such a comming nor doe the Jewes beleeve in Christ and therefore it is abhorred of all Christians and Jewes So farre are they hath from embracing it Reply Sir looke backe into your Preface and there you tell us that this spirit was abroad in the world in the Apostles days which had indeed been otherwise but a lying spirit and that it continued in the Church neere about 300. yeares after Christ Yea you say plainly by this historical narration beloved in the Lord you may see that this doctrine is no new light revealed in this last age The more strange it is therefore in the very enterance of the controversie to heare you cry out so boldly against your owne confession What new Spirit is this certainly that cannot be new which was both taught and beleev'd on so long agoe Neither can we easily thinke it to be false seeing it was the faith not onely of a few but even of all that were then accounted right beleeving Christians as part of the Dialogue between Tripho the Jew and Justine Martyr the Christian commented on by Mr. Mede doth averre Which being set forth together with his commentaries on the Apocalyps you were not doubtlesse ignorant of it And yet you demand againe whether be such persons Jewes or Christians to which you subjoyne They oppose themselves unto all Jewes and Christians as if you would have your reader therefore conceive them to be nor Jewes nor Christians because they oppose both in some few particulars But your argument is too weak for who knows not that Christians are opposed by Christians and Jewes by Jewes and that as a Jew may oppose both Jewes and Christians and yet not cease to be a Jew so likewise a Christian may oppose both Jewes and Christians and yet be still a Christian True then it is that we oppose all that are Jewes by profession in confessing with all other Christians that Christ is come in the flesh and hereby sure we shew ourselves Christians And true likewise it is that we oppose all other Christians in confessing with these Jewes that Christ shall come as a King to reigne on earth and yet we doe not hereby shew our selves Jewes but the truer Christians because according to plaine and expresse Scripture we acknowledge embract for truth in both what both doe unjustly condemne and reject as a manifest-error in each other And should we doe otherwise we should obey men rather then God and whether we should doe well in that judge you Having cast us out of the Church of the Christians and Synagogue of the Jewes I meane having endeavored to bring us into contempt with both in telling them that we oppose them both Your next Querie is Whether doe they understand the differences twixt Jewes and Christians No doubt Sir but all of them have understanding as well as you and that some 〈◊〉 are not inferiour unto you how meane soever you esteeme them but yet there is no need that we rehearse here any more differences then that which you have already heard and doe now labour all you can to make the reader beleeve to be none at all For it was never yet heard you say that the Jewes doe beleeve that Christ Jesus shall come as a King And have you heard so from us we say indeed that the Jewes beleeve that Christ shall come as a King which no writer either Jewish or Christian hath hitherto denied but we say not that they beleeve that Christ Jesus shall come as a King For then they should beleeve Jesus to be the Christ as well as we which as yet they doe not and by this we may see that if you had not quite altered our meaning by adding the word Jesus and so confounded and obscur'd what wee have clearly and distinctly delivered you could have said nothing to what we say For you would have been asham'd I suppose to have uttered your assertion thus It was never yet heard that the Jewes doe beleeve that Christ shall come as a King which yet is all that we affirme But having thus made your selfe worke you goe on and tell us They said Away with him we will not have him to reigne over us True but this shews onely that the Jewes then denied Jesus to be the Christ that the Jewes now continuing in the same blindnes are guilty of the same transgression but it shewes not that either the ancient Jewes did not or that the modern doe not beleeve that Christ shall come as a King You goe on They say that the Messias shall come but they speake not of his comming twice or thrice looke all the Iewish Rabbies and aske them who are alive they will say but once Let them that deny it take this paines but what though they say the Messias is to come but once what will follow from hence surely this will follow that as long as they continue to beleeve so they cannot beleeve that Jesus shall come as a King because they know that he is already come But it wil not follow from hence that they doe not now beleeve that their Messias shall come as a King And thus notwithstanding your Magisteriall Querie your foisted assertion and ought else that you have said it is very evident that the conceit of Christ's comming to reigne is both Christian and Jewish Christian because Christians beleeve it as plainly reveal'd in Gods word although you account it no part of a Christians beliefe and Jewish because the Jewes beleeve that Christ shall so come although they beleeve not that he is already come And therefore it is neither abhorred of all Christians nor of any Jewes so far are they both from rejecting it Yea so well doe they agree in the truth of this particular That Christ shall come as a King although as yet they disagree about his person and consequently in all that the Gospel reveales to be already done by him Israel's Redemption 2. And yet wltih submission to impartial judgements be it spoken I finde not in the Scriptures more voices for the one then for the other and therefore doe verily beleeve that neither Tenet apart but both together doe make up the full and c Rom. 8.23 ch 11. v. 12.15 Eph. 1. v. 14. ch 4. v. 30. Rev. 10. v. 7. compleat mystery of our Redemption which by Gods gracious assistance I shall to his owne glory and our christian comfort clearely prove in the examination of the words now readunto you Mr Petrie's Answer 1. Who are these impartiall judgements on the one side are Christians and on the other are Jewes it may be he submitts unto Turks but the Turks beleeve that Christ is come and will not say that he will come againe These impartiall judgements then must be Heathens 2. If the Millenaries find not more voices for the one then for the other it is no marvel any who hath the jaundies finds every thing yellow And who have an ague find every meate and
