paragraph where he saith I say the Scriptur only beareth Testimony to some of them to wit of the Chief Heads of Christianity which I dare him to prove ever to have been said or written by me And of the like natur are his lying conjecturs and his malitious insinuations from my words in the two following paragraphs which I utterly renounce and return upon him as his own false and fictitious apprehensions for do not I declare the Authority of the Scriptur when I testifie they are from the Spirit and that such commands require obedience as has been above shewn But what he urgeth of this further p. 57 59 from the saying of some Quakers affirming that is not a Command to them which is given to another albeit I might justly reject it as impertinent till he prove it for the reasons upon this occasion above declared yet because he mentions Benjamin Furly in Rotterdam having some knowledge of that matter I answer Whether will he say all the Commands in Scriptur to every person there mentioned are binding upon every individual now If he dare not say they are as I know he dare not how must I then distinguish betwixt what binds me and binds me not Must it not be by the Spirit suppose it were only subjectively as he will confess inlightening the Understanding To make this distinction then it seems it is the operation of the Spirit that makes them know their duty and sure they can not obey before they know But if he say that though they should want that operation of the Spirit did not know nor acknowledge them to be their duty yet they are binding upon them neither B. F. nor any Quaker will deny but even the Commands of God's Spirit the Precepts of the Scriptur which now concern all are binding upon all so that they shall be justly condemned for not obeying albeit that by the perversness of their hearts and wills they either refuse to obey or will not acknowledge them So that his urging of that p 60 61. n. 13. and his pleading for it is unnecessary and needs no answer yet who would say they could obey to any advantage of their Souls without this operation of the Spirit since what soever is not of Faith is sin But as to these words said to be writen by B. F. he is here challenged to prove they are his without adding or diminishing and it 's wel known the adding or diminishing of two or three words in a few lines will quite alter the sense and before he has answered this challenge and free'd himself from the just censur of a Calumniator albeit he take the help of his Author Hicks he will find his folly in accusing men at second hand proofs and upon the testimony of their adversarys What follows in this paragraph and p. 60. is meer railing and perversions comparing us with Papists as is before observed and indeed all of it is overturned by that one assertion of mine that what revelations are contrary to the Scriptur are to be rejected ¶ 5. Pag. 57. n. 10. he faith I come nearer to the core of my designe which is to set up Enthusiasmes in affirming that the Scripturs are not the Fountain but a declaration of the Fountain and yet the man within 3 or 4 lines confesseth it himself ascribing it to my folly to dream any man thinks so thus he goes backward and forward which he illustrats by the example of Laws But if it be so are not they to be blam'd that account them the principal Original of all Truth and knowledge Whether the other branch of my deduction follow from this that they are not to be accounted the primary Rule of Faith and manners will appear when the arguments and objections relating to that come particularly to be mentioned And whereas he thinks this is absurd and not making for my designe because God himself is the Fountain and yet not the Rule he mistakes the matter as urged by me for I argue that the Scripturs are not the original ground of knowledge but GOD not simply considered but as manifesting himself in Divine immediat revelations in the hearts of his Children which being the New Covenant's dispensation as in the last section is proven is the primary and adequat Rule of Christians For I was never so absurd as to call God simply considered or the Spirit of God in abstracto not as imprinting Truths to be believed and obeyed in mens hearts not contrary but according to Scriptur for he can not contradict himself the Rule of Christians and this may serve to answer all his cavills upon this Theam And whereas he wondereth in the following page 58. why any revelations even from the Spirit should be more primary than the Scripturs since they are confessed to come from the inspiration of the Spirit for why he useth the Latine word afflatus and doth not interpret it I know not unless to fright ignorant folk that they may think it 's a piece of the witch-craft of the Quakers whom he accuseth it is strange he should have so little sense as to make it a matter of admiration as if that were not more primary to a man which cometh immediatly from the Spirit of God in his heart than that which albeit it come from the Spirit yet is through another and so must needs be but secondary albeit it be confessed they writ them not for themselvs but for others which I deny not Of the same natur is and the same way is answered what he saith p. 65. n. 19. to wit that I confound the Principal Leader with the Original Rule because I say the Spirit is the Prime and Principal Leader but I deny his consequence neither doth his example of the Wind and Compass prove it the Spirit is the Principal Leader as imprinting upon man's Soul the Rules he should walk by but indeed he would prove a very uncertain Pilot that had no compass but only a description of it and a journal how other men had steered that course and such Pilots is he and his Brethren according to their own confession But he thinks I drive at something more intolerable to wit that the Revelations the Quakers pretend to or the Light within is to be preferred as the more primary and principal Rule to the Scripturs If the Quakers did affirm any revelations they speak of as coming from that Light either were or could be contrary to the Scripturs he would say something otherwise it will amount to no more but that commands as they are imprinted upon the Soul that is the Law writen in the heart by the Spirit is more primarily and principally the Rule than the same things writen and received only from another as to which I will only ask him Whether those things which the Apostles received immediatly from the Spirit commanding them to go here or there to preach the Gospel or the like were as to these ends more
that will not meet this case Those 1 Tim. 1 19. who are said to make shipwrack of a good Conscience are such who believed the true doctrin of faith in Christ as himself before acknowledgeth Now albeit a man may be said to live in good Conscience to other principles while ignorant of this yet he should prove how a man can be said to have a good Conscience with respect to the true faith of Christ held by him and yet without saving or true grace With railing he tels me pag. 358. n. 18. that Phil. 1 6. 1 Pet. 1 5. God's beginning and perfecting the condition And what then yet God doth not this against our wills it is with a respect to our performing the conditions on our part which yet we can not do without him Then he goes about to prove that Paul could not fall in answer to my saying from 1 Cor. 9 27. that Paul supposeth a possibility that he might become a reprobat but if the Reader consider how I bring that in my Apology he will find he had no reason for this cavill for I alledged it only to reprove those that are too too secure shewing where sin was there was always a ground of jealousy since the Apostle did reckon it needfull to keep under his body to subdue sin that he might not become a reprobat which since the Apostle did but upon this supposition if he did not keep under his body suppose possible others had no reason to presume Section Eleventh Wherein his XVI Chapter Of the Church his XVII Of the Ministerial Call his XVIII XIX and XXI Of their Qualifications Office and Maintenance and his XX Of VVomens Preaching is considered ¶ 1. HIs chapter of the Church is soon dispatched for it contains scarce any thing but perversions and railing for after he has given a large citation out of their Confession of Faith and then added some enlargements of his own and some little nibling cavils to what I say of no Salvation being without the Church pag. 361. he goes on with his old reiterated calumny that I suppose men may be made members of the Catholik Church by the Light of Nature which is utterly false And upon this false supposition is built his n. 5. pag. 362. as also what he saith pag. 364. But n. 4. he screws this to a greater pitch of falshood affirming that what I say of a Particular Church gathered together in the faith of the true Principles and Doctrins of Christ by the Spirit of God and testimony of some of his Ministers is that these are persons only taught by the Light of Nature and by such Ministers as preach nothing of the Gospel Against a man thus desperatly resolved and determined to lye and calumniat there can be no guard but sure all sober Readers will abhorr such dealing What I speak of a Church in this respect is only of such as have the advantage of the outward knowledge of Christ as my words afterwards shew where I say such were the Churches gathered by the Apostles of which the Scriptur makes mention And therefore what he objects that can not be don by Pagans is wholly impertinent and doth but verify the grossness of his calumny which he endeavours to inculcat as a truth to his Reader pag. 363. as if what I say further of the things requisit to be a member of this Particular Church were a third sort and not a more particular description of the former which the Reader may easily observe by looking to the place to be a meer fetch of his to afford himself some matter of cavill which imagining he has got he fills-up the paragraph with gross lyes and railing saying That the Quakers believe not the holy Truths set down in the Scripturs because they oppose and contradict them That they believe not in nor maké profession of Jesus Christ revealed in the New Testament because they oppose him and all his Institutions That faith according to them is not wrought by the Spirit of God but that Nature can sweetly and naturally incline yea compell thereunto All which are gross calumnys And then he concludeth saying And thus we have run round and are again where we began which is very true for he began with calumnys and having run round the same way his work