunities which he can do in his own will and by his own natural strength for else it would not differ in Matter but only in some Circumstances from that under the Law Next as for a Reason of this Worship we need not to give any other and indeed none can give a better than that which Christ giveth The Reason Christ gives for a Worship in Spirit which I think should be sufficient to satisfy every Christian to wit GOD is a SPIRIT and they that Worship him must Worship him in Spirit and in Truth As this ought to be received because it is the words of Christ so also it is founded upon so clear a Demonstration of Reason as sufficiently evidenceth its Verity For Christ excellently argues from the Analogy that ought to be betwixt the Object and the Worship directed thereunto God is a Spirit Arg. Therefore he must be worshipped in Spirit This is so certain that it can suffer no Contradiction yea and this Analogy is so necessary to be minded that under the Law when God instituted and appointed that Ceremonial Worship to the Jews because that Worship was Outward that there might be an Analogy he saw it necessary to Condescend to them as in a special manner to dwell betwixt the Cherubims within the Tabernacle and afterwards to make the Temple of Jerusalem in a sort his habitation and cause something of an outward Glory and Majesty to appear by causing Fire from Heaven to consume the Sacrifices The Glory of the Outward Temple and filling the Temple with a Cloud Through and by which Mediums Visible to the outward Eye he manifested himself proportionably to that outward Worship which he had Commanded them to perform So now under the New Covenant he seeing meet in his heavenly Wisdom to lead his Children in a path more Heavenly and Spiritual and in a Way both more easie and familiar and also purposing to disappoint Carnal and Outward Observations that his may have an Eye more to an Inward Glory and Kingdom than to an Outward he hath given us for an Example hereof the Appearance of his Beloved Son the Lord Jesus Christ who instead that Moses delivered the Israelites out of their outward Bondage Like Moses did from Outward so Christ delivers his from Inward Slavery and by outwardly destroying their Enemies hath delivered and doth deliver us by suffering and dying by the hands of his Enemies thereby Triumphing over the Devil and his and our inward Enemies and delivering us therefrom He hath also instituted an Inward and Spiritual Worship so that God now tieth not his people to the Temple of Jerusalem nor yet unto outward Ceremonies and Observations but taketh the Heart of every Christian for a Temple to dwell-in and there immediately appeareth and giveth him directions how to serve him in any outward Acts Since as Christ argueth God is a Spirit he will now be Worshipped in the Spirit where he reveals himself and dwelleth with the Contrite in heart Now since it is the Heart of Man that now is become the Temple of God in which he will be Worshipped and no more in particular Outward Temples since as blessed Stephen said out of the Prophet to the professing Jews of old The Most High dwelleth not in Temples made with hands as before the Glory of the Lord descended to fill the outward Temple it behoved to be purified and cleansed and all polluted stuff removed out of it yea and the place for the Tabernacle was overlaid with Gold the most precious clean and clearest of Metals so also before God be Worshipped in the Inward Temple of the Heart it must also be purged of its own filth and all its own Thoughts and Imaginations that so it may be fit to receive the Spirit of God and to be acted by it and doth not this directly lead us to that Inward Silence of which we have spoken and exactly pointed out And further This Worship must be in
Christ's own Practice or Command as to obey all the Commandments which comprehend both our Duty towards God and Man c. and where the Gospel requires more than the Law which is abundantly signified in the 5 th and 6 th Chapters of Matthew and elsewhere Besides as to the Duties of Worship he exhorts us to Meet promising his Presence commands to Pray Preach Watch c. and gives Precepts concerning some Temporary things as the Washing of one anothers Feet the breaking of Bread hereafter to be discussed only for this one thing of baptising with Water though so earnestly contended for we find not any Precept of Christ. § VI. But to make Water-baptism a necessary Institution of the Christian Religion which is pure and Spiritual and not carnal and ceremonial is to derogate from the New Covenant-Dispensation and set up the Legal Rites and Ceremonies of which this of Baptism or Washing with Water was one III. The Gospel puts an end to Carnal Ordinances as appears from Heb. 9.10 where the Apostle speaking thereof saith that it stood only in meats and drinks and divers Baptisms and Carnal Ordinances imposed until the time of Reformation If then the Time of Reformation or the Dispensation of the Gospel which puts an end to the Shadows be come then such Baptisms and Carnal Ordinances are no more to be imposed For how Baptism with Water comes now to be a Spiritual Ordinance more than before in the time of the Law doth not appear seeing it is but Water still and a Washing of the Outward Man and a putting away of the filth of the flesh still and as before those that are so Washed were not thereby made perfect as pertaining to the Conscience neither are they at this day as our Adversaries must needs acknowledge and Experience abundantly sheweth So that the matter of it which is a Washing with Water and the Effects of it which is only an Outward Cleansing being still the same how comes Water-baptism to be less a Carnal Ordinance now than before If it be said That God confers inward Grace upon some that are now Object 1 baptized So no doubt he did also upon some Answ. that used those Baptisms among the Jews Or if it be said Because 't is commanded by Christ now under the New Object 2 Covenant I Answer First That 's to beg the Question of which hereafter Answ. But Secondly We find That where the Matter of Ordinances is the same and the End the same they are never accounted more or less Spiritual because of their different times Now was not God the Author of the Purifications and Baptisms under the Law Was not Water the Matter of them which is so now Was not the End of them to signify an Inward Purifying by an Outward Washing And is not that alledged to be the End still And are the necessary Effects or Consequences of it any better now Men are no more now than before by Water-baptism inwardly cleansed than before since men are now by vertue of Water-baptism as a necessary Consequence of it no more than before made Inwardly Clean And if some by God's Grace that are baptized with Water are inwardly purified so were some also under the Law so that this is not any Necessary Consequence nor Effect neither of this nor that Baptism It is then plainly Repugnant to Right Reason as well as to the Scripture-Testimony to affirm that to be a Spiritual Ordinance now which was a Carnal Ordinance before if it be still the same both as to its Author Matter and End however made to vary in some small Circumstances The Spirituality of the New Covenant and of its Worship established by Christ consisted not in such superficial Alterations of Circumstances but after another manner Therefore let our Adversaries shew us if they can without begging the Question and building upon some one or other of their own Principles denied by us wherever Christ appointed or ordained any Institution or Observation under the New Covenant as belonging to the Nature of it or such a necessary part of its Worship as is perpetually to Continue which being one in Substance and Effects I speak of necessary not accidental Effects yet because of some small difference in Form or Circumstance