to the soul as well as enlightens the Subject if this will do let him be quiet only we say He reveals no new object besides what is revealed in the Scripture we thought that he had said so too in this very Chapter S. 3. But now he would insinuate p. 21. which he dares not speak out that he would have new Truths or Objects besides what are revealed in the Scripture i. e. either expresly or consequentially or he saith nothing let him but reconcile his third and sixth Paragraph and we shall know where to have him As for the Comparison by which he doth illustrate or rather scandalize our Doctrine as if we acknowledged No other sight of the Truth but as one that sees England in a map but never saw the land or one that heares and reads of meat but never saw and tasted it it is altogether aliene we believe with the Apostle that all our sight here is in a glass and that darkly or aenigmatically 1. Cor. 13.12 and that we walk by faith and not by sight 2. Cor. 5.7 and yet we believe that here is a spiritual feeling tasting and satisfaction in all this Heb. 11.1 we are not therefore concerned in this peice of Raillery with which his 22nd page is stuff'd only we observe his spirit like that of the primitive Persecutors who clothed Christians in skins of beasts and then worried them Sect. 7. We dissalow not his Distribution of the knowledge of God into Discurssive Inâ—uitive but how poorly he improves it to his purpose let the Reader judge for if â—n the mean while our Intuitive Knowledge brings no new truths to us but what are contained in the Word of God he hurts not our Doctrine in the least That Intuitive as well as Discurssive Knowledge may be in diâ—erse Christians in different degrees we never â—uestioned but when he hath made all the â—plutter he can about his intuitive knowledge â—e can never prove it to be any other than â—hat inward Satisfaction which the Spirit of God affords to the minds of His people about â—he things that are contained in the Holy â—criptures by the particular and personal â—pplication of them to their hearts and let G. K. or any other of his friends if they can produce any once instance to evidence that ever they had any Intuitive Knowledge of one divine Truth whereof they had not a discursive knowledge before And how much he vilisies the Word of God by comparing it only to the Cup which revealeth the wine and the Spirit to the Wine in the Cup is plaine David had another Opinion of the word Ps 19.7 c. and Christ giveth it another Encomium Joh. 6.63 Sect. 8. He introduceth an Hypothesis If they say c. but who of us ever said so make a Castle in the Air and then discharge pot-Guns at it but we do say that all this makes nothing for his New Revelations although it affords glad Tidings to the souls of God's Children Had he any Fore-head left him he would never have here affirmed that we preach altogether an absent Christ we alwayes professed our selves to believe That Christ is really and properly present with His people in His Ordinances and Application of Himself to them only we say He is so spiritually not corporally and it is strange that such pretenders to spirit should deny a Reality and Property to it Sect. 9. What little Reason he hath to charge us with Nonsense will be seen in what hath been already said at the beginning of this Chapter to which we refer the Reader But how comes G. K. by so much modesty as to grant That there is both ordinary and extraordinary Revelation and that theirs is but ordinary and pretends not an equality to that of the Apostles either in degree or variety Some Quakers have been otherwise perswaded else had their Lucas never said If thou hast a mind to a Scripture thou maist write as good an one thy self But if he mean no other Revelation but what Christ did Joh. 5.25 we allow it only that differ'd more than in degree from what the Apostles had as such officers Reflections on Chapt. 3d. of the Supreame Judge Rule of Controversies in Religion Let us not wrangle before we know what it is for The Dispute here is about the Judge or Rule of Controversies in Religion and observe 1. That it is only about Matters of Religion 2. That Judg and Rule here intend one and the same thing viz. the Standard by which things are to be tryed and judged 3. It refers to Controversies i. e. where principles are in debate Now wee 'll suppose two kinds of Controversies one between men men one party and another each pretending to have truth on their side The other between a man himself having a debate in his own mind and not being as yet settled The Question then is What as a Rule is to set men down put an end to these Debates and let us go together as long as we can Sect. 1. He seems here to bid fair for an Agreement at least in the first sort of the Controversy i. e. between men men for we have only outwardly to deal one with another and he assures us that the Scripture is the Touchstone