formerly the Gospel is NOT the Words the Unbeliever hath that but the Gospel he knows not it is â—id from him Christ himself is the great Preacher of that and his now saying that neither the Scriptures nor the Spirit and Light is the Gospel barely and abstractly considered He then said Christ preached it immediately he now tells us a little below It cannot be conceived without some Form of Words and Propositions that consist of words inwardly conceived and cannot be outwardly preached without some Form of Words outwardly expressed whereby he confounds a Declaration of or concerning the Gospel with the Gospel it self quite beside his Sentiments formerly That it was spoken in Man by Christ by the powerful Breath of his Spirit which surely may be without a Form of words as outwardly The one the Unbelievers may read hear and know and yet noâ— know the Gospel But will he say the Gospel was never communicated by the Divine Breath without a Form of Words seeing he now makes the outward Preaching and the thing preached so inseparable to the Gospel that neither of them are Gospel in the abstract And whereas he tells Imm. Rev. p. 213. The Gospel was preached unto Abraham Abel Enoch Noah and to all Believers who lived before Scripture was writ in a Book and that it was spoken into their Hearts by the Spirit of Jesus Christ c. Will he now maintain that they had both the Scripture Words and the Spirit and Light in order to make it Gospel Could not Christ in speaking into their Hearts be conceived without some Form of Words or was it not Gospel till so conceived Nor will his Allegations from p. 55 to 71. and p. 69 stand him in any stead For the first Reference is wide no passage assigned and though I cannot find any thing there to help him off yet I find in p. 56. what makes against him viz. The best of words uttered from Christ himself in the days of his Flesh or from any oâ— the Apostles or Prophets and yet recorded in Scripture cannot reveal the Father nor the Son neither they point only at that which reveals and were spoken and writ for that end that People might come to the Principle of true Knowledge in themselves see also p. 59. Whence I Query Cannot the Gospel which is the Power of God unto Salvation reveal the Father or doth that Gospel point only at that which reveal Or is that which reveals the Father which he saith the best of words cannot do as it is opened in Man by the Son no Gospel till outwardly preached or written Thus for want of Sincerity to retract and by labouring to defend as Congruous what is so Contradictory is the Man entangled and the more he toils the more he is perplext His second Reference instead of doing him any good further lays him open For though he doth there assert the Light as the Principal thing yet not in ordine ad idem not with relation to the Gospel for which end he here adduceth it for there was no Dissertation thereof there His words are these One takes himself to read Commentators to furnish him for the Ministry another to read Hypocrates and Galen to become a Physician while their hands are out from the Light of Christ which gives true Knowledge and Ability to Minister either to the Soul or Body and is the principal thing Mark he doth not say it is the principal thing of the Gospel he was not defining Gospel here but what was the principal thing â—o make a good Minister or Physician nor did he say â—eading of Hypocrates or Galen was Gospel in the abâ—tract but the Light was the principal thing or that â—hey and the Light together make up the Gospel in the â—ull and adequate Sense thereof This I urge to shew â—he Man's Falshood and Deceit who offers so remote â—n Instance and wide from the subject we are treating â—f to prove that to which it had no coherence and all â—o cover himself that the Shame of his Nakedness â—ight not appear which now is so much the more viâ—ble by this fresh Demonstration thereof From hence he sallieth to a Discourse about the Scripâ—ures being called the Word of God That he may ratifie our Adversaries he represents it an unprofitable â—rtful and groundless Contention on our parts especially â—r Friend B. Cool having in a late Book of his said That as they declare the Mind of God with respect to us and are his Commands to us they may in that respect bâ— called the Word or Command of God to us And so saitâ— G. K. all other Professions in Christendom own them and nâ— otherwise Answ Till he be more steady to what himâ—self owns I deem him no fit Voucher for others mucâ— less for all other Professions in Christendom Yet foâ— the sake of such to whom he labours to traduce us 〈◊〉 reply We contend not meerly about Words but aâ— some Men have erred in denying the immediate Internaâ— Revelation is a continuing Gospel-Privilege so havâ— they also in mis-applying what hath been said in thâ— Scriptures concerning the Word of God whence iâ— hath come to pass that as the Jews of Old thought iâ— them to have Eternal Life while not coming to Chrisâ— John 