the True Ministers and Members from the False but whether it be a remaining Gift to this day So that his varying the Terms from the present time to the time past is a meer Sophistical Shift who when he gives his former words hath it is when he makes his Inference hath it was Whose Sence formerly relating thereto is given Imm. Rev. p. 179 to 183. and p. 188 to 191. which T. E. hath laid before him in his Truth Defended p. 47 to 50. and G. K. hath not yet retracted He in p. 179. thus hath it Whereas they say The Tree may be known by its Fruits and it is so but by what are the Fruits known Two Men may be found doing the same outward Work which hath the same outward Appearance and yet the one a meer Hypocriâ—e the other a sincere Christian Then by what can their Works and Fruits be known These Worâ— which carry in them an appearance to be Good anâ— yet are not Good but dead Works empty withoâ—â— Life though they have a fair shew yet are they roâ—â—tenness within And p. 180. The Works having bâ— the Appearance they are also seen and discerned 〈◊〉 be such and being Evil they cast an evil Savour bâ— which in the Light which begets the discerning theâ— are felt and he can have no Union with them nâ—â— with the Tree on which they grow and this Maâ— discerneth in the Manifestation of the Light both hâ—â— own and his Neighbour's Works of what Nature theâ— are by the tasting and smelling of the Fruit the Treâ— is known And a little lower he adds Hereto I givâ— my Testimony that there is such a thing and I Dâ— WITNESS IT in my measure c. This shoâ— touch is enough to shew what the Man held formerlâ— and pretended to witness in his measure though noâ— being gone from the Light in which the discerning 〈◊〉 received and from that measure he then witnessed 〈◊〉 now wrangleth against it for he saith Whatever inward Sense or Discerning any may pretend 〈◊〉 have of another Man's Spirit being bad yet we find no waâ—â—rant from Scripture to receive an Accusation against anâ— far less a positive Judgment without plain evidence of Maâ—â—ter of Fact against them by credible Witnesses 1 Tim. 5 1â— Answ Accusation implies an Accuser and this respecâ— outward Conversation But what is this to the Instancâ— of a Man's Spirit being bad or to those outwarâ— Works which he said in the Citation above had thâ— same outward Appearance and yet the one might be meer Hypocrite the other a sincere Christian As he theâ— queried By what can their Works and Fruits be known Sâ— may I By what Evidence from without can they be coâ—â—victed when the Charge relates only to the Man's Spâ—â—rit being bad even when his Conversation is not acâ—cused For where Matter of Fact as without is objected the Evidence must be correspondent but where the Fruit and Taste is inward the Evidence and Demonstration is also inward But G. K. upon these false Premises labours to detect the ill Consequences of Mens being judged to be of a wrong Spirit only by the pretended discerning of Spirits Answ If it be only pretended not real this doth not destroy the Doctrine or render it unsound because abused by ill Men any more than pretending the Spirit is the Rule is an unsound Principle in it self because some pretend thereto and act contrary Again How came none of all this to be foreseen and fenced against by himself formerly when he gave Testimony and that even from his own Experience to such a Taste Savour and discerning of the Works that had the same outward Appearance yet the one good the other rotten within Why did he not thus even then distinguish between the Pretence and what was Real to make void the Judgment which is the Product of that Relish of that Dis-union if he thought Men with whom we can have no Vnion they are his own words above ought not to be judged to be of a bad Spirit or that we may not declare we have no Union with them He adds at the close And even to know Men by their Fruits is a Gift of the Spirit and proceedeth from a true Spiritual discerning that is given in some measure Vniversally to all the Faithful though they have not always such due use of it but they may be and are at times mistaken Answ If these Fruits be outward Fruits visibly evil or good Fruits that the very Wicked have a discerning of But if the Fruits be inward perceptible by the inward Senses the most extraordinary Endowments judgeth not without them By their Fruits ye shall know them even them who come in Sheeps clothing but are inwardly ravening Wolves said Christ to the very Apostles Matt. 7.15 16. i. e. Ye shall taste them ye shall savouâ— them ye shall see through the Sheeps clothing the outward Appearance to the inward ravening wolfish Nature That being the