we will believe their Ipsi dixerunt without any artificial arguments to prove what they say because we then know what they affirm is true by reason they have then received the unction 1 Joh. 2.26 which is truth and is no lye But in the mean time he must pardon us that we dissent from him and his catalogue of Fathers on which he buildeth his faith for ought we see in that point and desire him to give us leave or rectifie our weaknesse by some stronger reasons then we heard from him at that time to declare to him first negatively that the words of Christ could signifie no such thing Our reason is from the artificial arguments contained in that axiom Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God The axiom is a compound axiom as all exceptive and exclusive axioms are wherein are two axioms one affirmative the other negative Now as affirmation is before negation so in the said exceptive compound axiom the affirmative axiom is first to be considered 1. That a man is to be born again of water and of the Spirit to enter into the kingdom of God 2. Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God In the first axiom is laid down the effect to be born again and its causes water and the Spirit In the second axiom is intimated the necessity of those causes to the said effect that without those two said canses none can be born again to the kingdom of God And so much for the general consideration of the two axioms Our first reason we say why baptismal elementary water is not meant there is because the effect and its causes are of the same nature or quality according to the old and true maxime Qualis effectus talis causa contrà Such as the effect is such are the causes by reason that Causa est cujus vi res est A cause is by whose force and vertue a thing is Hence the birth specified Joh. 3.5 being as none we believe will deny spiritual the causes must be spiritual also which Christ nameth to be water and the Spirit in a copulate respect to the effect also Christ putteth water as the first cause in order to the effect aforesaid hence we affirm both causes water and the Spirit concurr as partial requisite causes to the effect Secondly that both causes therefore must be spiritual because the effect is spiritual but baptismal elementary water is a grosse material and no spiritual water and therefore the said water cannot be the water Christ meaneth as a partial concurrent cause to the new spiritual birth If it be said that baptismal elementary water is figurative and representative of the new birth That will not serve the turn because Christ doth not speak of a new birthin respect of a partial representative cause but he speaks of water as the true and reall partial coworking cause out of which a man must be born again therefore the said elementary water is not meant Neither can what is said be evaded by affirming that instrumental causes may be of another nature to the principal efficient causes as the Apostles were when it is said by St. Paul 1 Cor. 3.9 we are labourers together with God for though that be true in some respect when they are used as preparatory causes or instruments to the preparing of the said effect yet it is not true that heterogeneal causes can communicate immediately their vertue in common to the said effect and yet the effect be wholly of the nature of one of them and not of the other as we say in this place that the effect is wholly spiritual and Christ nameth water the preceding concurring cause in common with the Spirit from which this spiritual effect doth proceed Again though Paul do call himself a fellow-labourer as aforesaid 1 Cor. 3.9 yet the same effect of which he was a preparatory instrument and but a preparatory instrument might have been produced without him and no man we think dare affirm that except Paul or his fellow-Apostles had concurred that the Corinthians and others could not have been begotten again in Christ Again Christ specifieth the water in the said place to be so necessary that except a man be born of it and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God which if it be elementary baptismal water which is there meant then no man nor child can be saved or enter into the kingdome of God without it no not Seth Enoch nor Abraham nor any of the Patriarchs unless they and every one of them were baptized with elementary water but it is not likely though the Jews had ceremonial washings and though their washings were called baptism that any of them used to baptize with water as Christ hath left the institution direction of it to be In the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost as is expressed Matth. 28.19 which yet they must use in like manner or none of them were or could be born again to the kingdome of God without it because Christ saith Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit he cannot enter c. Again if it be such water aforesaid which Christ maketh so necessary as aforesaid then those do very ill who are of that opinion if they do not urge all parents to baptize their children so soon as they peep into the world especially if they maintain the old tradition of original sinne because they are liable to sudden death Quod cuivis potest accidere cuiquam potest and not deferre the baptizing their children unto some more convenient time as many do for a more pompous and magnificent administration thereof In the next place we do affirm with confidence that the water Christ meant in the said place is the divine and spiritual word according to that John 15.3 Now you are clean through the word I have spoken unto