our Pattern â—â—ich really was no part of that Doctrine as may be seen pag. 24 26. For because we assert him to have been our Example in Fulfilling the Righteousness of the moral Law T. H. would conclude from my words That he was only our Example in ending Types Shadows Sacrifices Propitiations c. of the Law Therefore great Forgery in him to make me answer two Questions the one in pag. 52. of his second Dialogue the other in in pag. 74 of his last Dialogue which take in the Death Sufferings of Christ that wholely related to but some part of the personal Obedience of his Life I cannot forbear one Instance more of his foul Miscarriage in this particular viz. Anab. Are we no further concern'd in the Obedience and Sufferings of our Lord Jesus without us then only as our Example or Patttern Quack What more wouldst thou have I have told thee that Christ fulfilled the Law but Only as our Example Where there is nothing clearer then that he thrusts the Sufferings of Christ into the Question which was no part of the Question making me to deny the Benefit thereof because I assert him to be only our Example in that which is our daily Duty unto Acceptance with God not in being a Sacrifice for Sin Is this not to be Guilty of Fiction Or is this to describe a real Quaker and act the part of a true Christian Oh hateful Injuries But 2 dly In his Quotation of my Answer he hath omitted two Passâ—ges for when I said If he can find such an Answer to such a Question he has not wronged me I placed theâ—e words between which he dropped viz. or the Mâ—â—ter strictly contained in that Question which I knew he could never compass because his Question was in what Râ—spect Christ dyed for Sinners and the Answer he made me give truly related to the fulfilling filling of the Righteousness of the Law in our selves Oh Injurious Man Is this the Christian His next Omission is this part of my Answer which followed from my Argument by him cited for Proof of his Charge upon John 15.10 If you keep my Commandments c. Now â—aid I that this concern'd not the whole Law Christ came to fulfill the whole Law he fulfil'd the placâ— of Scripture quoted the Nature and Matâ—er of the Argument clearly prove Again He was our Example in Holiness â—hough not in his Ending of Types Shadows Reas against Rail pag. 79. Which Passages Râ—ader plainly evidence that if ever those words were spoken by me they never extended to Christ's being but our Example in the Fulfilling of the whole Law which T. Hicks by his Sophistry would insinuate For Answer to his Three notorious Vntruths he chargeth on me take what follows 1. He sayes I insinuate as if John 15.10 were the only Text from whence I argued in my Sand. Found pag. 26. which Reader is so far from Truth that I only charg'd him with having argued from that Text in which no such word or matter was to be found which he denies 2 dly He says That I am sure the Fulfilling of the Law was not the Subject treated on there and that I know therein I have spoken falsly But sure I am he hath told two Tales in charging one upon me For first How could the Law as he understands it to wit the Whole Law that Christ came to fulfil be intended when the very Text Argument upon it shew that it was the Keeping of Christ's Commanâ—ments that they might abide in his Love and without which they could not be accepted that was insisted on 2 dly He tells an Vntruth in charging me with thâ— Knowledge of that which was not But as he declined â—his Scripture so the Arguments by which I proved the Impossibility of Christ's keeping his own Commandements in our stead with which I made good my Conclusion viz. The Necessity of Keeping his Commandments as he kept his Father's in order to Acceptance with him 3 dly He sayes I am certain the Word Only is not there and so add Lye unto Lye knowingly which Reader makes other Two Vntruths on my Adversary's part For first there is no such Word in all that Argument and Paragraph out of which he made his Citation as may appear Sand. Found Shak. pag. 26. Argum. 5. Dial. 2. pag. 52. Reas against Rail pag. 79. 2 dly His saying I should know of a thing that never was makes up his other Falshood But to the end he may acquaint all men with my Folly and Madness as he is pleased to term his own horrible Fiction he tells me that he referred in his Citation not to John 15.10 but Rom. 2.13 Not the Hearers of the Law are just before God but the Doers of the Law shall be justifiâ—d But do men use to refer to Places they never cite either as to Words Chapter or Verse for they are not mentioned in his former Dialogues How then did he refer to them If he sayes It was to my Argument I make the same Demand Do men refer to Argumenâ—s they never mention If to those they do mention then I can easily prove it was not this Scripture or Argument upon it that T. Hicks referred to Reader peruse Sand Found p. 26. Arg. 5. Dial 2. p. 52. Reas against Rail p. 78 79. and thou shalt see his palpable Untruth But becauâ—e he builds here upon this Argument lâ—t's bear it Unless we be Doers of the Law which Chriâ—t came not to destroy but as our Example to fulfill we can never be just before God Let not any fancy that Christ hath SO fulfill'd it for them as to exclude their Obedience from being requisite to their Acceptance but Onely as their Pattern Here Only is mentioned But first this was not the Place cited but another that had it not as before exprest Therefore I no Lyar but T. Hicks a Forger 2 dly This Law mention'd Rom. 2.13 was the Moral Eternal Law of God not that Shadowy Law containing Ceremonies Sacrifices Propitiatories Meats Drinks and dâ—vers Washings c. which Christ by his Life Death and Sufferings fulfill'd and ended in which T. H. would make me say That Christ was Onely our Example That it was not the whole Jewish Law the two next verses prove For when the Gentiles which have not the Law do the Things contained in the Law these having not the Law are a Law unto themselves which shew the Work of the Law written in their Hearts Therefore not the whole Jewish Law for that they had not consequently I do not contradict or make void the Benefit of Christ's Death and Sufferings by saying He was only our Example in keeping that Law which the best Jews and Gentiles were to keep and kept and the Righteousness of which is to be fulfill'd in us Thus hath he unworthily added diminished mis-rendred transposed c. from time to time Certainly the People call'd Anabaptists are deeply coâ—cern'd to reckon with
are therefore incosistent with Government Contin pag. 59 60. Who would have expected this from a profest Baptist and Preacher too XIII From our denying the Resurrection of the natural corruptible Body leaving it with the Lord to give us a Body as pleaseth him as 1 Cor. 15.36 37 38. This Caviller endeavours to possess People with our Denyal of the Resurrection of any Body to Life eternal however spiritual or glorified Dial. 1. p. 56. to 62. And lastly from our asserting the Unity of God and the Soul and Denyal of his carnal Resurrection he concludes That the Soul is Part of God aâ—d that no future Rewards or Punishments are to be expected Dial. 1. p. 16 17. These Reader are some of the many Perversions this Ungodly Man is guilty of against our Principles Is this to condemn the Quaker out of his own Mouth and to evince his Objections against him to be real Truths Is not Counterfeit a Name good enough for him that has thus counterfeited a Quaker anâ— a Christian too Will this bring Honour to his Brethren Or can it be consistent with their Credit to encourage such base Attempts when but a midling Heathen would have abhorred to have been the Actor of half that Injury T. H. hath not only committed but