resolvs in them Pag. 364. he affirmeth Men may be Members of the visible Church and consequently ought to be reputed such who are ungodly and without holiness and offereth to make it good if I will form a dispute upon it but I leave him as to this to disput with his learned Dr. Owen whose works he has applauded in this Treatise and whom his Postscript-Brother R. M. has in his preface to this B.'s book highly commended as a gratious man As for his silly argument that from the Apostle's saying Act. 2 39. the promise is unto you and to your children and 1 Cor. 7 14. it follows men become members of the Church by birth I leave him to debate it with his great Author Thomas Hicks who will tell him if he be consonant to his own principles it is a Babylonish invention But I. B. hath here unawares contradicted himself for if these Scripturs prove men become members of the Church by birth then the sprinkling them with water sometime after they are born or their Baby-Baptism is not necessary to make them members of the Church and they are to be accounted such without it He saith I am mistaken when I say Antichrist built his structure upon this foundation to wit that men without holiness may be members of the true Church because he applieth all the priviledges of the invisible Church unto his visible synagogue of Sathan where as this sheweth that I am not mistaken but that my affirmation is true for if he to wit Antichrist did believe holiness to be necessary to make a member of the true Church he could not apply the privileges of the invisible Church unto his visible members most of which he wel knows as often-times himself are not only void of but enemies to holiness It is false that I agree with him in his not distinguishing betwixt the Visible and Invisible Church and yet much more in unchurching all who are not of his combination in which albeit I. B. most impudently insinuats I approach to him yet himself can not but know it to be a most manifest falshood since I suppose some of all sects of Christians may be members of the catholik Church and he knows and has observed here how contrary the Pope is to this doctrin At last he concludes this chapter with a fit of Railing of which the last words must not pass without observation to wit that in stead of true holyness I press upon them a natural dead and anti-Evangelical Morality Now this Morality as pressed by me he himself confessed before to be such as the Law of Nature taught albeit in truth I pressed none but what
omission of any words in the Theses prefixed to the Apology proceeds from my being ashamed of the name QUAKER since himself bears witness in the very same page that I fully acknowledge it in the explanation of the 11 Thesis Here he has a descant upon Trembling and seems to strange that any Quaker should bring the example of Moses and Habbakkuk to shew that such a thing was not so much to be wondred at in the Saints but why this should be esteemed impertinent by him he doth not tell us As for the foaming at the mouth he talks of both here and elsewhere it is returned upon him as a calumny and he is desired to prove it but it must be by some more credible impartial testimony than his Mr Stalham for Partys use not to be admitted as witnesses For his denominating us by that name of distinction I shall not quarrel but as for his insinuation in the begining of pag. 5. where he saith It is like we would gladly have them casting away their Bibles as no more to be regarded than the Turks Alcoran it bespeaketh the height of malice as to which I shall only say The Lord forgive him for so gross a calumny which he that is the Searcher of hearts knows to be a most horrible lye He goes on after his usual manner saying I inveigh against all humane learning that hath been any ways made use of in Theology but where he finds this asserted by me I know not whether the words he would deduce it from to wit that man has rendred the plain and naked Truth obscure and mysterious by his wisdom will bear such a consequence is left to the Readers judgment But he thinks he has found out our secret design of being against Learning and Schools of Learning which is neither our affirmation nor principle but his own false supposition We would saith he have all those banished that we might the more easily prevail with our errors But methinks the man should be more wary in venting his own false imaginations unless he could bring some ground for them for his assertion is so far untrue that if he had been rightly informed he might have known that we have set up schools of Learning for teaching of the Languages and other needfull Arts and Sciences and that we never denyed its usefulness only we denyed it to be a qualification absolutly necessary for a Minister in which case alone we have opposed its necessity ¶ 5. He confesseth I speak not amiss in saying the world is overburthened with books but thinks that my Apology of 50 sheets adds some considerable weight but methinks he of all men should have here been silent who has troubled the world with an examination of it a great deal larger albeit he confesseth all that is in it hath been refuted by the Orthodox long ago not only so but since that he has written a book near twice as large upon one point to prove the first day of the week to be the Christian Sabbath and yet it is but the first time and seems but to be the porch of what he intends upon that subject With his usual candor he saith I am against disputes debates or books written of that natur But to inferr simply that I am against all such because I reprove the vain jangling that hath been and is among the School-men is an ill consequence he shall not find me any where speaking against usefull and solid controversys for clearing and maintaining of Truth He seemeth not to disapprove what I speak against School-Divinity confessing the abuse of it albeit he thinks it hath been of use and as for this imagination of my being acquainted with it we will place it among his other mistakes He proceedeth pag. 8 to say I am against the labours of those that have writ commentarys but his conclusion here is like others of this nature When I mention commentarys it is with relation to what goes before he will not deny but many books are written under the notion of commentarys on the Scriptur by which the Truth has been more darkened than cleared will it therefore follow that he condemns Commentarys indefinitly As for such writings tending to the opening of the Scriptur in which the Authors are acted and influenced by the same Spirit from which the Scripturs came and which alone can give the true meaning of them I am so far from condemning them that I highly approve them as very beneficial to the Church of Christ. As for his talk here of our disrespect to the Scripturs I shall have occasion to take notice of it where they are particularly treated of but he is apt to think that the real ground of my prejudice against such books is because so much is to be found in them against my old errors for I can not but know saith he that whoever reads these must see my nakedness and folly without much study As for this imagination we must take it with much more upon trust but this helps to prove the needlesness of his large Examination ¶ 6. At his usual rate of Perverting he goes on to say that the account I make of all the learned men of the World is that they are Scribes and disputers of the World c. But for proof of this we have nothing he confesseth the words to be those of the Apostle and how he proveth that I have a different meaning from the Apostle I know not After he hath commended his learned men and loaded the Quakers with reproaches he concludes this Paragraph pag. 8. with another falshood and yet he will have it remarked to wit that according to my judgment the pure and naked Truth of God was never unfolded nor declared untill the generation of the Quakers arose but where he finds me saying so he tells not and indeed can not since such a thing was never asserted by me For answer to my saying that God has laid aside the wise and learned and made use of illiterat men as to letter-learning after he saith it is affirmed without proof not considering how improper it was not to expect any formal probation upon the occasion and manner it was delivered he gives us divers citations out of the Apostle Paul warning against seducers all which I acknowledge to be true but the question lieth in the right application and yet since albeit he believes they very appositly agree to us he thinks it not his present business to demonstrat it it will need no reply After he has proceeded in his 10 page according to his usual sort of railing affirming the great difference betwixt our doctrin and that of the Apostles he brings forth a mighty charge that I usurp the Throne of God and judg of mens hearts and intentions but how guilty himself is of that crime hath been in part already shewn and will hereafter more appear but why do I so because I say the Clergy have clouded the