5.39 so these not attending to nor coming tâ— Christ as inwardly revealed have set up the Scripture as their Rule in opposition to an inward Guidance by the Spirit of God in these days assigning to them whaâ— was spoken of the Divine Inshining Words Now tâ— undeceive these and direct them to an inward Prinâ—ciple in themselves our Friends have been led to thiâ— Distinction not in Derogation to the Holy Scriptures nor through an Itch of Contention but as a necessarâ— Medium to six Mens Minds upon that Word which iâ— able to save the Soul and enlighten the Eye which thâ— best of Words could not do without it Yet very unfâ— was G. K. to fling this stone who himself hath botâ— used and defended this very Distinction in his Help iâ— time of Need p. 65. a passage not yet retracted foâ— there he not only tells us Though the Holy Scripâ—tures declare of this Word yet they are not thaâ— Word more than a Map or Description of Rome oâ— London is Rome or London or the Image of Caesar iâ— Caesar or Bread and Wine is the Body and Blood oâ— Christ c. But also allows They may borroâ— the Name and sometimes be so called as the words or Prophecy of Isaiah is called by himself his Vision c. He should therefore have first retracted his own unprofitable hurtful and groundless Contention as he calls it in others before he had bestowed his Censures upon us But the Man's Malice hath run him a-ground who needed not by this repeated instance to have given fresh Evidence of his Instability we having enough to load him with besides and more than he can fairly get from under were he not judiciously infatuated
word Gospel is used 〈…〉 the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised 〈…〉 in an instance or 〈…〉 hath over 〈…〉 when Paul speaks 2 Cor. 〈…〉 8 9 of them that preach another Gospel are 〈◊〉 some of the places which upon a diligent Search 〈◊〉 he finds speak of the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised 〈◊〉 Or will he confess that the word Gospel was here used to signifie something else Also when the everlasting Gospel was again to be preachedâ— after the 〈…〉 the word again it had been discontinued to be preached 〈…〉 History of Christs Birth Death c. had not doth that place Râ—â— 14.6 7 mention any thing of the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised Messiah There 〈◊〉 not a word of that 〈◊〉 there but saying with a loud 〈◊〉 Voice Fear God will give Glory unto him c. be in 〈◊〉 preached with Commission from on high is called preaching the everlasting Gospleâ— Did G. K. in his diligent Search â— over-look this 〈◊〉 how could he sayâ— IN ALL PLACES in the New Testament where the word Gospel is used it signifieth the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised Messiah I might also instance in Rom. 1.16 although he refuseth to allow it me now that the Gospel cannot be said to be the Power of God unto Salvation to the Believer in any other Sense than aâ—â— it a powerful energetical inward Principle for as it is barely Historical the Ungodly have that Belief though they went the Power So that as the Power oâ— God is not a Belief or Relation concerning the Power so neither in a strict genuin Sense is the Gospel which is the Power of God unto Salvation either the Relation 〈◊〉 it self or the Historical Belief of what is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he further asserts here That whatever Doctrine 〈…〉 or have at any that preached the great subject 〈…〉 not the promised Messiah to wit the crucified Jesus of the main Foundation c. it is not the Gospel in the proper full and adequate Sense and Signification of it as the Scripture useth it observe he doth not say it is not the proper full and adequate Sense and Signification of the â—ord in any wise but it is not the proper c. Sense and Signification of it as the Scripture useth it so loth is he yea to retract any further than an undue Application of a Scripture or two so he adde that Paul in that place Col. 1.23 meant the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ crucified and the Grace and Gift of the Holy Spirit given of God to Men through him and the other Apostles and Evangelists in that clear and bright Dispensation then given c. Answ Paul's words were not so restricted to that clear and bright Dispensation of the Gospel as to go no higher The Gospel he was speaking of was preached to or in every Creature under Heaven This relates to the time past but in the other Sense it was never so preached to all Men living whatever G. K. thinks it may have been to them after they were dead therefore it could not be meant of the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ crucified with respect to that clear and bright Dispensation the Apostles were under but of that Gospel which had been preached to or in EVERY Creature under Heaven This Objection G. K. foresaw therefore adds Though it was not 〈◊〉 that time actually preached to all Men yet it was began 〈◊〉 to be preached and that after