way by which alone the most experienced discern the inward State of any As well aâ— to assert formerly an infallible way of discerning thâ— true Ministers and Members from the false is given and now that there is not enough of it given to all the Faithful to keep them out of Mistakes shews how confused the Man is in his present Shiftings and Shufflings § 4 Whereas he had said Imm. Rev. p. 12. This Seed groweth up into a perfect substantial Birth which is Christ formed within the Body of Christ his Flesh and Blood which cometh down from Heaven and giveth Life unto Man which eateth it And it is called the Body and Flesh and Blood of Christ because his eternal Life and Spirit dwelleth in it immediately He here bids us Note By this perfect substantial Birth he did not mean as he now doth not any Substance NEWLY PRODVCED but only a vital Vnion of Substantial Principles formerly existing Answ A Substance then he allows it to be but not newly produced Was that the Matter in debate then Whether the Substance was newly produced or no or Whether it was a Substance or no Or is not this rather an empty Shift that he might seem to reconcile his former with his latter Writings without retracting either Had another committed such a Blunder he had like enough to have been one of the first that would have reflected on him But he now seems to forget what himself said Ex. Narr p. 24. when he undeservedly taunted at W. P. who had administred no occasion crying This is rare Logick and added You know there should be no term or thing of Importance in the Conclusion of any Syllogism or Argument but what should be in the Premises Let him therefore keep to his own Rule better or never pretend to correct others Logick For as is the Man's Cause so is his way of defending it In p. 4. he adds Whereas I did call that inward substantial Birth the Flesh and Blood of Christ I did so call it only by
of Christ the One Offering come to be revealed by which One Offering he hath for Ever perfected them that are sanctified as in Truth Advanced p. 71. I have opposed to his saying Way to City of God p. 125. that through the coming of Jesus Christ in the inward even before he was outwardly come or manifest many were saved and attained unto PERFECT Peace and Reconciliation with God in their Souls And to what he alledged in Vni Gr. p. 8. c. that the Gospel lay hid within the Law as within the Vail that Christ Jesus was in the Law and under it that universally in ALL Men both Jews and Gentiles there hath been both Moses and the Prophets in Spirit and also Christ See my Keith against Keith p. 4 12 13 c. Nor yet have we blamed his saying None were justified by the Law or first Ministration of the Spirit or Light within or their Obedience thereunto but thro' Faith in Christ which yet are not delivered as deduced by us out of him but shewed what he meant by Faith in Christ then viz. a believing in the Light nor is the outward Name that which saveth but the inward Nature Vertue and Power which was made manifest in them said he Vni Gr. p. 30. who had said p. 29. That in diverse of these Gentiles the Seed was raised which is that Divine Nature or Birth by which they did the things contained in the Law and SO were JUSTIFIED by him Also in his Postscript to G. W. â—is Nature of Christianity p. 65 and 70. Cited by me Keith against Keith p. 11. and not yet retracted God was in Christ reconciling Men to himself ever since the Fall in all Ages both before and since Christ suffered in the outward having given them or put in them the Word of Reconciliation by which they who became renewed thereby were reconciled and justified in all Ages blaming R. G. his Doctrine that no Men were justified nor reconciled until Christ suffered Death in the outward because then and not till then his Adversary had said was Reconciliation and Justification wrought c. to whom also he assigns as an Error the asserting That Obedience to the Light within in the Conscience is buâ— the work of the first Covenant and Righteousnesâ— thereof and that no Man is justified thereby By aâ— which the Reader may perceive G. K. hath not fairlâ— stated what we objected to him out of his Books as weâ— as that he had no cause to say as he doth here p. 19. â— That upon a diligent search into his Books and an impartiâ— examination of all the places Cited by us to prove it he caâ— find no such thing as that he had formerly asserted Mâ— might be justified and saved without all Knowledge aâ— Faith of Christ without us as he was Crucified c. Foâ— what I have here laid before him of which I havâ— Treated more at large in my People called Quakers cleaâ—ed p. 26 to 31. out of his Book of