Christ who is both God and Man who in the fulness of time came in the Flesh and shed his Blood for the Remission of their Sins is obvious to any Intelligent Reader Answ Then it seems he was the Man Christ before that fulness of time that he came in the Flesh and suffered viz. that which he calleth Way to City of God p. 133. That Heavenly and Divine Substance or Essence of which the Divine Birth was both Conceived in Mary and is inwardly Conceived in the Saints c. As such he calls him the Seed of the Woman that even at Man's Fall was given to bruise the Serpents Head and to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone and pacifie the Wrath of God towards Men and that he bore the weight of his outward Sufferings in great measure from the very beginning See ibid p. 125 126. Now the Matter in Debate between G. K. and us even with respect to what he hath formerly asserted is whether this Attonement this Sacrifice this bearing the weight of his Sufferings from the beginning did bruise the Head of the Serpent in none attone for none save none either before Christ's Offering up of himself in the outward or where a Revelation from God that he should so suffer was not given That without his outward Coming according to the Decree of God Redemption had never been Purchased so that whoever are saved in any Age of the World it is by Vertue thereof is fully and heartily acknowledged by us But whether this Vertue hath never saved any but where the History I do not say the Circumstances of Times Places c. but the History hath been revealed is that wherein we oppose G. K. formerly to G. K. latterly Therefore what he adds That we are most injurious to him and false Accusers of him who call this a new Doctrine to affirm that all whoever were saved with Eternal Salvation were saved by Faith in the Man Christ either express or implicit even by him that was in the fulness of time Crucified for them is an unfair stating of the Controversie For besides that contrary to his own Rule Ex. Narr p 24. as hath been hinted more than once the terms Eternal Express or Implicit are added to the Premises to make a noise with that he may seem to say somewhat to salve up his own Contradictions which he accounts false Logick in another Faith in the Man Christ is not the Matter in Deâ—te but whether Faith in the Man Christ implies always a Belief of what the Man Christ was to do and sufâ—er in time For the Man Christ he asserts Way cast up â— 123. is present in and among us and adds I do not â—â—an his external or outward Person for that is ascended inâ—â— Heaven Whereas he would now confound the Man Christ and outward Person together as if the believing 〈◊〉 the Man Christ as inwardly manifest and what the â—â—an Christ did and suffered outwardly were equivalent â—â—arms But he hath many a passage to Retract if he â—aw would render these tearms convertible and sugâ—â—st that what is predicable of one is also of the other This brings me to what he accounts a Trifling and Nonsensical Objection in us but where it is objected he â—ith not to argue that they could not believe in Christ â—rucified before he was Crucified for that it was one and 〈◊〉 same Christ that was to be Crucified and that was Cruciâ—â—ed even the same yesterday to day and for ever Answ We grant it that he who was to be and who was Cruciâ—ed is the same yesterday to day and for ever who â—ough he received something additional in time viz. â—â—r Flesh which he had not from the beginning yet â—as no less Christ before he descended into the Womb 〈◊〉 the Virgin than since Yet to open the occasion of his Objection of mine which this Trifler calleth Triâ—ing and Nonsensical in us the distinction I shall shew â—as G. K's not ours by assigning it Truth Advanced â— 70. as a dangerous and hurtful Error to say that Men may have that Holy Ghost that was given to Believers in Christ Crucified without all Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified which to refute he â—ds It is not said Cornelius had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile state nor is it any where to be found that any received that Holy Ghost which Christ promised PARTICULARLY to Believers in him but such only who believed in him even Christ Crucified and Raisâ—ed again c. And also p. 71. It is called the Holâ— Spirit or Spirit of Holiness because it worketh a peculiar degree and kind of Holiness in all true Believers in Christ Crucified above what the most upright Gentiles do witness or experience in their meer Gentilâ— state Now this Error he pretends to correct in others is not that Men may have that Holy Ghost as his tearm are and not believe in Christ for who held so 〈◊〉 pray but that they may have it and