led by a spirit of error Then the Quakers err in affirming inward and immediat Revelation to be the ground and foundation of true faith But the Quakers are led by a spirit of Error Therefore c. Which is just as if I should argue thus If I. B. be a Knave a manifest Lyar and Calumniator Then he is not a true Minister of Christ nor fit to write in Religious matters But I. B. is such Therefore c. Is not this a notable way of arguing and a quick way to dispatch controversies What saith Rob. Macquair Doth not this wel become his singularly acute solidly learned and truely gracious Author Postscript pag. 559. ¶ 3. The next thing to be considered is his stating the controversy where according to his custom he all along beggs the question for having writ down his opinion and taken it for granted without offering to prove it he goes on and builds thereon without more difficulty as if it were not to be further questioned This appears in pag. 20. 28. 29. 30. 34. 35. 36. 37. 40. 43. 44. in which places he states his opinion of the Immediat Revelation of the Spirit as not being such as presents any Truths to be believed objectively but only in removing the Vail of the Eye of the Understanding and spiritually Illuminating the Mind and Working effectually upon the Heart to embrace and receive the Truth already revealed and proposed in the Scripturs Now for not using this distinction and holding revelation in this his sense he greatly blames me as jumbling things together and darkning and prejudging the Reader and bestows upon me ever and anon many railing words with the repetition of which I will not trouble the Reader And yet notwithstanding this accusation in contradiction of himself he cites me pag. 42 28 taking notice of this very distinction as used by some and also refuting it Surely the man must have miserably forgot himself and will verifie the Proverb Lyars should have good memorys Next since he judges I err in not holding this manner of Revelation and that he builds all his superstructur upon it as the Truth he should have offer'd to prove it to be such for since he saith they willingly grant to these Scripturs noted by me as many as are led by the Spirit of God c. Rom. 8 9-14 together with 1 Joh. 2 27. Joh. 6 45. Joh. 14 16 17. By which Scripturs he can not deny but the manner of the Apostles being led as wel as of all Christians is included since some of them were directed to the Apostles particularly in all which there is no ground for his distinction and assertion It is not said The Comforter that I will send shall lead you the Apostles immediatly by proposing Truth to be believed objectively to you and this shall be accounted extraordinary but after you it shall only lead other Christians by illuminating their Understandings and that shall be the ordinary leading And since then it is a rule granted by all that we must hold to the plain words of Scriptur unless an urgent necessity force us to the contrary he should shew us where this necessity lies and prove his assertion to be the true and genuin meaning of the words and that we ought not to take them as we do according to their plain and naked signification and import For I would willingly hear any ground from Scriptur of this natur of Extraordinary and Ordinary Revelations as pertinent to this debate for albeit things extraordinary may be reveal'd to some and not to others that only respects the things revealed not the manner of Revelation For a man telling me extraordinary things and ordinary albeit the things may differ in their natur yet neither my manner of hearing nor his of speaking do thence necessarily differ ¶ But perhaps the man doth apprehend that what he saith pag. 20. 30. 31. 40. 44. 45. is some proof of his assertion which if he do the Reader may easily observe his mistake where he would insinuat as if the manner of Immediat Revelation by the Spirit asserted by me rendred all other means even those of Teaching and Exhorting which are appoynted by God useless and took away all obligations of obeying the commands of God conveighed by others And yet he taketh notice pag. 23. that I acknowledge other means of Knowledge as profitable neither has he ever heard me deny but men are obliged to obey the commands of God through one another as wel as in themselves as the children of Israel were those of Moses and the Prophets and the Christians those of Christ and his Apostles But I suppose he will affirm with me that no man's Obedience to any command will avail him any thing unless upon inward belief and conviction that the thing commanded is of God since Whatsoever is not of Faith is sin If he say that albeit I do not deny such an obligation yet it necessarily follows from my Principle That this is untruely alleged will easily appear since I suppose he will not deny but the rest of the Apostles who were alive when Paul's Epistls were writen were obliged to receive them and obey them as the dictats of the Spirit yea and were benefited by them and so the Apostle Paul by others albeit on both sides he will acknowledge them to have had such revelations as he accounts Immediat and Extraordinary And so we see that to have such revelations and yet to be mediatly instructed are not inconsistent nor do they render one another useless and indeed to affirm they do so is rather a presumptuous accusing of God who has appynted both in their order for the edification of his Church than a refuting of such as assert them Such are his reasonings pag. 45. Besides that this objection may be easily refuted for since I. B. affirms as particularly pag. 42. that the Scriptur is a compleat Rule in all things concerning Faith and manners in reference to Salvation might it not be said that this takes away the use of all Commentarys and expositions and other books especially since he and his Brethren do with all affirm that it is clear and intelligible to all in things essential to Salvation let him shew how this is weaker as to him than the other as to me With the like presumption he blasphemously asserteth that even these revelations which he himself calleth and acknowledgeth to be inward immediat and extraordinary are uncertain for this reason because many men have been deluded by the Devil on which he also insists in the following page And pag. 34. 48. where he sums up his matter in this question How comes that others pretending to Revelation as much as I have been deceived But as I said before How comes that others pretending to be led by the Scriptur as the Rule as much as I. B. have been deceived since the Scriptur declares nothing but Truth But how silly this is I have above shewn and
manifested upon you my witness is in heaven I am one who desires not the evil day but am willing to embrace all the sweet opportunitys of the drawings of my Father's love and the arisings of his Life to stand in the gapp for the single-hearted among you and I must declare for the exoneration of my own Conscience I am an experimental witness how grievously thou violatst the Truth in misrepresenting the things which thou callest the bitter root springing up in these sprouts of hell 1. Mens not receiving the love of the Truth 2. Their pleasing themselves with names and notions while Christ was not received to dwell in the heart 3. Their not departing from iniquity who seemed to call on his Name I am a witness when the Lord called me out from among the Presbyterians I was one who according to my education and information and inclination from my child-hood was a true lover of that called the Glorious Gospell and a constant attender upon the declarations thereof and the messengers feet that published it were beautifull to me so long as those Ordinances of man were unto me as the Ordinances of Christ which was more than 30 years I loved them more than all things in this world I passed through them hungry and hardly bestead for many years feeling after Life and immortality but could not find that somewhat was raised in me that words and reports could not feed names and notions I minded little but Christ to dwell in me was that and is that more and more I press after And now I must for the Truth 's sake say somewhat which I humbly mention with a fresh remembrance of the Love Power and tender Mercy of God who enabled me I know the Lord will not impute it to be boasting in that season wherein the Lord revealed the true way to life and immortality to me by his inward appearance in my Soul it was a time wherein he had mercifully turned me from all that ever his Light inwardly and Law outwardly had condemned me for my heart also did bear witness for me that whatsoever I had known would please him I was chusing to do that not that thereby I was seeking justification in my own righteousness but a sure evidence of my interest in him who was made unto us Righteousness Justification c. This blessed glimpse of my begun freedom was given me in a seasonable time that I might thereby be enabled to speak with mine enemy in the gate and be encouraged to believe in the Light and wait upon the Lord to feel his vertue perfectly to cleanse me from all filthyness of flesh and Spirit Neither was I an undervaluer of the Scripturs they were my Rule then and I hope for ever my life shall answer them I think they honour the Scripturs most who live most according to them and not they who call them the only Rule yet do not make them their pattern The Scripturs of Truth were pretious to me and by them was I taught not to walk nor worship in the way of the People the Spirit shewing me his mind in them and then I saw in his Light that it is not the Scripturs many adore so much as their own corrupt glosses upon them neither can my experience go along with what thou affirmest of the hazard of converse with that People It is very wel known to all that lived in the place where I sojourned I was none who conversed with them I was never at one of their meetings I never read one of their books unless accidentally I had found them where I came and lookt to them and laid them by again So now it remains with me to tell thee what was the occasion I joyned with them since it was none of those thou mention'st which I will very singly and can very comfortably do it was that thing ye school-men call Immediat Objective Revelation which my desire is ye were more particularly and feelingly acquainted with whereby the Lord raising in my Soul his feeling Life I could not sit down satisfied with hearing of what the Son of God had done outwardly though I believe thereby he purchased all that Grace and Mercy which is inwardly wrought in the hearts of his Children untill I should be a partaker of the vertue and efficacy thereof whereby I might possess the Substance of things hoped for I saw an historical faith would neither cleanse me nor save me if that could save any the Devils were not without a door of hope I felt I needed the Revelation of the Son of God in me All that ever I read or heard without this could not give me the Saving knowledge of God None knoweth the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son revealeth him through the vertue whereof mine eyes were more and more by degrees opened for the tender-hearted Samaritan had pitty upon my wounded Soul when both Priest and Levit passed by and the watch-men rent my vail and when there was no eye to pitty nor hand to help me he drew near and poured in wine and oile as he saw needfull and fulfilled the promise in measur wherein he had long caused me to hope he that follows me shall not walk in darkness but shall have the Light of Life and that sweet saying whereby I am confirmed and comforted if evil Parents know how to give their children good things how much more will the Lord give his holy Spirit to those who ask him When your children ask bread will ye give them a stone or when they ask a fish will ye give them a serpent These pretious Scripturs and many such like being opened up and applied by the Spirit of Truth powerfully and seasonably in saying be not faithless but believing times above number before and since hath made me set to my seal to these words of Christ The words that I speak are Spirit and Life and as I walk with him and abide in him watching at the posts of Wisdoms gates travelling in Spirit more and more to bring forth fruit unto him and walk worthy of him unto all wel-pleasing daily to dye unto self that Christ may live in me I becoming a passive creatur and he an active Christ in the encrease of his Government I feel the encrease of my peace And so my friend thou hast here by some touches at things occasion to see how far thou art mistaken concerning us and how far contrary to the Truth as it is in Jesus thou represent'st many things to the world speaking evil of things which thou knowst not and if thou dost the greater is thy sin two Particulars indeed I can not strain charity so far as to believe thou thinkst do we deny Jesus Christ and justification through his Righteousness because we make the sufficiency thereof of a more universal extent than ye or because we love whole Christ so much and his seamless coat that we will not have it divided Nay we dare not divide