continues in and boasts of And that he has betaken himself to no better Refuge from the Pursuit of our Arguments notwithstanding the Cautions of our former Book I shall in a few Instances make evidently appear to all that dare trust and will but impartially use their Eyes 1. From my saying That those that crucified Christ were Admirers of the Scriptures and pretended out of their own Law that it was both lawful and necessary he should be put to Death Whereas had they brought that Deed to the Light the Light would have shown it not to have been wrought in God which the Scriptures without the Light could not effectually do He makes no Consâ—ience of inferring That I intimate an Insufficiency in the Scriptures to convince the Jews that Murder was a Sin Dial. 3. p. 13. Whereas the Question was not whether Murder was a Sin but whether the Jews thought that Murder by the Scripture if they did give us an Instance if they did not then I have the End of my Allusion to wit If the Scriptures are not therefore insufficient in T. H's Account because the Jews were not convinced by them of Murder neither ought the Light within to be reputed insufficient because Men were not convinced of their Unbelief in Christ by it I will answer him in setting down his own Words to me O Impious Man sayes he The Defect was not in the Scriptures but in themselves in not attending what was therein delivered wherein Murder is peremptorily forbidden Right But O Impious Man say I the Defect was not in the Light but themselves in not attending to it whereby Murder is also forbidden How much more sufficient now T. H. is the Scripture then the Light Vain Shuffler But this is not all his Perversion for he further infers in my Name That the Scriptures did rather countenance and justifie then condemn them in that Fact Dial. 3. p. 13. Which Reader in plain Terms is as much as to say because the Scriptures do not so effectually discover evil Conceptions as the Light within therefore the Scriptures rather countenance and justifie them Monstrous Baseness The Truth is were his Endeavours against us but well weighed of all that see them there were little need of our Labour in his Discovery or our own Defence But that which aggravates his Sin is the hard Words he gives me after all I know not why unless to cover his own Guilt or make his credulous Reader think me as hateful as he would have me 2. The second Perversion I shall instance is this Because I told him in Answer to his Objection about the Light 's Insufficiency for it s not discovering to the Heathen-Philosophers how Sin came into the World If he meant by that Discovery a clear and distinct Account and particular History how Adam and Eve were beguiled by the Serpent it was nowayes to his Purpose unless he can prove the Knowledge of it absolutely necessary to Salvation He according to his usual Baseness makes me to say The Penning of that History was to no Purposâ— Dial. 3. p. 41. thus interrogating of me Wilt thou dare to say the Knowledge of this is to no Purpose Why then did sacred Penmen give such full Account thereof As if it were one and the same Thing for me to say the Penning of that History is to No Purpose and to say It is not to T. Hicks 's Purpose Is this the Way to prove the Quaker no Christian But since this full Account is made such a great Instance by T. H. for the Sufficiency of the Scripture and Insufficiency of the Light let him tell me What Paradise Adam was put in and where it was What was that Serpent that tempted Eve a fallen Spirit or a Beast of the Field And what was that Fruit and Tree God forbad and the Serpent tempted the Woman to eat of And what was the Voice Adam heard in the Garden What were those Fig-Leaves he covered himself withall And what was that Death that he dyed And what were those Cherubims and the flaming Sword and the Tree of Lifâ— all mentioned in that History If he takes the Account Literally let him say so but let him take this with him that then Adam bodily dyed before he begot his Sons and Daughters and the History gives us no Account of his corporal Resurrection But if he take the Account in whole or in Part mystically then how is it full clear and distinct not distinguishing Literal Natural from Mystical and Spiritual Things Is this the Way to prove the Insufficiency of the Light within that sends all People to the Light within for a sufficient Account which sayes Dr. Henry Moor of Cambridge spoke in and reproved Adam for his Lapse from God Philosoph Cab. p. 27. However it be this lies at T H's Door that because I said his Instance of Moses's Writing was nothing to his Purpose he makes me to conclude They were writ to no Purpose If he loved his Soul he would hate these Courses that need no Aggravation their own Infamy is enough 3. Again from my acknowledging that the Scripture furnisheth me with the Knowledge â—f Christ's visible Transactions he infers thus which is as if thou shouldst say God manifeste◠〈◊〉 lesh câ—uld not have been known by thee were it not revealed in the Scriptures intimating thou couldst NEVER have known it but by the meer Light in thee Dial. 3. p. 44 48. Which intimates that Thomas Hicks is an arrant Perverter of my Senâ—e Is there no Difference between saying I was informed of a certain Passage by A. B. and saying It was impossible I should have known it any other Way then by A. B. But why
Ghost be this Discoverer and Instructor and yet not eminently the Rule But in asmuch as thou chargest me with denying the Scriptures Authority and then railest p. 61. because I place it upon the Teâ—â—timony of the Light and Spirit of God In the Conscience Hear what D. John Owen sayes The only Publick Authentick and Infallible Interpreter of the holy Scripture is He who is the Author of them from the Breathing of whose Spirit it derives all its VERITY PERSPICUITY and AUTHORITY Exerc. 2.7 9. VVhat would have become of me T. H. if I had spoken so broad as this This makes the Spirit Interpreter Judge and Rule of our Knowledge therefore eminently the Rule T. Collier an ancient and considerable Baptist shall be my last instance here There is the Law and Testimony in the Spirit saith he as well as in the Letter The Law of God is in the Heart there it is written and there it testifies the Truth of God And if any man speak not according to this Rule it is because there is no Light or Morning risen in him See his Works pag. 249. Again Others know no other Touch-Stone nor Tryal no other Light by which they judge of Truth then Scripture thus putting it in the room of the Spirit which is Light and the Greater Light For they say they cannot know Truth till they bring it to the Letter for Tryal thus making an Idol of the Letter setting it up in the room of God Ibid. pag. 248. I could produce a great Cloud of more Witnesses both of Fathers and other Authors But I hope I have discharged my self of my Engagement and made appears That what I asserted was not too hard for me to prove and therefore thou T. H. wert too confident in saying so but thy notorious Ignorance in these things may a little excuse thee But thou chargest us with undervaluing the Scriptures a Fault I abhor to be guilty of Let me hear in what C. You contemptibly call the Scriptures the Letter whilst you entitle some of your own Pamphlets The Voice of Wisdom A Message c wherein you manifestly prefer your own Writings before the Holy Scriptures pag 55. Q. This Cavil has been answered again and again I told thee before and thou hast cited me thus If at any time we call the Scriptures Letter it is not that we mean our Books are the Spirit or that we irreverently set them the Scriptures below our own Writings but upon a Comparison only between the Scriptures