presume you would too seeing it is not likely that they would have brought an exposition different from that which was commonly received by others and have given no reason for it or one no better then a why may we not think so 2. If you thinke that these places here quoted be diversly interpreted as your disjunctive conjunction OR intimates and yet say why may not this Kingdom be taken as the thiefe meant or as Christ meant or as Simeon meant any one may perceive that you are altogether unresolved what sense to take it in but had rather take it in any sense then that we take it in And if you thinke that all these places have but one meaning as the last words of this part of your answer imply you should have shewed us what it had been For in our Saviour's and Simeon's words the word Kingdom is not found And the words which you take to be equivalent with it are diversly expounded Paradise in our Saviour's words is interpreted to be Heaven And salvation and Glory in Simeon's song doe signify Salutis et gloriae authorem the authour of glory and the authour of salvation to wit Christ himselfe So that if the Kingdom in the Apostles Querie be expounded either of these two waies it is all one as if they had said Lord wilt thou at this time restore Heaven to Israel or Lord wilt thou at this time restore thy selfe to Israel And as for the Kingdom the theife spake of we thanke you for mentioning of it And doe willingly grant that the Apostles understood it as he did But how was that surely as all other Jewes did of a Kingdom on earth and not in Heaven For his words in the original are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when thou commest in thy kingdome that is in thy Kingly power as it is Mat. 16. verse 27 28. for by those words the theife could not meane his ascension into Heaven as it is comonly expounded seeing he was wholly ignorant of it And therefore it must needs follow that he understood it of an earthly Kingdom which all Jewes expected and as it seemes by the Apostles Querie all beleeving Jewes thought should suddenly appeare after his resurrection But because it was not to be so therefore it was that our Saviour promised the theife the present happinesse of his soule in Heaven where it should remaine in his presence until at his comming in his Kingdom of which he had spoken he should bring it with him to be reunited to his glorified body and so according to his request he should in his whole manhood be made partaker of his Master 's glorious reigne on earth 3 You must give us leave to thinke that no expositour doth deny it until either we can find or you or others shew us such a one But it follows not you say the Apostles thought so therfore it shall be so But this follows therefore we must beleeve the Apostles before Mr. Petrie or any others who thinke it shall not be so Yea and this follows the Apostles thought so and our Saviour who knew their meaning reprehended them not for misunderstanding it therefore it shall be so And whereas you say that the Apostles for a time beleeved not the calling of the Gentiles and referre these words for a time to the time after our Saviours ascension it is not so For doubtlesse from the very time in which our Saviour said unto them Goe teach all Nations Mat. 28.19 they did beleeve it although perhaps they might not thinke that they should have been cald so soone yea if the words of St. James Acts 15. verse 14. should be meant of the song of old Simeon as you doe say page 26. there is no doubt but they knew it from the time they first heard of that prophecy Neither doth the text you quote speake of the Apostles doubting of it but of other beleeving Jews And therefore you have shewed your selfe very bold with the Apostles mistooke the ground of your argument and denyed what afterwards you confesse And lastly when the Authour doth take the Apostles words in that sense which interpreters doe give unto them and shews by reasons first and Scriptures afterwards that the Apostles did not out of any carnal minde or misconceit of our Saviours Kingdom utter this Querie and when that Mr. Petrie doth neither flatly affirme or deny any sense of the Apostles words nor give a reason worth the naming much lesse reading or answering against any of these reasons albeit but childish as he saith will any reader thinke that Mr. Petrie will prove a better guide to him herein then this Authour doubtlesse no man taking a journey will choose him for a guide that is in doubt which way to goe and no good Christian will be lesse carefull in his way to Heaven To the Law then and to the Testimony to the plaine word of God this is the sure ground of thy faith and therefore sticke to it for if men speake not according to this it is because there is no truth in them Isa 8.20 Israel's Redemption First because the Authours of this demand were not babes either in yeares or understanding but the Apostles themselves men who had followed f Mat. 4. v. 19. our Saviour from the very time that he manifested himselfe to the world by preaching and miracles and suffered not so much as a parable to escape their knowledge Men to whom h Act. 1.3 be had sbewed himselfe alive after his passion by many infallible proofes being seene of them forty daies and speaking to them of the things pertaining to the Kingdom of God And yet that these men should now at their last conference with him be mistaken in a matter of such importance as this is which concerns the purpose of God touching the whole Nation of the Jewes is as I beleeve and as I thinke you will all say a thing altogether unlikely and and so it is too that all the Apostles should be of the same mind unlesse it had been a truth formerly taught and not as it is imagined an error then newly vented by them g Mat. 13. v. 36. Mar. 7.17 Mr. Petrie's Answer 1. It is unlikely they could be mistaken and therefore it is likely that they understood of the true Kingdom of Israel as Christ did 2. And neverthelesse seeing after the last conference they were mistaken in a matter of great evidence so many times foretold as the calling of the Gentiles it is not unlikely that before Christ's ascension they might been miscaried with that opinion of the Jewish Monarchy which was not a new opinion invented nor vented by the Apostles Reply 1. The question is not what Kingdom the Apostles meant in their Querie which Divines generally consent to be an earthly Kingdom But whether they did not erre in meaning thus So that this part of your answer having relation onely to what Kingdom they meant is nothing to the purpose and