by which the Doctrine is to be tried and then surely it must judge and determine or what is the Advantage of Trying Only he spoils all by telling us They have a greater proof viz. the inward Testimony of the Holy Ghost We would only for the present ask him though that is not all we have to say to him whether this inward Testimony be greater as a rule to judge another by set him down and this because his words import that we are to judge by the Scripture whether the Testimony be from the Spirit or no for in what other way can the Spirit of the Prophets be subject to the Prophets else when a Quaker comes to tell us he hath a Revelation and this is a Testimony above the Scriptutes it would be impudence in us to search the Scripture if the thing revealed be so or no. What though the Spirit witnesseth in us that this is the Rule doth it hereby become no Rule or an inferior one how absurd Sect. 3. Here also he begins fair and would make us believe he is good natur'd for he gives the Scripture a preference to all other Writings and for that reason allows it to be a sufficient outward Standard and one would think that were enough to try Controversies between men and men and determine them though his Reason is but awk viz. Because Scripture-Writers had greater Measures of Wisdome c. so that he allows them a gradual difference of Revelation and not specifical which may be judged of by what hath been already said and what is it to us how or in what measures God revealed Himself extraordinarily to His Prophets who pretend to no such
upon us it hath therefore been the guise of Haereticks in all ages but possibly he will interpret himself more fully in the next Sect 3. Here therefore he furnisheth us with a Distinction which if he will give security that he will stand by make it appear that he intends no more we will try for an accommodation We have already told the world that we deny not new Revelations subjective and mediate i. e. that the Spirit of God blesseth the Use of means Reading Hearing c with His Influence opening the â—â—es of their minds and giving them a spiriâ—ual Illumination and if that be all he would â—ave he might have let us alone But when he comes to interpret himself â—e pleads for the Immediate extraordinary â—ay of Revelation of these things such as â—he Apostles had whose understandings Christ â—pened at once to understand the Scriptures â—ithout ordinary helps and upon whom the Holy Ghost came in cloven tongues c. which â—s far another thing and of which the Quakers can make no proof Sect. 4. The Fallacy of this Paragraph â—ndeed of the whole Chapter lies in his conâ—ounding Inspiration Revelation Illuminaâ—ion which ought warily to be distinguished That Christ by His Spirit doth give to His Children another sense of the Excellency sweetness and Glory of divine Truths than natural men have we believe and experience confirms but what is this to Inspiration Here therefore for once let us observe the main differences between Inspiration and Illumination Illumination is common to all Believers Inspiration is peculiar to some as Prophets Apostles c. as hath already been observed and proved Illumination ordinarily accompanies the diligent Use of the means Rom. 10.17 Inspirations usually came upoâ— men immediately and without using anâ— means for them Illumination becomes habitual Inspiration was transient off and on Illumination encreaseth gradually Inspirations were greater or lesser as God saw meet Finally Illumination is alwaies understood when as Inspirations sometimes are not understood by such as had them Dan. 12.8 His inference viz. that on suposal of Illlumination or mediate Revelation we musâ— needs grant it to be the same in kind witâ— what the Saints had of Old is dubious We ask him what saints he intends If he means ordinary Believers we grant it if inspired Prophets we deny it for such Inspirations differ specifically from ordinary Revelations and his spirit misinformed him when he cited Cant. 2.4 He brought me into his banqueting house again He brought me into his wine-cellar What again is there when it is the same Text and the same word diversly rendred His following Rhapsody in commendation of the Quakers silent Meetings we leave to themselves for our own parts we have no such way of the Communion of saints and yet let not any think that we deny the sweetness of retired Communion between God and the souls of His People in secret prayer meditaâ—ion c. his language therefore about it â—oucheth us not To what purpose he p. 16. concludes his long Section with a Comparison taken â—rom humane sciences which are taught only â—o such as have innate principles in them â—pon which Teachers build we know not â—f it be as it seems to prove that men have the seeds of all Divine Truths in their natural light and therefore the Revelations of God's Spirit are only the drawing out of these Principles into exercise