not so believe as to have his Crucifixion revealed to them For he wiâ— not pretend sure that Cornelius believed not in thâ— Light believed not in Christ when his Prayers aâ—â— Alms came up as a Memorial before God though hâ— did not account him a Believer in Christ Crucified Anâ— why Not that Christ within and Christ without aâ— two Christs But because that Heavenly Mystery wâ— not yet made known to him So that the distinction beâ—ing his the Trifling is his own and the Nonsensicalnesâ— if any Bodies is G. K's who is the Raiser the Authoâ— of it This leads me to take notice what he offers nexâ— with respect to the Gentiles not having that Holy Ghoâ— which the Believers in Christ Crucified had I haviâ— in my People called Quakers cleared p. 20 to 33. pinchâ— him with Contradictory Passages thereto out of his foâ—â—mer Books more I have added since Keith again Keith p. 9 to 39. G. K. in his Ant. and Sadd. p. 2â— varies the tearms thus viz. He is not said to be tâ— Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit in wicked Men nor in pâ—â—ous Gentiles to wit by Union Whom that might drive out of this muse I Cited him Keith â—â—gainst Keith p. 60. out of his Divine Imm. Rev. p. 4â— saying ' Plato Plotin and other Gentile Philosopheâ— spake of a most inward Union and Communion of 〈◊〉 Soul with God in a certain Intellectual and Spiritâ— contact or touch c. Now to help himself off here when he had touched upon my Objection without so much as naming me or any Book that he had it out of but only in general that his Adversaries had objected it 〈◊〉 if he designed the Reader should not find it he Answers p. 35 36. That Plato had no Faith in Christ so much as imâ—licit is more than they can prove and that divers Sayings in his Books makes it probable he had As to Plotin who lived above 200 Years after Christ and wrote against the Christians he suggests his
need of them That many called Vniversity Men have had among whom he reckons Wickliff Luther Cranmer c. and may now have a good measure of true Spiritual Knowledge he pretends he dares not be so Vncharitable as to deny Answ What his Sentiments may have been or yet are of particular Men I do not enquire what they have been of the Order of the Degree is manifest out of the same p. 137. where he goes on thus Then down should all the proud lording lofty Clergy with their many Degrees of Doctorships Lordships and Masterships pass who being Strangers to the true Knowledge are vainly puffed up in their Fleshly Minds by the Form of Knowledge in the Letter c. This is it which I laid before him once before in my Keith against Keith p. 143. and which he hath not yet retracted nay nor took notice of here though he gave us a Passage even now out of the same Page which shews the Man had rather slide over it than either defend it and so displease the Clergy he would now fawn on or renounce and disclaim it as an Error in him formerly and so be reputed a Man changed in his Judgment by those few who hold with him and would still be reputed Quakers viz. His Flock at Turners-hall which yet recommends him not as sincere to either Nor will an excepting some out of a general Rule while this Hand-writing is upon the Wall against him satisfie any Men of Judgment that are of that Order and Degree he hath thus reflected on and who are not willing to be imposed upon that this is a reasonable and adequate Compensation for those Epithets so lavishly bestowed upon them both in the place above and elsewhere § 18 In this § 18. he gives us a new Exposition I never heard of from him before of what he did understand by the Historical Knowledge and Faith viz. That Knowledge and Faith that respects the History of Christ's Birth Life Death Resurrection Ascension c. with all the Circumstances of Times Places and Names of Persons c. as related by the four Evangelists which elsewhere but he doth not say where he hath called the express or explicit Knowledge and Faith which many of the Faithful never had But the Doctrine of Christ simply considered he saith is one thing and the History or Historical Revelation of the many Circumstances of Times Places and Persons c. â—dâ—lating to that Doctrine is another thing Answ That this is a meer Shift the Objection raised Imm. Rev. p. 228. which he gives not and his answer will fully declare and evince The Objection was That G. K. did not mention any thing of the History or Historical Parts of Christ's Birth Life Miracles c. mark he did not say of the Circumstance of Time Place or Persons but of the History c. as being any Essential part of this new Revelation whereupon his Adversary brands him with Familism G. K. answers p 229. by distinguishing the parts of Religion into those necessary