was before Carnal notwithstanding it was commanded by God under the Law but now is become Spiritual became commanded by Christ under the Gospel And if they cannot do this then if Water-baptism was once a Carnal Ordinance as the Apostle positively affirms it to have been it remains a Carnal Ordinance still and if a Carnal Ordinance then no necessary part of the Gospel or New Covenant-Dispensation and if no necessary part of it then not needful to Continue nor to be Practised by such as live and walk under this Dispensation But in this as in most other things according as we have often observed our Adversaries Judaize and renouncing the Glorious and Spiritual Priviledges of the New Covenant are sticking in and cleaving to the Rudiments of the Old both in Doctrine and Worship as being more suited and agreeable to their Carnal Apprehensions and Natural Senses But we on the contrary travel above all to lay hold upon and cleave unto the Light of the Glorious Gospel Revealed unto us And the Harmony of the Truth we profess in this The Law distinguisht from the Gospel may appear by briefly observing how in all things we follow the Spiritual Gospel of Christ as contradistinguished from the Carnality of the Legal Dispensation while our Adversaries through rejecting this Gospel are still labouring under the burthen of the Law which neither they nor their Fathers were able to bear For the Law and Rule of the Old Covenant and Jews was Outward written in Tables of Stone and Parchments The Outward Baptism Worship Law distinguisht from the Inward So also is that of our Adversaries But the Law of the New Covenant is Inward and Perpetual written in the heart So is ours The Worship of the Jews was Outward and Carnal limited to set Times Places and Persons and Performed according to Set Prescribed Forms and Observations so is that of our Adversaries But the Worship of the New Covenant is neither limited to Time Place nor Person but is performed in the Spirit and in Truth and is not acted according to set Forms and Prescriptions but as the Spirit of God immediately acts moves and leads whether it be to Preach Pray or Sing and such is also our Worship So likewise the Baptism among the Jews under the Law was an outward Washing with outward Water only to Typifie an inward Purification of the Soul which did not necessarily follow upon those that were thus baptized But the Baptism of Christ under the Gospel is the Baptism of the Spirit and of Fire not the putting away of the filth of the flesh but the Answer of a good Conscience towards God and such is the Baptism that we labour to be baptized
I Answer So was he also Circumcised it will not follow from thence that Circumcision is to Continue For it behoved Christ to fulfil all righteousness Why Christ was baptized by John not only the Ministry of John but the Law also therefore did he observe the Jewish Feasts and Rites and kept the Passover it will not then follow that Christians ought to do so now And therefore Christ Mat. 3.15 gives John this reason of his being baptized desiring him to Suffer it to be so now whereby he sufficiently intimates that he intended not thereby to Perpetuate it as an Ordinance to his Disciples Secondly they Object Matth. 28.19 Go ye therefore and teach all nations baptizing them in the Name of the Father Object II and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Answ. This is the great Objection and upon which they build the Whole Superstructure Whereunto the first general and sound Answer is by granting the whole but putting them to prove that Water is here meant since the Text is silent of it What Baptism Christ doth mean in Matth. 28 And though in reason it be sufficient upon our part that we Concede the whole expressed in the place but deny that it is by Water which is an Addition to the Text yet I shall premise some Reasons why we do so and then consider the Reasons alledged by those that will have Water to be here understood The First is a Maxime yielded to by all that Arg. I We ought not to go from the literal signification of the Text except some urgent necessity force us thereunto But no urgent Necessity in this place forceth us thereunto Therefore we ought not to go from it Secondly That Baptism which Christ commanded his Apostles was Arg. II the one Baptism id est his own Baptism But the one Baptism which is Christ's Baptism is not with Water as we have already proved Therefore the Baptism commanded by Christ to his Apostles was not Water-baptism Thirdly That Baptism which Christ commanded his Apostles was such that as many as were therewith baptized did put on Christ But this is not true of Water-baptism Therefore c. Fourthly The Baptism commanded by Christ to his Apostles was not Arg. IV John's Baptism But Baptism with Water was John's Baptism Therefore c. But First they alledge That Christ's Baptism though a Baptism with Allegation I Water did differ from John 's because John only baptized with Water unto Repentance but Christ commands his Disciples to baptize in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost reckoning that in this Form there lieth a great difference betwixt the Baptism of John and that of Christ. I Answer as to that John's Baptism was unto Repentance Answ. the Difference lieth not there because so is Christ's also For our Adversaries will not deny but that Adult Persons that are baptized ought ere they be admitted to it to Repent and Confess their Sins yea and that Infants with a respect to and consideration of their Baptism ought to Repent and Confess So that the difference lieth not here since this of Repentance and Confession agrees as well to Christ's as to John's Baptism But in this our Adversaries are divided for Calvin will have Christ's and John's to be all one Inst. lib. 4. cap. 15. Sect. 7 8. Yet they do differ and the difference is in that the one is by Water the other not c. Secondly As to what Christ saith in commanding them to baptize in the Name of the Father Son and Spirit I confess that states the Difference and it is great but that lies not only in admitting Water-Baptism in this different Form by a bare expressing of these words for as the Text saith no such thing neither do I see how it can be inferred from it For the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is into the Name Of the Name of the Lord how taken in Scripture now the Name of the Lord is often taken in Scripture for something else than a bare sound of words or literal Expression even for his Vertue and Power as may appear from Psal. 54.3 Cant. 1.3 Prov. 18.10 and in many more Now that the Apostles were by their Ministry to baptize the Nations into this Name Vertue and Power and that they did so is evident by these Testimonies of Paul above mentioned where he saith That as many of them as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ The Baptism into the Name what it is this must have been a baptizing into the Name i. e. Power and Vertue and not a meer formal Expression of words adjoined with Water-baptism because as hath been above observed it doth not follow as a natural or necessary Consequence of it I would have those who desire to have their Faith built upon no other foundation than the Testimony of God's Spirit and Scriptures of Truth throughly to Consider whether there can be any thing further alledged for this Interpretation than what the prejudice of Education and influence of Tradition hath imposed perhaps it may stumble the unwary and inconsiderate Reader as if the very Character of Christianity were abolished to tell him plainly that this Scripture is not to be understood of baptizing with Water and that this form of baptizing in the Name of Father Son and Spirit hath no warrant from Matth. 28 c. For which Whether Christ did prescribe a Form of Baptism in Matth. 