by the meer improvement of their Reason and discovering only that the knowledge whereof they had in them seminally before it labours of two faults Falshood and Impertinency Falshood inasmuch as tho' the light of nature hath in it the Remains of many Theological notions and tho' man as a reasonable Creature is a Subject capable of receiving the impression of Revelations yet there are no seeds of Evangelical Truths in the hearts of men nor is there any witness antecedently in the Consciences of men to assert to the Truth of them the credit of them wholly depending upon divine Testimony Impertinency because it serv's not to prove new Inspirations but rather to prove them needless the meer Excitation of the light within bâ— his inward Teachings being on this princâ—ple sufficient we hope he will not deny 〈◊〉 manifest difference to be between Inspiration and Excitation nor is the Text he alledgeth Act. 17. any thing to his purposeâ— if he would prove new Revelation from it for the Apostle is there only endeavouring tâ— convince 'em that the light of Nature woulâ— if attended inform them of the vanity oâ— Idolatry of the Being of the eternal God oâ— the Incongruity of their manner of worshipping Him this in order to his preparing oâ— them to hearken to the Revelations of the Gospel Sect. 5. How arrogantly and falsly he chargeth Nonsense upon the Reverend Assembly for acknowledging Illumination and denying of New Revelation will be gathered from the premises and needs not to be here agen insisted on for indeed inward Illumination is not Revelation in the sense wherein we deny it nor do his Texts cited help him for we still deny that every one who is taught of God is inspired and he hath not proved it When he saith p 19. to be taught of God c. as the Prophets Apostles what is it but to be taught by Divine inward Revelation It it is a meer Sophism We consider the Prophets and Apostles either as such exâ—â—aordinary Officers or as they were Believâ—â—s for they had this double Capacity to â—y that all were or are taught as they were 〈◊〉 the former sense is utterly false as â—as bin â—roved to acknowledge them so in the latâ—er sense proves not such Revelations yea â—aul himself was not alwaies inspired but â—ometimes gave his Judgment as one illumiâ—ated 1. Cor. 7.40 Nor can he prove that â— Cor. 2.10 is applicable to all Believers â—n the same sense the Revelation or Inspiâ—ation belonged to the Apostles the Applicaâ—ion or discovery by Illumination belonged to all believers in their measures how ungroundedly therefore does he here assert that Paul holds forth that his Illumination was Revelation must he not so contradict himself in 1. Cor. 12.29 30. Nor can we altogether pass the scurrilous Title he puts on the Reverend Assembly calling them Faith-Makers who never pretended to any new Revelations of any Article of Faith more than is contained in Scripture and therefore have little Reason to be charged for making a new Faith But if it were enough for the Archangel to say to the Devil we content ourselves with so saying to one of his Emissaries The Lord rebuke thee Sect. 6. Here he makes a Clutter betweeâ— Subjective and Objective Illumination he haâ— no great matter to say against the Distinction it self but he finds fault with us for denying Objective Illumination but he mighâ— have spared his labour and heat for if hâ— will be patient we will not deny that neither i. e. That the Spirit of God reveals the Object
Possibility of Holiness Holiness is scarce sense and to acknowledge a capacity of Holiness but in some and yet but one page before to plead a possibility of Conversion in all would have been a Contradicting himself if it had not been G. K. Sect. 7. We have G. K. here speaking the Scripture fair The Scripture is a rich treasure and he is for Scripture Words and it is not safe to leave them and what is all this for why the Scripture indeed acknowledgeth all to be born in sin but what then Why the seed or principle of sin and Corruption is but it is not imputed till men join their Consent to it and actually obey it and it s as clear as midnight from Rom. 5.13 and thus he interprets it The time of Infancy is the time wherein there is no Law and therefore tho children are dead in law there is no imputation Excellently well expounded Paul is there proving that there was a law antecedent to the edition of the law of Moses and his argument is because there was sin in the world before and that it is imputed he might have found if he had read the following verse for there we find the sentence executed which necessarily presupposeth imputation nay the very calling it Sin is a charge or imputation and a supposition of a Law condeming men for it nor do his many Citations at all prove that none dye and finally perish for the first sin but for actual sins of their own which was now to be proved for they only intimate that all