and the Spirit that gave them forth What Return dost thou give to this C. It is aggravate not to excuse your Error Q. It is an Error to call the Scriptures the Letter in a Comparison with the Spirit And an Aggravation of that Error to prefere the Spirit before the Letter But as this all thou hast to say to the Matter C. Why have you not respect to this Comparison when you entitle your own Books But that you would have us to believe that your Writings are more eminently from the Spirit then the Sciptures p. 56. Q. How do we prefer our Writings above the Scriptures which we prove by the Scriptures I perceive it is become almost impossible with thee to make any other Constructions then what rather shew thine own Envy then our Sense Was there ever the same Reason for a Comparison between our Writings and the Spirit Did we ever set them up for the only Rule of Faith and Obedience and that in Opposition to the Spirit as the New Covenant Rule and those that maintain that Plea If there were the same Occasion thou shouldst quickly hear of the same Distinction and Comparison But go on C. Hence it is That when both stand in Competition you thus distinguish them Letter yea Dead Letter as the proper Term for the Scriptures but The Voice of Wisdom to your Books Art thou not ashamed of this Basâ—ness and Prophaneness pag. 56 Q. Whatever I am I perceive thou art not ashamed of making me base and prophane too and printing a most horrid Untruth to render me so There is not a Sentence in thy Book gives a clearer Testimony of the Injustice of thy Carriage then this in hand For nothing is more frequent with thee throughout thy Dialogues then first to invent something odious in our Name and then as if none so Modest and Righteous as thy self cry out Who would not be astonished at this Blasphemouâ— Absurdity p. 30. Art thou not ashamed of this Prophaneness and Baseness p. 59. O Impious Man c. p. 13. But let this determine this Point between us Produce but one of our Friends that ever brought his VVritings in Competition with the Scriptures calling the Scriptures the Dead Letter his own Books the Voice of Wisdom c. and I will yield thee to have written Truth If thou canst not thou hast but fastened Baseness Prophaneness and Lying upon thy self with thee I leave them for there thou ought est to rest till thou canst better clear thy self of them I charged thee with having wronged Geo. Fox and Rich. Hubberthorn in making them to say It is Dangerous for ignorant People to read the Scriptures and then fixing the Name of Jesuit and Romanish upon us producing their words at large which thou hast basely contracted to thy own Ends leaving out what might most make for their Innocency and the evincenâ—â—ent of thy own Forgery Thou givest the words thus The Letter killeth is Dangerous In my Quotation and in their own Book thus The Letter which killeth 2 Cor. 3.6 is Dâ—ngerous for thou Priest takest in hâ—re to war withâ—l against the Saints with thy carnal Mind giving out thy carnal Expositions upon it All this T. H. thou hast unworthily left out that thou mightest the better fasten thy Fiction upon G. F. and R. H. I ask Is it not Dangerous to read the Scriptures to these Ends And the Ministers of the Letter are the Ministers of Death here thou leavest out again which is to Condemnation and you take it to make a Trade with it and with what the Prophets Christ and the Apostles said so that some have 60 and some 100 l. a year but Christ cryed Wo unto such Whited Walls having left out this part that concerned the Hireling thou puttest in again And here you read with Danger who speak of them and speak a Lye because you speak of your selves Here again thou lettest drop and you wrâ—st the Scriptures to your own Destruction as the Unlearned and Unstable do and is not this Dangerous in them Then thou bringest in this And to you it is Dangerous to read or speak of them omitting all that here follows by me cited to clear them of thy Charge viz. who know not the Life of them as the Pharisees who were learned in the Letter but knew not Christ But I say Blessed is he that readeth doth understand All this so necessary to give the Undertstanding of their true Meaning thou
is spoken by you against us Anab. Will you be so liberal of your Revilings whether your Adversariâ—s give occasion or no ibid. Quak. It concerns us to render them as ridiculous as we can and to make our Friâ—nds believe they do nothing but contradict themselves And if this fail we will insinuate something by way of Quâ—stion that may be Reproachful to them Anab. But doth not this signifie a very Dishonest and Malicious Mind ibid. Quak. We â—are not what you think provided our Friends think not so We will give it out that we have both answer'd and confuted our Adversaries and our Friends will believe uâ— which is enough to us What a Wicked and False Quaker this counterfeit Christian hath made to abuse true ones If this be not Forgery palpable Forgery and that not only against some one Person but the People in general personated by his own madâ— Quakâ—r there is no such thing as Forgery in the World Oh you that seriously profess Religion can you away with this But hath he vindicated himself from these base Courses or honestly confessed them Nâ—ither How then can he justly call himself a Christian or be thought to have answered my Book that hath thus basely deâ—lined that part of it which stood him most upon to disprove But how grosly soever he hath represented us and how silently overlookt our Charges he wants not Confidence to write after this Strain I do affirm in seriousness that the Account I have now and heretofore given of the Quakers is no other then the very Truth Epist p. 5. How serious is this Man in his Lying Forge first and then Lye to prop it Impudence in Grain For what he hath said heretofore relating to this particular I have here briefly considered it Let us see if he be any better now In order to it I have already shown you the Shuffle of his Title-page I will now proceed to give you an Account of his Progress in this Black Art of Forgery and base Abuse Anabapt I am not conscious of having objected any thing against you in my former Dialogues but what I am certainly perswaded to be true p. 1. But is not T. Hicks conscious of first making us say that we never said then calling it A Dialogue between a Christian and a Quaker That T. Hicks was a Forger I have evidenced That he is one still his own words shew for instead of retracting he pleads Innocenâ—y in being so No wonder this man can write against the Light within whose Conscience if we will believe him is so seared that it feels no Risings against the foulest Forgeries But let 's hear him a little further Anabapt I am so confidâ—nt of the Truth of those Allegations that I doubt not to avouch them to all impartial men Ibid. We never doubted his Confidence but Honesty His Allegations must either respect those Passages which he book'd pag'd or else all that he alledges under the Name of Quaker If the former he is a Forger still for more then Three Hundred in his first Dialogue were neither book'd nor pag'd If the latter he tells a plain Untruth for he has not so much as attempted to avouch them unless it is to be understood of his Coâ—fidence Seven Instances I shall give of his Continuance in FORGERY I. T. Hicks's first Fâ—rgery begins with his Title-Pagâ— and in that very Passage where he promiseth an Evincâ—ment of his own Objections to be no Fictions but real Truths to wit that he doth not only content himself in making the Evincement of his own Objections against us unfairly over-looking ours to be all he is concern'd in but in so many words tells the World That I confess if