28 besides the Reason taken from the Signification of the Name as being the Vertue and Power above expressed let it be considered that if that had been a Form prescribed by Christ to his Apostles then surely they would have made use of that Form in the administring of Water-baptism to such as they baptized with Water but tho' particular mention be made in divers places of the Acts Who were baptized and how and tho' it be particularly expressed that they baptized such and such as Acts 2.41 8.12 13 38 9.18 10.48 16.15 18.8 yet there is not a word of this Form And in two places Acts 8.16 19.5 it is said of some that they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus by which it yet more appears that either the Author of this History hath been very defective who having so often occasion to mention this yet omitteth so substantial a part of Baptism which were to accuse the Holy Ghost by whose guidance Luke wrote it or else that the Apostle did no ways understand that Christ by his Commission Matth. 28. did injoin them such a Form of Water baptism seeing they did not use it And therefore it is safer to conclude that what they did in administring Water-baptism they did not by vertue of that Commission else they would have so used it for our Adversaries I suppose would judge it great a Heresy to Administer Water-baptism without that or only in the Name of Jesus without mention of Father or Spirit as it is expresly said
time baptized these Men but that he did it by vertue of that Commission Matth. 28. remains yet to be proved And how doth the baptising with Water after the receiving of the Holy Ghost prove the Case more than the use of Circumcision and other Legal Rites acknowledged to have been acted by him afterwards Also no wonder if Peter that thought it so strange notwithstanding all that had been professed before and spoken by Christ that the Gentiles should be made Partakers of the Gospel and with great difficulty not without a very extraordinary Impulse thereunto was brought to come to them and eat with them was apt to put this Ceremony upon them which being as it were the particular Dispensation of John the Fore-runner of Christ seemed to have greater Affinity with the Gospel than the other Jewish Ceremonies then used by the Church but that will no ways infer our Adversaries Conclusion Secondly As to these Words And he commanded them to be baptized it declareth matter of Fact not of Right and amounteth to no more than that Peter did at that time pro hîc nunc Command those persons to be baptized with Water which is not denied but it saith nothing that Peter commanded Water-baptism to be a Standing and Perpetual Ordinance to the Church neither can any Man of sound Reason say if he heed what he says that a Command in matter of Fact to Particular Persons doth infer the thing commanded to be of general obligation to all if it be not other ways bottomed upon some Positive Precept Why doth Peter's Commanding Cornelius and his Houshold to be baptized at that time infer Water-baptism to Continue more than his Constraining which is more than Commanding the Gentiles in general to be Circumcised and observe the Law We find that at that time when Peter baptized Cornelius it was not yet determined whether the Gentiles should not be Circumcised but on the contrary it was the most general Sense of the Church that they should And therefore no wonder if they thought it needful at that time that they should be baptized which had more Affinity with the Gospel and was a Burthen less grievous Object IV § X. Fourthly they Object from the Signification of the Word baptize which is as much as to Dip and Wash with Water alledging thence that the very Word imports a being baptized witb Water Answ. This Objection is very weak For since baptizing with Water was a Rite among the Jews as Paulus Riccius sheweth even before the coming of John Baptizing signifies Dipping or Washing with Water therefore that Ceremony received that Name from the Nature of the Practice as used both by the Jews and by John Yea we find that Christ and his Apostles frequently make use of these Terms to a more Spiritual Signification Circumcision was only used and understood among the Jews to be that of the Flesh but the Apostle tells us of the Circumcision of the Heart and Spirit made without hands So that tho Baptism was used among the Jews only to signify a Washing with Water yet both John Christ and his Apostles speak of a being baptized with the Spirit and with Fire which they make the Peculiar Baptism of Christ as contradistinguished from that of Water which was John's as is above-shewen So that tho Baptism among the Jews was only understood of Water yet among Christians it is very well understood of the Spirit without Water as we see Christ and his Apostles spiritually to understand things under the Terms of what had been Shadows before Thus Christ speaking of his Body thô the Jews mistook him said he would Destroy this Temple and build it again in three days and many more that might be instanced But if the Etymology of the Word should be tenaciously adhered to it would militate against most of our Adversaries as well as against us For the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies immergo that is to plunge and dip in and that was the proper use of Water-baptism among the Jews and also by John 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 immergo intingo to plunge and dip in and the Primitive Christians who used it whereas our Adversaries for the most part only Sprinkle a little Water upon the Fore-head which doth not at all answer to the word Baptism Yea those of old among Christians Those that of old used Water-baptism were dipt and plunged and those that were only sprinkled were not admitted to any Office in the Church and why that used Water-baptism thought this dipping and plunging so needful that they thus dipped Children and forasmuch as it was judged that it might prove hurtful to some weak Constitutions Sprinkling to prevent that hurt was introduced yet then it was likewise appointed that such as were only sprinkled and not dipped should not be admitted to have any Office in the Church as not being sufficiently baptized So that if our Adversaries will stick to the word they must alter their Method of Sprinkling Fifthly they object Joh. 3.5 Object V Except a man be born again of Water and of the Spirit c. hence inferring the necessity of Water-baptism as well as of the Spirit But if this prove any thing Answ. it will prove Water-baptism to be of absolute Necessity and therefore Protestants rightly affirm The Water that Regenerates is Mystical and Inward when this is urged upon them by Papists to evince the absolute Necessity of Water-baptism that Water is not here understood of Outward Water but mystically of an Inward Cleansing and Washing Even as where Christ speaks of being baptized with Fire it is not to be understood of outward material Fire but only of Purifying by a Metonymy because to purify is a proper Effect of Fire as to Wash and make clean is of Water Therefore the Scripture alludes to Water where it can as little be so understood As where we are said to be Saved by the Washing of Regeneration Tit. 3.5 Yea Peter saith expresly in the place often cited as * In the 4 th Book of his Instit. chap. 15. Calvin well observes That the Baptism which saves is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh so that since Water cannot be understood of outward Water this can serve nothing to prove Water-baptism If it be said that Water imports here necessitatem Praecepti Object though not Medii I answer That is first to take it for granted Answ. that outward Water is here understood the contrary whereof we have already proved Next Water and the Spirit are placed here together Necessitas Praecepti and Medii urged Except a man be born of Water and the Spirit where the Necessity of the one is urged as much as of the other Now if the Spirit be absolutely necessary so will also Water and then we must either say that To be born of the Spirit is not absolutely necessary which all acknowledge to be false or else that Water is absolutely