mens actions are liable to the Judgement and shall be tried and sentenced but deny not that man's state in Adam shall be so too Because the Scripture saith that men shall perish for actual sin doth it thence follow that men shall not so for original sin But the knack is they died in Adam and Christ by His death for all that died in Adam hath dischared all of that Imputation which is a perfectly Arminian principle and hath bin enough confuted by all that have written against them That therefore he concludes that none do suffer final Destruction but for Rejecting the Physitian makes the condition of Pagans better than that of Christians for these are certain to escape destruction being incapable of rejecting the Physitian who is never offered to them whereas Millions of those do reject Him and perish for it The Gospel then opens a door to man's Undoing which else he had been out of the danger of if Christ had but died for us and never told us of it His wild Assertion p. 91. That all the children of Adam and Noah have a foederal Holiness i. e. a seed of holiness in them i. e. a capacity of being made holy not to call the Coherence of it in question seems to contradict the Apostle who 1. Cor 7.14 assures us that Unbeleevers children are unclean i. e. not holy and he there treats directly about foederal holiness He concludes this Paragraph and Chapter with two Insinuations how true let any judge 1. That Grace is propagated by our natural parents how this is it may be he will tell us next time 2. That there is habitual Sanctification in all men by nature As to the first David was of another mind Psal 51.5 For the latter Paul was not acquainted with this principle Rom. 7.18 But he speaks as yet but in the clouds we shall have him a little more open in the next Chapter Reflections on Cap. 6. of Christ's dying for all c. In this Chapter he proceeds more particularly to urge and maintain the Doctrine of Vniversal Redemption and we might dismiss him for his Answer to the writitings of the Anti-Remonstrants but because many may not be advantaged with those discourses we shall make a few brief Remarks upon his Absurdities Sect. 1. His first and main plea is from the words of Scripture which express it in Universal terms viz All all men every man the world the whole world as for that of the Body Eph. 5.23 Paul himself there interprets it of the Church and its strange that the World and the Church should be of equal extent some of ours whom he calls the Adversaries of Truth have answered though it is not our whole Answer that by All is not meant all particulars i. e. Individuals but some of all sorts all the Elect. His Reply is that the word All must needs be as full and universal with respect to Christ's death and the benefit of it as it is with respect to Adam 's Fall and who denies it But it is not so in his sense except he will plead for universal Salvation as well as Redemption else the benefit is not parallel to the damage and so he indeed seems to plead by Citing 1. Tim. 4.10 for the proof of his Assertion but yet this he afterwards denies We are here to consider that Adam Christ are in Scripture made parallel in many Respects as Adam is a common Head so is Christ hence as Adam hath a natural seed so hath Christ a spiritual seed as Adam ruined all his seed so Christ Redeemed all His as Adam's seed are called the world because they comprize all the men and women coming into the world by natural Generation so Christ's Seed are called the world because they comprize all the men and women that belong to the world to come But then we must remember that Christ's Seed are a number selected out of the other and therefore though they are all because He loseth none of His Elect yet not all the Individuals of Adam's posterity for there are they of whom Christ saith They are none of my sheep Nor doth he interpret but pervert that in 2. Cor. 5.14 If one died for all then were all dead for the Apostles intention there is to prove that all God's Elect were dead because Christ died for them all The word All therefore doth not signifie some but all that come under that denomination Sect. 2. Whereas Christ Joh. 17.9 makes a Difference between His Redeemed and the world and saith I pray not for the world he would perswade us that world is there meant of final Impenitents or such as have finally rejected the meanes of Grace and with whom the Spirit hath ceased to strive But not to call over what hath been already offered Viz. That all have not the meanes of Grace and therefore cannot resist them it is plain that he excludes only the damned from Christ's prayer and hence he inferrs that Christ died only for their sins past Well then He died for those sins and prayed for those men he then owns His death and prayer to be lost and His Redemption void Did Christ dye to condemn men or to save ' em see Joh. 3.17 why then are they not saved for whom He came to dye Was He not able to draw them to Him or to save them that come to the uttermost That he saith Many are guilty of final