say of what they had done and not the beholding of their pierced Saviour which the Prophet mentions as the onely occasion of their sorrow by whose mourning this Prophecie is to be fulfill'd And our Saviour himselfe also hath foretold Matth. 24. at the 30. ver that this mourning is to be fulfill'd at his next appearing his words are Then shall appeare the signe of the Sonne of man in Heaven and then shall all the Tribes of the earth mourne and they shall see the Sonne of man comming in the n Act. 1. v. 11. clouds of Heaven with power and great glory Whom then shall wee believe our Saviour and the Prophet or you For what though the Iewes which shall mourne for him so long after his suffering did not in their owne persons either pierce or see him pierced yet as Levi is said to pay tithes in the loynes of his Father Abraham so these are said to have done what their Fathers did and Mr. Brightman in his exposition of the 7. ver of the first chap. of the Rev. understands that too of the accomplishment of these words of Zech. which he expounds almost in the same termes as I have done pag. 16. 17. of his Rev. of the Apocalyps Israel's Redemption And what comparison is there betwixt the griefe of a few fearfull and scattered Disciples for a day or two and the solemne mourning of all Iudah and Jerusalem and that to every Famils apart and their wives apart As therefore this Prophecie doth concerne the Jewes onely and chiefly the Tribes that crucified their Saviour 〈◊〉 doubtlesse it shall then receive its accomplishment when God at their generall conversion Zech. 12. v. 10. shall poure upon them the Spirit of grace and supplications that so they may at once obtaine the forgivenesse of their sinnes and thus lament their forefathers malicious and cruell contrivance and their owne hereditary and wilfull approbation of the death of Christ who shall then descend unto them to restore their Kingdome and to reigne over all the earth as it is in the 14. chap. of the same Prophet at the 5. and 9. ver c. Mr. Petrie's Answer It is said ver 11. There shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem and ver 12. and the Land shall mourne every Family apart c. whereby is intimated a distinction of the mourning in respect of place and as they did mourne at Jerusalem publikely so we may easily conceive that these who had resorted at these publick Feasts unto Jerusalem did likewise mourne apart after their returning and were not contented with one dayes mourning all facts that are credible are not written And therefore this Prophecie doth concerne the Jewes but not onely seeing even the Gentiles may be said to have pierced his sides by their sinnes meritoriously and to looke on him by faith and mourne for their guiltinesse c. and chiefly the persons that crucified their Saviour So doubtlesse it is great impudence to affirme that the same Prophet chap. 14. 5. and 9. ver saith Christ shall descend unto the Jewes to restore their Kingdome for there is not one word of restoring nor of the Jewes Kingdome in these two verses Reply As in the preceding answer you have applied the accomplishment of Zech. words ch 12. ver 10. to the Jewes converted by St. Peters first Sermon so in this you endeavour to parallel their mourning with the great and solemne mourning so largely exprest in the following verses of the same Prophecie For it is said ver the 11. There shall be a great mourning in Jerusalem c. and ver 12. The Land shall mourne everie Familie apart c. whereby is intimated say you a distinction of the mourning in respect of place and as they did mourne at Jerusalem publickly so wee may easily conceive that these who had resorted at these publick Feasts unto Jerusalem did likewise mourne apart after their returning all facts that are very credible are not written And therefore on the contrary 〈◊〉 have written here what is not credible For is it credible that the mourning of 3000. is any way comparable to the solemne and universall mourning of all Judah and Jerusalem for Josiah 2 Chron. 35. ver 24 25. to which the mourning in this Prophecie is compated Or is it credible that any of these Jewes who resorted unto Jerusalem out of so many Countries as are rehearst Acts 2. ver 9 10 11. were of the Families of David and Nathan when as the Tribe of Judab wat not then carryed into captivitie by the Râ—mans And if they mourned after their returne into their severall Countries into Mesopotamia Cappadocia Pontus and Asia c. this was out of the Land whereas the mourning the Prophet foreshewes is to be fulfill'd onely in Ierusalem and in the land of Iudea and it is to be observed by men and their wives apart and what circumstance is there in the 2. chap. of the Acts from which you can gather that any of the 3000. you speake of were women yea it is to be observ'd by all the Families of the Jewes that remaine that is that are living at the accomplishment of this Prophecie and therefore the repentance of these 3000. could not possibly be the mourning here spoken of by the Prophet You say next that this Prophecie doth concerne the Jewes and chiefly the persons that crucified their Saviour but not onely seeing even the Gentiles c. And did you not tell us even now that you give no other interpretation of the Prophecies then is chiefly intended How then can you say here that this Prophecie is chiefly meant of the Jewes in a proper sense and yet meant also of the Gentiles in a figurative sense is not this to give another sense besides that which is chiefly intended and doe you thinke that both these senses are intended if so how shall we know certainly which is chiefly intended Surely to affirme that the Holy Ghost doth intend a double sense in these Prophecies is no small errour seeing it makes God to have as it were a heart and a heart to be I say as a double dealer who speakes one thing and meanes another and shall we conceit thus of God God forbid Yea let God be true and every man a lyar as truth then is but one so doubtlesse there can be but one true sense of any place in the Scripture but one sense intended by God and thefore to make the Scripture Janus-like to looke two wayes is from man and not from God and it is the readiest way that I know to foment division amongst men But there is yet the heaviest charge behinde for it is great impudence you say to affirme that Zech. chap. 14. ver 5. and 9. saith Christ shall descend unto the Jewes to restore their Kindome for there is not one word of restoring or of the Jewes Kingdome in these two verses And yet his descending and reigning over all the earth is