Vni Gr. p. 28 29 3â— 34 35 36 56 57 58 115 117 and 120. are sufficieâ—â— to shew both what he formerly called Faith in Chrisâ— and what Faith justified even the Gentiles before Chriâ— was Crucified even a belief in the inward Manifestatioâ— in the Word nigh in the Mouth and Heart as Vni Gâ— p. 34 35. and abundantly elsewhere However there is a blunder of his behind p. 18 which having slipt over I now return to where 〈◊〉 saith no Justification is by that Law whether it be understâ— of Moses his outward Ministration or the same Ministrâ—â—tion of Moses in Spirit where the Law is writ but in Tabâ— of Stone till the Seed be raised c. Upon which I Qâ—ry Whether the Ministration of Moses in Spirit was writ in Tables of Stone or the fleshy Tables of the Heart If upon the former where were these Tables to be found Who had the keeping of them And who wrote them there He had need have recourse to his Metaphorical Allusion again and even that will not help him But it is just with God that such as Fight against his Wrath and are Bladder-blown with their own Learning should expose themselves that others may see if they will not that Pride goeth before Destruction and a haughty Look before a Fall Prov. 16.18 Yet in as much as in the Citation above out of Vni Gr. p. 29. I have shewed that he then allow'd that in diverse of the Gentiles the Seed was raised and they were justified by Christ In as much also as he here recurrs to his late distinction of Express and Implicit Knowledge and Faith for which he widely referrs to his Book of Anti. and Sadd. Detected without either assignâ—ng Page or Passage or observing that I have Answered him even with respect to that very distinction â—n my Keith against Keith p. 62 to 71. which seems to be the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Universal Heal-all of G. K's Languishing Cause brought in at every turn to stop a gap with whether applicable or no I shall tell him He that affirmeth must prove and if he will affirm those Gentiles had an Implicit Faith and Knowledge that Christ was outwardly to be Born Suffer Die and Rise again â—n order to their Justification he must not barely alâ—edge but demonstrate that they had it either explicitly or implicitly which I have more than once put him upon and he hath not yet attempted to do as well â—s that I have shewed that even then several of the Citations given out of him while unretracted block â—p his way Which I again press upon him to do whatever comes short hereof being meer Trifling § 4 G. K. having so severely as well as unjustly reflected upon G. W. Ex. Narr p. 39 40. as having Allegorized away Christ's Birth Death Resurrection Ascension and coming to Judgment it might reasonably have been expected himself should not have exceeded therein or at least that he would have corrected and retracted his own before he found fault with another Yet when his own Allegories or Metaphorical Allusions as he now tearms them lay at his Door unretracted hath he been casting the first Stone at another so unjust is he The instance before me and which aâ— length G. K. endeavours here to palliate in his § 4. is in Vni Gr. p. 9. where alluding to Moses his putting a Vail before his Face he saith The Word became Flesh and dwelt in us said John And this inward Appearance of Christ in Flesh is his Appearance iâ— Weakness as Natural and yet Spiritual the Mystery hid within the Vail of Flesh or Natural Spirit Again This is the Body of Christ that is indeed Spiritual but for our Cause descendeth into a Natural Form or Appearance Thus it is sown Natural but is raised Spiritual and thus also we become changed thereby both in the Soul and Body so as being sowâ— Natural we come to be raised Spiritual And indeed there was
to Contradict what he had delivered formerly Yet at length speaking of Infants he concludeth they all need that God be merciful unto them for Christ's sake and therein I agree with him but to different Ends For I distinguish between Mercy and Justice the not punishing Infants who have not sinned is a Fruit of his Justice the preserving them from sinning by his Divine Seed is a Fruit of his Mercy And thus I close this Section Sect. III. § 1 He begins his Sect. 3. with a Quotation out of Rector Corrected Printed Anno 1680. p. 22. thus By Christ his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World we understand both the Offering up of his Flesh as his dying for us upon the Cross and also his giving his Flesh to eat and his Blood to drink c. Which distinction I admit viz. that his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World had a twofold signification the one was Propitiatory a Dying for