removed by him ere he had used it only for confirmation in controversy against me But there is something more in this expression for when the Confession of Faith and Catechism is onely adduced for confirmation what becomes of the Scripturs that in words are so highly exalted It seems notwithstanding all these verbal commendations he has no more use for them than for an old Almanack the Confession of Faith and Catechism is that which is to be minded It seems what he brings of them in this controversy is only pro formâ for the confession of Faith is only adduced for confirmation it is the good antidot against the many Errors of the Times and whereas he speaks of apposit passages of Scriptur those that will compare them with the things they are pointed to to prove will find in most not the least correspondence of which I have given some proof in that place before mentioned ¶ 6. But indeed he hath spoken out the truth of the matter for all their great talk of the Scriptur it is manifest to such as will narrowly look into it that not the Scriptur but the confession of Faith and Catechism is their Rule of Faith and Manners for the Scripturs must serve the Confession of Faith not the Confession of Faith answer the Scripturs which must be turned twin'd and wrested to sute to the Confession of Faith Hence if a man believe the Scripturs ever so firmly and square his faith accordingly unless he agree to every point of the Confession of Faith all is to no purpose he must pass for an Heretik At last to conclude he having it seems said all he has to say makes provision not to be put upon the necessity to vindicat his gross perversions and calumnys As for his comparison of Rats and mice their dealing with books he must know I intend not to square these observations to gratify his humour it will be enough for me to satisfy the candid and judicious Reader He doubts not to make a judgment of things not yet in being and therefore expects no answer that shall savour of Reason Religion Candor and Plainness We have seen that of him which gives us ground to believe he has bad enough thoughts of us but however he must not expect to be judge in his own cause and whereas he saith he will not be troubled at our Railings and Barkings one may wonder the man has the confidence to accuse others of what himself is so highly guilty of but he shall not need fear to be troubled with such stuff and whether he gives or gets most of that is referred to the judicious Readers to whose judgment and censur whether he will or not as his writings will be liable so to them and to their Christian consideration I freely submit what is written in these Observations Section II. Wherein his two first Chapters containing Remarks upon my Preface and the first These of the true ground of knowledge are considered ¶ 1 UPon the Preface of my Theses which is but about half a dozen of lines he bestowes no less than 12 pages all which being either bare assertions or railing as can not escape the diligent Readers observation will therefore require the shorter reply He hath not got the length of a dozen of lines when with a piece of confidence he will seem so modest as not to preoccupy the Reader 's judgment by calling the Theses Ethnical or Diabolical but methinks if he has not forgotten his epistle which we will in reason suppose the Reader to have first viewed in which as is above observed there is enough of that sort said to preoccupy his judgment so that he must needs put out his eyes that doth not see that his pretended modesty and forbearance is not real ¶ 2. Next because these Theses are directed by me to Clergy men of all sorts in the Christian world he will needs have it that I acknowledg a Christian world to which my self and those I patronize do not belong but how he makes this consequence appear he leaves us to divine for there is no proof brought for it but his own assertion He needs not wonder that I acknowledge a Christian world unless he had known me somewhere todeny it for in respect of Profession which distinction himself elsewhere useth all these may be accounted of it who make an outward profession of Christ besides that I have sufficiently acknowledged my belief that in severals of them the inward life of Christianity is to be found as for what followes he needs not doubt but I am as much against the distinction of Laity and Clergy as himself can be But since I writ to such many whereof own it my using it to them for distinction's sake will not inferr my approving of it With his usuall candor he will have this direction to import no less than a chartal to provoke all those it is directed to to a dispute as if a man for removing of mistakes and misrepresentations could not give an account of his faith without it be esteemed a provocation to dispute if he really believes I intended so I must tell him he is greatly mistaken and I apprehend I should know my own intentions large as wel as he He is offended that our doctrines should be thought as different from Papists as Protestants but with how little ground will after appear and he also refers it to a fitter probation Then after he has knocked as hard as he can upon me for my confidence he tells me that there is little said by me but what was refuted ere I was born by the orthodox writing against Pelagians Socinians Arminians Enthusiasts Anabaptists and Papists But methinks then there was the less need of troubling the world with his volum yet he has for that a ready salvo he must answer a fool according to his folly lest he be wise in his own conceit Some other reasons he adds for ingaging in this his work which the Reader may judge of whether they be of any weight ¶ 3. As he goes on he is greatly offended I should stile my self a servant of the Lord and will have it to be upon no better ground than Thomas Muncer and the Anabaptists of Munster But because all this is founded upon the supposition of my being a false prophet and preaching another gospel than the true we must leave it to the Reader 's judgment after he has taken time to consider of the whole debate But because he speaks here of the produçing credentials I would willingly have him producing his credentials for being a Minister of the Gospel and it may be then seen if I can not produce as valid for any thing I stile my self only he must remember that as his must have something more than his own affirmation or those of his party so he must overturn mine with some stronger arguments than meer railing ¶ 4. He needs not apprehend as he would insinuat that the
more largely in my Apology in those paragraphs which I observed he most foully omitted And indeed this is a fine argument he has provided for Atheists and Sceptiks for it renders all Faith even that of the Patriarchs uncertain for since the ground and warrand of their writing the Scripturs was in his own account inward immediat and extraordinary revelations and if such be as he affirms uncertain then the truth of the Scripturs which depends upon such must necessarily be uncertain since the stream can not be more pure than the fountain nor the superstructur more sure than the foundation And therefore most weak is his reasoning pag. 46. where he pleadeth that such Revelations can not be more sure than the Scripturs which are the objective revelations of the Apostles writen down since the certainty of these writings depends upon the certainty of these revelations by which they were written and certainly if in any case that maxim of the Schools do hold it must in this Propter quod unum quod que est tale illud ipsum est magis tale ¶ 5. It will not be amiss here in the third place to take notice of his most uncharitable and unchristian insinuations contrary to all Christian and fair rules of debate as first pag. 24. where he will needs inferr our denying of the Trinity albeit he can not deny but he finds it owned by me groundlesly coupling us with the Socinians and to help him in this he brings-in the testimony of one Mr Stalham as he terms him an open Opposer of ours which Witness to receive against us is most unjust But I desire here in the entry that it be observed that I intend to take little or no notice of his many citations to prove what we hold out of the writings of our open Opposers and shall give such a sufficient reason for my so doing ere I make an end as I am hopefull shall satisfie all judicious Readers as wel of our innocency as his unjustice therein but by this the man's temper may be seen and that his design is not so much to refute what we truely hold as to make the world believe that we hold what we doth not to render us the more odious And thus he proceedeth also basely to insinuat that I deny Jesus of Nazareth to be the Son of God albeit he doth not so much as pretend to any color for it from my words only he finds some Quakers give an indistinct answer in this matter but who they are or what their answer is he tels not In pursuance of this in the following page he insinuats as if I mean'd not the first but the second Creation and so joyned with Socinus which is a gross calumny like the former as also is what he saith pag. 31. num 18. where he raileth against me as writing things contrary to the Scripturs and as one whose revelations are not from God but from Satan For all this the only proof is I. B. saith so which I must plainly tell him is with me of no weight at all Of the same natur is what is asserted by him pag. 33. nu 20. wherein he insinuats that we contemn the Scripturs telling a lying story from his Author Mr Hicks of one Nicolas