those things objected against the Quakers in thâ— two former Dialogues be true that then a Quaker is quitâ— another thing then a Christian who never said or coâ—fessed any such thing in all my Life For I well knew that the Controversie rise higher and went further then his meer Objections I mean â—o all he gave under our Name as both the Question stated and my Pursuit of it do evidently prove So that he to make the clearing of his own Objections enough yet more then he can eâ—er do brings me in with a Confession of a thing I never thought on much less ever writ what shall I call this but Forgery upon Forgery II. His Second Forgery brings me in thus Qu. If thy Quotations be true I do freely acknowlâ—dge that a Quaker is quite another thing then a Christian Reas against Rail p. 2. There is no Passage so laid down by me my words are these T. Hicks hath given us a Second Part wherein he hopes to make good what he charged upon us in his first by Quotations out of our own Books If faithfully done I shall freely acknowledge that a Quaker is quite another thing then a Christian Where it is observable that I do not lay the Hazard of a Quaker's being a Christian meerly upon the Truth of his Quotations but the Use of and Application of them if they be faithfully done that is if he can make those Quotations and his Charges meet against us I shall concede for a Quotation implies an Agreement He hoped to creep out at a few right Citings and to be over look'd all false Applying and Perverting by unnatural Consequences to his Crooked Purpose Though had I said as he sets me down I should have no Cause to fear the Issue since if Naming us may go for quoting he has done it an Hundred times where he has directed to no particular Way of knowing the Truth thereof consequently a Forger and where he has been more punctual I dare abide by every such one he ever made well knowing he cannot get one Letter to speak for him but by his meer Sophistry and customary Wrests III. His Third Forgery in this 3d Dialogue is thus laid down by him He begins with an Answer to the last Passage he quoted for mine Anabapt Art thou well advised in what thou sayest p. 1 2. Quak. Were we as thou representest us the severest Plagues and Judgments of the Eternal God we might justly expect to be our Portion Reas against Rail pag. 4. The Stress lies here Whether this Answer were ever given by me to the Question 't is now made an Answer to I say No Therefore a Forger Next let us see if it was ever given to a Question of the like Tendency No therefore the greater Forger I will set down the two Passages unto which this hath been given twice for Answer that my Reader may be helpt to a clearer Sight of the Man In this third Dialogue he queries of me Anab. Art thou well advisâ—d in what thou sayest in saying If my Quotations be â—rue thou doest freely acknowledge that a Quaker is quite anothâ—r thing thâ—n a Christian Dial. 3. p. 1. Quak. Were we as thou representest us the severest Plagues and Judgments of the eternal
the Eternity of the Light 's Nature and thou turnest it to an Eternity of Manifestation as if because we say the Light within is Eternal that therefore it must needs have been Eternally within This is not to act the Christian but play the Jew against the Son of God For the Term Effect it is variously spoken and taken among Men The Light of the Sun is called an Effect of the Sun and yet the Light of the Sun is not another Sun Howbeit the Scripture holds forth the the Life of the Word to be the Light of Men Consequently The Life and Light are one C. Though thou wilt not affirm every Measure of the Light within to be the Eternal Being yet thou wilt not deny but that it is God This clears me from Forgery Q. Thy saying so makes thee but the more guilty because the Passage thou pretendest to answer has no such Charge in it besides thou hast perverted my words as thy self hast given them viz. Though every Measure of Light distinctly is not that entire Eternal Being yet we are bold to assert that it is no other then God the Fulness of all Light who searcheth the Heart c. that doth shine into the inward Parts of Man and doth convince reprove c. These latter Words were omitted by thee on Purpose to make the Word God relate to the Measure of Light which is joyned by me to the Fulness But this is frequent with thee proceed C. Either the Light within in the least Measure is God a Creature or nothing Thou wilt not say it is the entire God thou darest not say it is a Creature it must then be nothing Might not thy Time and Abilities have been better improved then in contending for that which is neither God nor a Creature Q. This Reflection as well reaches thee for contending against nothing as me in contending for nothing But Argumentum ad hominem consider this either the Spirit in the least Measure of it is God a Creature or â—othing I suppose T. H. will not say that in the least Measure it is the entire God T. H. dares not say it is a Creature shall W. P. then say in T. Hick's Name it must be nothing Thus through Inadvertency do Men intangle themselves in their own Net we speak of a Measure of the Light and Spirit of God in Man T. H. presently prophanely takes God into Parts and Pieces as pag. 4 5 6. and then charges it upon us as the Consequence of our Doctrine Are not Measures and Degrees Scripture-Terms Does it strike at God's Immensity because he measures forth himself in his inward Discoveries according to Man's Capacity It is called Measure with Respect to Man and not that God is divisible But the Truth is T. H. Thou hast made it thy Business not soberly to argue but vainly to quibble manifestly aiming to take frothy Minds A small Share of such Sophistry might easily obscure the clearest Truths and seem to lead in Triumph the strongest Arguments given in its Defence but the best of it is such Attempts are short-liv'd and so are thine not I promise thee that I intend to have thee assassinated But let us hear what further thou hast to say upon this Passage C. For the other Part of thy Discourse viz. That God searcheth the Heart who denies it But what is this to the main Point Because God searcheth the Heart is therefore the Common Light in every Man God â—urely no Man except under the Power of Delusion would thus reason p. 6. Q. The Word Common is neither ours nor the Scriptures yet if that be the main point it will not be hard to prove provided by Common thou meanest that which shines in all Men for if God be the Searcher of all men's Hearts he that shows unto man his Thoughtâ— as we must believe till T. H. can groundedly assign us some other more common Searcher of the Heart c. then God and if God doth this as he is Light who is Light 1 Joh. 1.5 Ephes 5.13 Then this Light which T. H. calls Common and which we from Scripture say enlightens all Men is God as Joh. 1.4 In him was Life and that Life was the Light of Men. And here is thy main Poiâ—t concluded against thee I shall add Reader to this another Instance of his evasive Carriâ—ge which I entreat thee to take particular notice of that thou mayest see at what rate he shuffles with us In his first Dialogue pag. 7. he quotes Stephen Crisp thus If the Light be obeyed then it must be sufficient and answers I grant it ought to be obeyed so ought the lawful Commands of Masters c. Yet who will thence infer that they are a sufficient Rule to Salvation To this I replyed as he quotes me Dial. 3. p. 8. By the same Reason that such as obey the lawful Commands of Masters are reputed good Servants those who obey the Light are good Servants to God And if those who so keep the Commandments of Masters obtain their Favour and Recompence then those who obey the Light by T. H's