which yet imports not a Duty to observe them Their last and chiefest Reason is as they say The Apostle's Express Command for it Let a man examine himself and so let him eat The Students affirm and do but affirm that to say This is only a Permission is a desperate Shift Let us hear how they prove it Let a man examine himself this is without doubt a Command therefore Let him eat must be a Command also We deny this Consequence and it remains for them to prove it And though this were enough in strictness yet we shall give a Reason of our denial because their Proposition whatever it may do in some Cases holds not universally true As to instance from an Example or two Let a man marry in the Lord and so let him marry The first is a Command here but not the second Let a man speak in Religious things as the Oracle of God and so let him speak The first is a Command but not the Second Many more might be named which import only a Conditional Command not that there is a Necessity upon all to Marry or upon all to Preach But if a Man Marry let him do it in the Lord and if a Man preach let him do it as the Oracle of God Also see a most plain Example of this Rev. 22. 11. He that is filthy let him be filthy still and he that is just let him be just still They are both in the Imperative Mood yet the one is a Duty the other but a Permission not Moral and Positive but Physical and Negative So if a Man partake of the Ceremony of Bread and Wine let him examine himself Seeing then their Proposition holds not universaliy true it remains for them to prove That in this particular Place it is so They bestow their 34. Paragraph pag. 70 71. to no purpose in missing the Controversy For whatever we understand by the Substance which whoso enjoyeth needs not the Shadow We do not deny but these that had the Substance made use of the Shadow at times Paul purifying himself according to the Law of Moses For Paul purified himself according to the Law of Moses after he had been long an Apostle But the Question is Whether that oblige us now This the Students have forgot to prove and will do well to advert to it when they publish their next Volume omitting needless Homilies not to the purpose And thus we hope the Reader may see that the things we bring to prove this Ceremony is ceased are not Shadows but rather that what they bring to Confirm it is nothing but Shadows Pag. 71. They go about to answer an Argument used by R. B. against this Ceremony drawn from the Apostle's Words 1 Cor. 16.16 in his first Answer to W. M. p. 54. where he shews that since the Bread is but one which must needs be the Inward the Outward must be ceased And to this they Answer saying The true and genuine Sense of the Place is c. So go on as they were Dictating and not Disputing without adding any Probation But secondly they proceed saying That seeing the one Bread is the Saints though the Apostles were truly this one Bread yet Christ instituted his Supper without any Contradiction or making them not one Bread For answer were that Practice of Christ of the Nature they would have it then should they say something but while they suppose it so and Argue from it they do but beg the thing in Controversy For the Apostles both then and after that time used many Legal and Typical Observations and yet they would Argue ill that would infer from thence because they did so and that without Contradiction to their being Christians and under the Gospel Dispensation we ought to do so too As for that Bread spoken by the Apostles in the 16 and 17 Verses The One Bread We acknowledge it to be the Spiritual Bread to wit the Spiritual Body of Christ of which the Saints feed which makes them One and is One with them as the Apostle himself wordeth it ver 17. Now what signifieth all this to prove That the Outward Bread is the One Bread Hear how the Students Evince it But thirdly we say That the one Bread spoken of ver 17. is both the outward and the inward Bread yet but one Sacramentally And is not this rarely well argued We the Students say so As to the Reason afterwards insinuated as Christ saith of the Bread that it is his Body they should have shewen how it follows Christ as Protestants well argue against Papists calls himself a Door a Rock c. what then is Christ and a Rock one Christ and a Door one Door Let them shew us if they can in all the N. T. so much as one Word of this Figment of a Sacramental or Symbolical Vnion And whereas upon this occasion R. B. argued in his Truth cleared of Calumnies pag. 54. * See above p. 34 35. That if the outward Bread were to be called the one Bread as signifying it the Sacrifices of the Law might be called one with the one Offering of Christ mentioned Hebr. 10.14 and so continued This they say signifies nothing because these are abrogated Then until they prove this Continues by vertue of a Gospel Command which they have not as ye done the same Reason will hold against it To another Reason given of the Discontinuance of this Ceremony Meats and Drinks used in Religious Acts. from Gal. 2.16 Let no man judge you in meats or drinks They say first That then it had not been lawful for the Apostle to have Reprehended the Corinthians for the Abuses in this matter This is a poor Shift indeed though they should not have been Reprehended for laying it aside altogether yet seeing they used it as a Religious Duty they might well be Reprehended if they did it not Religiously Secondly they say That then Gluttony c. ought not to be reproved and that the Quakers ere they miss to pull down Christ's Ordinance will make way for Gluttony and Drunkenness Answer Here is but a silly malicious Reflection in stead of a Reason The Apostle is speaking here as the Students themselves afterwards acknowledge of Meats and drinks used in Religious Acts and if the Proposition hold true in this Respect it will answer the End and not of Natural Eating c. Thirdly They say It must only be understood of the Legal Ceremonies because of the 14. verse asking If the Lord's Supper was contrary unto us or was nailed to the Cross What then The Students are over-hasty and should have looked to the 21 and 22 verses Touch not tast not handle not which all are to perish with the using And do not Bread and Wine which perish in the using and are therefore here included As for the Absurdity insinuated by them How could that be Nailed to the Cross that was but Instituted two Days before Will they say That abstaining
Intercession For if Christ his Intercession without us in Heaven doth not derogate from his Satisfaction but doth fulfil it no more doth his Intercession and Sufferings in us Prop. xi 11. The Sufferings of Christ in Men are Voluntary and yet without sin as his Sufferings at Jerusalem were Voluntary and without sin for as he joined not with them who outwardly Crucified him in any Active way to concur with them or countenance them so nor doth he inwardly join with Men to countenance or concur with them when they Crucifie him by their Sins Prop. xii 12. As there was no need that the Jews should have Crucified Christ outwardly so as purposely to sin that Christ might suffer for Sin outwardly although the Prophecies of Christ's Sufferings and God's Fore-knowledge were certain so there is no need that Men should now Sin to crucifie Christ inwardly for if there be any Difficulty in the one it recurs in the other much more Now either Men sin or sin not If they sin Christ suffers by it If they sin not he doth not suffer nor is it needful that he suffer when Men sin not But all Men have sinned and Christ hath suffered for and by the sins of all both without and within