Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	according_a	faith_n	sense_n	2,308	5	6.2377	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A81734	The Quakers folly made manifest to all men: or a true relation of what passed in three disputations at Sandwich, April, 12, 13, 19, 1659. between three Quakers, and a minister, viz. Mr. Samuel Fisher, George Whithead, Richard Hubberthorn, and Thomas Danson wherein many popish tenents were by them maintained, and by him refuted. Occasioned by an imperfect and (in many things) false relation of the said disputations, published by R. Hubberthorn, one of the three Quakers, which said relation is also censur'd and amended. Together with a brief narrative of some remarkable passages. / By Tho. Danson, late fellow of Magd. Coll. Oxon, and now minister of the Gospel at Sandwich in Kent.	Danson, Thomas, d. 1694.	1659 (1659)	Wing D215; Thomason E2255_3; ESTC R34492	40,882	71

Whether the Scriptures are the VVord of God T. D. Mr. F. You promised to discourse upon this Question I desire to know what you hold about it Mr. F. if you mean by the Scripture the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the writing or the paper and ink we deny it to be the Word of God T. D Sir you cannot believe us so simple surely as to affirm the Scriptures in that sense the Word of God but we mean the matter contained in the writing whether that be our rule of faith and life Mr. F. This I affirm that there are several Books which are as much a rule as those you call the Scripture which are not bound up in your Bibles T. D. This is not to the purpose yet I should be glad to hear your proof Mr. F. 1 Cor. 5.9 I wrote unto you in an Epistle c. But now I have written unto you v. 11. Here you find an Epistle of Paul which was written before this which in your books is called the first T. D. Sir you fall short in your proof you should prove that the Epistle there mentioned was intended as much for our rule as these we have in our books and you prove only that such an Epistle was written by Paul Mr. F. If this Epistle was written to the same end with this you have viz. to instruct the Corinthians how to carry themselves toward grosse sinners then it was intended as much for a rule as this But it was written to the same end Ergo. T. D. I deny your consequence Sermons private religious discourses have the same common end with the written Scriptures yet the latter only are our standing-rule the former our rule but so farre as they agree with the latter in the Scriptures Mr. F. VVhat other evidence or character have you of this Epistles being a rule which the other wants that is not in your books T. D. Pray let me ask you one Question and I will answer yours Have you or any of your friends this first Epistle to the Corinthians or do you know that it is exstant Mr. F. No. T. D. Then I have a signal distinction between that and these we have viz. that God hath preserved these two for our use but not the first whereas had God intended the first for a standing rule to us as he hath the other two his providence which watched over these would also have watched over that Mr. F. But I will give you an instance of a Book which ye have not but we have Col. 4.16 And that ye likewise read the Epistle from Laodicea T D. Though it is certain that God intended not that for a standing rule which is lost yet all that was written by holy men and preserved for our use is not therefore our standing rule for then the discourses of holy Ministers in former and latter times should be our Rule which they are not but to be brought to the written Word as the Rule and Test But pray Sir what is the Title of that Epistle you have Mr. Fisher The Epistle of Paul to the Laodiceans T. D. So I thought such an Epistle I know there is that go●s under the name of Paul but the place you bring speaks not of an Epistle to Laodice● but from Laodicea And for ought you can prove to the contrary we have the Epistle Paul did intend 1 Tim. Postsc●ipt The first to Timothy was written from Laodicea Mr. Fisher Dost thou own the Postscripts to be Canonical as ye call it T. D. As Canonical for ought ●ppears yet to me as your Epistle to the Laodiceans W● know well enough that your Brethren of the Popish party have laid many such brats at the Apostles doors wh●ch they will not father And you shew what you a●e in abetting their wickedness I shall add that some learned men judge that Epistle mentioned from Laodicea Col. 4.16 to be not an Ep●stle written by Paul either from or to Laodicea but by th● Laodiceans to Paul which he would have read amon● the Collossians that they might understand the case of their Si●●e● Church and how sutable the matter of the Epistle to them was also to the Laodiceans Vid. Rev. Daven in locum And to make the businesse short Mr. Fisher suppose we should grant you there were such an Epistle legitimate yet it will not follow that it was intended for a rule to us For we have already as much as God thought sufficient read John 20.30 31. And many other signs truely did Jesus in the presence of his Disciples which are not written in this book but these are written that ye m●ght believe c. Suppose that we had the signs which are not in the Gospel faithfully recorded in writing yet were they not our Rule because God did not give order for them but has assured us as much as is sufficient to create and preserve Faith in the Gospel which we have Let us come to the Question which I propose to you in these terms Whether the Books commonly called the Old and New Testament were appointed by God for a standing Rule of Faith and life Mr. Fisher I deny those books to be a standing Rule of Faith and life T. D. Now you have spit your venom which I knew you were big with And I will say to you