to the Being of it and those not necessary to the Being of it which he thus summeth up The Knowledge and Belief of the History of Christ his outward Coming Birth Life c. and of the other Historical parts oâ— the Scriptures are such parts of our Religion and Faith as are to make up the Intiredness or Fullness of it But that the Historical Knowledge and Faith is not an essential part of true Religion he instanceth in Cornelius whose Prayers God heard and yet he knew not the History of Christ nor of his Death and Sufferings till it was preached unto him by Peter p. 230. By all which it appears what he then meanâ— by Historical Knowledge and Faith viz. Not the Circumstances of Times Places and Persons only but that Relation which Cornelius wanted and for want whereoâ— he denies in his late Book stiled Truth Advanced p. 45 and 70. him to have received the Holy Ghost in his Gentile State Who sure must be very uncharitable to Cornelius and the many Faithful who never knew alâ— the Circumstances of Times Places and Persons c. as alledged even now if they having the Essentials oâ— Religion and being destitute only of the Circumstanceâ— of the History not of the History it self must thereupon miss of having the Holy Ghost which is the natural Consequence of this new Interpretation of Historicaâ— Knowledge and Faith Yet to make it yet more fully appear hear him further p. 232. where he saith In them who have not the Scriptures the Spirit and Light sufficiently teacheth them the parts of Religion absolutely necessary without the Scripture to which parts the History of the Scripture doth not belong What parts are those say I For the Spirit doth not teach the Knowledge of Christ's Birth Life Death Resurrection Ascension c. without the Scripture omitting Circumstances of Time Place c. therefore he could not formerly mean as he now saith but his saying so now is a false Pretence See also p. 243. where he saith True Religion and Christianity may subsist without the Knowledge of Christ in the Letter to wit In the Mystery of the Life of Christ in the Spirit and yet even here where the History is wanting he doth not say the Circumstance of Time Place c. the Mystery or in-side of Christianity is not without its skin or out-side namely an outward Confession unto God c. This I doubt not but he would now account Deism in us but I observe he did not then oppose Mystery to Mystery but Letter to Mystery out-side to in-side yea that he admitted of an outside viz. an outward Confession unto God which might subsist without the Knowledge of Christ in the Letter which is more than bare Circumstances of Time Place or Persons even where the History is wanting And that in the Mystery of the Life of Christ in the Spirit So that then true Religion and Christianity with him might subsist in the Mystery without the History Nor was it the Debate between him and his Antagonist whether all the Circumstances were Essential to true Religion but whether the literal and historical Knowledge was so which G. K. denied as hath been already instanced Now upon his thus Expounding Explicit and Implicit Knowledge he tells us He knows not any thing to be found in all his former Writings to the contrary notwithstanding the Attempts of his Ignorant Adversaries who affirm it and whom he hath sufficiently Answered as he pretends in diverse of his late Books particularly that called Ant. and Sadd. detected Answ This is a very nimble way of Purgation to say he doth not know it is to be found in his Books yet confesseth we have affirmed it but where he saith not and alledgeth he hath sufficiently Answered us but for that he names but one of his Books particularly and in that assigns neither Page nor Passage that the Reader might be forced to take all upon Trust
they judge to be Errors in my Book which they did not formerly see or at least gave me no notice of Then why do they blame me that I have both of late seen and noticed diversâ—â— Errors in their Books which formerly I had not seen foâ— want of due Examination nor noticed Answ He stateâ— the Case amiss with respect to us What we have Collected out of him being not so much to detect the unsoundness of his Principles as his late Contradictions to his former Principles and is rather a Vindication of them for the most part than the contrary Yet iâ— â—on this view which he hath led he hath drawn and 〈◊〉 it were invited us to by pretending as in his Seâ—us 〈◊〉 Appeal p. 21. that he lâ—â—d not Contradicted himself in â—NY THING referring to his own words in his Printed 〈◊〉 for proof we have not only shewed he hath Conâ—dicted himself in MANY THINGS but have also â—nd here and there especially in those Books borâ—ing upon the time of his