Allusion obtain God's Favour and Reward of Righteousness unto which he makes this Return C. This concludes not the Question in Controversie therefore it can be no Prejudice to me Q. No T. Hicks Is it nothing to the Purpose that those who obey the Light are saved from the Wrath and receive the Favour and Reward of God as Servants which obey their Masters Commands are saved from the Wrath and receive the Favour and Recompence of their Masters Let the Reader judge how much this concerns the Question C. I confess the Light within ought to be obey'd and so ought the lawful Commands of Masters from whence thou boldly like thy self concludes to the Sufficiency of the meer Light within Sâ—ch Extravagancies as thâ—se do ordinarily attend thy peculiar Genius Dial 3. p. 9. Q. Soft a little If the Light ought to be obeyed it is a suâ—â—icient Rule for that Obâ—dience To keep to thy â—wn Parallel of a Master and a Servant How can a Servant be condemned of his Master for not answering his Command whilst the Master's Command is not a sufficient Rule for the Servant's Obedience The Command implies a sufficient Rule to the Performance of the thing commanded C. ' Tiâ— true that God approves of Servants that do sincerâ—ly obey the Commands of their Superiors will it therâ—fore follow that their Commands are sufficient to gâ—ide us to Salvation p. 9. Q. What a wretched Shuffle is this Was it ever the Question Whether the Commands of Masters were sufficienâ— to guide us to Salvation Or are the Commands of the Light about the Things of God no more sufficient to Salvation then the Commands of Masters be they about what they will are sufficient to Salvation Is not this a taking away the Comparison by putting the Subject of it in the Room of that for which it was brought making Salvation
to be as natural a Coâ—sequence of following the Commands of Masters as of following the Requirings of the Light But we are not so to be shifted off for by the same Reason that the civil Commands of a Master obeyed are sufficient to the obtaining of a civil Salvation from Man's Wrath The spiritual Commands of the Light obeyed are sufficient to the obtaining of a spiritual Salvation that is a being sav'd from the Wrath to come which is and shall be further revealed against all the Workers of Iniquity Let me use thy own words T. H. falsly reflected upon me in this very matter Where Proof is defective thou beggest the Question nay I may say changest it and triumphest in thy oâ—n Confidencâ— which a modest Man would not do Away with these poor Shuffles for shame Is this to evince the Matters objected to be real Truths But what sayest thou to my Argument p. 15. grounded on Jo. 1.4 If God be Divine and sufficient to Salvation and the Word be God and the Life of the Word one with the Word and that Life the Light of men then the Light of men is Divine and Sufficient to Salvation C. Oh what profound Divinity and exquisite Logick is this I perceive thy Mind abounds with Ignorance from the Arguments that spring thence Thou hudlest the Principal Agent and Ordinary Means together p. 18. Q. A rare Excuse for thine or something worse Ought they not to be together in an Argument design'd to prove them one Ordinary Means are thy own words and not mine A meer Shift for an Answer But to go on C. How can God himself be called a Means p. 18. Q. After the same manner that his Power saveth us and his Spirit sanctifieth us and that he becomes the Teacher of his People such a Means if thou wilt call it so my Argument was offered to prove the Light to be Is this to act either the Divine or Logician after all thy conceited high Rants thus pittifully to beg the Question But what follows C. Thy Argument is fallaciouâ— because that which is spoken in the first should exactly be the Subject of the second Proposition p. 18. Q. And so it is See Reas against Rail p 14. C. If the Proposiâ—â—on were right yet thy Conclusion doth not reach the plain Terms of the Question viz. Therefore the common Light in every man is God and sufficient to Salvation Q. Though I told thee before that the word common is none of ours yet I am not offended with it For the Love of God is never the worse for being common whatever thy Reprobation-Faith thinks of it But art thou willing in earnest this should be the Question between us For I perceive when thou art put to a Pinch it is frequent with thee to turn me off with such Expressions as these Prove this to be the Common Light within What is thiâ— to the Common Light within men Meer Evasions and most times attended with hard words to cover them as in pag. 9 14 15 17 39 42 43 52 53 c. C. This is the Controversie between us whether the Common Light in every man be God Christ and sufficient to lead to Salvation p. 8. If thou couldst demonstrate this it would put an Issue to a great part of the Controversie between us Ibid. p. 17. Q. Very well Thou hast granted that in the Word was Life and that Life the Light of men as Joh. 1.4 on which I grounded my Argument and that the Life and Light there mentioned are one with the Word or of its own Being consequently God and sufficient to Salvation But that such a Conclusion reacheth not the Terms of the Question to wit the Common Light in Men which thou denyest to be one with the Life of the Word and therefore Insufficient to Salvation Upon this I thus argue for the bringing of the Controversie to an Issue If the Light of men John 1.4 be the Light of All men then is it a Light common to all men Thou must deny one of these two either that Light of Men is the Light of all Men or that the Light of All men is common to all men The latter I should think in Point of Reputation thou wilt not be so unreasonable as to deny The former then I must suppose thee to reject viz. That the Light of men is the Light of all men This I shall maintain by the general Phrase of Scripture Eccles 1.13 This sore Travail hath God given to the Sons OF MEN chap. 2.3 8. the same chap. 3.10 I have seen the Travail God hath given â—o the Sons OF MEN vers 18 19. That which befallâ—th the Sons OF MEN befalleth Beasts as the one dyeth so â—yâ—th the other Jer. 32.19 Thine Eyes are upon all the Wayes of the Sons OF MEN to give every one according to his Wayes Which prove that OF MEN is meaâ—t OF ALL MEN. I will add two Places more out of Prov. 8.4 Vnto you O Men I Wisdom call and my Voyce is to the Sons OF MEN. And ver 31. My Delight is with the Sons OF MEN. This proves Matter and Phrase For both Of Men signifieth of all Men and this Voice cometh from him in whom are hid all tâ—e Treasures of Wisdom and Knowledge even the Eternal Word in whom is Life and that Lifâ— the Light of Men. From all which I conclude that the Light of men is the Light of all Men yea Every Man that cometh into the World Joh. 1.9 And that the Light of all men is a Light Common to all men and that the Light that is common to all men is a Common Light Now T. H. thou hadst done something if thou hadst given us as plain Reason and Scripture for thy Two Lights within Common and Special and made good that Distinction between Light and Light in Job 24.13 John 1.4 9. chap. 3.20 21. Ephes 5.13 1 John 1.5 7. chap. 2.8 9 10. and have told us if thou couldst Where the common Light endeth and the spâ—cial Light begins And if the Special reprove for Evâ—l as well as the Common which thoâ— sayest reveals much and ought to be attended to thou shouldst have let us know how the Discoveries Motions Reproofs Commands of â—he one might be discern'd and distinguished from the other For we own but one real Spiritual-Light to the Sons of men though divers Manifestations and Operations of that one Light suited to the Capacities of all Persons and Ages and not to shuffle me off with asking me How canst thou infer with such presumtuous Confidence wilt thou dare stand by this Consequence after thou T. H. hast made it as Ugly as thy Malice and Dishonesty could well contrive Mean Artifices to bear thy weak Reader in hand thou hast hit the Mark when thou hast all along shot quite beside it Practices unworthy of any fair Disputant much more a Man of thy Pretences to Religion Hadst thou truly regarded that Light of which thou hast