the Prophetical Stile that which was to be done is said to be done Answ This will not help him for first where that Prophetical Phrase iâ— or how it is used he assigns not 2ly Neither did the Apostle speak of it as what was then begun to be preached or of what was to be done but of what waâ— preached was done and that not only to a few thoâ—â— the Primitive Christians preached to but to or inâ— every Creature under Heaven It was an Vniversaâ— Gospel universally preached Paul was speaking of 〈◊〉 that G. K's Allegations are unsound One thing I shall take notice of here out of his p. 23 24. relative to this subject which may excuse my hanâ—dling it there where he takes notice that the Gospel oâ— the Kingdom shall be preached in all the World and that thâ— is not the inward Principle only but the Doctrine of Christ's Birth Death c. instancing those words of Christ Where-ever this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached 〈◊〉 also shall be told what this Woman hath done c. Answ This makes against him not for him For Christ did not say Where-ever THE Gospel of the Kingdom but where ever THIS Gospel of the Kingdom shalâ— be preached c. So that the Gospel may be preached where this Gospel giving a Historical Relation of Christ'â— Birth Death c. may not even without contradicting Christ's words And that the glad Tidings brought by them whose-Feet are beautiful upon the Mountains are Gospel in a secondary Sense we deny not Yet so that as the outward and visible things are the Figures oâ— the Inward and Spiritual as G. K. hath asserted Imm. Rev. p. 15. so the name Gospel is more immediately and properly applicable to the Inward Yet in as much as G. K. still shelters himself under the tearms undue Application of some Scriptures and acknowledgeth no Error in Doctrine I shall give a foâ—â— Instances of what he delivered formerly Doctrinally upon this subject in his Book of Vni Gr. who to an Objection that the Gentiles have not had the Gospel preached to them all this time by-past thus answers p. 20. Though the Gospel came not unto them outwardly by the Ministry of Man yet it came unto them inwardly by the Ministry of God himself Again Whereas our Adversaries denied this Manifestation of 〈◊〉 in the Gentiles is the Gospel or any Manifestation of a Saving Nature G. K. argueth thus p. 21. If it were not Evangelical and the VERY GOSPEL IT SELF in an inward Ministration it would quite â—ender the words of the Apostle Impertinent for Paul is here speaking what the Gospel was and what was revealed in it both to the Just and to the Unjust 〈◊〉 that it was not then delivered as a Figurative way of 〈◊〉 dothe according to his last Phrase but the VERY GOSPEL it self or the Apostle must speak Impertiâ—ntly What! Had he not then made a diligent Search â—â—to the Scriptures Or did they tell him one thing â—hen another since But he adds p. 22. By this Manifestation they did see the invisible things of God and his eternal Power and Godhead c. But had â—hey a Revelation of the Manhood of Christ so as to â—ave the Knowledge and Faith of Christ's Birth Death c. either explicitly or implicitly seing it is not the being the Eternal Power and Godhead that makes it â—ospel now with him without the other If he will 〈◊〉 it he must prove it If not Why did he not â—tract this as a
begging of the question who himself had once acquitted us and that even from the Errors he would now fasten upon us yea and out of some of the same Books he then cited in our Vindication and we still continue to defend as unjustly imputed to us whereas his own let him call them Errors or some more diminutive name if he please he hath assigned as needing both Explication Emendation and Correction His second Assigning his own to be Motes ours Beams is too idle for me to take notice of as thinking his Testimony on his own behalf not valid His Thirdly alledging our Excommunicating him is as shallow For had not that drawn him to be Vindictive it would rather have stirred him up by a free and open Retraction to have approved himself to have exceeded us in Confessing and Forsaking And his lastly is all of a piece with his second That what he hath retracted or renounced was never judged by him an Article of Faith and that we have not proved him contradicting in his latter Books any Article of Faith asserted in his former Books To which I reply Had he not done his work by halves he would have found cause to have retracted his doctrinal Errors Errors which every body else that knows what Errors are will acknowledge to relate to Articles of Faith and which as suc◠we have exhibited and argued upon which must be left to the indifferent Reader 's Judgment who hath read his and our Books In the mean time I enter upon examining those before me which he hath here pretended to explain or correct which I also submit to the Judicious whether they relate not to Articles of Faith and also whether G. K. hath at length done his Work Well Sincerely and Conscientiously