Schism from us an unâ—und passage or two are we to be blamed for our exâ—sing of them which perhaps had not occurred to us â—t upon the Scrutiny himself occasioned Whereas â—mself had Read our Books and in Year 1692. quoâ—d them in Print in his Christian Faith and Serious Appeal 〈◊〉 an Evidence of our Soundness in Doctrine who a litâ—e time after quoted some of the very same Books to â—ove us unsound in those very Doctrines as I have â—fted already in my Apostate Exposed and Keith aâ—ainst Keith p. 57 and 116. which shews G. K. is not 〈◊〉 much Eagle-sighted as Double-sighted looking variâ—sly yea contrarily upon one and the same Object as â—mself is changed from a Friend to an Enemy § 8 G. K. after having given a Citation out of Truths Def. â— 170.171 That if nothing should be required of one sort from another as an Article of Faith but what is expresly delivered in Scriptures in plain express Scripture Tearms of how much Advantage it might be to bring to a true Reconcilement c. saith p. 33 34. â—ome of his late Opponents have brought this place to prove â—m guilty of a Contradiction by his late practice of what â—ey call his imposing on them unscriptural Creeds and Tearms as when he told them They must believe in Christ â—ithout them for Salvation c. Answ His stating his Opponents Allegations even if he had not so often Noâ—oriously traduced them deserves no Credit except he â—ad brought his Proofs along with him by whom where and when they were so laid down Yet whether G. â— may not have so Preached Christ without Heaven Râ—â—surrection and Day of Judgment without in suâ— terms as might minister just occasion to some to endeâ—â—vour to hold him to his own Rule of Scripture tearâ— and expressions may deserve our Enquiry I 〈◊〉 then that C. Pusey in his Modest Account p. 56 to 5â— after having given the Citation out of Truths Deseâ— much larger than G. K. hath here given it Quetiâ— thus ad hominem 1. Where are the express woâ—â— of Scripture that say The same Body for Matter aâ— Substance shall rise 2. That none but those tâ— have the Faith of Christ Crucified can love Enemies 3. That the 400 Pieces of Silver that Abraham Pâ—â—chased the Burying-place with signifie 400 Vertuâ— and that those who have not those 400 Vertues cannâ—â— have the Priviledge to be Buried in that most Exceâ—â—lent Burying-place 4. That Adam and Eve weâ— not Naked before the Fall and that the Garden Gâ— placed Man in was no part of this visible Earth 5. That Men may not have that Holy Ghost that wâ— given to Believers in Christ Crucified without tâ— Faith of Christ Crucified whereas G. K. had saiâ— Looking-glass for Protestants p. 28. It is our Faith thâ— the Heathen once had the Spirit of God and thâ— Pharaoh before his Heart was hardned had the Spâ—â—rit of Grace 6. That the Light is not sufficieâ— without something else 7. That no Man can â—â—tain unto Eternal Life and Happiness without tâ— Knowledge of Christ's outward Sufferings Deatâ— Resurrection c. If this was it G. K. meant by 〈◊〉 Charge above it reacheth not his purpose for wâ—â—ving that I might say would I take G. K. for my Eâ—â—ample C. P. doth but Query they were simply proposed 〈◊〉 him as Queries as G. K. hath alledged for himself 〈◊〉 Ant. and Sadd. p. 34. what he doth Query is nâ— Whether we viz. we to whom the History hath â—en revealed must believe in Christ without us for â—alvation the tearms of G. K. his Charge but wheâ—â—er NO MAN can attain to Eternal Life and Salvatiâ—n without the Knowledge of Christ's outward Sufferâ—â—gs c. which being an Article of G. K. his Faith at â—resent even contrary to what he had Asserted formerâ— who then was for keeping to express Scripture â—ords C. P. hampers him with it and is cogent aâ—ainst G. K. but not to the End assigned by G. K. for â—â—at we must believe in Christ for Salvation is not queâ—ioned but whether no Man can attain to Eternal Life â—nd Salvation to whom the History is not revealed is the Query Thus much for C. P. now let me present â—he Reader with the gross Notions I brought out of his Book of Truth Advanced relating to the Resurrection He had said p. 27. That the Coats of Skins wherewith God clothed Adam and Eve after the Fall was a clothing them inwardly with the Righteousness of the Lamb and outwardly with the Skin and Flesh of this Frail Mortal and Corruptible Body that the true Body of Man lyeth within the Shell Oar or Mine of this Gross Heavy and Corruptible Body and that is it which shall be the Resurrection-body at the Resurrection of the Dead And upon this Notion that Man had not this Grosness and Imperfection before the Fall be grounds his Chimera p. 28. of Man and Womans being made Back to Back before the Fall and afterwards