Lucas which I desire him to prove the next time not by Hicks for he is accuser but by some more indifferent Witness else to be justly held as a Calumniator And whereas he saith We should not obtrude any thing upon them without Scriptures this is another lying insinuation for where do we obtrude any doctrins without offering to confirm them by Scriptur as much as he and his Brethren For if he say that our confirmations are not valid that is not to the purpose we can easily say so of his and do as truely believe it but the question is Whether we obtrude any doctrins upon any to be believed telling them they ought to believe it albeit we either will not or can not confirm them by the Scriptur Now he knoweth in his Conscience this to be a lye since I affirm of the Scripturs Apol. Lat. ed. p. 47. n. 60. that they are the most fit outward judge of controversies of which himself also taketh notice in that place And lastly of the natur of these malitious insinuations is what he saith pag. 48 49 and last paragraph of this chapter where after he has repeated what he terms my monitory conclusion he infers that I mean that a man should believe that Natur 's dim light is the Spirit of God and the Holy Ghost and that he may burn the Bible and with confidence assert he is led by the Holy Ghost whatever Scriptur or common sense say to the contrary This is all affirmed by him without the least proof which as it is the height of injustice so it is with respect not only to my words but belief and intention God the Searcher of hearts knows a most horrid falshood and calumny ¶ 6. Now albeit what is said may seem sufficient for a reply to this chapter and is indeed enough to give any sober man a disgust of it yet that he may not have reason to complain that any thing wherein he may judge there is weight and is directly to the purposs is omitted I will now in the last place consider and answer what he saith against the validity of my Arguments to which an answer hath not been included in what is already said To begin then like himself which to be sure is with some calumny or other he saith pag. 14. I stigmatize with the black mark of being carnal and natural Christians all that assent not to what I say but he takes no time to prove it and indeed can not for albeit I say that it is like many natural and carnal Christians will condemn what I say yet it will not follow I account them all such who will not fully agree with me in this matter Of the same kind is his calumny p. 22. n. 5. where he allegeth the citations of the Fathers so called prove no more than his sense of Revelation above expressed but whether he speaks true here or not the Reader may judge by seriously reading over these citations and then let him see if they do not hold out an inward and immediat teaching of the Spirit of God in the Soul as the firm ground of Knowledge without which all outward teaching is in vain but to inserr this he tels they writ against such as being Impostors and led by the spirit of the Devil pretended to Revelations What then Can not men write against false revelations without they deny the necessity of true ones That is an odd conclusion If I. B. were wel acquainted with the writings of the Quakers so called he would find them as much against false Pretenders as any other But pag. 24 25 he findeth fault with my argument deduced from these words that there is no knowledge of the
perswasion and assurance in them was the formal object of their faith as the things spoken were the material Even as the Light serves by way of formal object to make us see what is proposed unto us ¶ 8. Pag 31 32. he acknowledgeth that Divine and inward revelations need not be tried by the Scriptur as a more noble Rule by him who hath such a revelation but by those to whom he delivers it and then giveth the instance of the Bereans being commended to which I shall willingly assent judging no man that delivers or declares a revelation to another ought to be offended that he try it by the Scriptur which no true revelation can contradict But that such may not also try it by the Testimony of the Spirit of God in their hearts I can not deny and that it is the more noble Rule as being most universal since some Divine revelations such as Prophecys of contingent truths or things to come can not be tried by the Scripturs as was that of George Wishart concerning the Cardinal's death for had another taken upon him at that time to prophesy the quite contrary I would willingly be informed by what Scriptur it could be deduced or known that the one was false or the other true yet who will be so absurd as to deny but that it could by the immediat Testimony of the Spirit As for his proof that the Scriptur is the most certain Rule taken from those words 2 Pet. 1 19 20. We have also a more sure Word of Prophecy c. it is but a begging of the question in supposing that Peter by this understood the Scriptur and indeed is most ridiculous to affirm For since the Apostle reckons this Word more sure than the voyce they heard with their outward ears and the vision they saw with their outward eyes it were absurd to affirm that the description or narration of a thing were more sure than the immediat seeing and hearing it Can any description I may receive of I. B. however true give me so certain a knowledge of him as if I saw him and spake with him Yet without any absurdity it may be said that the Inward Word or Testimony of the Spirit in the heart is more sure in things spiritual than any thing that is objected to or conveighed by the outward senses as that vision was of which the Apostle there speaks since the inward and spiritual senses are the most proper and adequat means of conveighing spiritual things to the Soul by which the saints after they have laid down this body and have no more the use of the outward senses which are seated in it do most surely enjoy the blessed vision of God and fellowship both with him and one another As for that of Isa. 8 20. To the Law and to the testimony c. and that of Joh. 5 39. Search the Scripturs c. mentioned here by him I shall have occasion to speak of them hereafter It 's true John tels we are not to believe every spirit but it will not thence follow that the Scriptur is a more sure rule than the Spirit for such a trial Pag. 35. he thinks my saying that the Divine revelation moveth the understanding wel disposed confirmeth what he saith and spoileth all my purpose because then every revelation pretending to be Divine is not to be submitted to But where did ever I say so What he talks further of this wel disposed intellect pag. 36. I spake to in my answer to Arnoldus pag. 18 19. to which I referr For I believe all men in a day have by the gratious visitation of God's Love an understanding wel disposed to some Divine revelations which becomes disposed for others as these are received which will after in its place be discussed And some Divine revelations which are prophetik of things to come may so far manifest themselves by their self-evidence even to men not regenerat as to force an assent as in the case of Balaam mentioned by him did appear What he saith further pag. 36 37. inquiring how and after what manner these revelations were the object of the Saints faith of old is easily answered by applying it to what is before mentioned in answer to his querys and conjecturs of the formal object For those of old that had these revelations immediatly the formal object of their faith was God manifesting himself and his will in them to them by such revelations and those who received and obeyed the things delivered by the Patriarchs and Prophets those things so delivered as he confesseth were not the Formal but Material Object of their Faith but the Formal Object was GOD by the secret and inward Testimony of his Spirit perswading them in their hearts that these things declared to them were really his command and thence inclining and bowing their minds to an assent and obedience to them And albeit pag. 38 he terms this a wild assertion yet he hath but said and not proven it to be so and till he prove he needs no further refutation neither is it non-sense nor yet a destroying of the cause as with the like proofeless confidence he affirms p. 37 that where revelations are made by outward voices or in a manner objected to the outward senses the cause or motive of credibility is not so much because of what the outward senses perceive as because of the inward testimony of the Spirit assuring the Soul that it is GOD so manifesting himself Which testimony to answer his question is distinguishable from what is objected to the outward senses albeit it go always along with it simul semel as they use to say since he with me accounts it a serious truth to say the Devil may delude the external senses and he can far more easily deceive them than the true inward and spiritual senses of the Soul by counterfeiting the inward testimony of the Spirit since by that the Apostle saith we know and partake of that which neither eye hath seen nor ear heard ¶ 9. Pag. 39. He confesseth with me that the formal Object of the Saints faith is always the same But yet that he may say something he spendeth the paragraph in railing accusing me as writing non-sense and being an Ignoramus because I bring instances which relate to the material object which himself confesseth also to be the same in substance But by his good leave for all he is so positive in his judgment I must shew the Reader his mistake for those exampls of Abraham and others are adduced by me to shew the one-ness of the formal object neither has he shewn that they are impertinent for that end since as the formal object of Abraham's Faith was God's speaking to him by Divine revelations so is the same the Formal object of the saints now and therein stands the unity or one-ness of our faith with him and not in the material object which often differs for to offer up his son was