us upon the Cross as he hath it the other his giving his Flesh to eat was Spirit and Life and fed the Soul And herein we agree with him What he adds that he did not place all our Salvation upon the Light within excluding the Man Christ without c. but that he did lay a great weight upon iâ— is not the Matter in Controversie as he hath been often told We both lay a great weight upon Christ's outward coming and do not place all our Salvation upon the Light within exclusive thereof and also have not charged him with what he here seeks to purge himself from any otherwise than as argumentum ad hominem i. e. that we are no otherwise so than himself who hath with us formerly born Testimony to the sufficiency of the Light where the History hath not been revealed distinguishing as himself hath done between the necessity that Christ should come and suffer for all and of the Revelation of the History thereof where the means aâ—e not afforded its being indispensibly necessary to Salvation to such Before I take notice of the Citation he gives out of Rict Corr. p. 26. I shall observe what he saith to that passage of his ibid. p. 25. that by his Flesh and Blood â—ohn 6.50 51. Châ—ist meaneth ONLY Spirit and Life which he holds it needful to retract aâ—d correct as â—e saith yet assigns it as either a Typographical Error 〈◊〉 an Oversight in him for want of due Consideration That it was neither but a Judgment upon deliberation â—d that he hath abtruded a Falshood upon his Reader thus demonstrate first that the Matter in Dispute â—tween him and his Adversary would not be suppoâ—d to be Whether the words spoken by Christ were Spirit â—d Life or no. Christ had expresly affirmed it and â—e Rector doth not deny it and it were idle to suppose â—xcept he had been so presumptuous as to say so in â—idem verbis the Rector would alledge that when â—rist said they were Spirit and Life that he meant â—y were not Spirit and Life But whether they were 〈◊〉 so might admit of Dispute 2dly As Christ had 〈◊〉 It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth noâ—g so G. K. gives us those very words And to his â—ersaries objecting Spiritual Flesh cannot be broken nor â—itual Blood shed which relates to the Spiritual â—h and Blood only for the other might be broken and 〈◊〉 G. K. alledgeth the Scripture speaks of a broken â—it and the Holy Spirit 's being shed Whereas had not G. K. meant that it was only Spirit and Life this instance had been wholly remote and it had been enough to have said it related to both outward and inward Flesh and Blood and that the outward might very well be broken and shed To drive it yet more home I betake my self to his Citation out of p. 26. which shall give more fully than he hath done viz. Although the Saints do not eat the Visible Flesh of Christ he adds here to wit by the Bodily Mouth and drink his Visible Blood yet they partake of the Benefit and Vertue of both his Flesh and his Blood and the Substance of both doth remain which is his glorified Body in Heaven and the Vertue of which doth really extend unto thâ— Saints both in Heaven and on Earth by which they are Spiritually refreshed and nourished as with Meaâ— and Drink and thus we do not divide Christ herâ— G. K. stops with an c. but I go on nor his Fleâ— and Blood although a distinction there is betwiâ— that Flesh which he had from the beginning aâ— which the Saints fed on in all Ages from the begiâ—â—ing and that which he took upon him in the Virgiâ— Womb. From this latter which G. K. would haâ— concealed from us I observe he allowed of a distinctioâ— betwixt the Flesh and Blood Christ had from the bâ—â—ginning and that which he took upon him in the Viâ—â—gins Womb. Let him now tell us therefore what thâ— Flesh which Christ had from the beginning and whiâ— the Saints fed on in all Ages was besides Spirit aâ— Life Again as he gave us not this part of the Ciâ—â—tion which he could not stumble over without soâ— hurt to himself so to what he did give he foists 〈◊〉 the words so wit by the Bodily Mouth and iâ— proves it as an Evidence that the word ONLY was most an Oversight in him that he did not intend that Faithful did not partake of the unspeakable Benefit of Flesh and Blood that was outwardly broken and shed but his sense was they did not eat it with the Bodily Mouth but by Faith and that the Vertue conveyed may be said to be Spirit and Life i. e. had a spiritual sense and signification Aâ—sw What he said above of the Saints feeding could not be an eating visible Flesh either with bodily or spiritual Mouth seing it was a feeding common ro Saints in Heaven and on Earth too Nay the substance of the Flesh and Blood doth remain even