you which is Christs living and powerful word which is called spirit and life John 6.63 which also is aptly called water by Christ because it hath the same parallel effect to the defiled and unregen erate soul that water hath to the defiled body for as water cleanseth the defiled body so the said word maketh clean the defiled soul according to that Ephes 5.26 27. where it is said Christ gave himself for his Church that he might sanctifie and cleanse it by the washing of water in or through the word as the Greek expresseth it making the word the exegesis of the water and the vulgar Latine turneth it the word of life hence Christ did say to Nicodemus Except a man be born again of water that is the word called water as aforesaid he cannot enter into the kingdome of God Secondly this word is meant by the water aforesaid because none can enter into the kingdome of God without a washing with that word called also Tit.
promised to the keepers of the Law then the promise had been vain So it had without grace in Christ Secondly if righteousnesse were by the Law then Christ had dyed in vain because it were superfluous for him to dye for us if we could attain it by the works of the Law and therefore it is apparent that by the works of the Law no flesh living can be justified Thirdly for hypocriticall Gospellers such as seem Saints in ostentation that they may play the divell without suspicion as John Tendring did till he went away who say they have faith but shew forth no works which are not vailed with hypocrisie and which are not done or intended to wrong ends for such saith he let Isaiah tell you how acceptable their works be to God and whether they be like to justifie them Isai 1.16 17. For the Lord complaineth that he is weary of them and that his soul hateth them and bids them bring no more such sacrifices to him But we demand of him whether those men were Gospellers or pretended Professors whether the works which the Lord there forbids were Ceremonial or Morals For he forbids not the works of the Moral Law Fourthly he saith that for true Christians that are born not of blood nor of the will of the flesh but of God if any works could justifie it must needs be their works which are wrought in and through them by the spirit of God and yet we say quoth he that the best works of the best regenerate men cannot justifie them before God And thus we prove it how doth he that First because all the graces that we receive in this life are given to us but in part page 55. sure they are wholly and freely given as we shewed in the proof of the other positions and so they are imperfect grace But see how he contradicts himself and lyes against the Holy Ghost in his next words which are these not that the Spirit of Gods works imperfectly but that he means not to inrich us with any grace here while we are conversant with sinful men in this vale of misery but only so far forth as he seeth it fit to bring us unto the kingdome of perfection where that which is in part shall be done away 1 Cor. 13.10 But what if Paul looked for that here saying when that which is perfect is come then that which is in part or but a piece-work shall be abolished and swallowed up verse 11. yea what if Paul all that time enjoyed that which is so perfect for he saith verse the 11. When I was a child I spake as a child I understood as a child I thought as a child but when I became a man I put away childish things And if so then the Vindicators conclusion will stand against us like the walls of Jericho which fell flat to the ground which follows in these words And therefore our inherent justice being but as our knowledg is imperfect and therefore it is impossible that it should perfectly justifie us before God But we have overthrown that supposition of his before Secondly he saith that though our good works are perfect in respect of the Spirit of God which effecteth them yet they are tainted when they pass through us who are so subject to sin as waters running through a dirty channel and therefore cannot justifie us before God in whose presence every polluted thing stands condemned whence the Prophet saith Is 64.6 All our righteousness is as a menstruous cloth But neither are all Saints subject to sin all their life long nor can that which proceeds from Gods Spirit be tainted by us nor is that the righteousness of Saints but of sinners and unregenerate men which is so menstruous as is said before Howbeit he brings in Gregorie's saying Moral lib. 21. cap. 15. and lib. 3. cap. 7. All mans righteousness should be unrighteousness if God should strictly judge it and then Augustine's saying Wo to the most laudable and best life of men Unto which we first oppose these sayings of the Apostle 1 John 2.29 If ye know that he is righteous ye know that every one that doth righteousness is born of him chap. 3.7 Little children let no man deceive you he that doth righteousness is righteous even as he is righteous chap. 4.17 Herein is our love made perfect that we may have boldness in the day of judgment and then those of the Psalmist Psal 11.2 3 4 5 6. and 119.1 2. and 128.1 2. unto which we could adde many more Howbeit he goeth on in the same lying strain saying if God laying aside his mercy should discusse our lives or righteousness in the strictness of his justice it would be so for God is a God of purer eyes who charged his angels with folly Indeed Eliphaz one of Jobs back-friends and of John Tendring's gain-saying spirit saith so but falsly Job 4.17 18. for the Lord never charged any but the fallen Angels with folly so But he tels us further if you will believe him that the best of men when he lives on earth is both a Saint and sinner a Saint by reason of grace wrought in him and a sinner by his own natural corruption which in some measure tainteth every grace of God and therefore the best of these who being compared with their fellows might seem just indeed yet looking to the strictness of Gods justice they disclaimed all their own righteousness What that of grace and regeneration also But who are those Saints St. Eliphaz a lying and contentious zelot with whom God is highly displeased Job 42.7 But he brings in Job himself saying chap. 9.2 3. But how should man be just with God if he will contend with him he cannot answer him to one of a thousand and David Psal 130. and 143. 