Prophecies speake onely of the Gentiles and how then doe they expound in any degree the Prophecies of the Iewes in Ezek. Hosea or any other Prophet Israel's Redemption And therefore I should rather take it to be brought in by St. Paul as a testimony establishing the freenesse of Gods election which is the Doctrine he there maintaines and doth in these words as he did before in the example of Jacob and Esau give an instance of it touching the Israelites whom God had for a long time rejected and would yet again receive and that because as the Potter hath power over the clay to make of the same lump one vessel to honour and another to dishonour so He hath mercy on whom he will and whom he will he hardneth Mr. Petrie's Answer 1. This subterfuge will not serve for he saith in the preceding page that the Prophecie Hosea 1. is meant of the Jewes and if that be true which I have proved to be false it is not meant of the Israelites 2. The Apostle verse 24. is speaking expressely of the Faithfull not of the Jewes onely but also of the Gentiles and hither to be useth that testimony of Hosea 3. Of the Gentiles doth he expone the same testimonies in other texts where he is not speaking of election nor of the freenesse thereof as 2. Cor. 6.16 Reply 1. In the preceding page I have said that the Prophecie Hos 1. is meaâ—â— onely of the Jewes and if that be true say you it is not meant of the Israelites O rare criticisme O profound subâ—letie Jewes are not Israelites and Israelites are not Jewes But surely if it be meant of the one it must needs be meant of the other for they are both the names of the same people and the Apostle calls them by both in the 9. chap. of the Rom. ver 4. and 24. Yea they are indifferently usâ—d one for the other in the last part of your former Answer for as the Israelites by Idolatry became like unto the Gentiles so say you the Gentiles receiving the Gospel are Jewes So readie are you to censure that for an errour in another which you allow for a truth when spoken by your selfe 2. 'T is true that the Apostle speakes expressely of the Jewes and Gentiles in the 24. verse but it is not true that hitherto he useth the testimony of Hosea for the 24. ver hath relation onely to the preceding verse and not to that which followeth so that it is as if the Apostle had said And that he might make knowne the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy even on us as on a part of them which he had afore prepared unto glory and hath now called not of the Jewes onely but also of the Gentiles For the 19 20 21 22 23 and 24. verses are brought in by way of digression to satisfie such as might from the discourse of the freenesse of Gods election be readie to dispute against his Justice and at the 25. v. he returnes againe to confirme this Doctrine partly by other Scriptures in Hosea and Isaiah which shew Gods eternall purpose in passing by some and receiving others of the Israelites and partly by Gods receiving the Gentiles even in the time of his passing by the Israelites as the 30 31 32 and 33. verses doe manifest 3. You said before that the words alledg'd in the 2 Cor. 6. chap. at the 16. ver I will dwell in them and I will be their God and they shall be my people were taken out of Ezek. chap. 37. ver 27. and are they now taken out of Hosea too but what is it that you will not say to make a shew of answering and to puzzle the unlearned Reader for the Apostle neither mentions Ezek. nor Hos and t is most likely that he tooke these words out of the 26. chap. of Levit. at the 13. ver as I have said and he makes no other use of them but to shew that the faithfull Corinthians were become Gods people and therefore should no longer yoke themselves with the servants of Belial either in the observance of their Idolatrous Feasts and pastimes or in any extraordinary familiarity Israel's Redemption And this the 14. verse seemes to confirme where it is said Isaiab also crieth concerning Israel For what makes the copulative also here if the Apostle understood not the former Prophecie of Israel as well as this And yet in what sense soever you please to take it here I hope it is already sufficiently declared that it concernes the Israelites onely in the Prophet which is as much as the subject of my discourse requires Mr. Petrie's Answer The copulative knitteth the testimonies and shewes that they must both be understood of these people ver 24. this is yet more cleared by the 30. ver what shall we say then that the Gentiles who followed not after righteousnesse have attained to righteousnesse but Israel who followed after the Law of righteousnesse hath not attained There it is manifest that he speaks of the Gentiles attaining to righteousnesse and of Israel not attaining it and neverthelesse the opposition is not simply of the two people but of their seeking righteousnesse two contrary wayes to wit by Faith and by workes of the Law And now ye see it sufficiently declar'd that these Prophecies doe not belong unto the Jewes or Israelites onely Reply The copulative knitteth the testimonies and shewes that the testimonies of Hosea must be understood of the Israelites as well as the testimonies of Isaiah and if these are not properly to be understood why saith the Apostle Isaiah also cryeth concerning Israel and not rather concerning the Gentiles or the Nations And this is fully cleared by the 30. and 31. verses where the Gentiles and Israel are plainly oppos'd and that that passage is inferr'd upon the former Prophecies of Hosea and Isaiah these words in the 30. verse immediately following them What shall we say then doe clearely shew and therefore those Prophecies must needs be understood of the Jewes onely And if this be not enough consider also what the Apostle saith in the 3. and 4. verses of the same chapter I could wish saith he that myselfe were accursed from Christ for my Brethren my kinsmen according to the flesh who are Israelites where as he shewes his great heavinesse for them because they were cast off so in the following dispute about the freenesse of Gods election he alledgeth those Scriptures which doe foreshew their passing by and receiving againe and therefore if we know who those Israelites are that are St. Paul's brethren according to the flesh we need not doubt what Israelites Hosea and Isaiah speake of Israel's Redemption There is yet in the 3. ch of Hosea at the 4. v. one more materiall Argument for the Jewes deliverance The children of Israel saith he shall abide many dayes without a King without a Prince without a sacrifice and without an image and without an Ephod and without