Prop. xiii 13. Christ's Outward Sufferings at Jerusalem were necessary unto Men's Salvation notwithstanding his Inward Sufferings that he might be a Compleat Saviour in all respects For it behoved Christ not only to Suffer in the Members of his Body but also in the Head so that it is a most foolish and unreasonable Consequence to argue that because Christ suffereth in the Members therefore he needed not to suffer in the Head Whereas the Sufferings of Christ in the Members are but a small Part of what he Suffered in the Head by being Offered up once for all Yet a part they are as serving to make up the Integral of his Sufferings 14. The Doctrines of the Incarnation Sufferings Death and Resurrection of Christ c. are necessary every where to be preached Prop. xiv and being preached to be believed and improved as being of and belonging unto the Integral Parts of Christianity and Christian Religion Even as the Arms and Legs are Integral Parts of a Man without which though it is possible that a Man may be and live yet he is not a Compleat Man as to all his parts even so though one may be a Christian and partaker in part of Christianity and in that State be accepted of God as is clear in the Case of Cornelius without the express Knowledge of the outward Birth Sufferings c. of Christ yet without the same he is not a Compleat Christian as wanting the Knowledge of that which serveth to the Perfection and Accomplishment thereof Before we close this particular The Students gross Lies and Perversions we cannot omit to take notice of two most horrible Perversions committed by the Students Sect. 2. The one is pag. 83. where they alledge out of G. K. his Book of Immed Revel pag. 7. That G. K. holds that when Christ suffers by Man's Sin that he joins with man Which is a most abominable Lie and Perversion The Second Perversion of the Students which is no less abominable is in pag. 79. of their Book where to cover their other Perversion they cite most falsly and perfidiously a Place in G. K's Book where they bring him in saying Though it may be hurt and stain by joining with the Contrary Seed before it come to its perfect Formation And thus they would prove That according to G. K. Christ joins with Man when Man sinneth Now we beseech the Reader to look to pag. 7. in G. K. his Book of Immed Revel and he will find that the Words of G. K. are thus Though till it come to its perfect Formation it can suffer hurt so far as to be slain through Man his joining unto the Contrary Seed and Birth Mark Reader G. K. saith Through Man his joining but the Students purposely to deceive the Reader have left out the Word Man that the Reader may understand it of Christ his joining a thing never entred into G. K. his Heart to think far less to write This Abominable Perversion of the Students is enough to make all sober Men abhor them as Wilful and Impudent Liars for such a manifest and visible thing could not be done in Ignorance But are not these Students rare Disputants who thus argue against the Quakers pag. 83. l. 5 6. Either he to wit Christ suffereth within willingly and so he sins it being by the sins of Man that he suffers and is crucified within For by this Argument it will follow not only that all the Martyrs Who think it a Sin to suffer willingly when they suffered willingly did sin but also that Christ himself when he suffered willingly by the Sins and wicked Hands of the Jews that Crucified him outwardly did sin Which is the highest Blasphemy and naturally follows by the Students Argument But it seems these Students have no mind to suffer willingly for Righteousness sake seeing they are Men of such Principles that think when any doth suffer willingly he Sins We leave the Reader to judge whether such Stuff and Work of the Students be Quakerism Canvased and a Confutation of the Quakers Errours or rather whether it be not a Manifest Betraying of the Truth and declaring themselves Guilty of highest Blasphemy Lying and Confusion And whether these Men who are guilty of such Confusion themselves are fit to accuse others as not writing perspicuously and clearly as they do G. K. for his Book of Immediate Revelat. pag. last of their Preface But G. K. doubteth not but that his Book will be acknowledged to be Clear and Perspicuous where it meets with Men of a Clear Vnderstanding such as the Students to be sure are not J. N's Repentance As for those Stories about J. N. they have been long ago Answered by our Friends who judged both him and them that joined with him in that particular As he also judged and Condemned himself and was by the Mercy of God reduced to a sober Mind As for that Passage in Christopher Atkinson's Book we can say nothing to it unless we saw the Book which is in G. M. his Custody which shews That the Students have plowed with his Heifer who refused to let us have the use of it to see whether the place was perverted And we did not know where to have it any where else But it is Incumbent on them to prove whether C. A. or his Book was owned really by the Quakers for we can prove he was denied by them And if he denied that Christ is Man we deny him and his Book both For we truly believe that Christ is both God and Man The Heathens Book of Nature In the Prosecution of their Second Argument Sect. 2. They take great pains to prove That Heathens have the Law and Book of Nature and from
exercising their Reason and Vnderstanding naturally they may know many things Which we do not deny and so they might have spared that Labour But whereas they Alledge That there is nothing needful to be known and believed by the Heathens but what the Book of Nature and their Natural Understanding and Reason as Men can teach them according to the Quakers Principle and consequently the Heathens need not these Supernatural Revelations This they affirm without any Proof We shall give manifest Instances to the Contrary For the Quakers say All Men need both to have and to know a Supernatural Influence and Work of the Spirit of God in order to their Salvation And this also our Adversaries grant Heathens need a Divine Revelation Now the Heathens need a Divine Revelation to make this known to them For the Book of Nature or the meer Natures of things being considered cannot teach Men what is Supernatural and so it cannot teach Men that in all their Actings they are to have a Supernatural End Nor can it teach them that they are to Love Fear Serve and Worship God from a Supernatural Principle of God's Grace which are the greatest Duties required of Man and if it cannot teach Men and convince them of their greatest Duties it followeth that it cannot convince them of the great sins that are contrary unto those Duties Also Nature cannot teach Men the Mystery of Regeneration which yet is needful to be known For Men who are but too much addicted to Natural Reason and Searchings into the Book of Nature and despise the Divine and Supernatural Illumination of Christ in them think Regeneration a Fiction or unnecessary thing Other Instances could be given but lest they should call them the Quakers Errors we shall forbear contenting our selves with such as our Adversaries acknowledge to be true But 2. if it were granted that the Book of Nature could in some sort discover all things necessary to Salvation without Supernatural Light which yet we deny it doth not follow That therefore Divine Supernatural The Book of Nature is short of Divine things Objective Revelation is not necessary Because the Discovery that the Book of Nature and Natural Reason gives to Men of Divine Things as of the Power Wisdom Justice Goodness Love and Mercy of God is but Dim Weak Faint and Barren and is no more a proportionate Object to the Spiritual Sensations of the Soul than a Report of Meat and Drink and Cloathing are a suitable or proportionate Object to the Tast and Feeling of the outward Man The Souls of men need