laws to the Almighty 2. That the Infants of Believers are under the visible meanes of Grace viz. the Covenant Baptisme and so are not the Heathen Isa 63.19 3. That Christ hath assured us that some Infants are saved Mat. 19.14 2. Sam. 12.23 but we have no assurance concerning Heathen or Pagans but the contrary Prov. 29.18 4. That the different capacity of Infants and grown persons in regard to the means requires a different manner of the dispensation of grace to the one and the other that therfore is asserted concerning all adult persons Rom. 10.14 For him therefore to assert that All honest elecâ— gentiles are saved in some other way is a meer Begging of principles that will never be conceded That moral Honesty iâ— a meritorious Cause either of Salvation or of any further Discoveries of saving grace to men is a Jesuitical principle That there are any Elect among Pagans who never had the gospel offered them is not only without Scripture-Warrant buâ— against its Testimony as hath been agen and agen made evident And his pleading for New Revelation of things not contained in Scripture because Infants are saved by another manner of Application to them than Adult persons is meerly precarious for it is the same grace which is revealed in Scripture which is reveled to them if G. K. has said true viz. That None are saved but by Jesus of Nazareth Sect. 7. How perversly doth he here state the Question viz. Whether any are or can be saved without the express knowledge of Christ crucified is one question and whether without all hearing of Christ outwardly preached is another We believe that God did not reveal Chrisâ— so clearly at first as afterwards nor had they all of them in former times the same distinct Conceptions about Christ which acâ— now made clear in the Gospel but we all believe that they had so much knowledge o a Saviour as led them to place their trust in Him for Salvation and these Truths werâ— extraordinarily revealed to some and gradually too But that All honest Gentiles who did by nature the things contained in the law had an express knowledge faith of Christ crucified as he asserts is not credible to us and when he bids us to disprove it he forgets all laws of disputation for Affirmantiâ— est probare it sufficeth for us to deny it say there is no Scripture to prove it till he produce it the Spirit 's working When Where He will is no evidence for it A gross Errour it is in him to say p. 110. That the knowledge faith of Christ belongs to the finishing work of Salvation but not universally to the beginnings of it for how shall they beleeve c. Rom. 10.14 15. his instances in Nathaniel Cornelius give him no â—elief it s his ignorance if not his malciousness to say that they were Vnbelievers when that testimony was given oâ— them Joh. 1.47 Act. 1.2 They had believed in a Christ to come tho' at present they knew not that He was come in the flesh till it was further revealed to them And it would do well to observe concerning the latter that though he had an Angel sent to him to direct him how he might be acquainted with that necessary Truth yet Peter must come and preach it to him and whereas he saith p. 112. that he had not faith in a crucified raised Christ but in God and in the Word of God in his heart We answer that Faith in the word of God in the heart without Christ is not Saving Act. 4.12 Nor is Faith in God without Christ so Joh. 14.6 â—nd he is greatly mistaken when he saith The mystery of Christ crucifyed was not firstly necessary to be known as not being fully preached It was preached from the Beginning Gen. 3.15 tho' more clearly in Gospel-times All the Rites and Ceremonies of Moses's Law preached Christ though the Veil is now taken off and the glory of the Truth is more manifest and resplendent he therefore concludes before he has prov'd his Assertion That the express knowledge of Christ crucified is not of absolute necessity especially he is very cautious where it hath not been preach'd to the beginning of a man's salvation though indispensibly necessary to the finishing of it And surely 1. Cor. 4 3. Heb. 12.2 stand much against him And his so ofteniterated Assertion That there are honest Gentiles still that have not Christ outwardly preached and yet dy in Salvation is nothing else but a magisterial Assertion without any one proof at all to command our Beleef What then shall we say to his new Doctrine pag. 1.15 That they may receive it after Death If he thinks to Father such a thing upon the Assembly of Divines Cap. 32. S. 1. Confes it 's a bold untruth for they say no such thing there but beleeve that in the instant of dying Believers are made perfect in holiness see Shorter Catechism Quest 37. we shall have a new Quakers purgatory erected ere long Christ revealed to men