writ so many slight things we should not have seen that Envy Passion base Shuffling Insolence c. that thy Writings now abound withall Therefore under all thy higher Conceits thou standest condemn'd of the Light Be exhâ—â—ted first to obey it before thou undertakest to write of thiâ—gs thoâ— vainly thinkst beyond it Testimonies concerning the Light Within Munsterius Castalio Vatablus Drusius Clarius Coâ—ureus upon Job 24.13 chap. 25.3 They are of those who Rebel against the Light Vpon whom doth not his Light arise say that this Light is of the Divine Wisdom and Fountain of Light alluding to the Psalmist 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Mat. 4.19 The People that saâ—e in Darkness saw great Light Also see â—â—ese Men Erasmus and Camero upon John 1.4 9. I shall for a further Defence of the Light produce some Testimonies from several Gentiles some Hundreds of Years before Christ Orpheus His Hand reaches to the End of the Sea his Right Hand is every where â—hen within of him alone are all things Clem. Alex. Strom. lib. 5. Thales thus There is but one God he is Glorious forever he knows Hearts and tells Thoughts He makes the Teller of his Thoughts God as in Amos 4.13 Pythagoras thus God resembleth LIGHT and TRUTH he is one he is not OUT of the World he is the SALT of all Ages ONE HEAVENLY LIGHT and Father of all things only Wise Invisible yet Intelligible The very Language of the Apostle Jambl. Just. Mart. Heraclitus thus God is not made with Hands Pythagoras What things are agreeable to God cannot be known unless a man HEAR God himself Again Having overcome thy Rebellious Appetite thou shalt know the COHABITATION of the Immortal God and Mortal Men whose Work is Immortality Eternal Life Tim. de Anim. Mund. Sophocles speaking of the Preceptâ— written in man's Heart saith God is their Father not Mortal Nature Neither shall they ever be abrogated for there is in them a great God that never waxeth old Again saith he This is with respect to man's Conscience a Divine a Sacred Good God the Overseer Oedip. Tyr. Cl. Alex. Str. l. 5. Socrates had the Guide of his Life within him and preach'd as he was moved by it even in â—he Streets And dyed for Reproving the Corruptions of the Atheâ—ians in Manners and Religion Ploâ—in taught That man had a Divine Principle in 〈◊〉 which maketh a True and Good Man Hiâ—ron called it A Domestick God They held Victory over their Sins by the Power of it witness Chilon Socrates Plato Zeno Antipater and others which Doctrine of Perfection thou T. H. with all thy pretended super-â—dâ—â—d Light can't tell how to swallow As they prest Perfect Living so they clearly laid down Eternal Rewards the Pure to Godâ— the Impure to Chains said Pythagoâ—as as if he had read that Scripture writ Six Hundred Years after him The Pure in Heart shall see God The Good saâ—d Socrates shall be united to God in an inaccâ—ssible Place the Wicked in conveniâ—nt Places suffer due Punishment And though they might not have the Jewish History and Chronicle yet they had a sufficient Law and Light within to Salvation and such as trusted in it came to Salvation by it and so much the Apostle sayes Rom. 2. And for the Fathers that they confirm the Testimonies of the Gentiles and speak not of another Eternal Law and Light briefly thus Justin Martyr in his Apology saith God has built to himself a natural Templâ— in the Consciencâ—s of men as the place wherein he would be worshipped and there men ought to look for his Appearance Clem. Alex. Admon ad Gent. It is the Voice of Truth that Light will shine out of Darkness Therefâ—re does it shine in the hidden part of Mankind Strom. l. 5. Man cannot be void of Divine Knowledge who naturally or as he comes into the World parâ—akes of Divine Inspiration Lactant. de Cult ver The Law of God is made known unto us whose Light clearly discovers the Path of Wisdom That Law is pure and unspotted Reason diffused through all the World Aâ—hanas contr Gent. The Way to attain to the Knowledge of God is Within us which is proved from Moses who saith The Word of God is within thy Heart and from this saying of Christ The Faith and Kingdom of God is within you §. II. Concerning the Soul of Man Counterfeit I affirm that G. Fox sayes the Soul of Man is Part of God's being without Beginning and infinite which is to say The Soul is God Dial. 3. pag. 19. Quaker I have two things to say First That in case G. F. so holds thou hast done unworthily to conclude generally against the Quakers In thy former Dialogues thou chargedst it upon the Quakers and now thou layest it directly upon G. F. Are such Shiftings Runnings from Generals to Particulars allowable in Disputation Is this equal Dealing But 2dly I deny that G. F. so holds what sayest thou to that C. G. Fox in his Great Mystery p. 90. in Answer to one that said There is a kind of Infiniteness in the Soul yet it cannot be Infiniteness in it self speaks thus Is not the Soul without Beginning coming from God returning into God again Hath this Beginning or Ending and is not this Infinite in it self Can anything be clearer then that G. F. makâ—s the Soul the Subject and not the Divine Life Ibid. pag. 20 21. Q. Yes that there may For it is clear enough that G. F. intends by the Soul and Breath coming out from God the Divine Breath or Soul of the Soul as Augustine calls it and as Mach Neshemah Pneunia Anemos and Spiritus signifie 'T was this made Adam a living Soul to God Thou dealest unfairly with G. F. and us in making his Questions about this both his and our Affirmation That the Soul or Spirit of Man is God A manifest Falsehood and Abuse And was not the Death threathned Adam upon Disobedience the Loss of this They that read G. F's Books with a more impartial mind then thou doest may see that sometimes he speaketh of the Soul as of the Man pag. 91. where he sayes That such as receive the Light receive Redemption whâ—r by their Spirits Bodies Souls are sanctified and sometimes he speaks of the Soul as respecting that Breath of Life by which it became a living Soul to God which is Man in the Heavenly Image He that reads page 90 91 100. may discern the Truth of this But why art thou not angry with the PRIEST for talking of a kind of Infiniteness in the Soul 'T is at the Quaker and not the Principle thy Gall is stirr'd For a kind of Infiniteness â—ust be Infiniteness and not a Finiteness Did G. F's words at most rise higher What further doest thou object C. But G. F. saith pag. 100. God breathed into man the Breath of Life and he became a Living Soul and is not this which cometh out from God part of God which Soul Christ is