not only to be Convinced That there is a God who is Good Loving Merciful Powerful and Just but they need also in order to their Salvation to have a Feeling of his Divine Power to see and tast that he is Good to handle that Word of Life to know Christ in themselves to have the Love of God shed abroad in them by the Holy Spirit Which Love is a sensible and perceptible Object and so is Objective For if the Scriptures be not a sufficient Objective Revelation of God and the things of his Kingdom much less the Book of Nature c. But the first is true therefore the Second is true also Now that the Scriptures are not a sufficient Objective Revelation of God c. G. K. hath proved at large in his Book of Immediat Revelat. and we need not produce any new Arguments here until the Students or their Masters Refute those already set down in that Book Only this we say in short Nature and Scripture tell us That there is a God but they can neither give us a Sense Sight or Tasting of him or of his Love or of his Spiritual Judgments as these things are inwardly experienced where God Reveals them Nature cannot Refresh or Comfort the Soul nor pour in Wine and Oil into it when it is wounded with Sin and although it could tell that God can do this what Comfort could that be to the Soul unless God himself do it and make the Soul sensible of his Hand reaching unto it the Spiritual Things themselves that Nature cannot afford Also Nature cannot discover the Spiritual Judgments of God in the Soul whereby he cleanseth it from Sin as by Water and Fire Now as to the Second Branch of their Argument That the Scriptures are a sufficient objective Revelation of all things necessary to Salvation this we altogether deny as is said For although the Scripture is a full-enough Declaration of all Doctrines and Principles both essential and integral of Christian Religion yet the Scripture doth propose Divine Things and Objects but as a Card or Map doth a Land The Scripture a Map and the Fruits of it to the outward Eye Now as this is not a sufficient Objective Proposal because we need to see the Land it self and to tast and eat and drink of the Fruit of it so our Souls need a more near and Immediate Discovery of God than the Scripture which is but a Report of him that he may Feed and Nourish us by his Divine Manifestations And here in the Prosecution of this Argument they are at great Pains to prove That the Scriptures are given from God which we deny not although same of their Proofs be weak But whatever Reasons can be brought to prove That the Scriptures are given from God if the Inward Testimony of the Spirit of God be not believed and received these Reasons cannot beget any Divine Saving Faith whereof only we speak but a meer Human and Natural Faith or Conviction As to that Place of Scripture 2 Cor. 4.3 4. If our Gospel c. that is If our Gospel be hid c. say they the Outward Gospel But doth Paul say so Nay Look the Greek Text and you will find the contrary that the Gospel he spake of was hid in them that are lost so the Greek * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore it was Inward And this Scripture they bring to prove That the Scriptures have Objective Evident and Perspicuity in themselves whereas Paul doth not say of the Scripture but of the Gospel which is the Power of God And whereas they query If a person may have Immediate Objective Revelations who hath not his Mind well disposed and if so what Advantage would he have by them which he might not have without them by the Scriptures We answer Much every way Because the Scripture is not able to Dispose his Mind as our Adversaries grant but these Immediate Objective Revelations are also really Effective and have sufficient Power and Ability in them to Dispose his Mind if he do not resist them Again whereas they query May a Person be well disposed who hath not such Revelations We answer No Yet he may want some and have other some but if he may yet there is need of such Revelations Even as if a Man's Eye or Tast were never so well disposed he needeth the Objects themselves And as
only for Rejecting the true God and his Law and introducing new and strange Gods Their other proof is from Zech. 13.1 2 c. where it is said That the Fathers and the Mothers of the false Prophets shall say unto them Thou shalt not live and thrust them through when they prophesy This is so far from being taken literally that the Students dare not take it so themselves else the Father and the Mother might do the business without troubling the Magistrate And afterwards the Text speaks of those Who were not to live of their having Wounds in their hands and being alive which shews the Vnderstanding here is to be Spiritual And seeing the Students do not understand it literally of the Persons to whom the Text ascribes this Coercing and that there is not the least word of a Magistrate in the place for them to affirm that it is not to be understood of the Magistrate is but miserably to Beg the Question They begin their 8th Sect. pag. 126. Affirming That Quakerism tends to Anarchy and Confusion Quakers are not against Magistracy and Treason alledging We would pull down the Magistrate if we could and set up our own spiritual Magistrates as John of Leyden c. For this Malitious Insinuation they give no Reason but such an one as destroys it to wit Our giving in Resist not evil pluck not up the Tares as Repeals of some Laws in the Old Test. Now let Men of Reason judge whether Treason be the Tendency of these Mens Principles that Affirm Evil is not to be resisted Or how these can do Violence to the Magistrate without Contradicting their Principles And then it cannot be the Tendency of them And whereas they Conclude saying That Quakerism as they Conceive beyond all doubt tends to Anarchy Confusion of State and Treason Their Conceptions are very false in this matter The Fraternity of the Students Trumpeters of Wars and Confusions and we may upon far better Grounds Retort this upon the Students Confraternity the Clergy who through their Ambition and Turbulency did from the Pulpits blow the Trumpet of all the late Confusion and Treason in the Civil Wars and shew themselves Exact Disciples of John of Leyden acting his Pranks upon the Stage of Great Britain a Charge they have not to lay to the Quakers Their next Effort is to prove We deny the necessity of Professing Christianity because we believe those not bound to believe the History of Christ from whom God hath necessarily with-held the knowledge of it For they Confess That we believe those obliged to believe them to whom they are Revealed But they must here also Act like themselves in making that a horrible Crime in us which their own Chief Doctors Affirm who being pressed by the Arminians with this Argument That which every Man is bound to believe is true But every Man is bound to believe that Christ died for them Therefore it is true They deny the Minor plainly Affirming that those that have not heard of Christ are not bound to believe he died for them so according to the Students themselves are guilty of denying the Necessity of professing Christianity as well as we But further they say We are guilty of this because we set up a new Christ in every Man that is born and grows up unto a perfect substantial Birth Christ within is no new Christ. As their first Charge in this matter hits at their own Doctors so this second is common with us to the Apostle Paul for the Students Dispute like blind Men striking at Random that heed not what they hit seeing the Apostle calls Christ within of which we speak the Hope of Glory which is neither a New Christ nor yet another than He that died at Jerusalem who did travel that he might be brought forth in the Galatians and calls him the New Man born in and put on by others So if in this the Apostle did not deny the outward Sufferings of Christ neither do we