2. of which we said before that all this is true of man in his corrupt estate and for a time afterwards but not of the Saints best estate and growth upon earth For whereas he saith page 56. that Paul affirmeth 1 Cor. 4.4 that he knew nothing by himself it is true But whereas the Apostle addeth that he was not thereby justified he renders a false reason of that saying of the Apostle and contradicts himself also saying though he served God most faithfully in the inner man yet he saw another law in his members warring against the law of his mind and hence he cried out O wretched man that I am who shall deliver me from this body of death What did he feel surely a law of sin and felt such a body of death continually and yet knew nothing by himself Good Hyperbolick bring your ends nearer together as the servant said to his lying mother Thirdly saith he that although it were granted that some works of the Saints were perfectly good yet any one sin blotteth out the remembrance of our former righteousness Ezek. 18.24 But that Text speaks of a final Apostasie from righteousness not of one actual
an inward portraiture of righteousnesse a glimpse of the heavenly man yet earthy naturall and mutable which we all beare at the first and so are said to have born the image of the earthly 1 Cor. 15.49 This is opposed verse the 14 of this 5 chapter of the Rom. to Moses another inward state or work of the Law discovering the deadlinesse of sin unto us with lightnings thunderings and terrors Heb. 12.18 19. The third Adam is the old man of sin The fourth is the last Adam the Lord from Heaven who is not as the first was with his weak image of Righteousnesse a living soul but a quickning Spirit 1 Cor. 15.45 It 's the first then of those soure the Adam of our earthly or naturall man who yet with the help of the second is the image of him that is yet to come to the beleevers to wit the Lord from heaven in whom we first sin and die by our personal fall according to 1 Cor. 15.22 As in Adam all die which doe die so in Christ shall all be made alive who are quickned for we proved before that no man did or could dye by the first Adams sin both by the Law and Gods oath thereagainst As for the first 1 Cor. 15.47 48 49. we have shewn that it makes for us and not against us As for Ephes 2.3 Paul there confesseth that since his fall he and the fallen Jews as well as others were not children of God by love patience and meeknesse as in their first creation but children by the nature of the wrath for so the words run in the Greek and consequently the children of the prince of the power of the air as well as others according to Rom. 3.22 23. Unto the words of Job 14.4 Who can bring a clean thing out of an unclean We say that since the mans personal fall and corruption he can neither by his own strength cleanse himselfe nor bring forth any righteousnesse or holinesse that is in it selfe clean or pure Unto Psal 51.5 Behold I was shapen in iniquity and in sin did my mother conceive me or warm me we answer that David speaks here of his own first personal fall and disobedience or his first conception and forming not in his natural mothers belly but in the womb of sin accordingly as it is said of Eve who was at the first created after the similitude of God that when she fell 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Tim. 2.14 But the woman being deceived was begotten in the transgression Thus the Jews speak to the blind man Joh. 9.3 4. Thou wastaltogether born insin and dost thou teach us And David himselfe complaineth of some noted wicked ones the wicked are strangers from the womb they goe astray as soon as they be born they speak lies Psal 58.3 4 5. If he had spoken of their natural birth he could not truly have said that they had either gone astray or spoken lies as soon as they were born This mother that conceived David in sin was his consent to the first Temptation Jam. 1.15 Lust when it hath conceived c. Unto Esay 48.8 I knew that thou wouldest deal very treacherously and wast called a transgressor from the womb I say that men could not from the natural womb deal treacherously and therefore it is a spiritual womb of which the Lord speaketh here And Hosea 9.11 As for Ephrains their glory shall flee away like a bird from the birth and from the womb and from the conception to wit in the sin or in the false righteousness Finally unto Gen. 8.21 For the imaginations of mans heart are evil from his youth I say that is true for before that time men usually lose their innocency and corrupt themselves But what is that to innate corruption And whereas he brings in Augustine saying in uno vniversi It is granted while we were in Adams loines we were all one and so we are still in the natural Adam at the first birth earthly but innocent and in the old Adam of sin all one when we are fallen and