as the Apostle If any man bring any other Gospel than what we have received let him be accursed Mr Fisher I am sure the Gospel you preach will never bring men to heaven Indeed people it will not T. D. Then friends you hear his acknowledgement and how well he deserves the curse denounced against him Mr. F. If there be another standing Rule then the Scripture is not it but there is another standing Rule therefore the Scripture is not it T. D. I deny your Minor there is no other standing rule but the Scripture Mr. Fisher I prove there is from Gal. 5.16 This I say then walk in the spirit We are commanded to walk in or by the Spirit and therefore that is our rule The Scripture it self sends us to another for our rule T. D. That phrase does note the principle not the rule of our obedience in that place Mr. F. You suppose the Letter to be antecedent to the Spirit whereas the Spirit is antecedent to the Letter and none can walk in the Letter till they walk in the Spirit T. D. The Spirit is antecedent to the Letter in respect of the revelation of the Letter but the Spirit is subsequent to the Letter in respect of assistance and ability which he gives to obedience And whereas you affirm none can walk in the Letter till they walk in the Spirit if walking in the Spirit be meant of special assistance 't is false for many walk in many things according to the Letter without the Spirits in-dwelling as Paul while a Pharisee was touching the righteousnesse of the Law blamelesse Phil. 3.6 Mr. F. I will prove the Lette● of the

Thou sayest 't is meant of a natural light whereas 't is said to be the knowledge of whatsoever might be known of God Rom. 1.19 T. Danson The Apostle intends that what might be known of God without the preaching of the Gospel was known to the Gentiles v. 16 17. 't is by the Gospel that the righteousnesse of God is revealed and John 4.22 Christ tels the Samar●tan woman that the Jews exclusively knew what they worshipped and that salvation was of the Jews And in respect of this knowledge revealed by the Gospel the Scripture saies that the Gentiles have their understandings darkned Eph. 4.18 G. Whithead That place saies that the Gentiles were not so enlightened as afterwards For 't is said that Christ was given for a light to the Gen●iles T. Danson You give your meaning of the Scripture which you will not allow us to do But as for that Scripture which is Isa 49.6 it proves not that Christ was a light to the Gentiles in every age and generation but the contrary in that Christ was not to be a light to them till his coming in the flesh and it was fulfilled Acts 13.46 47. Lo we turn to the Gentiles For so hath the Lord commanded us saying I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles As for the place in the Ephesians it denies that the Gentiles had been at all enlightened by Christ unlesse you mean as God ch 2.13 The Apostle saies in that estate before Christs coming they were afarre off viz. from God and Christ spoken of v. 12. and the knowledge of them And Eph. 4.18 he saies that they were alienated from the life of God which imports that their understandings were no more capable of the knowledge of God then creatures of one kind of life to converse with those of another Gods understanding is his life as he is a reasonable being and these Gentiles wanted what some have by especial gift 1 John 5.20 an understanding to know him that is true and could no more converse with spiritual objects than bruit beasts can with such rational objects as mans understanding does So that those Scriptures put together do assert that the body of the Gentiles for ages and Generations wanted the light of the Gospel and light in their understandings the difference of which you may conceive by the light of the Sun which is external light and so the Gospel and the light in the eye to which answers an understanding to know him that is true and both of them are necessary or else a blind man might see when there is light and the seeing man when there is none G. Whithead Thou makest the Gospel to be an outward light in the darknesse of thy own reasoning but the Scripture saies 't is an inward light 2 Cor. 4 6. the Apostle saies it shines out of darknesse in their hearts T. Danson You shew much ignorance in your interpretation The Apostle speaks of material light and argues from the effect of one creating word to another that by the like word of command he had the light or knowledge of Christ in his understanding which was given not for his own use only but to be communicated to others As for the phrase in their hearts it imports but the same thing with that expression Eph. 1.18 The eyes of your understanding being enlightened The light by which the Gospel is discerned is inward but that makes not against the Gospels being an outward light But what 's this to the enlightning of every man by Christ Reply to the Scriptures brought against that assertion G. Whithead The Apostle saies the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ shined in their hearts 2 Cor. 4.6 T. Danson In whose hearts nor of all mankind but of the Apostles and some others a small number in comparison of the rest who were not enlightned and therefore the Apostle saies that the Gospel was hid to them that are lost v. 3. and that there are some to whom the light of the Gospel doth not shine v. 4. And 't is elsewhere spoken of as a distinguishing mercy to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 13.11 It was given to the Disciples not to others And to the same effect Luke 10.21 Christ gives thanks to his Father that whilst he hid the secrets of the Gospel from Scribes and Pharisees he revealed them to others G. Whithead The Scripture saies that the Kingdom of God was in the Pharisees Luke 17.21 and