according to him and what they feed on is not on the substance even of Christ's glorified Body in Heaven but of the Virtue which extends therefrom And what is this Virtue Is it not only Spirit and Life However seing he is so fond of his addition viz. by the Bodily Mouth I desire to be resolved in one thing as a Point of Philosophy Whether if that which be to be eaten be Bodily any thing but a Bodily Mouth can eat it and whether if the Mouth be not Bodily the Food can be said to be Bodily for that a Corporeal Substance a Substance which is not only Spirit and Life but also Bodily should be fed on by an Incorporeal Mouth is equally as inconceivable by me as that a Corporeal Mouth should seed on an incorporeal Substance If G. K. resolve me this fairly erit mihi magnus Apollo § 2 In p 26. of these Explications for now I trace him by Pages not by §'s he alledgeth for his having brought
Salvation either explicitly or implicitly else why should he say That it was needful to be revealed by the Spirits Answ I find no words there of the Knowledge of Christ as he came in the Flesh but only of Christ as God that God filleth all things but is apprehended by nothing but that which cometh from himself is begotten by himself c. p. 55. Adding towards the close of the Page It the Carnal Mind cannot by searching find out God he dwelleth in another Principle c. And in p. 56. he tells us how he is known and revealed viz. by the Son for which he quotes Matt. 11.27 And to manifest that no outward mediate Revelation can do it they are his following words he in that and p. 57. instanceth that the words uttered from Christ as he hath it in the days of his Flesh or from any of the Prophets or Apostles cannot reveal the Father Who in his Gradation descends to this Query saying To come to Jesus Christ himself who spoke to them in the days of his Flesh Did his words reveal him or his Father unto them But what is this to prove that the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh was needful to all Mens Salvation either explicitly or implicitly when as that was no subject of the Argument but only of Scripture words spoken by himself in the days of his Flesh or by others before and since Who when he comes to summ all that is said in this Argument they are his own words p. 70. himself giveth it thus The Knowledge of God he doth not of Christ according to the Flesh being that which is indispensibly necessary to every Believer and true Christian and seeing this cometh only by the Revelation of the Son immediately in the Heart and by receiving it from the Mouth of God himself and from the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost c. hath not one Syllable of the Necessity of the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh but only of the internal immediate Revelation So hardly is the Man put to it neatly to varnish over his Cause and impose an untrue Explication instead of a true one upon his Reader § 8 Yet he will be trying at it once again § 8. where citing out of Imm. Rev. p. 60. his having said Seeing the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh was not sufficient nor to be rested in but they were to look for a better c. he tells us It will appear from the foregoing and following words in that Book that by the Knowledge of him after the Flesh he did not mean that Knowledge of him as he came in the Flesh but that Knowledge that the Disciples and Apostles had of him by their outward sight and hearing of him or by what they could know of him by the meer actings of the Mind without Internal Revelation Answ Outward sight and hearing by the meer actings of the Mind are foisted in now not mentioned there nor deduceable from thence Yet I observe how he varies in treating upon one and the same Argumenâ— When he speaks of Jesus Christ's speaking Face to Face in the days of his Flesh he applieth it to the Knowledge of him as he came in the Flesh but when he useth the words Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh he did not mean the Knowledge of him as he came in the Flesh but by outward seeing hearing and the meer Actings of the Mind c. Yet all will not help him For having shewed p. 59. That if Christ's Bodily Presence was not sufficient of it self to minister but a MORE GLORIOUS they were to expect then far less the outward Administration of any other Man He in p. 60. adds For if Christ be no more to be known after the Flesh much less any other Man but they were to look for a BETTER a more clear and full Manifestation in themselves to wit a Spiritual Heavenly Mysterious Manifestation in themselves even such a way as the World cannot know him or receive him which