split 〈◊〉 divided into two halves in order to their multiplying their Species which they could not do without that Separation as they might have done if the Fall had not been And in p. 113 he saith Within this Brutal Skin of the gross Body that â—otteth in the Grave there is lodged the true Body of Man that at the Resurrection of the Dead nothing of the drossy part that is Brutal shall Arise but only that which is proper to Man as Man such as Adam had before the Fall So the Flesh thâ— is Gross Mortal and Corruptible is not that Flesâ— that shall be Raised up Immortal and Incorruptiblâ— c. And p. 115. he tells us The Separation 〈◊〉 made between the pure and noble part and that droâ—â— part in Man's Body in the Mystical and Invisiblâ— Machpelah or Sepulchre in Hebron in the Land 〈◊〉 Israel Figuratively and Mystically understood thâ— Ephron signifieth the Dust-Eater and the 400 Pieces 〈◊〉 Silver so many Vertues the
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
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
had its Object yea and it was a saving Faith too The Jews and People of Israel who lived in Moses's time and were SAVED it was through Faith in this Word said G. K. Imm. Rev. p. 107. forecited Let him then reconcile these Passages to his late Noâ—ion that Faith in Christ as he died for us and rose again is indispensibly necessary to all Further Discovery p. 16. or never pretend that we pervert his words when we shew he once asserted the inward Manifestation as the Object of SAVING Faith even where the outward hath not been revealed And there it is the only one § 15 That Scripture Luke 15.8 9. concerning the lost piece of Money he freely confesseth § 15. is one of those places of Scripture he hath through weakness of Vnderstanding misunderstood and unduly applied to prove a Truth Answ Here is no retracting this which is the first shew of Retractation I have hitherto met with as unsound as untrue No it was only misunderstood by him anâ— unduly applied but it was to prove a Truth he pretends Let us hear then what he hath next to say for himself Why it seems in construing the lost piece of Money menâ—tioned in this place to be the Light Within he was too mucâ— swayed by the Quakers Authority But what Man of Seâ—â— was he to be so imposed upon in the mean while say I However now he is sufficiently convinced he saith Chriâ— did not mean the Light Within but the lost Souls of Men and he plainly now understands that by the lost Sheep 〈◊〉 piece of Money and the lost Son is understood men or tâ— souls of men Answ He plainly understands amiss boâ— in confounding those three Parables together for tâ—â— lost Sheep was lost out of the Wilderness Luke 15 â— the lost Son came back of his own accord v. 18. anâ— the lost piece of Money was found in the same Hoâ— where it was lost v. 8. and also in understanding 〈◊〉 the lost piece of Money the Souls of Men. Yet â— enforce it he adds They who expound the lost piece â— money to be the Light Within will find difficulty to shâ— what the nine pieces are which are not lost whereas to undeâ—â—stand it of the Souls of men there is no difficulty in 〈◊〉 Answ As Similies seldom go on all four so neithâ—â— must Parables be pursued too far yet hence I taâ— occasion to demand of him Whether there be no difficulty to find who the Woman is that had ten Souls kept nine and lost one or has the same Woman lighted the Candle swept the House sought and found one of her Souls in the House and what that House was where she found the Soul she had lost Surely Absurdities will grow upon him thick and three-fold as the Saying is if we come to examine him throughout However he endeavours to prove his Assertion That by the lost piece of Money is meant the Souls of Men not the Light Within from the Womans lighting the Candle to seek the lost piece of money which plainly signifieth saith he that the way that the Lord useth to find the lost Soul is by lighting a Candle in it and inwardly enlightning it to see its lost Condition Answ First The Lord can find the Soul without lighting a Candle in it but he lights a Candle in it that by the Light thereof it may find him in and through that Gift of his Light Spirit or Grace which he had put into it and which it by departing therefrom is said to have left Which if the Creature had totally lost so that its day of Visitation were over there had been no remaining spark in the Soul to seek it nor had it received that degree of renewed Light whereby to light the Candle and both seek and find the lost piece Secondly The very design of the Parable was to set forth not what God had lost but what Man had lost the Candle being used by Man who needed it not by God and Christ who