therfore it denies not but that they did know the mysteries of the Kingdom T. Danson That expression may import that the Kingdom which they did upon mistake look for without them was indeed a Kingdom within them To which I shall adde that upon second thoughts I judge the most genuine interpretation to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 among you so the prepos may be rendred Mat. 21.43 meaning of the preaching of the Gospel by Christ in person and his Disciples and this threat of taking away the Kingdom of God from them is directed against the Pharisees v. 45. The Pharisees perceived that he spake of them R. Hubberthorn The form of ●ound words is that Christ enlightens every man that cometh into the world John 1.9 T. Danson The mean●ng of those words cannot be as the letter of them does import for then the Scripture would contradict it self but it must be either that Christ inl●ghtens every man that is inl●ghtened or else that he inlightens some of every Nation kindred tongue and people as the phrase is Rev. 5.9 R. Hubberthorn The Scripture saies every man and thou saiest but some who shall be believed thou or the Apostle Thou makest John a liar T. Danson No such matter I make not the Apostle a liar For the indefinite phrase hath a restrained sense as elsewhere in the Scripture Christ tasted death for every m n Heb. 2.9 when as he died but for a certain number as appears by that very place v. 10. In bringing many so●s to glory Those whom Christ brings to glory are those for whom he tasted death but the former are but many sons and therefore not the latter the every man for whom he died must be limited by the many sons whom he brings to glory R. Hubberthorn Then it seems thou deniest that Christ died for all T. Danson Yes that I do and 't is more than you can prove G. Whithead I witnesse according to the Scripture that Christ died for all 2 Cor. 5.14 If one died for all then were all dead T. Danson 'T is spoken of those who were converts and believers whose sanctification was the end of Christ's death and for whom Christ rose and who therefore did ri●e with him As for the meaning of the words 't is this that the necessity of Christ's dying imported the misery of their condition in that they were dead spiritually and obnoxious to eternal death and the love of Christ which made him

be fulfilled in us not in our own persons but in Christ his righteou●nesse imputed to us as if it had been inherent in our selves Mr. Fisher That is thy meaning but not the meaning of the Apostle T. Danson Yes but it is the Apostles as I have proved But pray Sir let me ask you a question though it may seem besides yet it will be to the purpose 't is this whether there be any true believers who are not perfect Mr. F●sher I must acknowledg that there are degrees among believers as the Apostle saies 1 John 2.13 14. Little children Fathers Young men T. Danson I suppose you mean that some of these have a mi●ture of sin with their Grace But let me ask you but one question more whether the children for instance b● in a justified estate or not Mr. Fisher I 'le tell thee Tho. Danson there are but two estates Justification and condemnation T. D. Now Sir you are caught in a manifest contradiction and absurdity for before you maintain'd that our justification was by a personal fulfilling of the Law and now you grant some persons to be justified who never did fulfill it personally That end I proposed in asking you the questions and I have obtain'd it to make your folly manifest to all men Reader observe that though it concern'd Mr. Fisher to wind himself out of this contradiction yet he did not reply but sate down on the top of the seat like a man astonish'd and under the Hereticks judgement I mean self-condemned Tit. 3.11 After a while we fell upon an Arminian point whether a man that is justified may be unjustified which Mr. Fisher affirmed and I would have omitted all the discourse but for the strangenesse of one medium by which he endeavoured to confirm it Mr. Fisher Take the instance of David Psalm 51.4 That thou mightest be justified when thou speakest and clear when thou judgest Whence I argue if David was unjustified in his own conscience he was unjustified before God and consequently a man may become unjustified after he hath been justified before God But David was unjustified in his own Conscience Ergo he was so before God T. D. I might deny your minor for it does not appear to me that David was at this time unjustified in his own Conscience but the contrary for he spake these words after the Prophet Nathan had come to him Title of Ps 51. And we find 2 Sam. 12.13 The Prophet told him the Lord hath put away thy sin He might lose much of his joy and yet retain the sense of his interest And for the words David either acknowledged Gods righteousness in the temporal evils threatned against him 2 Sam. 12 11. or the desert of condemnation But I chuse to deny your Sequel Mr. Fisher I prove it 1 John 3.20 If our hearts condemn us God is greater than our hearts and knoweth all things Here the Apostle argues to Gods condemnation from that of our own hearts which is alwayes according to the light of the Spirit T. Danson Your place proves nothing about Davids state but to take it as it comes nor does it prove your assertion in the general the place speaks of such a sentence as is passed by a Conscience not erroneous but rightly guided I shall add to what was spoken but these Scriptures against that tenent Psal 77.8 9 10. Joh. 8.54 Compared with v. 44. T t. 1.15 Their conscience is defiled Of which latter Scripture I say but this that one of Consciences Offices being a Witnesse its defilement as such in the wicked is to lead them into a wrong opinion of their estares and Conscience in the