depraved that is are corrupt and sinful but are not all such in the same measure and degree But his following positions are these page 4. That we were all in the first Adam legally No but seminally onely That there was a stipulation and Covenant between God and Adam for all mankind That we were all parties with him to any such Covenant That we were liable to the curse that belongeth to the breach of that Covenant All which are the meer figments of mans brain That we had interest in the mercy promised in that pretended Covenant Of all which there is no footstep to be found in the word That being in him naturally we were unavoidably subject to all the bondage and burthen which he or the humane nature then contracted Not so unless it were some temporal calamity with which God might justly plague his posterity for his fall and sins Yet he goes on in page 4. to prove that we are guilty of the first Adam's sin but by false principles or with true principles misapplied as followeth That every thing which is born carrieth with it the nature of that which did bear it as touching the substance and accidents proper to the special kind This is a truth and therefore the soul which is born and breathed from God must needs be pure and the natural earthly man must needs be good in his kind as all other natural living creatures are that which is born of the Spirit in a way of regeneration is Spirit but what is born of the Flesh is still Flesh as this mans Wisdome and Doctrine is of which birth Christ speaks John 3.6 as before That we being all born of corrupt and guilty parents do in our birth by nature draw their corruption and guilt Which is false for guilt and corruption are not natural but spiritual and adventitious things as is aforesaid That by the death of Christ who is the second Adam howbeit not as he was man but as he is a quickning Spirit and the Lord from heaven 1 Cor. 15.45 47. we receive a double grace of Justification and Regeneration Wherein are two false grounds layed down First that justification and regeneration are two distinct things which St. Paul makes but one and the self same thing Titus 3.4 5 6 7. But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the holy Ghost which he shed abundantly on us through Jesus Christ our Saviour that being justified by his grace we should be made heires according to the hope of eternal life And 1 Cor. 6.11 And such were some of you but ye are washed but ye are sanctified but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God The second false ground is that we
as we shall in our catasceuastical or affirmative part of our discourse more fully manifest But he concludes with his form of prayer I pray God to enable us all to hold the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace and that we may renounce all those doctrines that set up any thing of man And much more say we do tend to the setting up of Satan or his kingdom to the abasing of Christ and that we embrace those doctrines which abase man and much more whatsoever is of the devil and which exalt the Lord according to that of the Psalmist Not unto us O Lord not unto us and much lesse unto the Devil but unto thy name and unto that only give the glory Psalm 15. Unto all which we say and that not formally but cordially Amen You see the Vindicator hath closed like a Saint of the Pharisaicall sect with a prayer even as specious in words of Scripture-phrase as his Preface was to his beloved friends placed in the front of his Vindication but when his prayer is explained to you in reference to his position That sinne will remain in the best of Saints as long as they live then it will appear to have the same scope and end to his said position as we have declared his Preface had For whom can he mean and include in the relative word us when he saith I pray God enable us but the Levites his friends and other his allies with himselfe For be it known to all men by these presents that we disown his Tenents and resolve to speak against them dum maneat Lachesi quod torqueat to speak until we lack breath if we have opportunity Secondly if to hold the unity of the Spirit be intended in reference to his position then these words must signifie to hold the onenesse of the wicked spirit for all sin is of the Devil 1 Joh. 3.9 therefore to pray in reference aforesaid to hold the unity of the Spirit is to pray to hold the onenesse of the wicked spirit in upholding and maintaining with one affection that sin will remain in the best Saints as long as they live Thirdly to hold it in the bond of peace is to pray in reference to the foresaid position that in the onenesse of affection to the wicked spirit that he and his friends may in all tyes bonds obligations of a quiet and peaceable agreement be bound together to maintain that sin will remain in the best of Saints as long as they live and not to disturb one another as those foresaid false Prophets do disturb them who deny their position Yea the Vindicator prayeth as ignorantly as he can if he maintain his position that he and his friends may renounce all the doctrine that sets up any thing of man to the abasing of Christ for if he intend that clause of his petitionary note in reference to our doctrine of a possibility of a total mortification of sinne in this life then his prayer is that nothing of man that is of us in contradistinction to himselfe and his friends may be set up to the mortifying of all sin and so to abase Christ by a total mortification of sin if he mean to prefer his own petition before our doctrine tendeth absit blasphemia dicto to the