for Salvation after death who died ignorant of Him And now what Reason hath he to conclude this Section with a Triumph That he hath demonstrated from Scripture that men have been in a state of salvation that have not had the Mystery of Christ made known to them unless perverting of the Scripture may pass for Demonstration Sect. 8. But what needs more then would he out-do Demonstration Fain would he draw in Paul 1. Cor. 12.4 5 6. to speak of the different degrees and modes of God's revealing Himself before Christ under the Law and after Him under the Gospel Though we are satisfyed that Paul aims at another thing Viz. the distribution of gifts in the dayes oâ— the Gospel variously yet supposing the other what is this to mens knowing of Christ where the Law was not or to the Gentiles being illuminated with saving knowledge and where does he find three Baptisms in Scripture especially such as that the First only reveals the Father the second the Father and the Son the third the Three Persons or had he this mystery by Revelation if so he might have kept it to himself for he hath discharged us from believing him and wherein it serves to 〈…〉 â—e se◠〈◊〉 except it be to prove that man might 〈◊〉 the first be saved wâ—â—hout Châ—â—st â—nd 〈◊〉 will contradict his own professioâ— Sect. 9. Now at length after a deâ—l of â—â—dious waiting we are come to the thing which he hath all this whiâ—â— been maâ—â—ng way for and this will salve all the Phâ—nomina remove all doubts The Light within the Quakers God and Christ and Holy Ghost and Word and what not What particular thing this Light is they seem to be in the dark about very likely its beames are so languid that they are not Self-evidencing However something it is and it is in all men yea so great a thing that it may be blasphemed for he tells us It
is no less than real Blasphemy though we thank â—oâ—â— that he that hath made it blasphemy hath made it pardonable too to say that the Light in man is not sufficient to give him that knowledge of God that is necessary to Salvatiâ—â— But how can we plead Guilty or not guilty till we know what it is that we have offered such an affront to Let us therefore see if we may not find it out by some meanes and whether he hath not helpt us in the search He tell us the Assembly twise call it the lighâ— of â—â—â—â—â—e the Expression he can allow but not in our sense Thus far we suppose he will grant it in our sense viz. That the Light within is that Discovery of divine Truths which is made to men inwardly as they came into the world whereby they are able to know something of God without outward meanes to acquaint them or something within them which doth make these discoveries in them and this is not any special extraordinary Indulgence to some but it is common to all men belonging to Humanity Only herein we differ and are not to be reconciled We say That it is nothing but some remaines of the Law of nature in the Hearts of men Rom. 2.14 which they are capable by their Reasoning Faculty of improving for the making a Discovery of many Truths by which will suffice to leave men without excuse Rom. 1.20 he mistakes when he thinks we reckon it any distinct faculty the Understanding indeed and in that the Conscience is the subject of it but it is something there imprinted He on the other hand tells us that It is Christ Himself in the man and that it is he who quickens and sanctifies nature in all men and this he understands to be the Emphutos Logos in Jam. 1.21 which he fasly renders Innate word it properly signifies Engrafted as our translation renders it and is a Metaphor from a Siene that is grafted into another stock than at first it grew upon intimating that the word whatever it be is not natural to us but is ingraffed in us supernaturally and therefore is not put into the nature of all men and that this word is not Christ appears from vers 22. and those that follow it is a word that we are to be the Learners and Doers of it is a Law of Liberty that we are to be looking into which cannot be applied to Christ no not by any tolerable Catacresis There are Three things which we will here not only assert but also give Scripture proof for 1. That Christ is not the Light of nature in all men Is it the light in men that was born of a Virgin hanged on a tree buried in a grave all which he else-where confesseth of Christ Besides the Apostle expresly saith that men in their natural estate are without Christ Eph. 2.12 and that Except men be in the faith Christ is not in them 2. Cor. 13.5 and he tells us that All have not faith 2. Thes 3.2 2. That the Light of Nature left in fallen man is not sufficient to point him out the way to Happiness had not they the Light of Nature of whom it is said Deut. 29.4 that the Lord has not given them eyes to see to that day they to whom Christ gave that warning Luc. 11.35 Doth not the Apostle describe the natural estate by this