not absurd yea blasphemous to talk of God's redeeming the Seed Ibid. Q. No more Blasphemy then is in the Scripture which sayes Out of Egypt have I called my Son a Place of Burdens But I the less wonder at thy Ignorance in these Heavenly Things who never yet drunk of his Cup nor was baptized with his Baptism nor knew the true Fellowship of his Death and Sufferings but art now adding to them by as provoaking Impieties as any man of this Age hath committed against him Give me thy Judgment of these Scriptures and my Consequence from them And God saw that there was no man and wondred that there was no Intercessor therefore his Arm brought Salvation to him and Righteousness it susteined him Isaiah 59.16 Again The Year of my Redeemed is come and I looked and there was none to help and I wondred that there was none to uphold therefore mine own Arm brought Salvation unto me and my Fury it uphâ—ld me Chap. 53.4 5. Whence it is no Contradiction to say That God did rid himself of the Enemies of his own precious Life or that he brought Salvation to himself C. I infer from your Words this horrid Absurdity that God redeems himself p. 37. This is thy Truth against Fiction Q. It is not from our Words but the Words of Scripture and but that thou art become shameless I should wonder that any Man pretending the Scriptures to be his Rule should charge plain Scripture with Absurdity and Blasphemy C. Thus Christ is at one and the same time at Liberty and in Bondage redeeming and redeemed conquering and yet pressed down And though this kind of Language be Folly and Madness yet thou tellest us thou art content to use it p. 38. Q. And it were well if thou wouldst be contented not to abuse it Is this thy Religion to vilifie the Language of other Peoples Religion nay of holy Scripture it self But how dark art thou T Hicks to make bâ—th a Wonder and a Scoff at Christ's conquering and yet being pressed down at the same Time when the Scripture so plainly holds forth that he is crucified by such counterfeit Christians as thou art at what Time he reigns in the Hearts of his Children And is not the Spirit said to be quenched by some at what Time it lives in others And is he not grieved by the Rebellions of some whilst he is delighted in others Was not God at Liberty at what Time he said They made him sâ—rve with their Sins And was he not whole at what Time he said He was broken Ezek. 6.9 Canst thou reasonably infer because of these Expressions us'd after the manner of men that it is Absurdity and Blasphemy that God heals himself delivers himself and eases himself of his Enemies Words of equal Import Methinks thy unsavory Carriage should reflect Shame upon W. Kiffin with his Elders c. to suffer such irreverent Trash to come out of their Congregation if they value their Credit they will not suffer thee any longer thus upon the Ramble But before I leave thee in this Section I have one thing more to charge thee with and that is not only the Abuse of our words by concluding from Man's being turned to seek after a lost God and Christ that God and Christ are in a lost Condition but that they only want Redemption and that Men and Women are not the Objects of Redemption as in 3 Dial. p. 37. Then which nothing can be more false and consequently injurious to a People But I have left wondering that thou shouldst be base §. IV. Concerning our Belief in Christ Quaker ANother Instance by which thou undertakest to prove the Quaker no Christian is his Denyal of Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without him Is this true or no Counterfeit I accuse you for denying Jesus Christ to be a distinct Person without you p. 25. Q. I say that thou hast varied thy Charge and given thy self an Answer to it out of my Book which was never an Answer to any such Matter viz. Herein thou hast shewn thy Ignorance and Malice nor is it so in my Book but Ignorance or Malice Thou also omitteth the Ground of my so speaking which is not fair viz The Quakers say that Christ is in them Christ is God-man is God-man in them Again there is but one Christ born of â— Virgin that suffered at Jerusalem Can that Christ be in Man In Defence of which strange Construction of our Belief thou hast offered nothing to what I opposed Howbeit I desire my Reader to take notice that since thou pretendest to own but one Christ and sayst that it is impossible that Christ should be in Man that thou both denyest the Scripture and contradictest thy self there is not any Doctrine clearer in holy Record then that of Christs indwelling with his Saints Joh. 14.20 23. Chap. 15.4 5. Chap. 17.23 Rom. 8.10 2 Cor. 13.5 Cal. 1.16 Col. 1.27 Revel 3.20 The same Objection thou makest against us holds good against them as thus Christ is God-man can God-man be in the Corinâ—hians What might not a T. Hicks have cavilled against Christ and his Disciples â—s well as against us Is this the Way to prove the Quaker no Christian that makes that Thing Error which can only constitute Men right Christians For if Christ be not there no Anointing can be there which John sayes leads into all Truth Besides thou contradictest thy self as thou mayest see Dial. p. 22 23. But to thy present Charge C. This I object against you your denying Christ to be a distinct Person without you to which thou speakest nothing signifying thereby that yâ—u are pinched Ibid. p. 26. Q. I told thee under the Head of Perversions that this was not all thou madest us to deny for thou didst untruly infer Our Denyal of Christ's Bodily Appearance concerning which thou speakest nothing signifying thereby that thou art pinched unless it be to deny thou ever saidst so as p. 26 31. thereby adding a Lye to the Shuffile But why are we pinched because we say nothing to a Doctrine the Scripture sayes nothing of Give me one Place that mentions Christ to be a distinct Persoâ— without us art thou so destitute of common Sense as to think of proving the Quaker no Christian because he denies a Doctrine not expressed in Scripture and yet at that Instance to magnifie the Scripture as thy sole Rule Verely thou makest thy self a Derision to all wise Men. But go on make the best of thy Charge C. G. F. in his Great Mystery p. 16. writes thus Thou art deceived who sayest Christ is distinct from the Saints Can any Man eat the Flesh of Christ if his Flesh be not in them Q. This probably thou mayst have found in thy Brother Faldo 's Book and thou mightst have found it defended in mine Whâ—re is Distinct among G. F's Words which are these But God and Christ is in his Saints and dwell 〈◊〉 them and walk in
Auditory to prove thee guilty of Forgeries Self-contradictions and gross Errours from thy own Dialogues Instead of yielding to the Test even about matter of Fact where thou hast grossely abus'd us thou didst in plain termes shuffle by a fresh proposal of Question as if thou wert to teach us where and what to charge our Enemies with and then prescribe Rules with many taunting Expressions omitted in thy 3d Dial how to behave our selves on purpose to evade the Meeting I would have thee know it was our Right to make the Complaint and hadst thou been a man of any Honesty thou wouldst readily have considered it and joyn'd issue upon our Charge This in Reputation to thy self as well as Justice to us thou oughtst not to have declin'd And yet to aggravate these shuffles G. W. proffer'd in his 4th paper to thee a note of the particulars charg'd as Forgeries c. if thou desiredst it so willing was he and others to have seen thee in a publick Auditory Bâ—t seeing this would not do he and I went to John Gladman's desiring him to offer thee from us we wouâ—d meet thee and who else to defend thee in a publick Auditory with thy Dialogue in one band and the Bible in the other the fairest of tenders to make thy own Book the Subject and the Scriptures thou sayst we reprobate A Rule But this thou canst not but know was also rejected So that to conceal these Shifts nay to say thou art Shuffler and which is worse to charge G. W. with both Shuffling and Lying at what time thou art so manifestly guilty of both is to highten thy Vnworthiness to a monstrous pitch But as the Matter of thy Book is injurious so thy Languague insolent and scurrulous intitling us Cheats Impostors a mad arrogant abusive prophane Mâ—n Knave in discourse Coxcomb impious Cursers Lyars Blasphemers