needed it not Man was the loser he was to sweep his own House in order to find what he had lost which was primarily the Divine Gift which God had given him and his Soul or rather the Life of his Soul but consequently of that And indeed G. K. himself more nearly hits the Scope of the Parable in the Explication he here gives of what he had said Imm. Rev. p. 125. the which he tells us T. Hicks imposed a perverse Gloss upon viz. That God had not lost himself nor Christ had not lost Christ but men had lost both by their Sins So little doth he mend the matter by his present Exposition of the Parable Yet to that degree is the Man infatuated that what most deserved notice viz. His many flat Doctrinal Contradictions he can glibly slide over this which himself said above was a misunderstanding an undue application of Scripture and yet to prove a Truth comes very frankly from him as if he longed to expose his Folly and Unsoundness which he had given but too great Demonstration of before § 16 His next § is designed to correct his Correction of our Translation and that with respect to two Scriptures positively That place 1 Cor. 2.2 where our Translation hath it among you he had rendred in you Imm. Rev. p. 126. Now he tells us Though the Greek words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can be grammatically translated in you yet they will not ALWAYS admit of the Translation otherwise in many places the Sense would be marred as 1 Cor. 2.2 and that that place and Col. 3.1 He should have said Gal. 3.1 are to be understood of Christ aâ— outwardly Crucifiâ—d and that the true Sense of Paul 's wordâ— related to the outward which included his inward appearance consequentially Answ As I am not entring into a Debate with him of Doctrinals but only to manifestâ— his Incoherence and Instability I apply my self wholly thereto and Query If Paul preached Christ's inward Appearance only by Consequence inclusively why did he but a few Lines back Imm. Rev. p. 125. from Col. 1 26 27 28. infer which here he hath not retracted that Paul preached Christ in them pointed them to him in them him Crucified in them c Was he iâ— them by Consequence only And why did he say alluding to the Mystery in the Gentiles for so it is in thâ— Greek said G. K. then and is he now better skilled in the Greek than then say I This Mystery is Christ the Mystery in them hid in them the Treasure hid and till it be found it is not the Hope in them but in them in whom it was manifested it is the Hope of Glory Will he say otherwise now And will he pretend to demonstrate it For till then this passage unretracted is Evidence against him In what follows he gives out That he freely acknowledgeth his Weakness in Vnderstanding in straining these and some other places of Scripture which he names not to
To call that a Command of God which he hath given them no Command to practise is to set up the Precepts of Men in the room of God's Commandements as the Pharisees did of old and is a taking of his Name in vain for which he will not hold them Guiltless And they can never prove adds he by all their Art and Skill that Water-Baptism is commanded by Christ Matt. 28.18 19. for all God's Commands and Precepts especially of publick Institution relating to the Church are express in so many express words and are not left to be gathered by uncertain and doubtful Consequences This is argumentative and let him get over it if he can and detect the Unsoundness thereof if hâ— dare cope with it In the mean time let us hear wheâ—ther the Reason he now offers and which we may supâ—pose to be his only one and that his talking of Reaâ—sons is a meer Flourish will weigh down this Hâ— saith We no where find in all the Scriptures such a Phrâ—â— or manner of Speech that over any Man but Christ aâ—oâ— who is both God and Man did Baptize with the Holy Ghosâ— or had Power so to do Answ That God and Chriâ—â— gave the Holy Ghost and did baptize with the Holâ— Ghost by the Ministry of Faithful Men both in Preacâ—â—ing Prayer and laying on of Hands himself hath acâ—knowledged Truth Advanced p. 184. printed but Anâ—â— 1694. Therefore what he adds here That this distiâ—â—ction of the Apostles Baptizing not Principally yet Instrâ—â—mentally or Ministerially is as false and unwarrantable to say God created the World principally yet Angels did it instrumentally Christ redeemed the World principally by his Death and Sufferings but the Martyrs redeemed it by their Deaths instrumentally will stand him in no stead except he could prove on behalf of Angels and Martyrs that the former created the World instrumentally and the other redeemed it instrumentally as he hath granted that God and Christ have Baptized by the Ministry of