made Judas not Iscariot to wonder and question him saying How is it that thou wilt manifest thy self to us and not unto the World By all which it will appear G. K. was not shewing that the Knowledge of Christ as he came in the Flesh was needful to Salvation to all as he alledged § 7. nor yet here treating of the Knowledge received by the meer Actings of the Mind without Internal Revelation but was preferring the inward Manifestation of Christ in Spirit to his bodily Presence in the Flesh representing the outward Coming as noâ— sufficient of it self the other as more Glorious Heavenly full and clear such as the World could not receive So that instead of extolling the outward Coming and setting off the Benefits thereof he was rather magnifying the inward and lessening the other Whereas he adds The true saving Knowledge of Christ is a spiritual Knowledge of him as he came in the Flesh and died for us so as by the inward Revelation of the Spirit 〈◊〉 God the Mystery of his Death and Sufferings is opened to us I answer We deny not the unvailing of any Mystery to be a Spiritual Knowledge nor yet that great Blessing and Benefits were purchased by his Death and Sufferâ—ings but that such who have not had the opportunity and means of the knowledge of what Christ did outwardly and have died without it either are not saved or receive the Knowledge thereof in order to Salvation when dead is what we have detected him as contraâ—ictory to his former Writings in § 9 From these words Imm. Rev. p. 63. The glorious Gospel is not the words the best of Scripture words there he stops referring from p. 55 to 71. he takes occasion § 9. to declare His sense was that the â—ords of Scripture are not principally and chiefly the Gospel â—ot the principal thing of the Gospel but that p. 69. he calls â—he Light the principal thing But as the Scripture words without the inward Life c. is not the Gospel so nor is the Spirit and Light barely and abstractly considered without â—he Words and Doctrine the Gospel in the full and adequate sense of the word Gospel Answ I shall first confront him â—ut of what he hath more fully delivered in p. 63. than â—e hath here given and then consider his References â—n the first place he there saith of the Gospel It is that which the words declare of but not the words themselves which may be read heard and known by the Unbeliever of whom he saith but the Gospel he knows not it is hid from him and his reason is for it is the Power of God unto Salvation it is the Preaching of the glad Tidings of Salvation by Jesus Christ himself IMMEDIATELY in the Heart it is Christ's saying in Man by the powerful Breath of his Spirit Awake thou that sleepest He is the great Preacher of this great and glorious Gospel himself Now Reader what Consistency is there between his sayâ—ng
3.15 but on Mat. 12.50 and Rev. 12.1 5. Answ The tearm Seed of the Woman he must borrow from Gen. not from Mat. 12.50 and Rev. 12.1 5. and also that this Seed should bruise the Serpents Head in the instance above As well as that when he said Way to City of God p. 125. Even at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not only to bruise the Serâ—pent's Head but also c. he must refer to the Promise made Gen. 3.15 This he called Imm. Rev. p 12. as alledged above in 〈◊〉 § 4 and there Cited by him and observed â—y me to which I refer as himself doth to what himself said in that § which â— there Answered a perfect substantial Birth of an Heavenly and incorruptible Nature the Body Flesh and Blood of Christ and in his Way Cast up p. 96. saith the Saints in all Ages did feed on it And seeing Christ had Flesh and Blood from the beginning he afforteth that he was Man from the beginning for as God simply he cannot have Flesh and Blood for God is â— Spirit therefore it is the Flâ—sh and Blood of Christ as he is Man or the Son of Man for which he Ciâ—es Christ's words unless ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man c. Again in his Way to the City of God p. 133. he calls it the Heavenly or Divine Substance or Essence of which the Divine Birth was both Conceived in Mary and is INWARDLY Conceived in the Saints And must all this be now turned off as an Allegorical Allusion as impâ—oper c O the inconsistency O the variableâ—ess and unsoundness of this wavering fickle Man Who having lost his Guide is perplext and entangled in Fetters of his own making while insincerely alledging and adducing false pretexts to cover himself with which are too narrow and too short Thus having gone through his first Section and touched the most material passages not designedly overlooking any although he hath omitted several of which I