Saints being but in part cleansed as a witnesse it testifies falshood to them also in that th●● estate is bad when it is good as to the wicked that it is good when it is nothing lesse An Account of a Discourse April 13 between three QUAKERS Mr. S. Fisher G. Whitehead R. Hubberthorn and T. Danson T. D. Mr. F●sher because you urged so hard for another Conference I have granted your desire yet not for your sake so much as the hearers that they may be convinced of the damnablenesse of your Doctrine and may loath and detest you as you well deserve And against it I shall urge one irrefragable Scripture which I should be glad to hear your answer to or else you shall oppose and I will answer which I rather desire The place is Rom. 11.6 And if by Grace then it is no more of works otherwise Grace is no more Grace But if it be of works then it is no more of Grace otherwise work is no more work The Apostle having spoken of the efficient cause of Election and effectual calling he here excludes works from being any cause of them And this he does by an argument taken from the opposition between immediate contraries And I apply it to the case in hand thu● that if Justification be of wo●ks as you assert then Grace is excluded from any hand in Justification which is contrary to the Scripture which says we are Justified by Grace Our Justification cannot be a debt and a free gift I mean not both in respect of us To this no reply was made T. D. I will name another Scripture Rom. 10.3.4 For they being ignorant of Gods righteousness and going about to establish their own righteousness have not submitted themselves to the righteousnesse of God For Christ is the end of the Law for righteousness to every on● that believeth The Apostle here makes a distinction between our own righteousnesse and Gods and finds fault with them who neglect●ng Gods went about to establish their own And be makes our own righteousnesse to be a personal conformity to the Law and Gods righteousnesse to be Christ made ours by faith you are therefore guilty of this sin who make your own righteousness your justification G. Whitehead We do not make our own righteousnesse our justification but the righteousnesse of God is that we testifie being made manifest in us T. D. Do not ye delude your hearers with doubtful words Ye did yesterday assert that the righteousnesse which we are enabled to perform or our good works are the meritorious cause of our justification G. Whithead We witnesse to the righteousnesse of God according to the Scripture Phil. 3.9 Not having mine own righteousness which is of the Law but that which is through the Faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by Faith T. D. You could not have brought a Scripture more full against you The righteousness which is of Christ and of God by Faith is cal'd Christ vers 8. That I may win Christ And how he is our righteousness 2 Cor. 5. ult tells us as Christ was made sin for us so are we the righteousness of God in him but the former was by imputation not inherence and therefore so the other So that the Apostle by his own righteousness understands his personal conformity to

come in at a pinch to help when none else could is a great constraint to obedience upon all the dead for whom Christ died That place is fully parallel and opens this putting but Christ in stead of God into the former clause God commendeth his love toward us speaking of believers v. 1 2. in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us Rom. 5.8 G. Whithead Still thou pervertest Scripture by thy meanings T. Danson I pervert it not but I reconcile the Scripture to it self G. Whithead The Scripture is at unity with it self and needs not thy reconciling 'T is said the Scripture cannot be broken T. Danson I say so too that the Scripture is at unity with it self but withall that it seems to disagree and cannot approve it self to our understandings without the mediation of a meaning or interpretation It was an usual thing with Christ to speak words of a doubtful sense as John 3.19 Destroy this Temple which they understood of the material Temple he being in it at the time v. 15. and likely enough speaking with his eye as well as his tongue v. 20. but he meant of the temple of his body v. 21. G. Whithead Thou art such a giver of meanings as they were who gave it contrary to Christs meaning T. Danson Whether I be such a one or no is not for you to judge in your own cause ● leave it to the understanding hearers But in the mean while the place serves my purpose viz. to prove that Christ's meaning may be mistaken when his words are taken in the most ordinary and literal sense and so it would be if by every man we should understand every individual man so that 't is your self and not I that am such a giver of meanings as the Jews G. Whithead How canst thou prove that thou art to give meanings to Scripture T. Danson I do not pretend to power to give meanings to Scripture as your phrase is if you mean thereby adding any thing to the Scripture which is not in it but to find out what already is by causing the Scriptures with the Cherubims to face one another that is my duty and all other mens This the Scripture warrants Neh. 8.8 So they read in the Book in the Law of God distinctly and gave the sense and caused them to understand the reading And I should be glad to know of any of you who are against meanings how you can understand such Scriptures as these without a meaning God is not a man that he should repent It repenteth me that I have made man God tempted Abraham God tempts no man Answer not a fool according to his folly Answer a fool according to his folly And once more Paul and James The former saies that a man is justified by Faith without the works of the Law Rom. 3.28 And the other flatly