Faithful Men. For although we read the Angels are said to be Ministring Spirits sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation Heb. 1.14 yet we no where read they were instrumental to the Creation for God created the World not only principally but even without Instruments nor was the World so much as instrumentally redeemed by the Death of the Martyrs their Death was not so much as contributary thereto but solely and wholly by Christ the Redemer So that the Cases are not parallel And if this be his topping Reason he may well talk of keeping the rest behind His Reason why the Coming of the Lord mentioned 1 Cor. 11.26 is this outward Coming he deducing from the outward Practice of breaking of Bread in the Supper which I rather take to be that himself might eat Bredd among them who continue the Practice of breaking of Bread naturally leads me to shew the Defectiveness of his Retractation even herein For were he a Sincere not Belly-convert why doth he not retract and enervate what I have offered in my People called Quakers Cleared p. 38 to 41. out of his Rect. Corr. p. 60 to 65 and Tr. Def. p. 9 139 to 142. And why not tell us what he thinks of the Supper as now used as well as of them who use it In his Pres and Ind. Ch. p. 185. he said That which ye now use is neither substantial Dinner nor Supper being only a little Crumb of Bread scarce so big as a Nut and a Spoonful of Wine or two which hath little outward Substance and NO INWARD AND SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICATION unto you as ye use it while ye altogether deny that the Saints are Partakers of the Substance of Christ or that Christ really and substantially dwelleth in his Saints c. Will he say so still For he hath not yet retracted this Or will he now say Theirs is a Supper and that Christ dwelleth not really and substantially but by a Metaphor and Allegory in his Saints Or will he rather take a Mid-way couching himself under general Expression till he sees he can make no longer Friends but of them who repute breaking of Bread to be a continuing Divine Ordinance and of his Flock at Turners-Hall too And whereas he said ibid. p. 184 185. These who altogether are for the outward Baptism and Supper and deny wholly the inward and Spiritual Baptism and Supper of Christ which is only known and received by the Holy Spirits inward Revelation no Charity can be allowed unto them to judge them true Christians in any degree but altogether for the time Hypocrites and Formalists Will he retract or defend this now Or would not himself be willing to be one of these Hypocrites or a worse provided they would receive him and maintain him He saith now p. 30. That it stands well with good reason that what is represented to Mens Hearts of our Lord's Sufferings by their Hearing Sight Smell Tasting and Feeling in the use of these Signs instituted by himself will more effectually affect their Hearts and Souls than what is done alone by the Hearing or Reading c. Whereupon I Query of whom he thus speaketh Of Men or of Children If of Men I must put him in mind that he once spake of and pretended to witness a Preaching and Hearing beyond what could affect the outward Senses even à tast and discerning begotten of the Lord which tasteth Words and Works as the Mouth tasteth Meat Imm. Rev. p. 180. as I have also observed Sect. I. § 3. If of Children viz. of such of whom he said If these who are so Zealous for Water Baptism where cordially Zealous for the Inward and Spiritual Baptism they might be the more borne with as Men bear with Children that use Liknesses and Figures of things that suit most with the Age and State of Children c. See Presh and Ind. Chur. p. 184. then when they become Men they must put away Childish things according to that of the Apostle 1 Cor. 13.11 So that take him either way while one of them is unretracted he runs himself upon the Pikes Which had he been sincere and true even to his present Sentiments he might have obviated by a hearty espousing of the one Cause and as heartily renouncing the other But this Laodicean way of neither Hot nor Cold will be Spued out even of Men in time He alledgeth indeed without so much as touching upon what we have offered out of his former Books that God hath given him of late since he found many of the People called Quakers greatly opposed the Faith in Christ Crucified and raised again as a necessary thing to our Christianity and Salvation as he falsly chargeth us a further and clearer sight and a more deep inward Sense and Consideration of the great Benefit and Advantage the Practice of these outward things when duly practised is to the Preserving the Christian Faith and Doctrine in the World But in this he is not