as thy self which proves it not at all yea to understand it of the Scripturs were to make the Apostle's words scarce good sense as if he had said fulfill the Scripturs according to the Scripturs whereas it sutes the place much better that the Apostle meaned they should fulfill the Royal Law in their hearts which was one with the Scripturs that also command the same thing that the Apostle means the outward Law and not that written in the heart chap. 4 12. he hath affirmed but not proven Next he comes to the Bereans being commended for searching the scripturs Act. 17 11. But this is the same way answered as the former for if the Bereans were obliged to believe and receive Paul's testimony because he preached the Truth to them by authority from God then their using or his commending them for using the Scriptur will not prove the Scriptur to be the Primary Rule yea more a Rule than the doctrin they tried by it In the rest of what he saith in this n. 28. he but sights with his shaddow for I never said they excluded the Law of Natur in affirming the Scriptur to be the Rule or did I ever deny but that the Sriptur reveals things which Natur could never have discovered But the question is whether that truth that Man is the Off spring of God from which the Apostle argues with the Athenians was discovered to any by meer Natur or by a Divine Principle and this is that he should have proven and therefore yet remaines for him to do but to be like himself he concludes this also with a gross lye saying I affirm the Scriptur to be no more our Rule than the Heathen Poets which no ways follows from my words neither hath or can he ever prove it ¶ 9. He thinks the Scriptures not determining of many things nor having any Rule for them which he seems to acknowledge is no argument against their being the primary and adequat or only Rule for that he apprehends no rational man will think needfull to a compleat Rule Why because general Rules are enough and thence he thinks it would follow that the Quakers must have a new particular revelation for every act and word such as eating drinking walking c. But I deny this consequence these acts as simply considered are natural and it will not follow because to spiritual acts relating to Faith and my immediat service towards God I need a spiritual motion and influence of the Spirit that therefore I need such a thing to natural acts If he say these natural acts under some circumstances may be sin or duty I confess then the revelation of the Spirit is needfull for if I be sitting sleeping or eating in one place when it is the mind of God I should be preaching and praying in another I do sin but how can the Scriptur give me a Rule here All that he answers to this p. 76 77. resolves into this that all such doubts may be solved applying the general rules of Scriptur by Christian Wisdom Prudence and Discretion c. But how shall I know that I truly make this application And to give him his own often repeated argument in the case of Revelation have not some thought they have made this application by Christian prudence when they did not And not to go further than I. B's own Brethren the Presbyterians yea the chief and most eminent Teachers among them did not some of them judge it Christian prudence according to the Scriptur Rule to draw near adhere to the Remonstrance which others called publik Resolution men denied Do not some of them think it Christian prudence to go hear the Bishops Curats which others deny Did not those chief men among them as George Hutcheson and others think it Christian prudence to acçept of the Indulgence Anno 1668 in entring according to the limitations proposed by the Council to their Places which others especially of the banished Brethren and perhaps himself was highly offended at whence these men were termed Council-Curats Other instances among them I could give But how shall all this be decided What Scriptur-Rules can he assign that clearly do it Let him answer this distinctly and not pass it over lest he be suspected to leap where he can not step He confesseth to my alledging 1 Cor. 12. Rom. 12. and after a little railing he tels p. 78. that he that is to rule is to do it with diligence c. but that the Scriptur saith not that James or Peter should take-on this or that Office by which confession he destroys all since the question is How James and Peter knew they should take upon them to rule This he saith he has shewn above but how insufficiently my reply will evidence He thinks no less impertinent p. 78. for me to argue against their being a Rule as to all things because they do not tell a man that he has the marks of true Faith upon which knowledge the assurance of Salvation is founded as if I must think the Laws of the Land must prove that R. B. is a Quaker or that if R. B. had murther'd a man it is a sufficient defence to say the Law doth not name R. B. But such examples are poor arguments and do miserably halt R. B. confessing himself to be a Quaker acknowledging every one of their doctrins is enough to prove him one in the sense of the Law of the Land and the Judge is to condemn him a murtherer if convict by Witnesses that he really did the deed And both these relate to outward things which can be proven by outward restimonys for without the certainy of the evidence the Judge can not pronounce his sentence But is a man 's own confessing or affirming he hath the true marks of faith enough to prove he has them And what are the Witnesses to apply the example of committing the murther by which a man shall know he has these marks and who must examin the Witnesses and judge of the certainty or clearness of their evidences Must it be the man that is accused who useth that method Doth not the man see how miserably his pittyfull example claudicats ¶ 10. To my objection against the Scripturs being the Only and Adequat Rule the example of deaf persons idiots infants such as can not read and are ignorant of the Original Tongues so called all which in some measur less or more are deprived of the benefit of the Scripturs so as to apply them to themselvs immediatly and effectually for a Rule he asketh Whether if any such person in a land should kill a man or do any thing contrary to the Law would it not punish them And this he repeats n. 35. in other words which urgeth nothing but upon supposition that the will of God can not be known otherwise than by the Scriptur which supposition is false and therefore his argument concludes nothing yea himself confesseth that some things and
which himself I judge will not deny for will he say that the hour of tentation Rev. 3 10. came upon every one as contradistinguished from the Saints and that the Beast 12 9. did in this sense deceive the World that is all and every one and that 13 3. all the World wondred after him The other places marked by him have no relation to the Whole World in the sense I here urge it which is that the whole World when used in contradistinction from the Saints expresseth all and every one and the thing he should have done if he would have truely reâ—uâ—ed me which he has not so much as attempted was to prove that the Elect or any part of them as expressed by the word We or Us by any of the Pen-men of Scriptur are contradistinguished from the Elect or any part of them under the term of the whole World untill he do which he no ways overturns my argument and therefore what he saith besides this is beside the purpose ¶ 7. Pag. 204. N. 59. In answer to Ioh. 3 16. compared with 1 Ioh. 4 9. God so loved the World c. and God sent his Only-begoten Son into the World c. he tels whosoever albeit indefinit is not universal unless it be in a necessary matter which this is not But he should have defined what he means by a necessary matter distinctly and then proved this not to be such till both which be done that 's now omitted by him his answer is deficient His next quibble is that the world in these two places is not the same the one being understood of the Habitable World and the other of the Inhabitants but the last may be understood of the Inhabitants as wel as the first where is the absurdity of saying God sent his Son into the world that is unto men or among men 3. He supposeth I will not say God sent his Son into the World that all Inhabitants might live the life of Faith for all men have not faith and all men will not be saved or God should be disappointed of his Intentions and therefore he adds as his commentary upon Rev. 3 3 4. what if some do not believe shall their unbelief make the unchangeable Purposes of God of none effect No. Answ. I perceive as most of the man's reasonings are built upon suppositions so most of his suppositions are false for God sent his Son into the World to put all men into a capacity to live the life of Grace and therefore who do not the fault is their own nor are God's unchangeable Purposes of none effect since God has not unchangeably purposed to damn any which he supposeth he did And upon this meer and unproved supposition according to his method he builds his matter He adds Ioh. 3 16 is directly against the meaning of his Adversaries I judge he means all those who assert Universal Redemption who build much upon it albeit I had not the wit to improve it but it seems had I had a great deal more wit than I have he judgeth himself to have wit enough to prove it all to no purpose why because according to the Greek it is for God so loved the World that all believing or all believers or every one that believeth in him might not perish c. And what then we must prove that either all are or shall be Believers and then he will easily grant without disput that Christ dyed for them all But the man has not here wel heeded what he saith there is no necessity of proving that all are or shall be Believers it is enough to prove that all are put in a capacity to believe and that Faith is not made by an absolute decree impossible to most this in part is done already and more of it will appear hereafter that Christ by this place intended to shew that his Death should not be restricted to the advantage of the Jews only is not denied In answer to Heb. 2 9. that he tasted death for every man he saith that the Greek here for every man importeth in their room and stead shall we think that Christ dyed so for every man and yet many of these men dyed for themselvs But if any absurdity be inferred here it will redound upon himself no less than upon me who will confess as his after words make manifest the saying here Christ tasted death for Every man imports his dying here for the Elect and yet do not many of the Elect dye for themselvs Here again he saith this sheweth the benefit of his death is not restricted to the Jews which is granted but that proveth not that it is not therefore Universal Next he taketh notice of the context where it is said it became him in bringing many sons unto glory c. and therefore these are the all for whom he dyed But this is strongly to affirm not to prove albeit Christ brought many sons unto glory and called such Brethren it doth not follow he tasted death only for such The Apostle sheweth us first the general extent of Christ's death in saying he tasted death for every man and then sheweth us how it became effectual to many and yet the man is so confident albeit he has urged nothing but only affirmed that he adds If this context do not sufficiently confute this conceit we need regarde the Scripturs no more But here he has spoken out the truth as it is for this evidently shews that for all their pretence to exalt the Scripturs yet they regard it no more than it favours their opinion This is the account for which they regard the Scripturs if it favour their opinion and confute their advetsaries but if it do not they need no more regard it else surely he should have said If the Scripturs do not confute that which he esteems an error then he will not judge it so any more but regard the Scripturs more than his own judgment but on the contrary he is resolved if the Scriptur do not confute what he thinks a conceit that he need no more regard them Likewise in the rest of this page he gives himself a notable stroak for to my saying that their doctrin would infer that Christ came to condemn the world contrary to his own words Ioh. 3 17. 