contradicts him in terms that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only Jam. 2.24 When as any of these do sweetly consent if the ambiguity of phrases be once removed As for instance in Paul and James the one speaks of being formally justified the other declaratively Justification in Paul is opposite to the condemnation of a sinner in general and justification in James is opposite to the condemnation of an hypocrite in particular In Pauls sense a sinner is absolved in James's sense a believer is approved So Diodat whose words I used but forgot to name him in the discourse Here the two disputants had nothing to say but what was absurd and impertinent and thereupon I desired we might leave what had been spoken to the hearers judgment and to go on to another Question which at length was agreed to The Second Question was Whether in this life the Saints attain to a state of perfection or freedom from sin This they held in the affirmative T. Danson Your Doctrine of perfection is against the tenour of the Scripture let us hear what you can say for the proof of it R. Hubberthorn 1 John 3.9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin T. Danson That cannot be meant of freedom from sin but either there is an emphasis in the word sin intending under that general term one kind or sort of sin which is spoken of 1 John 5.16 There is a sin unto death Or if not on the Substantive on the Verb 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which notes to make a trade or businesse of sin as 't is explain'd v. 8. where he uses the same verb for the Devil sinneth from the beginning He hath never ceased to sinne since he began thus indeed the Saints sin not but a course of sin is broken of● and there is not such a free trade between the soul and sin as in the state of unregeneracy whereof this is given for one character that cannot cease to sin 2 Pet. 2.14 G. Whithead Thou wrestest the Scriptures to thy own destruction T. Danson No I wrest them not if I do shew wherein And if you will observe either it must be meant of all Saints or none for the New birth agrees to all if then the phrase excludes the being of sin in some it must in all and mark the reason given because his seed remaineth in him and he cannot sin because he is born of God Now the seed remains in all as well as any now lest you should be so mad as to assert all Saints to be free from sin pray read 1 John 1.8 If we say that we have no sin we deceive our selves and this is spoken of such persons as of whom it is denied that they commit sin persons that had fellowship with the Father and his Son Jesus Christ v. 3. Mr. Fisher Pray do not multiply words to no purpose but read v. ult If we say that we have not sinned we make him a liar The born of God should lie if they did deny themselves to have sinned before they were in the new birth T. Danson Sir you must not think to put us off so v. 8. 't is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the other is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Suppose the latter verse were to be understood of the sin which preceded the new birth yet the former is expresly de praesenti that we have not have had no sin and yet I see nothing to the contrary but that we hav● not sinned v. ult may relate to particular acts of sin in the state of the new birth denied either in whole or in part G. Whithead Phil. 3.15 As many as he perfect let us ●e thus minded T. Danson For the phrase upon which you ground your notion 't is used in a comparative sense 1 Cor. 2.6 speaks of grown Christians who could fancy the Gospel in a plain dress whom he cals perfect in comparison of others as he cals Babes in Christ carnal in respect of those who are more spiritual Ch. 3.1 And often in Scripture perfect is put for upright and made synonymous or of

of judgement shall be but as God You know well enough what communication of Idioms means And the Apostles themselves did not partake of that divine property of Infallibility for then they would have been infallible at all times and in all things which they were not as appears by the instance of Peter Gal. 2.11 But in the delivery of what was to be a standing rule to us they were so guided that they d●d not erre as you may find 2 Pet. 1. ult The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the holy Ghost As for our want of infallibility 't is no valid plea against our Ministry Acts 20.30 the Apostle speaking to the Elders of Ephesus ● 17 Also of your own selves shall men arise speaking perverse things to draw away Disciples after them And yet he saies the holy Ghost had made these fallible men Overseers over the Church v. 28. 1 Thef 5. Quench not the Spirit vers 19. Despise not prophecying vers 20. Prove all things hold fast that which is good v. 21. The connexion of these verses imports that that prophecying must not be despised nor can be without neglecting the Spirit in it which may teach us somewhat which is not good an● not to be received And both these instances are of an ordinary Ministry which is set in the same universal Church with the extraordinary 1 Cor. 12.28 and for the same end viz. to convert and build up Eph. 4.12 Note that when we had gone thus far I gave a brief account of my Call for which you are referred to Hubberthorns account of the Conference and my answer hereto annexed A short ANSWER to a trifling Pamphlet intituled The Difference of that Call of God to the Ministry c. published by R. Hubberthorn IN the Epistle to the Reader the Questions debated on are falsly stated as will appear by the Narrative hereto annexed In the Book it self you have his Call to the Ministry which is not worthy a further Reply than I made by word of mouth And an account of my Call which except two or three passages