say next that all interpreters from the beginning of the Christian Church except a few Millenaries till this time have exponed these texts not of the Jews only but of the Christian Church which is as if you had said that all interpreters doe write for you besides those that write against you And doe you not remember what you said before even of the scriptures themselves that number prevaileth not why then doe you urge us now with the greater number of interpreters I am sure you will not be content that the triall of the truth shall be put to most voices betwixt Protestants and Papists if not why would you have it so here But were the prophers thus interpreted from the beginning of the Christian Church no it could not be for we have learned from the Dialogue betwixt Tripho and Justine Martyr that then no other Christians weree steemed orthodoxe but those of the Millenarian faith therefore it may easily be conceived how the Prophets were expounded in those days and that they then began to interpret the scriptures mystically when errour had taken hold not onely on the most but the most powerfull patrons in the Church also on such who by their place and authority could force the truth either wholly to hide it selfe or to be knowne no otherwise then by the ignominious name of an heresie which was not till some ages after the Apostles dayes as you your self confesse in your Preface But you say that these Interpreters have written according to their consciences And so our Saviour told the Disciples that they should be put out of the Synagogues yea that they should be kild by such as should thinke that they did God service Joh. 16.2 and St. Paul was mov'd by his conscience to raise a very tyrannous persecution against the Saints as he confesseth Acts 26.9 I verily thought with my selfe saith he that I ought to doe many things contrary to the Name of Jesus of Nazareth which thing also I did c. and so although he went not against his conscience yet he went against the truth for his conscience was a blind and ignorant conscience as he saith in the 1 Tim. 1.13 but I obtained mercy because I did it ignorantly in unbeleefe And such consciences no doubt were the consciences of many if not of all of these Interpreters in relation to the truth in controversie who had they first made diligent search after this truth of the Jewes generall conversion and returne and of our Saviours personall reigne on earth they would never I presome have spent their time and paines in such Expositions But these Interpreters are dead for the most part long agoe and there is scarcely one of them now living and we appeale not to the dead but to the living who are or may be acquainted with what is said on both sides and therefore cannot passe sentence against us out of ignorance although they may out of prejudice and so not according to conscience And who ever heard till now that it is a vaine bragge to appeale to mens consciences in giving their judgement about a truth certainely he that feares to appeale unto this Judge doth feare the uprightnesse of his owne cause for what saith Saint Paul in the 2 Cor. chap. 4. ver 2. We have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty not walking in craftinesse nor handling the Word of God deceitfully but by manifestation of the truth commending our selves to every mans conscience in the sight of God Israel's Redemption Which Prophecies as they doe containe many evident and unanswerable arguments for a future restauration of Israel I meane a restauration yet to come so they have such correspondence with that of Isaiah in his 59. ch at the 20. ver and with that of Amos in his 9 ch at the 11. ver both which Prophecies are alledged by the Apostles St. James t Act. 15.16 and St. Paul u Rom. 11.27.26 for the conversion of the Jewes after the fulnesse of the Gentiles is come in that is after all those of the Gentiles which are appointed to be cal'd before Christs comming againe be converted or rather perhaps when the fulnesse of the Gentiles shall come in that is when the time shall come in which not a part as now but all the Gentiles that are left shall through the wonderfull deliverance of the Jewes together with them serve the Lord that seeing these are not yet fulfill'd neither can any of the other betwixt which and that of Amos there is not any materiall difference and no other betwixt them and that of Isaiah then there is betwixt a Comment and the Text betwixt a briefe intimation and large explication of one and the same thing Mr. Petrie's Answer We grant that these Prophesies containe evident arguments for a future restauration of Israel if you will acknowledge that which is before clearely proved by the testimony of the Apostles and by experience that is that they are begun already in part we grant also that they have such correspondencie with these Texts of Esay and Amos and many mee too but we deny 1. Your manner of restauration and we hold that the spirituall restauration is more glorious for the honour of God and weal of Israel 2. We deny that the Apostle James alledgeth the prophecy of Amos for such a conversion of the Jewes for he speakes expresly of visiting the Gentiles to take out of them a people unto his name Act. 15.14 and of this visiting he expones the words of Amos and the other Prophets he speaks not onely of Amos but saith generally and to this agree the words of the Prophets 3. We deny that the Apostle Paul alledgeth the prophecy of Esay to that pretended purpose for he saith not and then all Israel shall be saved but and so all Israel shall be saved he shewes no order and distance in time but makes a conclusion out of the former words where he saith Blindnesse in part is hapned to Israel untill the fulnesse of the Gentiles shall come in and then he inferreth And so all Israel shall be saved and therefore the couclusion must be exponed according to the preceding words that is all Israel are the called of Israel and of the Gentiles there is a distinction twixt Israel and all Israel and all Israel is more then Israel seeing it includes likewise the faithfull Gentiles and in this signification the proofe following in the cited testimony must necessarily be understood and not of all calling of the Jewes after the full calling of the Gentiles and far lesse of that calling which he saith shall perhaps be not in part but of all the Gentiles that shall be left Yea these conjectures destroy one another for if the calling of the Jewes shall be after the fulnesse of the calling of the Gentiles then all the Gentiles that are left cannot be called through the wonderfull deliverance of the Jewes And this last conjecture destroyeth a maine tenet of