most implacable Enemies to the Christian Religion as vile Impostors as ever were influenced and inspired by the grand Impostor the Devil calling our Religion malignant Errors a mystical Romance Satan's Snarâ—s Blasphemy blasphemous Absurdâ—ties I proclaim to the World that your Religion is a meer Cheat calculated only to the Service of the Devil and your own Lusts and abusing our religious Language with such like Expressions as these Impertinent Canting your idle non-sensical and blasphemous Prating Termes that as much unbecome thy Pretences as they resemble the rest of thy Practices Canst thou with good Conscience upbraid E. B. with rebuking a Priest in Scripture Language whilst thou hast taken the Liberty throughout thy Dialogues when and where thou weâ—t never provok'd of such foul and frothy Expressions as becomes not any Man writing of Religion Is this to make the Scripture thy Rule or to act the Christian against the Quaker and to prove the Quaker none No such matter T. H. but much the contrary and that in the minds of not a few and those too of thy own Way though of a better Spirit who have disown'd them Root and Branch I would not after thy Example reprobate all with thee God forbid That God has turned these ill design'd Attempts to our Advantage remember what sort of Salute was lately given thee by a Religious and Ingenious Person in Bristol once a Preacher among the Independents at thy reflecting upon his adhering to the Way we profess viz That he read thy Dialogues before he ever read the Quakers Books or Answers and that the disingenuity of that Dealing apprehending it to be no real Dialogue was a FURTHERANCE of his INQUIRIES and so of his CONVICTIONS grounded upon thy ABUSES an Argument never to be answer'd by thee T. H. if thou shouldst write Three Dialogues more unless they were as remote from these as thou wert from Honesty when thou writ'st them who doest first Forge and then Lye and Rail to maintain it Think not with these Comical Courses to obtain thy Ends upon us nor raze the Foundation of our Religion by thy abusive Interludes in which thou hast not imitated Christ but Ap'd the prophane Stager writing a sort of Mock Religion instead of solid Controversie therein playing the Humourist with the Vulgar like Aristophanes of old though with worse Malice and less Wit who sacrific'd the Vertue and Gravity of Socrates and his Friends to please their Enemies and profit himself the Hinges on which thy Dialogues turn The First is manifest and so is the Last to the value of 300 Books at an Impression if some of thy Assistants do not wrong thee as we suppose not ask the Bookseller else besides â—erquisites hereby proving thy self one of those unruly Vain-Talkers who writest things thou oughtest not for filthy Lucre sake applyed to us in thy Title-page but due to thy Self And however sweet these Courses may relish to thy worldly Palate thou wilt find them deadly Poysonous in the End at what time thy own Dialogues and not I nor any influenced by me will prove so many ASSASSINATORS in thy own Bowels God if it please him give thee Repentance that thou mayst escape his fierce VVrath to come Amen Now sober Reader I shall address my self to thee and God's righteous VVitness in thy Conscience whether I have acquitted my Self in this Controversie as becomes a Christian-man against the Violent Uâ—fair Aâ—â—â—ults of my Adversary and if I may not with very good Reason conclude that he has all this while but counterfeited the Christian and abused the Quaker and consequently that he and not the real Quaker is quite another thing then a Christian Let Righteous Judgment take place 23d 6th Mon. 1674. A true Lover and hearty Wisher of thy Souls Felicity W. P. Not every one that sayth unto me Lord Lord shall enter into the Kingdom of Heaven but he that doth the Will of my Father which is in Heaven Mat. 7.21 For he is not a Jew which is one outward neither is that Circumcision which is outward in the Flesh But he is a Jew which is one inwardly and Circumcision is that of the Heart in the Spirit and not in the Letter whose Praise is not of Men but of God Rom. 2.28 29. But us then he that was born after the Flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit even so it is now Gal. 4.29 But be of good chear I have overcome the World Jo. 16. last Pag. 13. line 7. read two first Dialogues p. 34. l. 32. r. Dial. 3. p. 41. p. 35. l. 28. r. spoak l. 31. r. was p. 41. l. 26. r. 76. p. 46. l. 14. r. of â—his A Postscript by another Hand WE expect to hear what the Baptists in and about London will say as being appeal'd to concerning their Brother Thomas Hick's Proceeding in his Three Dialogues and whether they approve thereof or of such Play-Books or Romances about Religion yea or nay for they are highly concerned to give Judgment and to be plain to the World herein as they tender the Glory of God and Reputation of Religion c. NOw if you the Teachers and Elders c. among the Baptized People do not publickly clear your selves of Thomas Hicks and these his unjust Proceedings against us and hereafter he further persists therein VVe may take it for granted that you own his VVork and may justly deal with him and pursue him not only as Tho. Hicks but as the Baptists great Champion peculiar Agent or Representative But if you ingenuously clear your selves of him and his Corrupt Perverse VVork then his future Miscarriages will be chargeable only upon T. Hicks himself and you will appear to the VVorld so far clear thereof and approve your selves the more honest and sincere towards God Truth and Religion THE END * Not that I allow him to have rightly châ—rgd us in every thing in that Sense neither * Which was only admitted with respect to its Illumination or Measure of its Appearance in man It was never G. W's Principle or Words tâ—aâ— the Life which is the Light of men Joh. 14. is but in it seâ—f a meâ—r Effect for he owns it in its oâ—n Being to be no other then God himseâ—f and values not the Counterfeit's Quarrel * T. H. takes that literally which is metaphorically spoken both in Scripture and our Books and makes liâ—eral Consequences upon metaphorical Premises as if â—od had Hands Eyes Head Arms could be imbondaged broken c. after a Worldly Manner or in â— strict and proper Sense and â—ot rather in a more hiddeâ—â— c Metaphorical Signification He is herein eâ—ther very blind or very maliâ—ious I would ask him how he knows the Scriptures extanâ— are perfect both as to Number and Copy and Translations Several Books are â—oft that is certain does the Scripture tell us what they contâ—ined if not the Rule is impeâ—fect by T. H s Consequence The Copies are above Thirty in Number at least in which there are Thousands of different Readings the Translators greatly differ and have greatly câ—rrupted Aâ—so T. H is to look to prove the present Collection Canonical If he pleads the Testimony of â—od within his Cause is gone if Tradiâ—ion I ask how Is he assured the first Canon was rightly made The Council as either Faâ—â—ible or Infallible If the First what Assurance haâ— he If the last it grants Infallibiâ—ity since the Apostles 360. Years but begets the Quâ—stion How does T. H. know they were in the right And if in one Thing why not in alâ— But those â—ouncils conâ—radicted and none ever gave the Cataâ—ogue as now it is nor can T. H. give a Canon for it And if he cannot assure us that it is eâ—â—ct with the Origâ—nal free from Variation Corruption Mâ—s-translation c. as it is not he can never prove it the Rule as he eâ—â—eavour in Opposition to the Spirit for thaâ— iâ— alwayes pâ—in and peâ—fect But more of thiâ— in the Christâ—an Qâ—aker not to lessen Scrâ—pture but to conâ—ound such Caviâ—â—ers