was the summe of what I spake One passage is He said I said 't is non sence to say that a man is made a Minister by the gift of grace Reply My words were that he had spoken a great deal of non-sence in his discourse not that that particular passage was non sense Yet I said and do still stand to it that if by gift of grace he means qual●fications for the Ministry more is r●quired to a mission than them Another pass●ge is That I said my qualifications were such that I might have been cloathed in Scarlet Reply I said not so of my self particularly but in general that many of us who had chosen the Ministry for our calling were capable of other callings and had opportunities of entring into them which might have cloathed us with scarlet as they did other men who followed them VVhereas he saies that T. D. provoked his Church to laughter rudeness c. Reply I confess the Assembly did laugh oftentimes at their sorry shifts and poor evasions in our discourse but that I did compose them I have many witnesses And I deny not but that now and then I could not forbear smiling at them which I presume as justifiable in me as Elijah the Prophets scoffing at Bauls Priests 1 Kings 18.27 Whereas he sayes that none of my people can set to their seal that my Ministry hath brought them to a perfect man c. Reply 'T is readily granted nor was the Ministry intended for that end but only to br●ng the Saints to that degree of Grace in this life which might make them immediatly capable of perfection in the next life Note that R. H. brings in several passages as mine some of which I own and others which I own not I shall name them briefly That every individual man is not enlightened by Christ and he complaines that I brought two meanings of that Scripture and know not which is the meaning of the holy Ghost Reply I still affirm the Proposition mentioned and I would have him to know that both the meanings are the Holy Ghosts though but one is intended in that place the phrases will bear either senses and either of them cross his Interpretation That the whole body of the Gentiles was not enlightned Reply He leaves out what I added viz. by Christ or with the knowledg of salvation As for his answer I refer you to the dispu●e upon that principle That the Gospel is an external Light and not invisi●le and that it is not the Light within Reply My wo●ds were that the Gospel is an external L●ght as that of the Sun and that there is an inward Light created in the soul c●ll'd an understanding g●ven us c. 1 John 5.20 which is as the Light in the eye and that the light of the Gospel is not the light which every man naturally hath with in him That Christ is a propitiation but for the world of believers intend●d 1 John 2.2 Reply I expla●n'd my meaning when I so interp●eted the ph●ase by c●mparing it with Rom. 3 25. Whom God hath set for●h to be a Propitiation through Faith in his blood the ph●ase Prop●tiation intends not the price but the actual atton●ment and this latt●r is not without the intervention of Fa●th So th●t John intends as Paul that the terms of actual reconciliation w●th God are the same to all the world viz. beli●ving in the blood of Christ T●at we must reconcile Scriptures and he saies I gave two contrary meanings of one Scripture Reply I have said enough to this in the D●spute the Scriptures are not at variance among themselves but they s em so to be and 't is part of our wo●k to l●t p●ople see how well they are agreed And I dare leave it to any Reade●s j●dgement whe●h r these two interpretations which R. H. intends be contrary to one another viz. that Christ enl●ghtens every man who is spi●itually enlightened or that he enlightens a number of every Nation which were the two meanings to use his phrase of John 1.8 That the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ was not the Law of the Spirit in the Saints but that they were two Laws c. Reply My words were that by the Law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus Rom. 8 2. was not meant our personal righteousn●sse but Christs imputed to us and that though the righteousnesse in Christ and in us are of the same kind yet they have not the same use the former being alone our justification the latter our sanctification That there are two righteousnesses of Christ the one without the Saints to justifie them and the other within the Saints that did sanctifie them Reply My words were that there is a righteousness whereof Christ is the subject and the efficient viz. that of his

the same import Job 1.1 that man mean●ng Job was perfect and upright that perfect is not meant in your sense appears by c. 9.20 If I say I am pe●fect 〈◊〉 his mouth shall also prove me perverse Sinceri●y Job all along avouched but perfection such as he m●ght j●stifie h●mself by he denies But to return to the place Phi● 3.12 He denies that he was yet perfect whilst in a breath he affirms himself so The perfection he denies is the resurrection of the dead v. 11. that is by an usual Metonymy of the subject for the adj●nct that measure of holinesse which accompanies tha● state wh●ch we shall find to be exclusive of sin 1 John 2.2 We shall be lik● him meaning Christ when he appears But how shall Christ appear Heb. 9. ult appear the second time without sin Put it together and the perfection Paul denies is the state of the resurrection which is to be without sin The perfection he ●ffirms is comparative in respect of Christians of lower attainments who could not assent to all the Doctrines of the Gospel v. 15. If in any thing ye i. e. some of you be otherwise minded M. Fisher I will prove from the Scripture such a state of perfection Psal 119. Blessed ●re the undefiled in the way v. 1. They also do no iniquity v. 2. Do you mark every word T. Danson Yes Sir we mark