abasing of Christ But if he iutend to maintain to the end as he begun that sin will remain in the best Saints as long as they live then the said clause of his vote and prayer is a contradiction to himself and his position for doth any doctrine set up any thing of man but that Doctrine which maintaineth the necessary continuance of sin in this life for only sinne and allsin is of the Devill and man Joh. 3.9 Rom. 5.12 by one man sinne came into the world and 2 Thess 2.3 the devil or wicked one what ever men dream to the contrary is called the man of sin therefore for the Vindicator to pray that no doctrine be owned but renounced that sets up any thing of man is to pray against his own position that sin will remain in the best Saints as long as they live because only sinne and all sinne is from man as aforesaid And is there any thing which abaseth Christ but sins continuance when as the Lord complaineth thou hast made me to serve with thy sins and wearied me with thine iniquities Isai 43.24 Hence also upon the same account that the doctrine of sins remaining is the setting up of man and abasing of Christ we say here also the clause of his prayer which is expressed in these words And that we embrace those doctrines that abase man and exalt the Lord is a prayer for the embracing our doctrines because a total mortification of sin in this life is it which exalteth Christ in his holinesse will and power to destroy all sin according to that James 4.5 6. for the Lord offereth more grace that is to overcome it See Phil. 4.13 Joh. 1.16 who came to redeem us from all iniquity and purifie unto himselfe a peculiar people zealous of good works Titus 2.14 that the Lord may be exalted alone in that day Isai 2.17 Not unto us Lord Psal 115.19 in a better sense then the Vindicator doth apply those words in reference to his prayer relating to his position but unto thy name be the glory who hast in some measure made known to us and made us to believe the true doctrine which abases man and exalts Christ which doctrine is a possibility of a total mortification of sin in this world Thus we have traced the Vindicator 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the first to the last of his Vindication wherein the unbiassed Reader may easily comprehend what nonsense tacit contradictions besides open ones this Vindicator is guilty of in this his Vindication so that he hath first and last verified therein another apt Anagram of his name In no end right Our Gusmond hath spit folly with despite But marvel not for He 's in no end right The finis rei by his confession Of his positions is transgression Will you his friends elect this sinful wight To be your Pilot who 's in no end right Can he direct your souls unto heavens blisse Who at both ends doth steer amisse You Levites in his Preface cal'd to fight With us forbear for he 's in no end right His Jus and Saints mentioned in his letters Are mongrels compared with their betters For he cannot on best Saints temper light It to define who is in no end right Disown him then who hath no morning light Detest this vagrant who 's in no end right Having demonstrated the Anasceuastick or confutative part of our revindication and observed the Vindicators ends what they are we proceed to the Catasceuastick or confirmative part thereof in two axioms or assertions contrary to the Vindicators positions First we affirm that there is a possibility through the grace and help of Christ of a total mortification of
said verb in the said place in the Hebrew text is in the future tense but who is there that knows any thing of that language who knows not that the Hebrews have no potential mood of a verb and that when they have occasion to make use of the same mood to declare the sense of Scripture according as it is intended they then render the future tense of the Indicative mood in the Potential mood as aforesaid which the English Translators should have done to have made the hypothetical axiom good sense in reference to the reason given immediately in the Parenthesis to illustrate the hypothetical axiom by Again its requisite to find out the sense and scope of a Scripture-axiom to observe whether the said axiom be laid down absolutely without any dependence on the context or whether it be laid down with some relative particle to be taken notice of evidencing its dependence upon the context antecedent or consequent As for instance it is thus translated Eccles 7.20 for there is no man which sinneth not hence it is more confidently affirmed then truly by most that Solomon doth acknowledge that there is no man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not But the mistake of these men who affirm as aforesaid is from the mistranslating of the Hebrew particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which indeed is a relative particle and doth intimate that this verse doth relate unto the 19 verse which is the antecedent context thereunto where it is said that wisdome doth strengthen the wise more then ten mighty men which are in the city The meaning is that wisdome will fence and secure a wise man more from dangerous assaults and violence then ten mighty men which are in the city For the illustration of which and to shew the excellency of wisdome and the use thereof in a superlative degree Solomon doth subjoyn the 20 verse so as to make it with the 19 verse a discrete axiom by putting a discrete particle if rightly translated to the 20 verse but our Translators expresse that particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by a a causal particle for which