unless the Students can shew how our Doctrine differs from his or Contradicts it which they have not yet attempted to do As for that Question of J. Penington How can outward Blood Cleanse We refer them to his own Book in Defence of that Expression as quarrelled by J. Hicks called The Flesh and Blood of Christ Of which there were divers printed Copies at Aberdeen before the Students Book was put to the Press The CONCLUSION Wherein their Observations upon R. B. his Offer and their last Section of the Quakers Revilings as they term them are Examined IN the End of the Account of our Dispute I renewed an Offer to the Preachers of Aberdeen as being the Persons we were principally concerned withal giving the Reasons therefore and shewing the good Effects that might proceed there-from as in the same Offer may be seen At this the Students seem to have gone Mad and Fret and Fume like Persons possessed alledging I betake my self to Railing as my last Refuge But whether there be any Railing in that Offer is left to the Judicious Reader to Examine The Students notwithstanding their Clamours give not one Instance of it but whether they have any better Reason to Answer it withal than Railing let the Reader judge For upon this occasion pag. 127 128. they call me Vain and Arrogant The Students Railing Expressions and Lies like a very Thraso Ignorant and Foolish one whose Weakness and Ignorance is renowned a bold Barker but a soft Biter These are the Modest Young men that profess to be against Railing that say in their Preface They have abstained from personal Criminations and have not rendred evil for evil And with this their unreasonable Railing they mix in a Company of Lies as that Insinuation As if the Theses had been written by G. K. which is a false Calumny they are dared to prove Like unto which is what follows That I provoked all Europe sought Dispute in divers places from any who would without distinction Vpon the Account of this Printed Provocation boasted and gloried that I had got no Dispute which contain as many Lies almost as Words for which they offer not the least Proof Afterwards as an Instance of my Cowardliness and vain Boasting they say I with G. K. fled and deserted a Dispute appointed betwixt us and R. G. my Vncle at the Cross of Elgin Which is utterly false neither G. K. nor I ever spake with R. G. about such a matter nor made any Appointment with him Yea R. G. hath under his Hand declared that being by a Friend of his desired he refused to Debate with us in relation to these Theses nor was there any such Appointment ever made known to us So the Reader may see whether these Credible Witnesses that Attested their Accompt be any better here than those Credible Informers from whom they had this great Vntruth As they proceed they give themselves the Lie for after many needless Words of which it is
Singular Number as if thence he would Infer that One Sin is only Transmitted But how he proves his Consequence thence he has not shewen For albeit by that first Offence he gave Entrance for Sin that being his First yet it will not follow he then ceased to be a publick Person and if not nothing can be proved from granting him to be such as is above observed As by the Offence of one c. Objected Next the Words are The Offence of one and not One Offence as he would Insinuate which though in the Singular Number may include many yea all his Offences For whatever way he seek to urge this from this Place as to Adam the parallel will allow it to be Interpreted of Christ where the Apostle speaking of his Righteousness useth also the Singular Number and thence according to him we might say that it is only the first Act of Christ's Righteousness that is Imputed unto us and none of the rest so that we have nothing to do with his Death Sufferings and Resurrection What thinks he now of his own Divinity Let him loose his Knot the next time to give him one of his own modestest Proverbs The Absurdity he seeks to draw from denying this Consequence of his being a publick Person That if Adam had stood Infants should have no Advantage by him since they have no hurt by his Fall Toucheth not me at all who no where say That Infants have no Hurt by Adam's Fall Adam by his Fall became obnoxious to Temptations Adam by his Fall lost his Glory his Strength his Dominion by which he could have easily withstood the Devil and came under great Weakness whereby the Enemy's Tentations had a ready Access to him and he became very obnoxious to fall under them And so all his Posterity are come under the same Weakness and Obnoxiousness to the Enemy's Tentations who influenceth them by Entring into them and powerfully Inclining them to Sin and this malignant Influence is that Seed of Sin in all Men whereunto they become obnoxious by reason of the Fall which though in it self really Sin yet is it not Man's but the Devil 's until Man give Way to it But I deny not but the least yielding is Man's Sin among which I reckon Concupiscence to be one and so differ from Papists For albeit the Tentation simply considered or as presented by the Devil be not Man's Sin yet if he have the least Love or Desire to it albeit he join not Actually that shews his Mind is already defiled and corrupted and that he is become a Partaker of it Thus are answered his Reasonings and Questionings How this Seed of Sin can be and yet not the Persons Sin p. 121 122 c. as the Reader by Comparing may observe Only it is remarkable p. 121. where he seems to put a great Stress upon the Judgment of Augustin and citing him he brings him in saying these Words among others concerning Infants Shall they sin that are under no Command Now since they Infants are under no Law who are under no Command are under no Law for every Law imports a Command how will he reconcile this saying or his Holy Father which he brings as a matter of Authority with his accounting it both foolish and strange in me p. 119. to prove Children are under no Law J. B. taken in his own Snare So that either the Authority of Augustin he brings is not to be regarded or his Reasonings to prove Children under a Law that is a Command must be naught let him chuse which he will and clear himself of Impertinency His Argument in this page That as the Seed of Grace denominates a Man gracious even while not exercising works of Grace so the Seed of Sin must denominate a Man sinful is but a begging of the Question as in its place will appear when I come to treat of the Seed of Grace ¶ 7. When he cometh p. 123. n. 18. to Reply to my Answer to their Objection Rom. 5.12 among his preliminary Observations the first is very proper where he saith It is observable the Apostle makes Comparison betwixt Adam and Christ. I answer As Christ's Righteousness so Adam's Vnrighteousness is not Imputed to Men before actual Joining with either It is indeed so for as the Righteousness of Christ is not imputed to Men for Justification until they actually Join with it or apprehend it by Faith as himself will acknowledge for I suppose by his accounting the Antinomians Hereticks he will not with them affirm that Men are Justified before they believe so neither is the Vnrighteousness and Disobedience of Adam Imputed to Men for Condemnation until they actually Join with it but this Comparison spoils all his Doctrine Then after he has beg'd the Question a while by meer Allegations affirming his Doctrine to be so clear from the Apostle's words that it cannot be Contradicted without doing violence to the Text he forms an Argument thus That Sin which is so described to us by the Apostle that he saith it brought Death upon all Men that Men sinned by it and were made Sinners even they who could not as yet actually Sin that thereby all became guilty of Death and of Condemnation that Sin by Imputation is the Sin of the whole Nature included in Adam and rendreth the whole Nature obnoxious