12 47. he answereth that prejudice has so blinded mine eyes that I can not see the beam in mine eye for in my opinion not one man might have been saved because Christ only procured a meer possibility and no certainty for any one man c. But as I have above observed I assert as my judgment the express contrary that Christ has so dyed for some that they can not miss of Salvation and this himself also noticeth afterwards p. 276. I would know then and let all honest men judge if there be any spark of honesty left in him whether himself be not the man whom prejudice has blinded Almost at the same rate p. 207. he
in Grace to put-off the old man and on the New if this be not to pervert Christianity what can be said to be so If men can dream waking as he sometimes supposes he has sure been in this postur when he brought this proof But he adds that this Perfection rendreth Gospel commands useless but are the Laws useless if men obey them This saith he takes away the exercise of Repentance the exercise of Prayer and maketh the petitions of the Lord's Prayer useless forgive us our sins on this he also insisteth pag. 345 346-349 That because all have sinned they have need to repent and pray for forgivness and the continuance of it I have shewn in my Apology but if this his argument hold true to prove that men must sin all their life-time and break the commands every day in thought word and deed then the greatest sinners and most wicked profligat villains do less make useless Gospel commands than others because they afford more matter to exercise Repentance and Prayer for forgivness of sins But he proceedeth that this tendeth to foment Pride and Security and taketh-away diligent watchfulness and holy fear humility and the usefulness of the Ordinances of Christ but where freedom from sin is where can pride and security have place or diligence and humility be wanting But with him to sin is the way not to be proud and secure but to be watchfull and humble Let the judicious Reader judge whether they that break the commands daily in thought word and deed and affirm they must do so all their life-time be more diligent and humble and less proud and secure than such as keep and obey them for such Ordinances as must be made usefull by daily breaking God's commands in thought word and deed I resolve never to cry-up but always cry-down by the Grace of God however I. B. may rail at me for it Some Scripturs here added by him will come hereafter to be examined ¶ 2. Pag 332. N 9. When he comes to take notice of my stating this matter as not being such a Perfection as can not admitt of a daily encrease but only a being kept from sin and receiving strength to fulfill the will of God for these are my words he would upon this both in this place and elsewhere pag. 333. 341 c urge this absurdity that since the least sin is a transgression of the Law it follows that no regenerated man can sin and that no man that sinneth is regenerated but we will not wonder at his inference here considering his many other perversions But to shew he has no ground to urge this absurdity let it be considered that we are to consider Regeneration as begun and carrying on and as perfected and accomplished he which hath begun a good work in you saith the Apostle Paul Phil. 1 6. And again Ye did run wel Gal. 5 7. with many other places which might be mentioned Whereby it is clear that Regeneration is not wrought in an instant and if he think so he must prove it ere he conclude any thing from it and those were already converted and regeneration begun in them Now albeit such may sin and that every sin doth hinder and impeed the work of Regeneration yet it doth not destroy it nor wholly annihilat it Physik given to a man in whom there is an inward and inveterat disease doth not cure instantly and albeit by some heedless actions he may hinder the cure from being perfected so soon yet every one of these actions do not render it altogether unsuccessfull Also as to the comparison of a child which he accepts of albeit he have all the integral parts of a man yet he has not that vigor and strength of body nor yet that understanding nor exercise of mind that a man hath and thence can neither defend himself nor do either in body or mind that a man can do Now what I speak of such as are born of God saying that I dare not affirm but there may be some that can not sin I understand of this absolute compleat and full regeneration not that I deny but such as are entred and in part regenerated may be also said to be born of God though not in that absolute sense and therefore still under the possibility of sinning and capacity thereunto And thus his great absurdity upon which he insists so much is removed Next he proceeds p. 334. to shew my agreement with the Pelagians but the very citation he brings to prove it out of Vossius history bewrays his weakness and shews the contrary where it is manifest that the thing condemned in Pelagins was his affirming men might keep the commands by the power of Nature which I never said but always denied And whereas he cites the Fathers saying that none by the strength of Grace did live all their days without sin that the perfection ascribed to some in Scriptur was not from Nature but from Grace c. this clearly shews they believed men might be free from sin by Grace sometime though none bad been so for all their life-time which shews they were far from believing man must break the commands daily in thought word and deed which is his affirmation What he adds of the Fathers arguments against the Pelagians and of the opinions of the Socinians and others in this matter I judge it not my work to meddle with it I heed not in this what these Sects say but believe the Truth without respect to them as it is clearly proposed in Scriptur I could easily recriminate by shewing things wherein he agrees with Papists Socinians Arminians Antinomians Pelagians Anabaptists and others against us if I judged it pertinent to be filling-up paper with such stuff to make a noise as he doth hundreds of times to nauseating but I love to abstain from such superfluitys and come to the purpose and will now consider what he saith in answer to my arguments ¶ 3. He begins pag. 337 n. 18. and to my saying their doctrin is against the Wisdom of God who is of purer eyes than he can behold iniquity he asketh Is it against these attributes of God that sin should be in the world But my following words shew I spake of the Godly neither will it follow what he adds after that then they must be as free of sin here as in heaven and that at first for I urge it to be contrary to God's Wisdom to make this freedom impossible unto them only means for their being free being given them not his permitting sin And whereas he proceeds in answer to my saying that if man be always joyned to sin he should be always disjoyned from God according to Esai 59 2. Whereas on the contrary they to wit the Saints are said to be partakers of the Divine Nature 2 Pet. 1 4. and one Spirit with him 1 Cor. 6 17. he answers All this would plead for a sinlesness from the very first instant of Regeneration
at hand if he dare charge me in this with the asserting of a falshood in matter of fact I will give evidence for proof the persons being yet alive but untill he do that my knowing the thing to be true gives me ground enough to assert it To my argument shewing that without Grace a man can not be a member of Christ's Body which is the Church far less a Minister in stead of answer after he has accused me as not understanding the difference betwixt the Visible and Invisible Church he tels Christ is an Head to both which I deny not that I apply Epb. 4 7. 11. 16. 1 Cor. 12. solely to the Invisible Church so as to exclude the Visible is his mistake not my ignorance Then he goeth about to shew the difference betwixt Gift and Grace but that any had the gifts there mentioned who were altogether void of Grace remains for him to prove Besides what is mentioned he is not sparing of his calumnies in this chapter as where he saith pag. 382. that I deny that about the time of Reformation there was a Christian World which is false in respect of Profession in which sense I only here understood it and pag. 385. albeit he find me calling the heresy of Arius horrid yet upon the trust of his Author Mr. Clapham he affirmeth the Quakers to be in this erroneous but sure I have better reason to be acquainted with the Quakers doctrins than any of his lying Authors Another of his calumnys is pag 386. that we lay-aside all means in coming to the Saving knowledge of God's Name and albeit his railing in this chapter be thick enough that the Reader may easily observe it yet for his more particular direction let him observe 380 381-385 386. And whereas pag. 386. n. 11. he enumerateth several particulars wherein he affirmeth we agree with Papists he may find them refuted and answered in G. K's book called Quakerism no Popery And in the last two sections of that book written by me he may find himself and his Btethren proved far more guilty of that crime than we which because the Professor Iohn Menzies against whom it is written found not yet time to answer he as having more leasur may assume that province If the increase of our number be as he saith a clear verification of 2 Thess. 