the man that uttered this selfe-conceited query Whether doe they understand the differences betwixt Jewes and Christians pag. 1. This is one untruth to wit That I have granted that Christ hath executed his Kingly office The next is That I have said that he sits on a Throne in beaven as man which though it be in it selfe a truth for Christ himselfe saith of himselfe and am set downe with my Father in his Throne Rev. 3. ver 21. Yet it is not true that I have said these words for thus I have said that the place where he now sits is the Fathers Throne a Throne in which he hath no proper interest but as God These are your misreports of what I have idsa to which we may adde your affirming that it hath not been proved that the Prophets have spoken of a Kingdome on earth when as the Prophecies which I have alledged for it are so plame that you left them as one afraid to behold their evidence Now your contradictions follow for having also falsely affirmed that this Proposition Christ sits on a Throne in heaven as man is one thing about which we disagree you thus descant on it If these words as man be understood according to the Logicall acceptation it may be granted Thus farre you affirme that according to the Logicall acceptation Christ fits on a Throne in heaven as man and yet you subjoyne presently for what agreeth unto any man as man belongeth unto all men and indeed it belongeth not unto all men to sit on the throne of Majesty Whereby you deny that according to the Logicall acceptation Christ fits on a throne in heaven as man It so lowes and neverthelesse Christ sits at the right hand of the Father as God-Man or Mediatour Here likewise you affirme that Christ sits on a Throne in heaven as man though not onely as man but as God too and yet you immediately subjoyne and in this sense we deny this assertion to wit that Christ sits on a Throne in heaven as man as it seemes this Author takes it But surely this Author haâ—h not spoken the words and yet he will not deny that Christ doth sit there as man 〈◊〉 he should deny what Christ himselfe and the Apostles have said neither will he affirme that Christ sits there any otherwise then as God-man or Mediatâ—ur although his sitting doth properly belong unto him as man onely But you have said that Christ both sits and fits not there in a logicall acception and that be sits there as God-man and yet not as man Thus contrary are you to your selfe and withall as contrary to the truth in misapplying your distinction For whereas you say It may be granted that Christ sits on a throne in heaven as man if these words be understood according to the logicall acceptation of them it is notoriously false for the words as man in this sense doe imply somewhat essentially belonging unto man which cannot be affirmed of Christs sitting on a Throne in heaven to wit that it doth essentially belong unto his humane nature for then it should inseparately belong unto him and to all other men besides this then you should have deny'd and affirm'd onely that he sits there as such a man as Mediatour But you out of your great skill in Logique in which you will allow me no insight have first affirmed both members of your distinction and presently deny'd both such a subtile or rather simple discourse have you extracted out of your logicall principle And that the Reader may see how unseasonable and unreasonable you have alledged this Philosophicall rule as well as the Propheticall and Apostolicall writings and revelations he must know that this maxime what agreeth unto any man as man belongeth unto all men is generally true onely of meere man in opposition to other creatures and not of our Saviour who is both God and man and so as well distinguisht by his humane properties from his divine nature and by his essentiall attributes from other creatures as by his mediatory offices from other men Wherefore it followes not that what belongs unto Christ as man belongs unto all men because we usually say that all that belongs to Christ as man which belongs not to him as God which appertaines to his humane and not unto his divine nature Whether it be proper to him as man in opposition to other creatures as to laugh and to be borne of a woman or common also to other creatures as to be hungry and thirsty to eate and drinke to walke to weepe to groane c. Or proper to him as such a man as Mediâ—tour in opposition to other men As to be borne of a Virgine to dye for our sinnes to rise againe for our justification to sit on a Throne in heaven and to reigne visibly on earth overall Nations These and such like we say doe not in propriety of speech belong unto Christ as God but as man because they are the properties of his humane nature As on the contrary it belongs unto him as God and not as man to be equall with the Father to be infiâ—â—ite omnipotent omniscient â—c And thus much for your answer in grosse which is indeed a very grosse answer You goe on to catch at particulars which you thus alledge The 1. Particular That the Jewes are yet to receive a Kingdome in which they shall hold them captives whose captives they are Mr. Petrie's Answer Here a little change of a little word makes a great difference for the text saith whose captives they were And now they say they are The Prophet is speaking by name of the Assyrians whose Monarchy is now destroyed and the Interpreters shew the accomplishment of that Prophecy according to the Propheâ—s meaning but that prophecy speakes not of them whose captives the Jewes now are neither know we whose captives they are seeing they live as free Subjects wheresoever they live Reply It is true that the text saith whose captives they were but seeing the deliverance which the Prophecy foreshewes hath not been hitherto accomplished we may truely say whose captives they are and therefore there is no such great difference in this change as you pretend For unlesse you can prove that the whole Nation of the Jewes whose redemption this Prophecy doth concerne as these words for the Lord will have mercy upon Jacob and will yet chuse Israel doe shew Vnlesse I say you can prove that the whole Nation that all the Tribes have been set in their owne Land and at their returne thither have brought strangers with them whom they have possessed there for servants and handmaids and have ruled there over their oppressours over those who formerly ruled over them which I am sure you cannot doe it is not very materiall whether we say whose captives they were or whose captives they are And if there be any difference in the change it is onely because the Prophets expression doth seeme to point to that last generation of