to Death and to Condemnation But The first Sin of Adam is described to us by the Apostle c. Ergo That Sin is the Sin of Nature c. This Argument may perhaps satisfy such as are already Proselites of his Theam but will not Convince one that either believes other ways or doubts since the Major is a meer begging of the Question And if any thing be a foisting-in of words to the Text this must be it since he foists-in the thing in Debate and words not in the Text such as Even they J. B. foist 's in words of his own to deceive his Reader who could not as yet actually Sin and joineth them with the words of the Text without distinction and not as an Interpretation that his unwary Reader may Conclude them to be of the Text. And yet the Man has the Impudence in the same page to Accuse me of Intolerable Boldness as foisting words into the Text while I expresly shew it is but an Interpretation by saying That is c. so much is he blinded with Self-Interest but I am Content there be neither Addition nor so much as Consequence made use of Let him shew me the plain Scripture that saith Infants are guilty of Adam 's Sin If he say It must be necessarily Inferred from these words in whom all have sinned I say it as necessarily follows that it is only to be understood of all that could sin which Infants could not as not being under any Law as I have above proved and Augustin whom he so much reverenceth doth affirm if his Citation from him be true And
of outward Help and where the Arm of Flesh had least hand in it as the Children of Israel's Deliverance out of Egypt as also Judges c. 5 from ver 16. to the end 2 Kings 6 17 c. and Chapters 7 13. and 19. 35. and in other places To prove That Christ in the 5th of Matth. commands no more than in the Law he referreth to the Writings of their Divines but he might have done this to all he has Written if he judge it sufficient and so have saved himself a great deal of labour since he saith elsewhere All I have written is Confuted long ago How can Men love their Enemies and yet kill and destroy them How Men can Love their Enemies and yet kill and destroy them is more than I can reach but if it were to such as rather suffer than do it do surely more love them and to do so is no Injury to our Selves nor Neighbours when done out of Conscience to God in answering our Duty to whom we must not Regard our own or Neighbours profit And if what I grant of the Lawfulness of Fighting to the present Magistrates and State of Christians be considered it will render all his Arguments superfluous since he confesseth A time will come in which the Prophecy of Isaiah 2 4. Mic. 4 3. will be fulfilled and thinks fit there should be a Praying for the fulfilling of it and what if some believe that as to some there is a beginning already of the fulfilling thereof We do nothing doubt but that of Rev. 16.5 7. which he mentions pag. 522. will in due time be fulfilled but we see no necessity of believing that that will be performed by outward Fighting or that the Saints shall need to draw Carnal Swords or shoot Cannons towards the performing of it When he saith Fighting is from the Corrupt Nature of Man that the Argument of Fighting is not taken from the Corrupt nature of Man pag. 519. he must have forgotten himself since had not Man fall'n and so his nature been corrupted he may infer if he can where there should have been an occasion for Fighting with Carnal Weapons And since he Confesseth That in nothing more than in War is seen the Fruits of Man's Rebellion against God He may thence see how little need Christians have to plead for it As for the Citation out of the Confession of Faith wherewith to fill-up he closeth his Chapter I know not to what purpose he did it since no Man doubts their Faith in this matter ¶ 2. He begins his 30 th Chapter of Oaths with saying We deny their lawfulness that we may destroy all Policy and Government But it must only be the Devil's Government for where the Government of Christ prevails and Men speak Truth there all must Confess there is no need of Oaths and also where the like punishment of Perjury is inflicted for speaking falsly Where Men speak Truth there is no need of Oaths the End of Oaths is obtained and that without breaking Christ's Command Thus according to his own Concession since the Verity may be had as well without an Oath none should be urged to take an Oath But let us see what after a Citation out of their Confession of Faith he saith to Answer Matth. 5 34. and James 5 12. which saith so expresly Swear not at all Swear not at all To this he saith That Christ is only Interpreting the Law and not Adding any thing to it and that it only relates to ordinary discourse but for proof of this he has nothing but an Heap of words asserting the thing To all which till he bring some Scripture-proof there needs no Answer But to oppose Christ's and James's words Swear not at all It is not said Except ye be called before a Judge let him prove this Exception by Scripture next time and therefore till he do so his Affirming over and over again That Christ forbad no more than was forbidden in the Law pag. 525. is to no purpose The Law forbad idle Swearing and Oaths in Communication but Christ's Resumption shews throughout that Chapter some more to be urged to any that understand plain words and will not shut their Eyes That its being said Deut. 6 13. Thou shalt swear by his Name is urged as an Explication or Comprehensive part of Moral Worship I deny and remains for him to prove or that it was more than a Command to the Jews to Swear by the true God that they might not Swear by Idols and till he prove this Arguments founded upon it need no further Answer As for what he addeth N. 8. to prove Swearing not to be of the Devil because commanded of God and afterwards Concluding That my urging against it as being of the Devil is pregnant of Blasphemy because it would infer some of the Ceremonial Laws of God to have their Rise not from the Will of God but from the work of the Devil he sheweth here more Malice than strength of Reason The Bill of Divorcement permitted in the Old Test. because the hardness of their hearts Was not the Command Deut. 24 v. 1. Let him write for her a Bill of Divorcement A part of the Ceremonial Law and yet Christ saith Matth. 19.7 that Moses did this because of the hardness of their Hearts and is not hardness of Heart which gave a Rise to this Command of the Work of the Devil Let him then make the Application and then Answer the Empty Bluster he has made of Blasphemy And doth not what Christ saith of this matter of Divorce Matth. 5 v. 31 32. shew Christ Commanded more there than was Commanded under the Law He confesseth pag. 529. That God cannot be said properly to Swear Albeit some things being ascribed to God makes them not Vnlawful to us yet any things being ascribed to God makes it not Lawful to us when Christ commands the Contrary Christ's and the Apostles Asseverations were not Oaths That Christ's saying Verily Verily is more than Yea and Nay I deny and it remains for him to prove it That the Apostles Asseverations are Oaths he affirms in like manner but proves it not His thinking We in being willing to do as much as the Apostle did do strain at a Gnat and Swallow a Camel is but an Evidence of his Railing Genius as it doth of his Malice in Catching what follows That the Question is not What Paul or Peter did but what their and our Lord For that is not said by me he hath but said it as believing they did Swear or that their Words were Oaths But the giving not granting it had been so to shew it would not prove this thing now lawful and that Peter and Paul both had their Failings so as all though not in that himself will not deny which is enough to shew their practice in all things is not to be our Rule His 531. page needeth no Answer being but his own Affirmations and Conjectures