the words but I might expect a reply to what I have urged against the Scriptures brought by your friend As for the phrases they are hyperbolical v. 6. Then I shall not be ashamed when I have respect to all thy Commandm●n●s in respect of design and endeavour though falling short in accomplishment that v. explains the other two you brought I shall add that David excludes himself out of a blessed state if undefiled and doing no iniquity be meant strictly His wish vers 5. and other passages ●n the Psalms shew that he was not free from sinne which su●e David did not intend for Psal 32 2. he pronounces the man blessed which hath no guilt in his spirit or sincere which himself was at that time though under th● guilt of a great sinne vers 5. which is by interpreters supposed to be the same sins for which Psal 51. was composed But Mr. Fisher can you produce one single example of a perfect Saint in your sense Mr. Fisher Yes Thomas Dans●n that I can 'T is in Luke 1.6 And they Zachary and Elizabeth were bo●h righteous before God not before man only but bef●re God walk●ng in all the Commandments nor in s●me few o● many but all and O●dinances of the Lord blameless T. Danson Methinks Sir you bring in this Scripture with pomp and ceremony yet it will not do For first how doth it appear that righteous before God is meant a perfect inherent righteousnesse seeing a believers person with his works are accepted with God though his works be not perfect Heb. 11.4 By Faith Abel offered to God a more excellent Sacrifice than Cain by which he obtained witness that he was righteous c. And secondly how do you prove blamelesse to be meant otherwise than comparatively Phil. 2.15 Blameless without rebuke in the midst of a crooked and perverse Nation among whom ye shine as lights in the world In the same sense may Luke understand the phrase And if you mark the very same phrase is used of Pauls external conformity to the Law when he was so far from perfect that he had no Grace at all Phil. 3.6 Touching the righteousnesse which is in the Law blamelesse v. 5. Touching the Law a Pharisce Now how they were blamelesse you find by instance Luke 18.10 11. Not as other men are I fast twice in the week c. I bring this instance to let you know that the phrase simply considered will be so far from importing perfection of Grace that it will not import any Grace But in a word to put it out of doubt Zacharias of whom these words are used whence you gather him to be free from sin is found guilty at the very time that this description agreed to him of unbelief and was with dumbnesse punished for it Luke 1.10 Behold thou shalt be dumb and not able to speak until the day that these things be performed because thou believest not my words c. 'T is the message of Gabriel the Angel to Za●harias v. 19. You see Mr. Fisher your pomp in the bringing in of this Scripture was meer wast Mr. Fisher But Tho. Danson there is no such thing m●ntioned of Elizab●th and if there be one instance it sufficeth T. Danson But Sir your Argument is drawn from the import of the phrases and if the phrases are applicable to him though guilty of actual sin then they will not argue her to be more free from sin than him though there be no mention of any of her sins Pray Sir seeing you have nothing to reply but God has stopped your mouth let me hear what answer you can give to that Scripture which hath run much in my mind against this Doctrine Eccles 7.20 There is not a just man upon earth that doth good and sinneth not R. Hubberthorn It cannot be meant as thou wouldst have it for the man Christ then were not a just man which I think thou wilt not say T. Danson I desir'd Mr. Fishers answer and not yours But seeing he is silenced I will answer you What a wretch are you to make such an Inference was not Christ God as well as man And could a nature tainted with sin be taken into a personal union with the Divine Nature The place I urge excludes any meer man from perfection in this life Mr. Fisher I will give thee an answer Tho. Danson We grant the truth in that Scripture the just man there spoken of is not on earth for he is redeemed from the earth and in the Revelation he is said to be a dweller in Heaven whereas the wrath of God is said to come upon the Inhabitants of the earth T. Danson Mr. Fisher you run very low at last this is a meer evasion I verily believe in your own judgment and intention because you think you must say somwhat Can you possibly think that the j●st mans being in Heaven in respect of his disposition and affection and in his Head Christ excludes his local abode on earth We say indeed that no such just man as Solomon speaks of is to be found on earth but in Heaven which is a place of abode as well as a state of blisse R. Hubberthorn In Heb. 12.23 Spirits of just men made perfect this is spoken of them to whom the Apostle writes T. Danson The pl●ce doth not import the perfection of any men on earth but sp●aking of the state we are advanced to under the Gospel by Christ he saies we are one body with them in Heaven and have the same title with them in possession R. Hu●berthorn Thus with thy meanings thou