or on the contrary Sect. I. § 1 Beginning then with his first Section Containing as he saith divers Explanations and Emendations of Passages out of his Book of Immediate Revelation not ceased Printed Anno 1668 and reprinted with an Appendix Anno 1676 in his § 1. he saith Some but who he saith not are offended at the Term Immediate Revelation and mis-construe it to a wrong Sence never intended by him as if he thereby did signifie such a Revelation as did give us the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith of Christian Religion and Principles thereof without the Holy Scriptures or other outward means of Instruction To which I answer The People called Quakers are not concerned in this Charge at least with respect to the Term Immediate Revelation for they allow the thing and dispute not against the Term. And what himself hath said on behalf of the Necessity and Usefulness of Immediate Revelation the Book it self will plainly evidence Yet lest this Reference may seem too general a way I dislike in my Antagonist let the Reader consult the Preface and he will find G. K. there represents this Doctrine of Immediate Revelation a great and weighty Matter which it hath been in his Heart once and again from the Lord to write of saying that It REMAINETH and is of necessary continuance in the true Church Not only for the Preservation Safety and comfortable Walking of the Saints with God but also in order to Men and Womens becoming Saints And that there is no Immediate Revelation now-a-days as the common Priviledge of the Saints he accounts such a Fundamental Error in Men that the greatest part of their other Errors are built on it as 1. That the Scriptures outward Testimony is most necessary and that no true and saving Knowledge of God is to be attained but by the Scriptures being read or heard See Preface p. 1 2. Now hence I argue If it be an Error according to G. K. to assert that the Scriptures outward Testimony is most necessary and that no true and saving Knowledge of God is to be attained but by the Scriptures being read or heard Then it is G. K. his Sense and not a Mis-construction thereof that a Saving Knowledge of God may be attained by Immediate Revelation without the help of the Scriptures and that the Scriptures outward Testimony is not most necessary in his Judgment And this Saving Knowledge must be a Knowledge of the Christian Religion except he be prepared to retract his Retraction But to obviate this Offence and Mistake as he terms it he recommends the Reader to what he hath said from p. 38. to p. 42. of that Book but cites no passage out of it where I distinguish saith he of means intermitting and transmitting and shew that it is the intermitting means that hinders the Revelation to be Immediate but not the transmitting Answ Here he Shuffles the Debate here is not whether Revelation be Immediate or no when transmitted through organized Instruments either the Holy Scriptures or Men divinely inspired but whether he hath asserted such an Immediate Revelation is not ceased as is received with either the one or the other That the Reader may inform himself of even in p. 40 within the compass of G. K. his Reference for he there saith We find that he sometimes useth outward means and sometimes he useth them not but conveigheth unto us from and through his own Seed and Birth in us the living Manifestations and Communications of his Life Will and Council many yea MOST TIMES without all Means or Instruments from without for most times we are left alone as to Instruments or Means without us I would advise him therefore in his next either to retract this Passage which is within the Pages he hath so lately recommended to us or his referring us thereto to obviate the pretended Mistake and Offence for this Passage will hamper him else Now let us see whether he mends the matter by his other Book called Divine Immediate Revelation for he tells us that in p. 44. thereof as an instance He did own the Holy Scriptures to be a necessary means to give us the true Knowledge and Faith of Christian Doctrines and Principles But that his own Citation saith not but only that all other Doctrine and Heads of the Christian Religion which he calls special the other general Religion are made known to us by the Scripture means the Holy Spirit inwardly inlightning and inspiring c. Which doth not prove that they are a necessary means a sine quâ non that without which the Knowledge cannot be conveighed but that they are profitable and useful means when attended with Divine Illumination and Inspiration and therefore not ad rem What he would have noted that twelve Years ago he distinguished between Gentile and Christian Religion saith he between special and general Religion say I though some call this a new Doctrine in him so to distinguish I think hath little of weight in it except he had told us who his Accusers were For my part I do not account it a New Doctrine in him to distinguish between special and general Religion yet I do esteem it a Contradiction to say as in p. 63. of