Eph. 5.8 and what saies he 1. Cor. 2.14 but we have him confessing this amply in p 120. That man in his state of integrity had Light sufficient to have guided him to felicity we believe but all the Light of nature in fallen man will not objectively reveal the truths necessary to be known in order to salvation It had never told men of Christ and the Satisfaction that is made to the Law by his Righteousness 3. That God hath not any way imparted such a light universally to all men which the forecited Scriptures do prove Besides if this Light be connate with men what needed G. K. to make such a splutter about Immediate Revelations and if it be only by Revelations where will he find evidence that God hath so reveal'd Himself to all Sect. 10. That from the Law written in mens hearts he goes about to prove that man has such a sufficient light is weak for the Apostle speaks plain in Rom. 2.14 which we are turned to of the law given to man at the first which is become weak through the flesh and cannot give life Rom. 8.3 Gal. 3.21 And his pleading from our Concession That it is sufficient to make them inexcusable that it is therefore sufficient to make them excusable that frame their lives to it follows not The fall of man hath left him without strength to obey it Rom. 5.6 The Light of Nature discovers to man that Duty which he doth not and by reason of Sin cannot do which leaves him inexcusable Roâ— 1.18 19 20. but it is Christ only that can take off guilt and remove Condemnation and the light of nature neither discovers His person nor the way how to get pardon by Him His arguing pag. 121. That Because for mens not glorifying God He gave them up to a reprobate mind therefore they were not Reprobates from the beginning hath no face of a reason in it for besides that if we should take the word Reprobate in Rom. 1.28 in such a sense a man may be reprobated before he be left up to make the open discoveries of it the meaning of that place is that God left them to a mind that chose dross rather than Silver preferred wickedness before Holiness and so was a mind disapproved of God And when He tells us that The light the Gentiles had is a new gift and grace of God to them he saith nothing at all till he can prove that there is such a gift common to all men nor do all his alledged Scriptures speak one word that way inward convictions and warnings of wrath to come which we deny not to have been in heathen will not amount to it being only the Actings of a natural Conscience under legal Convictions which indeed shew to man some of his Misery but nothing of his Reâ—edy and that place on which he puts a peculiar Remark Luc. 12.20 God said thou fool c. is as little to his purpose as any for if we cannot tell how God said so to him yet it is enough that He did it by awakening of his Conscience nay that he did it Providentially and what 's this to a sufficient Light telling men how they may be saved it is a meer Wheadling and not Arguing It is therefore impudence in him to assert pag. 122. That though God's Dispensations of grace be various and the Gospel Dispensations fine words be best yet whoever is faithful in any one of these is accepted of God and yet none is accepted but in Christ or for His sake and give no other proof for it but his
consideration of their being Members of the Church visible thus Paul delivered Hymeneus c. to satan 2. Profession as it is understood by the Assembly is not a meer verbal thing but practical too it containes in it an Orthodoxy in the principles professed and a Conversation framed thereto a professing in words a not-denying in works else men are not visible Christians but to be turned from 2. Tim. 3.5 and yet we believe that men may do all this and be close Hypocrites and that they may afterwards fall away G. K. himself confesseth and now let us trace him He infers that Notoriously-scandalous persons liars deceivers drunkards c. are qualified members of our Church but without reason if he should essay he would find is to reject him for some of the qualifications he mentions We acknowledge not such for professors and if any in our Churches afterward prove so we censure them And it is grosly untrue that Independents require no more than such a profession as he talks of to make them members of their church for they whom he calls Independents distinguish between the Church visible or Christianity at large Membership or Fellowship in a congregational Church and have not been wonâ— to be charged for their Laxness but rather Strictness in Admission Nor doth it arguâ— them of Hypocrisy or contradiction becausâ— they separated from another Church viz the Episcopal it being well known that they did it mainly because their terms of Communion were such as they could not in Conscience comply with tho' also their promiscuous Admission of all sorts of ignorant scandalous persons to the Lords Table added to the incitement