if the bodies shall be like unto his glorious body they shall not live an earthly life nor dye againe He quoteth 1 Thes 3.13 and chap. 4.14 c. but the first hath nothing of a second resurrection and chap. 4.14 saith We shall be ever with the Lord to wit in another manner then now now by grace and then in glory If we shall ever be with the Lord then we shall not dye againe and rise againe unlesse the Lord dye too which I thinke they will not say Lastly he cites Ezek. 37.12.13 which words certainely are allegoricall and shew the returne of the Jewes from their captivity notwithstanding the extâ—eamity of their misery and after these words be takes occâ—sion to speake of the spirituall Kingdome of the Church as is said before but neither first nor last speaket the Propher of a first and second resurâ—ection at or about the last day And so in all these testimonies nothing is to this purpose of the concurring of the Iewish Monarchy with the first resurrection Reply The first resurrection of bodies importeth a second you say True but of other bodies not of the same bodies And I dare say that the conceite touching the dying againâ— of them that rise to rise the second time is your proper fancy Sure I am it is very slanderously imputed to Mr. Archer who holds indeed that the raised Saints shall be made governonrs over our Saviours Kingdom in his absence but not that they shall again be subject unto death And when I say here that these Sainte shall have a shore in Christs Kingdome and be his assistants in it And elsewhere pag. 121. that the time of these Saints abode with Christ shall never have an end yea when you your selfe confesse that the testimonies on the margine doe prove the contrary doe I hold their dying againe thinke you or doe I not Certainely as we know not to what end the Saints should rise if they were to dye againe so we know that the bodies of the dead though they be sowne in corruption shall be raised in incorruption even the bodies of the greatest sinners who could not other wise live in eternall torments and therefore it is manifest that you have here laid aâ—errour of your owne devising to another mans charge partly that you might not seeme to take so much paines and confuce nothing and partly to disgrace the truth we hold touching the order of the resurrection For as it is true that the dead shall rise but once so it is true also that they shall not rise all at once And this the propheâ—ies of Saint John Rev. 20.4 c. and Saint Paul in 1 Cor. 15.22 23 24. doe so plainely reveale that we may well wonder why so many learned Interpreters should rather strive to extinguish these greater lights then by the brightnesse of them to discover the true meaning not onely of such texts as concerne the resurrection but of those also that concerne the prerogatives and priviledges which they who have part in the first resurrection are to enjoy on earth And now let us see how you deale with the texts on the margine of which the first that you alledge though not the first that is quoted is in Luke 20.35 36. But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtaine that world and the resurrection from the dead neither marry nor are given in marriage neither doe they dye any more for they are equallanto the Angels and are the children of God being the children of the resurrection This is the text and your inferences these If they can dye no more and he equall unto the Angels then they shall not rise at a sâ—eond resuâ—rection And who saith that they shall neither shall they live anâ—earthly life say you And so say we if by an earthly life you meane a siâ—full life or a mortall life but if you meane only that they shall not live on earth we deny your sequelli For our Saviour lived on earth before his death and yet he lived not anearthly that is a sinfull life And he lived many dayes on earth after his resurrection in which he she wed himselfe openly to his Disciples who did eat and drinke with him after he rose from the dead Acts 10.42 And yet his glory was not diminished by it nor he made lower then the Angels or the more liable unto mortality for it Neither shall the raised Saints be lesse equall unto the Angels in their immunity from copulation in their holinesse of conversation or in the immortality of their bodies while they abide on earth then when they are carried into the presence of God himselfe And seeing our Saviour saith here But they that shall be accounted worthy to ob tame 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that age or that time of the world and the resurrection from the dead doth he not plainely point out unto us a time in which none of the dead shall be raised but such as shall be accounted worthy of some peculiar happinesse which is kept in store for them against that time Certainly if we compare these words of our Saviour with the 14 and 15 verses of the 14. ch of Luke we cannot think otherwise For what is the resurrection which none but they that are accounted worthy shall obtaine but the resurrection of the just spoken of chap. 14. ver 14 which you passe over in silence and what did our Saviour meane when he said not onely thou shalt be recompensed at the resurrection but at the resurrection of the just Did he not meane that he should receive a recompence at that time when all the just then dead and none but the just should be raised And what is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 here That age or that time of the world but the time of the Kingdome of God spoken of chap. 14. ver 15 And what is this Kingdome of God of which it is said that he is blessed which shall eate bread in it but the Kingdome which God shall set up under Christ as man when he brings him againe into the world For whereas it is recorded chap. 14. that when one that sat at meate with our Saviour heard him tell the Pharisee who bad him to eate bread at his house that if he made a feast he should not call his rich kindred friends and neighbours but the maimed the blinde and them that could not recompence him and that he should be recompenced at the resurrection of the just whereas I say it is written that when one heard these things he said unto our Saviour Blessed is he that shall eate bread in the Kingdome of God What correspondence could there be betwixt these words and our Saviours touching the recompencing of the charitable at the resurrection of the just unlesse the Kingdome of God here spoken of should contemporate with the resurrection of the just unlesse the just I say should rise to receive their recompence when this Kingdome of God shall