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
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
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
Death So foully hath he prevaricated in wresting his words to what they will not bear nor were not designed to bear when given He goes on This was never intended by me to lâ—ssen or obscure that great Truth of the Gospel That the Man Christ is the Promised Seed of Abraham in the true literal Sense and without all Allegory as he was born of the Blessed Virgin and that Promised Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Serpents head Answ What he intended is best interpreted by what he said except he would perswade us that he said one thing meant another I shall not therefore think much to transcribe a Passage or two already given in our former Books and not yet retracted by him In his Way cast up p. 99. he saith Though the outward Coming of the Man Christ was deferred according to his outward Birth in the Flesh for many Ages yet from the Beginning this Heavenly Man the PROMISED SEED did inwardly come into the Hearts of those that believed in him and bruised the Head of the Serpent and destroyed him that had the Power of Death that is the Devil And in Way to the City of God p. 125. Even from the Beginning yea upon Man's Fall God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself and Christ was manifest in the HOLY SEED inwardly and stood in the way to ward off the Wrath of God from the Sinners and Unholy that it might not come upon them to the uttermost during the day of their Visitation For even at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone and pacifie the Wrath of God towards Men. And also p. 128. he Queries Why might not Christ suffer in Men before his outward Coming as he doth now suffer in them long after it Again The Seed hath been the SAME in all Ages and hath had its Sufferings under by and for the Sins of Men in them all for the removing and ABOLISHING of them This I bring not to entertain a strife about words but seeing he absolutely told us what he ever intended I demand the Intent hereof whether he did not then acknowledge Christ's Appearance as a Seed and the Effects thereof both to reconcile attone and pacifie the Wrath of God towards Men and also to bruise the Head of the Serpent was previous to that of his being born of the Blessed Virgin the which he knows to be that which we have all along pinched him with out of his former Writings and which to this day he hath neither retracted nor defended § 13 Whereas he had said Imm. Rev. p. 87. ' The Soul speaks to God in the Son Through him not at a distance but near He now § 13. saith His Sense was not at a discontinued distance but both near and afar off Answ This idle Shift will not help him he is positive he is not a distance but near and adds Where his living Drawings are felt his eternal Power is felt making way for the Soul unto God breaking through all the Powers of Darkness c. And is that Presence wherein the livings Drawings are felt c. at a distance absent not near even within say I Yea Christ is near as Mediator He is Man's Advocate unto God and there is none to intervene or come betwixt God and the Soul but Christ the alone Mediator to whom God speaks in his Son said G. K. but a little above and in p. 88. speaks of the Appearance of Jesus to mediate in Men which could not be spoke of the Body received of the Virgin and now glorified in Heaven for that is at a distance not near but of that Presence which is not at a distance but near even of him who is the high and holy one that inhabits Eternity with him also that is of a contrite and humble Spirit Isa 57.15 Nor will his Notion of a discontinued distance help him but rather shew he is a meer Shuffler First for that it is no Scripture Phrase Yet expresly delivered in the Scriptures in plain express Scripture-terms therefore by his own Rule Truths Defence p. 170 171. should not be required by one sort from another as an Article of Faith or Doctrine or Principle of the Christian Religion 2ly However it may hold in the Mathematical Science with respect to a direct Line which extends from the place near to another remote and afar off yet here Vbiquity being an Attribute not only of the Deity but even of the Man Christ according to his own Assertion Way Cast up p. 130 131. and not yet retracted so that God and Christ are every where not confined or circumscribed to a remoteness as in a direct Line where one part is near the other afar off this distinction will not hold 3ly What he alledges out of Acts 17.27 where Men are bid to seek the Lord if happily they may feel after him and find him reacheth not his purpose viz. That he is not at a discontinued distance It being spoken of the Vnfaithful and even to them God was not afar off however they might be far from him so as to feel and find him For that which may be inwardly