indeed being so expressed maketh those said 19 20 verses relating together to contain in their relative respect little or no sense at all as will appear to every truth-searching man thus Wisedom doth strengthen the wise man more then ton mighty men which are in the City for or because there is not a just man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not Now is that a good reason or cause why wisedom doth strengthen a wise man more then ten mighty men even because there is not a just man upon earth who doth good and sinneth not surely it s not a better reason then his was who gave out of his shallow judgement that Tenderden steeple was the cause of Goodwin-Sandes because Goodwin Sandes was after Tenderden steeple That story Bishop Latimer made use of upon an occasion in a Sermon before King Edward concerning such who ignorantly put non causam pro causa that which is no cause for the cause So do the Translators by their translation put non causam pro causa for sinne is no cause why wisedome hath any excellent effect but the contrary rather if we believe what Solomon saith Eccles 10.1 Dead flies make the ointment of the Apothecarie to smel so doth a little folly him that is in reputation for wisedom But if the Translators had translated the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discretely though although notwithstanding and rendred the verb which is in the future tense of the Indicative mood in the present tense of the Potential mood then had they given a good and profitable sense of the words thus Wisedom strengtheneth a wise man more then ten mighty men which are in a City although there be no man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not as it did strengthen Christ Luk. 20.20 21. and Stephen also Act. 6.10 By translating the said words in the manner aforesaid as they should have done they had not been guilty of seducing the people to believe by their translation that Solomon doth affirm contrary to Scriptures that there is no man upon earth which doth good and sinneth not If those who are Judges and assume power to scan and judge mens words do conclude the axiom or axioms to be positively and absolutely affirmed or denyed which are only intended relatively to the antecedent or consequent axioms we say if they do so quis pene innocens sit who can free himself from treason or blasphemy as often as their tryers and Judges please to declare their words absolutely and abstractly spoken when the author of them intended them as Solomon did in the place aforesaid onely to be relatively spoken By which kind of dividing axioms he did more wickedly then wittily who said Hang all the Law and the Prophets concealing and not mentioning Christs antecedent words Math. 22.40 On these commandements hang all the Law and the Prophets 10. Que. Whether if we doubt of the meaning of an axiom which is a divine testimony we are not to consider to the end we may see the meaning of it the artificial arguments contained in the said axiom for though testimonium be argumentum inartificiale yet the axiom consists of artificial arguments and these testata must be proved by artificial arguments or something equivalent or tantamount unto them which are qualifications requisite to be in every witnesse as scientia virtus prudentia First Knowledge in the testis else he will speak he knoweth not what like them 1 Tim. 1.7 Secondly Vertue or else talke they care not what as they did Math. 28.15 upon a sad account Thirdly Constancy else the testes will seem to contradict themselves as they did that cryed before Christ Hosanna to the highest and the next day cried Crucifie him crucifie him Therefore to find out the true meaning of the res testata the thing affirmed or denied we must see what arguments relating one to another are contained in the axiom which is a Scripture-testimony As for instance Christ saith to Nicodemus Joh. 3.5 Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit c. Now what water Christ meaneth is the thing to be inquired into We instance in the said place because there was a learned respondent who did of late in a publique disputation affirm and the opponent did not deny it though he might that elementary baptismal water was meant by Christ in the said place His only reason was without any further demonstration because so many Fathers had for so many ages downward attested it without any artificial arguments but onely their bare words to be so which is the reason we professe to all men why we doubt that sense to be the meaning of water in that place unlesse the said respondent can assure us that those Fathers or some of them were by inspirement infallible in giving of the said sense if he can then
3.5 the Laver of regeneration c. for no unclean thing can enter Rev. 21.27 and Christ said John 15.3 Now you are clean through the word I have spoken to you and James 1.18 it is said Of his own will begat he us by the word of truth But we presume to adde yet a little further to shew how needful it is to prove from the text or context that the sense we fix upon a Scripture-axiom is the proper sense which the Holy Ghost intendeth in the said place Because one Mr. Stevens of Fenny Drayton in Leicestershire hath set forth a book which he intitles A three fold defence of original sinne in reference to the old common notion thereof in which book he saith p. 94. that the Examiners of the late Synods Confession of faith deal sophistically with him and his party in leaving out their chief argument which lieth hid we confess to us in 3 John 6. But if it do appear that we have