Scripture is not our Rule if there was a rule before the Scripture was written then that is not our rule but there was a rule before the Scripture Therefore T. D. Your Argument concludes nothing against us for we assert the matter contained in the Scripture is a standing Rule your argument proves but that there was a rule before this writing we grant that God reveal'd himself by visions dreams c. yet it was the same matter Since the Gospel preached to Adam there have not been any increase of truths quoad essentiam sed tantum quoad explicationem as the Learned speak of the Articles of our Faith The manner of conveyance is different then and now but the matter or doctrines conveyed still the same All this while you go about to delude the simple as if you denied only this way of writing to have always been the onely way of conveyance and you magnifie the Spirit that with more security you may throw down the Letter of the Scripture And if you would speak out plainly as some of your friends as you call them do that which you call the Spirit would be found to be the dictates of your own Conscience blind and corrupt as they are the Lord knows and you are no further bound to obey the Letter of the Scripture than you are willing to obey it Mr. F. I am sure your Scripture is not the Word of God for that is within but your Scripture is without This I prove out of R●m 10.8 The Word is nigh thee even in thy heart T. D. You read not all 't is in thy mouth too so that 't is without as well as within Mr. F. This is meant of the Light which is in eve●y mans Conscience 'T is a word which every man ha●h heard v. 18. But I say have they not heard yes verily their sound went into all the earth T. D. It seems then the Light within is the Spirit you pleaded for to be the Rule in opposition to the Scriptures But 't is plain enough that v. 18. speaks of the Gospel for it relates to the Preacher spoken of v. 14 15. who were Prophets and Apostles And though the words are taken out of Psal 19.4 yet they intend not that n●tu●al knowledge of God which David speaks of but the Apostle would intimate that the knowl●dge of Christ by th● Gospel should be of as large extent in the publication as the knowledge of God by the Ministry of the heavens and Firmament which are Davids Preachers Psal 19.1 And 't is evident that the word spoken of in the heart Rom. 10.8 is meant of the matters contained in the Scriptures for the Apostle saies ●xpresly That is the word of Faith which we preach and Acts 26.22 VVe say none other things than those which Moses and the Prophets did say should come which sayings are contained in the Old Testament And as for your odd notion of the Words being within not without I say but this that it remains without when it is within as the matter in a Book does to instruct others when the Reader hath throughly digested it in his memory and unde●standing And that as to the Saints somewhat of the word is alwaies without when some is within that is the Word prevails but in part over their corruption and so far as it does prevail it is within so far as it prevails not it is without Mr. F. In Col. 3.16 Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly that which is the word of Christ dwells within whereas that which ye call the VVord is without T. D. The VVord spoken of was without or it was the Letter of the Scripture and his exhortation was to get acquaintance therewith and he prescribes means to that end in teaching and admonishing one another and singing Psalms which were part of the Word of Christ as the subject matter and author of them Mr. F. Now thou talkest of sing●ng Psalms it is a fond custom you get to make the people sing Davids conditions who have not his spirit as to make a proud man sing O Lord I am not puff'd in mind T. D. Though it be besides our businesse yet I shall answer to your cavils against our practice in a word Your objection holds as strongly against the use of them in the times of the Old Testament as against our use of them for the matter of them was no more all the singers conditions then than now and yet they were part of publique Temple-worship 2 Chron. 29.25 30. and the matter of many of them is doctrinal and prophetical and such as cannot be sung with particular application and I know no particular application necessary to singing that 131 Psal more than to reading of it nor is it more a lye to sing than to read them Mr F. VVhereas thou sayest Thomas Danson that the teaching and singing was a means of the words dwelling in them therein thou art out as in many other things for the word of Christ dwelt richly in them and thence they teached admonished and sung T. D. The words are an exhortation to get the word of Christ dwell richly in them or to grow in the knowledge of Christ as elsewhere 't is expressed and there is none that hath so much of the knowledge of the word but it may admit of encrease and therefore though they might teach and admonish from a stock of the word that hinders not but that the use of it in those duties might be the means of adding to it In the next place Richard Hubberthorn undertook to prove his Call in a discourse wh●ch you have in his own Book to which I referre you the main thing he insisted on was his Infallibility in teaching and the falsehood of our Ministry who are not Infallible T. D. You are much mistaken in thinking you are infallible it appears otherwise to us by the false doctrines which you teach and as for your participation of the infallible Spirit if that were granted which we cannot grant that infers not a participation of the spirits infallibility for that is as incommunicable as omnisciency or omnipotency R. Hu●berthorn The Apostles had a power of working miracles in them T. D. That i● d●nyed God himself was the sole subject of that power by which they were wrought and their faith was the means or sign of exerting it Acts 3.16 His Name through faith in his Name hath made this man strong c. Matth. 21.21 If ye have faith and doubt not c. ye shall say to this mountain be removed and it shall be done Mr. Fisher The man Christ Jesus whom ye call God-man was omniscient Joh. 2.24 Jesus did not commit himself to them because he knew all men c. T. D. Pray sir Do not you call the man Christ Jesus God-man too Your silence is not consent but dissent Omnisciency agreed not to Christ as man for he says elsewhere the son of man knows not when the day