felt and found is not far off But hear him again I did not intend in the least saith he by asserting the Mediation and Intercession of the Mediatory Spirit of Christ in the Saints to deny or derogate from Christ's Mediation and Intercession without us in Heaven Answ Neither do we But what doth he retract then if it be still good Doctrine that Christ is Mediator in his inward Appearance in Man as well as in Heaven What hath he been hitherto contending with us about in his several envious Pamphlets Will he give up the Cause at last and cry Peccavi for his fierce opposing and slandering us as denying Christ's Mediatorship upon this very foot rather than retract this Passage Or will he do neither but twist and twine and wriggle in constant Inconstancy and neither plainly renounce nor plainly defend what he hath so plainly asserted formerly § 14 He would perswade us if he could § 14. that by these words Imm. Rev. p. 99. Jesus Christ revealed in Man is the Foundation of the true Church He did not mean only and alone the Light Within but that the true Knowledge and Faith of Christ as he is both God and Man and who as Man died rose and ascended c. is grounded upon him as inwardly revealed c. Answ He was not speaking of Jesus Christ revealed TO Man but of his being revealed IN Man which is the Scope of his Argument from p. 99 to 129. Who in p. 101. saith Christ must be revealed by the Father before he became a Foundation this is that which buildeth which edifieth the effectual Working in every part the Revelation of the Arm of the Lord IN Man's Heart And p. 103. having told us that Whatsoever Church
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
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
Expressions might not be so much from his own Experience as his Master Plato 's Writings or allowing he might have some true Experience of a Divine Contact or Vnion it was in some transient way like a glance or slash of Lightning Answ If G. K. will allow Plato to have had the Divine Spiritual Contact Union c. himself must prove beyond probabilities and may-be's that Plato had Faith in Christ yea even in Christ Crucified and Raised again to wit such a degree of Faith as was accompanied with a Divine Union such an Union which in the Quotation given out of Ant. and Sadd above he denies to have been given to the Pious Gentiles or to Cornelius who had not that Faith And if that could be done and Plato could be proved to be more than a Speculative Philosopher is it not pretty fair that G. K. even when denying that Cornelius of whom the Holy Scripture give so large a Character as a Devout Man one that feared God whose Prayer and Alms were come up as a Memorial before God Acts 10.24 had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile state should admit Plato might have it and that by Union Was Plato a better Man than Cornelius Or is not G. K. worse than either A very Changeling in Religion And yet stiff in defending he is not so Nay Plotinus himself a Writer against Christians shall have so much of G. K's good word though Cornelius go without it as that he will not deny he had not this Union at least in a transient way A sign that they who write against Christians a Work himself hath lately taken in hand have more of his Favour than the Pious Gentiles But he hath not spun his Thread fine enough yet so that if the word Union will not fetch him off but he be hampered there in p. 36. he will riveit it with the words permanent and lasting inward residence abiding and then he vaunts saying It is great Ignorance in his late Opposers not to understand how the Spirit of God who is holy may work in the Hearts of the Gentiles and Vnbelievers but we were speaking not of Gentiles and Unbelievers indefinitely but of Cornelius and the Pious Gentiles yet hath no inward residence or abiding Vnion or Communion with them but such only who have Faith in Christ Answ The words fore-cited viz. MOST INWARD UNION AND COMMUNION cut the Nerves of this New Exposition for what can be so if not that which is a permanent lasting abiding Residence and that in the Pious Gentiles But to mislead his Reader as he adds so also he substracts at pleasure yet gives it as our Inference For besides the word Pious which he left out as if the Debate had been only of the Vnbelieving Gentiles he here speaks of Faith in Christ not of Faith in Christ Crucified his own tearms when he denied Cornelius to have had that Holy Ghost as if there had been two Holy Ghosts which was a peculiar Gift to Believers in Christ Crucified and Raised again and not to every Believer in Christ indefinitely to whom the History thereof had not been revealed All which shews the Man is a meer Shuffler seeking to reconcile his former with his latter Sentiments instead of retracting either by indirect means adding to and taking from the Premises at pleasure and yet giving them as if they were even so stated what we had alledged to him A Work ill becoming a Scholar to such