sophisticated with them we acknowledge that they may justly according to their large power of admitting or hindring interdicere nobis aquâ igne sed qui non est sponte nocens we desire him to pardon for we do profess to him that we did not dream of such a best in the said place among all their weak arguments for their tradition of original sinne as aforesaid The sense Mr. Stevens sixeth upon those words John 6.3 That which is born of the flesh is flesh is that original sinne and the impurity of the natural birth is meant by the same words and therefore there is a necessity of a new birth spoken of v. 5. from original sinne Which we grant if it be in all men but that is petitio principii it s the thing to be proved though yet there is a necessity of a new birth according to v. 5. and for the reason added v. 6. but we challenge Mr. Stevens who boasteth of this place to contain being as little to the purpose as the rest their chief argument to prove for as yet he hath not done it that Christ meant by flesh from which that which is flesh is born is original sinne and impurity by nature which we openly deny as it were at the market-crosse 1. Because flesh in Scripture is taken in more senses then Mr. Steven's his distinction of flesh in the said place p. 94. doth comprehend Secondly because flesh is more largely taken in Scripture then he can yet fathom within his apprehension and opposite also to the sanctifying work of the Spirit therefore we say Mr. Stevens distinction and his explication of it doth not prove what he with rash confidence affirmeth Now that flesh is taken in Scripture in other respects then Mr. Stevens mentioneth as aforesaid these following Scriptures do evidence 2 Cor. 5.16 Wherefore henceforth know we no man after the flesh yea though we have known Christ after the flesh yet now henceforth we know him so no more Let Mr. Stevens apply the said place to his sense of flesh John 3.6 and make good and Christian-like sense of the said words if he can for there is spoken of a knowing Christ no more after the flesh although they had known him so before now to know them after the flesh must intend not to own them after the flesh any more because Paul could not but know them after the humane flesh by reason all are in that condition to be outwardly conversed with Secondly He did never know that is own Christ at any time after the flesh as it is meant by Mr. Stevens in the second member of his distinction for Christ was not born in original sinne nor yet lived at any time in the corruption of nature Hence flesh in this place doth not come under any member of Mr. Stevens destinction Again flesh in this place is the same in sense as appeareth by Pauls expression in reference to men and the reason of the Apostles disowning any man henceforth after the flesh is grounded upon his disowning Christ after the flesh any more for so the arguing lieth clear by the emphatical expression or revocation yea though we have known Christ after the flesh yet now henceforth we know him so no more therefore the flesh is to be taken in that place in the same sense as it relateth to men and Christ and Paul would henceforth know neither men nor Christ after the flesh hence its plain that the flesh there was a state in contradistinction to the Spirit or his other sanctifying work of the Spirit in which Paul would not henceforth know them in Again in John 6.63 flesh is taken in another sense then Mr. Stevens doth apprehend But to come nearer to the sense of flesh as it may suit with John 3.6 flesh is taken Gal. 3.3 not for corruption of nature in any kind because none can think the Galatians ever did expect to be perfected by sinneful nature after they had begun in the Spirit much lesse did Paul drive at it so as to upbraid them for attempting to be perfected by the flesh in that sense but for the fleshly ordinances they were turning back unto after they had begun in the Spirit as doth plainly appear in chap. 4.21 22 c. chap. 5.1 2 3. So Heb. 7.16 the Ceremonial services in which the Sribes and Pharisees rested in and were captived to are called the carnal comman dement So Heb. 9.11 12. Hence the observances of them were but carnal because the ordinances were but fleshly Hence that which is born of the flesh is still flesh according to Christs words John 3.6 Now with Mr. Stevens his favour in this sense of flesh and not in his of original sinne and impurity of the birth did Christ teach Nicodemus first the necessity of a new birth Secondly the necessity of it by the water and Spirit which are the two copulate causes of it named by Christ and that upon the reason Christ giveth from the nature of the cause to the like nature of the effect in two instances v. 6. that which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit for it was in that flesh that is in fleshly ordinances that he and others were captived in therefore not in Mr. Steven's sense of flesh did Christ intend that instruction to Nicodemus because Christ had no occasion given him from Nicodemus to fall upon the doctrine of original sinne this appears from Nicodemus discourse with him owning him upon his working such works to be a teacher come from God our Saviour knowing Nicodemus was a master in Israel v. 10. and likewise well knowing wherein all the present masters of Israel stuck and what they gloried in being puffed up though captived with fleshly ordinances Col. 2.17 18 c. he taught Nicodemus a new lesson of the necessity of his and their new birth from better principles then fleshly rules and services which onely served Heb. 9.13 but to the