may chance to put him in mind of at the close I come to his second Section containing his Explanations and Emendâ—tions as he calls them of passages in his Book of Universal Free Grace Printed Anno 1671. which how Effectually done I now purpose to Examine Sect. II. § 1 Waving then his Preamble which respects the Title Page and hath been touched upon above § 5. of Sect. I. I begin with his § 1. where he pretends to remain in the same Testimony against that absurd Doctrine of absolute Reprobation rendring Salvation impossible to the greatest part or indeed to any part of Mankind and adds yet an Election even of Persons as well as of the Divine Seed I have owned c. I shall therefore examine whether what he now owns be correspondent to what he then owned seeing he here pretends not to retract any thing Beginning then with p. 107. of Vn Gr. which he widely refers to without giving any Citation thence I observe that to Mens objecting from that Scripture I will have Mercy on whom I will have Mercy that God hath not Mercy upon all but upon â—ome only he Answers These words relate not to Mens first coming into the World but unto a time after when they had despised the much Long-suffering of God extended unto them that after a time of Gracious Visitation though never so small he may have Mercy upon some to give them a longer time and yet not have Mercy upon others to give it them â—he which rather makes against a Personal Election â—an for it say I For if God have Mercy upon all â—ot upon some only it is in order that Election the â—uit of his Mercy should extend to all not to this or â—at Person only or as Persons but as adhering to â—d found in that Divine Seed wherein the Election â—ands So that this makes not for him but against â—n And whereas he now tells us that in p. 108. he â—ows the Common Translation of those words Acts â— 48. And as many as were ordained unto Eternal â—fe believed the Reader will find if he consult the place that he did not allow it for he rendred it who ever believed were ordained unto Eternal Life or ordered or placed into Eternal Life which is both a Transposition and varies the Sense i. e. they were not ordained to believe but the Believers were ordained or ordered into Eternal Life Whereto he there adds Although the Common Translation should be admitted he doth not say he doth admit it but although he should it proves not what they intend And thereupon he grants indeed that as whoever believâ— are ordained to Eternal Life so whoever are ordaineâ— unto Eternal Life do believe and so far G. K. giveâ— in these but what himself thence inferred he gives not viz. which hinders not but that others may havâ— had a Day of Visitation wherein it was possible foâ— them to have believed but God did fore know theâ— would not believe and so he did not predestinaâ— them to Life Which again spoils his late Notion 〈◊〉 Election of Persons as well as the Divine Seed for whicâ— end perhaps it was omitted by him seeing the Electiâ— was not Personal but in the Divine Seed All otheâ— having had as he saith a Day of Visitation whereâ— it was possible for them to have believed then sure 〈◊〉 was possible for them to have been Elected and tâ— Election was not limited to Persons say I To the he adds a third Reference out of p. 109. The objâ—â—ction which he gives not here was this that frâ— John 6.37 All that the Father giveth me shall coâ— some would infer that none but the Elect who are given Christ can come unto him and they all shall To whâ— he Answers There is a more general giving and a mâ— special giving which is only applicable to the Sainâ— who are his Children and cannot but come unto hâ— But what is this to prove an Election of Persons to 〈◊〉 the more special giving is only applicable to the Sainâ— Are Saints and Persons Synonymous tearms Or is â— Saints rather a Qualification Such cannot but come unto him but is that predicable of Persons indefinitely Or only of Persons found in the Divine Seed wherein the Election stands So little doth he help himself out in his vain Essays to Reconcile his late with his former Sentiments The inconsistency whereof I shall further make appear in an instance or two out of his Book of Truth Advanced compared with a passage or two out of Vn Grace Who in p. 105. of Vn Grace having in p. 104. Asigned his Understanding thereof to be given of the Lord by his Spirit thus delivereth himself There are two Seeds one Elect and of God the other Reprobate and of the Devil Who so now cleave to this Elect Seed in the true Faith and persevere so to do are chosen of him before the Foundation of the World as fore-knowing and fore-seeing them in Unity with this