as for the Presbiterian Churches we did not separate from them but have held Communion with them and have admitted their members to Communion with us although by reason of some points of Church Administration which they differ from them in in principle they thought they might without any just offence do so in practice too Sect. 2. How daringly doth he here assert that we find no such Church in all the Scripture owned to be the church of Christ that the outward form or profession of religion makes such when the whole New Testament acquaints us with no other if he keep to his subject viz. a visible Church For indeed it is nothing else but such a profession as we have described that can make them so nothing else can give them the visibility of a Church and how strangely do's he talk when he saies We nowhere find in scripture any society called â—he church of Christ that had nothing but the professon of the true religion who ever said â—hat they had nothing but so We say if â—he profession be right it s a making sincerity visible as far as may be but yet let us tell him there are such owned for Churches in which the major part were such as he mentions Sardis was so had a name to live was dead had but a few names Rev. 3.2 and Laâ—dicea was so vers 15. But the truth is he aequivocates about the word True If by a true Church he intends such as are united to Christ in truth sincerity we plead it not but the word also signifies that there is really such a thing and that there is really such a thing is visible there may be a true visible Church tho many in it are not of the true invisible Church Sect. 3. Men that talk of two things may thwart one another strangely but we thought he had been discoursing of the visible Church and if so then he is deceived when he saith that every member of Christ is a living member Christ hath said otherwise see Joh. 15.2 how in Christ but by profession their being fruitless proves them dead and they might be taken away which they could not be if they were not first in him and he did well to instance in the Church of Corinth 1. Cor. 3.6 there was the old Leaven in this Church which was to be purged out there were fearful divisions there were that would eat in the Idols Temples that horridly profaned the Lord's Table that denied the resurrection of the body c. Such a mixture there was in this Church yet see what a glorious Encomium Paul gives them on the account oâ— their being a visible Church cap. 1. begin His finding fault with us for using an Hour-glass to know how the time spends and a Bell to gather our Assemblies together orderly is worse than ridiculous That God's people should have their Meetings to worship GOD is undeniable to neglect it is a sin Heb. 10.25 as for his inward spiritual Bell which he calls the Gospel-bell ringing in their hearts serving for such a use it is a Fancy more fabulous than any thing in Aesop as if the Light-within were a Clock to tell the hour of the day Besides it is certain that God's people in all ages have had a known time of meeting and some civil sign to give notice that they might meet together as in one place so at one Time and he knows that we place no holiness in Bells yea the very Scripture which he abuseth to prove a Gospel bell is directly against him Psal 89.15 which intends the Silver Trumpets which God appointed for such an end as ancient modern interpreters agree yea the Quakers themselves give notice of their meetings Sect. 4. He makes The work of conversion wrought by the Spirit in the hearts of God's Elect to be the true gathering of a visible Church for of that he must speak or he is distracted and let any man of sense judge whether this be any gathering of a visible Church at all or whether this makes a man so much as a visible Christian it being a thing secret and that which no man knows but he in whom it is wrought As for his Banter here about new-made things it is but a second Disgorging of the vomit which he hath licked up after he had once before spewed it in p. 36. where he is animadverted upon once is too much Sect. 5. Here he agen confounds the mystical invisible Church which the visible and gives the encomiums proper to the one unadvisedly to the other which mistake led him to draw that blasphemous Inference p. 172. that the Religion which we profess is not the Religion of Jesus Christ and that in the foundation it self which is Jesus Christ hence we do without any breach of charity infer that G. K. bids the world to take notice that he utterly renounceth the religion we profess even in the very foundation of it which is JESUS CHRIST and of which he himself if we are not misinform'd once made no mean profession in the University of Aberdeen and say if Julian the Apostate did worse Sect. 6. He contradicts himself here in the same Paragraph at the beginning he saith that Christ is but one both in heaven and in us and before the end