Illiterate Antagonists as â—e would render us But his Cause and Management are a kin § 10 Waving then any Doctrinal Discussing of the Point for the Matter before me is a Consideration of the Incongruity and Incoherence of his Contradictory Assertions and the Defectiveness of his false Covers instead of shewing wherein the Scriptures alledged by him do not answer his purpose I come to consider the next trifling Objection as he also calls it we have made but where he saith not I had in my Keith against Keith p. 107 108. quoting him out of Presb and Ind. Chur. p. 111 112. shewed this Notion there that Men who had not the express Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified WHEN LIVING might have it at or after Death to wit in their passing through the Valley of shadow of Death favoured that of Purgatory as in my People called Quakers Cleared c. p. 31 to 33. and else where I proved what he held with respect to that of the Transmigration of Souls Now to obviate both these he alledgeth a passage out of his Pretended Antidote p. 115 116. which Book I know not how to come by That all that go to Christ in Heaven after Death must have an express Knowledge of Christ in Heaven Whence he Queries both whether the Souls now in Heaven can be without all Knowledge of Christ and whether the Souls of Plato and Socrates whom farr be it from him he saith to suppose they are not in Heaven are still without all express Knowledge of Christ Answ If the Faith the Gentiles have will carry them to Christ in Heaven they are well enough We doubt not but their Knowledge there will be compleat nor do we think when they are once there they will be sent back again for want of an express Knowledge before they came thither However I thought before this great Philosopher arose that the Faith and Knowledge that carried me to Christ in Heaven was Saving Knowledge and that if I had not my Saving Faith and Knowledge here I should never come thither Thus to extricate himself from an Imputation of holding the Notion of a Purgatory on which he was like to be stranded he alledgeth another as unsound i. e. They shall have their express Knowledge of Christ in Heaven the tendency of which as it is a Procrastination a putting off the day of Salvation so it contradicts the Scriptures which say TO DAY if ye will hear his voice harden not yâ—â— hearts Heb. 3.7 8. NOW is the day of Salvation 2 Cor 6.2 Thus he shews his unsoundness in what follows his Malice by insinuating if some of his Opposers whom he names not think there is no Christ in Heaven having any bodily Existence it 's no wonder they think the Saints in Heaven have no knowledge of him In which he is both Injurious and Detractive as well as Self-inconsistent in his malitious Charge once vented by his Brother Apostate Chr. Lodowick who then defended that it was not true and quoted a Book of G. W's called Malice of Ind. Agent p. 17. and another written by some Friends called Testimony for the Man Christ Jesus which p. 4. cited W. P. on that behalf wherein both G. W. W. P. and those Friends assert the Man Christ's Existence in his glorified Body in Heaven see G. K. his Christ Faith p. 12 13. as he is also in suggesting we think the Saints have no knowledge of Christ in Heaven which I remember not to have heard from him before and is
if it be an Exâ—lication then not a Retractation for they are not Synoâ—imous Tearms and if strained not genuin nor proâ—er then not plain and free much less fairly defended â—y Explication Besides that he that will strain an â—xplication beyond what it will bear cannot be supposed to be freely willing to retract it seing it was â—is Unwillingness to do that which drew him to strain â—is Explication So that this profound Scholar hath run himself a-ground miserably Yet surely had he not been conscious to himself of using strained Explications he need not have given this Caution to his friendly and judicious Reader for such are not apt to take things at the worst hand nor so to conceive without just Cause administred Had he given it as a Caution to the Captious and Inimical not to the Friendly and Judicious there had been less ground to suspect he knew he had deserved such a Censure And indeed he hath so managed his Work all along as will be obvious upon the reading of these that he could not expect but it would be excepted against even by the Friendly that do not give away their Judgment To mend the matter he now tells us he freely retracts all Passages in any of his Books in so far as they are inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures and submits them to the Test thereof Answ As this is general no particular passage assigned it is no Retractation at all For who even of them that are least conscious to themselves of having offered what is not perfectly consistent with Scripture may not say so and that theâ— submit theirs to the Test thereof which may be rather called a Purgation and Vindication than a Retractation Again when