which I find the doctrine of my text to be encompast I here give over the pursuit of these meditations and commend to as many as wish well to themselves and to Zion these instructions following Mr. Petrie's Answer If you be throughly satisfied why have you so oft used the words of probability conjectures my conceit it may be thus or thus these words smell not of satisfaction nor of that certaine knowledge and stedfastnesse which is required 2 Pet. 3.17 As for that double jury it may evidently appeare that both Prophets and Apostles are contrary to such fancies It may be the Vses of this doctrine are commendable yet if wrong premisses be powerfull to perswade Neverthelesse heare all Reply We bring not onely probable but demonstrative and necessary arguments also to justifie the truth of our tenet And besides all this we alledge for it a large Catalogue of cleare and invincible prophecies from which as we receive full satisfaction our selves so that we might shunne the guilt of keeping backe any part of the counsell of God Acts 20.27 we hold them out to others too that as many as God hath appointed by our Ministery to call to the knowledge of this truth may be partakers of the like satisfaction with us And what though I have in some places used the word probable and once the word conjecture and somtimes said in my conceit shall that therefore of which I so speake be suspected for an untruth I pray tell me why my conceit may not be as agreeable to the truth as any others or why without any disadvantage to the truth I may not use such expressions as the pen-men of holy writ have done How much was Saint Peter beside the truth when in answer to our Saviours demand touching the two creditours Luke 7.42 43. Tell me which of them will love him most he said I suppose he to whom he forgave most Certainely nothing at all for Christ replyed Thou hast rightly judged Or what was Saint Pauls counsell the worse for saying I suppose that this is good for the present distresse 1 Cor. 7.26 Or will you say that it was doubtfull whether Saint Paul had received the Holy Ghost because ver 20. he saith And I thinke also that I have the Spirit of God Or can you imagine that the Apostles tooke not the best course for the pacifying of the difference that was risen in the Church of Antioch betwixt the Gentiles and some beleeving Iewes about circumcision Acts 15. because they wrote in this forme It seemeth good unto us ver 25. and againe ver 28. It seemeth good unto the Holy Ghost and to us If you dare not say or once imagine that these words doe argue unstedfastnesse or uncertaine knowledge in these then how can that be true which you say here that words equivalent with these smell not of satisfaction And if these words argue uncertaine knowledge and unstedfastnesse in us then what do they argue in you who even in the second and third pages have your may be me thinks why may we not thinke thus or thus it is likely it is not unlikely Certainely as to cavill at words and phrases shewes the weakenesse of your cause so to blame another for that which you your self may as well be blamed doth shew the malice of your mind Israel's Redemption First to praise God for his abundant mercy who through the fall of the Iewes hath brought salvation unto us Gentiles that together with them we might partake of the roote and fatnesse of their Olive tree Mr. Petrie's Answer Whether is it more to the praise of Gods mercy and bountifulnesse that the godly shall come againe from the heavens to abide so long on the earth or to abide in that glory of heaven for ever and ever certainly the gift of the greater and uninterrupted glory deserveth the greater praise and while they were on earth they professed themselves to be strangers from home and pilgrimes on their journey towards their home Heb. 11.13 and shall they come as pilgrimes againe Reply Doubtlesse God is not to be taught by us what reward is most to the praise of his mercy and bountifulnesse towards the godly But we are to account that reward most to the praise of his bountifulnesse and mercy towards them which we find in his word to be appointed unto them And we doe conceive that the glory of the Saints after their reunion to their bodies will be greater because more perfect though they live on earth then the glory of their soules is now without the fellowship of their glorified bodies And we know not what should interrupt their glory on earth when as Christ himselfe on whom the Angels shall visibly attend shall be on earth with them and God himselfe also may here manifest his glory unto them in what measure hee pleaseth And though Abraham and some other of the Patriarches to whom God had promised the possession of the Land of Canaan did in their corruptible estate here live as strangers and pilgrimes in that land yet they shall not after their resurrection possesse it as strangers and pilgrimes but as heires and coheires with Christ And whereas you say That it is a greater gift of God that the godly should abide in that glory of heaven for ever and ever then to come againe from the heavens to abide on earth You seeme to me to imagine that the godly shall never againe come from thence as your denying also pag. 54. that Christ shall bring all the Saints with him doth testifie against you which conceit is contrary to all the scriptures that affirme the resurrection and the Saints appearing with Christ And I pray where doe you finde in scripture that the Saints shall after their resurrection live in a place separate from the earth Certainely they are after the last judgement to be translated into the new Jerusalem and that City is then to descend to the new earth as we read Rev. 21.2 3. And lastly what affinity hath ought that you have said here with the use you answer what I shall we not praise God for his mercy in making us partakers of the fatnesse of the Jewes Olive tree while we are here although it were a greater happinesse for us to be ever in heaven after our departure then to come againe to the earth Israel's Redemption Secondly to beware of unbeliefe which was the cause that the Jewes were broken off from their Olive And if God spared not the naturall branches much lesse will he spare us if by faith we continue not in his goodnesse Mr. Petrie's Answer It is greater unbeliefe to despise the revealed truth of God then to despise the fancies of men as this Monarchy is proved to be Reply 'T is true that it is greater unbeliefe to despise the revealed truth of God then to despise the fancies of men And it is as true that it is a sinne but little inferiour to that against the Holy Ghost wilfully