2 9 10 11 12. that we are of the deluded ones there spoken of then it must be a clearer verification of it as to them that they are of that deluded company since they are more numerous than we and also encreased more suddenly As for his exhortations and wishes in the end because I will be so charitable as to suppose they come from some measur of sincerity I do not wholly reject them only I must tell him that nothing has more conduced of an external mean to confirm me in the belief of the verity of the principles I hold than his treatise because of the many gross calumnys manifest perversions and furious railing in it since I know the Truth needed no such method to defend it and I can not believe one in the Truth would use it since lying is contrary to the Truth therefore if he will lay-aside all this falshood and passion he may have a more sure ground of hope to see the truth manifested to the dispelling of Error ¶ 4. He beginneth his 19 chapter of the Ministerial Office with supposing that their Order is according to Scriptur and that what we plead for is quite contrary and so ushereth himself into a rant of railing with which he concludeth this paragraph saying that the evil Spirit that acteth us is such an Enemy to all Gospel Order that it cryeth up only Paganish and Devilish Consasion More of this kind the Reader may observe pag. 388. 389. 391 392-394 His calumnies and perversions are also very frequent in this chapter as pag. 387. where he saith We cast-away all Order and in stead thereof bring-in the confusion of Babel and pag. 388. because we are not for the shaddow without the substance therefore he saith we make a repugnancy betwixt them which is also false and again in the same page N. 4. because I say it was never the mind of Christ to establish the shaddow of Officers without the power and efficacy of the Spirit therefore he concludes that the Quakers think that men can establish the Spirit which silly perversion will easily be manifest to every intelligent Reader And after the like manner pag. 389. n. s. because I say that upon setting up meer shaddows where the Substance was wanting the work of Antichrist was erected in the dark night of Apostasy he concludes that then according to me Christ and his Apostles wrought the work of Antichrist and mystery of iniquity accusing me thence of blasphemy But who can be so blind as not to see this manifest perversion And again pag. 390 he saith I will that every man according as his own spirit falsty called the Spirit of God moveth him setting to this work meaning that of the Ministery which is a false calumny never said by me who deny all false motions of man's own spirit however called And pag. 391. he saith that malice prompteth me to charge them with owning the distinction of Clergy and Laïty though I know they do not where the man supposeth that what I write is only written against the Presbyterians while he can not but know that I write against others since in his first chapter he charges me with writing against all the Christian World so it is his malice to say I charge them with it if any of those I write to be guilty of it it is enough albeit I doubt whether the Presbyterians can free themselvs of it ¶ 5. Having thus far discovered his perversions I come to the main business pag. 388. he saith they plead not for shaddows but own the Ordinances as Christ hath appointed to remain and continue for the perfecting of the Saints c. Eph. 4 11 12 13. And pag. 389. n. 6. he asketh whether the primitive Church was not instituted by Christ and gathered by God in whose assemblys he was Ruler and Governour asking were there no distinct Officers particular individual Persons set apart for the work of the Ministery in the Apostles days And p. 391. n. 7. he argueth against my saying that these mentioned 1 Cor. 12 28 29. Rom. 12 6. were not distinct Officers but only different operations of the same Spirit and against this also he pleadeth p. 393. n. 11. 394. To all which I answer distinctly and particularly that they can plead nothing from Eph. 4. unless their Church had all the Officers there mentioned which it has not yea and which themselvs affirm are ceased such as Prophets Apostles which are said to be given for the work of the Ministery and perfecting of the Saints nothing less than the other and by what authority do they then turn these by and
to the Spirit 's influences He would seem to say it were since it is but some and a may be some too with him that do so And whereas he tels of some that are constrained to change their text and what they bad purposed to speak upon it this shews the case is but rare and therefore I am not to be blamed for what I say in general of Preachers among Papists and Protestants whose general way is to prepare aforehand what they preach and then speak it to the People at a set hour without waiting for the leading of the Spirit or whether they have its influence or not And for all the weight that this man would seem to lay sometimes upon the Spirit 's influence and concurrence yet he gives shrewd presumptions that he doth it but pro forma else how comes he to urge as an absurdity pag. 445. that all that Ministers preach by the Spirit must be true And why not If it be from the Spirit it can not be other ways yet men whose principle it is to speak from the Spirit may through weakness and mistake preach false doctrin yet the Spirit is not to be blamed for it but those who keep not purely to it I suppose he will not deny but all that which men preach according to the Scriptur is infallibly true it will not thence follow that all that which men whose principle it is to preach acccording to Scriptur preach is true because that through weakness they may mistake the true meaning of the Scriptur Also what he adds if the matter be thus it is all one whether the Preacher be young or old for it is not he that speaketh but the Spirit in him for this savoureth not of a Christian Spirit to seek to draw an absurdity or make a mock of that which is no other than Christ's express words Matth. 10 20. Mark 13 3. and indeed what he saith in this page N. 9. in answer to these Scripturs seemeth rather a mock at Christ his Apostles than any answer asking me if I know not that Christ gave them their Preaching with them telling them what they should say And as ye go preach saying The Kingdom of God is at hand And a little after he saith they had their sermon taught them before hand But dare he say that Christ's words before mentioned were therefore false This he must say or else prove nothing Or will he say that the Apostles in all that progress said nothing but these seven words The Kingdom of God is at hand For according to him this was all they said which they had learned aforehand and not as the Holy Ghost taught them in that hour what to say albeit it be Christ's express words Luk 12 12. Pag. 447. to my argument that according to their doctrin the Devil himself ought to be heard seing he knoweth the notion of Truth and excelleth many of them in learning and eloquence he answers Why doth the man thus speak untruth Do we say that every one though he were the Devil if he speak truth should be heard Do they not say that men ought to be heard and accounted as Ministers albeit void of the true Grace of God if having the formality of the outward call And to prove this do not they bring the example of Judas whom Christ called a Devil And they suppose him to have been such even when sent by Christ deserved to be heard as his Apostle Let him consider then how he can shun what I have affirmed And albeit the Devil may speak without study yet he can not be said to speak by the Spirit of God which is the thing we affirm needfull to Gospel preaching And for his last argument pag. 448. that since extraordinary gifts ceased there hath been no ordinary way of Preaching but by ordinary gifts studied and acquired it is but a bare begging of the question and the same upon the matter with his new enforced objection which I answered towards the beginning of my third section of Immediat Revelation ¶ 4. I come now to his 24th chapter of Prayer and as to his first paragraph there needs no debate for except some railing intermixed I own what is asserted in it as to the necessity of Prayer and its being through Christ as Mediator In the next he alledgeth I speak untruely in saying that the acts of their Religion are produced by the strength of the natural will for they can pray when they please but how truely this is affirmed concerning them will after appear albeit in opposition to it after citing a passage out of the larger Catechism he saith they owne the influences of the Spirit as absolutely necessary to this duty which if he would hold to there needed no further debate I should agree to it for he doth untruely state the question when he saith a little after that the motions and inspirations I plead for are extraordinary which is false and never said by me and therefore his building on it is in vain as wel here as pag. 452. 457-459 461. where he insinuats that I judge not the gratious and ordinary influences of the Spirit a sufficient warrand to pray which is false What he saith pag. 451. of the necessity of Prayer at some times and of the Scripturs mentioning Prayers being made three times a day I deny not nor is it to the purpose The question is Whether any can pray acceptably without the Spirit We see he hath granted they can not then the thing to be proved is Whether the general command authorizeth any to set about it albeit in a manner which is granted will not avail and is unacceptable So the matter resolves in examining what he can say from Scriptur or other ways to prove this and that there may be no mistake let it be considered that I deny not the general obligation to pray upon all so that they who do not pray sin albeit they be not sensible of the Spirit 's help enabling them to do it but that the way to avoid this sin is not to commit another to pray with out the Spirit but to wait for the Spirit that they may pray acceptably seing without it though they should use words of Prayer it would be no fulfilling of the command And first then to what he argueth pag 452. from the reïterated commands of God to pray I answer that God's command lays upon man an obligation to pray I deny not but God commands no man to pray unacceptably God commands the right performance of Prayer and this he has confessed can not be without the Spirit therefore God commands no prayer without the Spirit neither is the command answered or fulfilled by such as pray without it To this he objecteth pag. 453 458. that the same Moral dutys might be shifted untill the Spirit lead to them and also natural acts of sleeping eating c. which are abomination in the wicked yet to go round he