at one time he faith the Text saith thus in the Greek the proper and usual Significatioâ— must be kept to as Vni Gr. p. 43. another while reâ—tracts that alledgeth the Sense would be marred iâ— that Translation were admitted and all this upon thâ— same Scripture as hath been instanced above Sect. ◠§ 16. and Sect. II. § 7. what must be the Test then Who the Interpreter If G. K. himself It may be 〈◊〉 question how long he will keep of that Mind 〈◊〉 another Who is that other And what Assurancâ— will G. K. give that he will stand to his Arbitrement Yet upon this he gives his Reader very oily Words tells him how ready he would be to correct them for thaâ— possibly divers other particulars may have not been observed and p. 43. That he would receive an Information most kindly as a most friendly Office and judge himself greatly obliged to be thankful to him which I take as an artificial Cover that he might not be suspected to have slipt over so many without the least notice which he had received Information of As for ours he represents them to be without a right Vnderstanding from a Spirit of Prejudice or a Scoffing Taunting Airy Vnchristian Spirit which as it is no Encouragement to any Man to take the Pains to be Scavinger to his Books for what Security can the Reader have he shall be better treated so it denotes not a hearty Desire of Information for why then did he over-look them he was informed of but a design to hide and cover himself under specious Pretences and excuse himself from engaging where he cares neither to retract nor defend Who saith of T. E. C. P. and me That we have blamed and censured the soundest Passages for most part in his Books in relation to Doctrine though generally such as most need Correction we have past without the least Censure To which I answer In as much as he is thus conscious to himself of passages that need Correction why did he not clear his hands of what was depending before he called upon his Reader for more Work To the rest I say It is Contradictions not Doctrines that we have mostly alledged out of his Books And where they have offered themselves we have taken them the censuring his Doctrines any otherwise than by comparing the Contradictory Assertions being the least part of what we have been engaged in He begins p. 44. thus Finally with a free and willing Mind I make a general Retractation of all the hard Names and uncharitable Censures I have at any time past upon any differing from me in pâ—int of Judgment that have not deserved them But who have deserved them and what Censures such have deserved he that knows can tell For G. K's part the Determination he keeps in his own Breast Wherefore I appeal to the several sorts of Protestants in this Nation Doth this satisfie you whom he thus hath censured and given these hard Names unto Do ye look upon this as a sincere hearty Retractation springing from deep Regret as he gives out or that it is any thing but a meer Shift Is this sufficient Compensation to you the Members of the Church of England for his tearming Prelacy a Limb of Antichrist Help in Time of Need p. 37 That filthy thing set up in the Land p. 38. telling the Presbyterians They did well in departing from you who gave your selves forth to be the Lord's Ministers and Servants running and he sent you not and that your Covetousness and Ambition and seeking how to please Men and not any Zeal for God set you on lording it over the People and that what ye gave forth as his Ordinances c. were the meer Inventions of Men and Babylon's golden Cup of Fornication for whose Pride Pomp Covetousness Tyranny and Ambition God's Wrath was kindled against you and he poured Contempt and Desolation upon you ibid. p. 47 48. Or to you of the Presbyterian way for his alledging in the Title Page That ye have GENERALLY shrunk from what but of late ye so zealously asserted and maintained to be the Cause and Work of God Was not that your Covenant against Prelacy say I the MOST PART actively complying to the building up again and healing old Babylon like the Dog returning to the Vomit and the Sow to the Puddle after the being once washed others lying by and cowardly bowing under and giving up themselves to a detestable Neutrality And p. 50. That when ye got upon the Walls and Bulworks of your Enemies building and levelled it to the Ground when ye had rooted out Prelacy and the many Corruptions and Superstitions that accompanied the same and digged down a good part of Babylon's up-setting that then ye took your selves to build Whos 's Form of Church-Discipline Order and Government is nothing upon the Matter better than the Episcopal saith G. K. p. 52. Or to you Independents and Bapâ—ists for linking you with the former as ALL of you open and declared Enemies to the Holy Spirit its inward Revelation and Inspiration c. see Presb and Ind. Ch. p. 45. For these are not yet retracted by him and how know ye but he still esteems you as DESERVING these Epithets It is true indeed he pretends