unsound in thee and thy fellows to oppose the Light and Spirits imediate teachings and Kingdom within which both teacheth sufficiently and opens the Scriptures and leads into all Truth and to Scoff at the true sence-hereof though under the term Enthusiastick or Enthusiasm however ironically and reproachfully rendred by you which if that be dangerous and unfound then is divinely inspired unsound Is this good Doctrine For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in quo Deus est 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deus divine inspired Enthusiasmus an Inspiration it is the inspiration of the Almighty that gives understanding Is this dangerous No unless to the Priests to discover their ignorance And is not the Light Spirit Kingdom within communicated before the Scriptures are truly understood and opened What darkness and error hast thou here implyed and signified And doth not the Light and Spirit bring to the right use and end of the Scriptures which was given by inspiration Priest There is no man free from sin in this life c. Christ doth not totally subdue it in this life For that place 1 Joh. 3 of Christs being manifest to destroy the works of the devil if ye take it so may as well prove that Sathan shall not tempt a Child of God Aâ—sw This plainly enough shews thy confusion and ignorance of Christs manifestation and work and of his Vertue and Blood which destroyes the devils works cleanseth from all sin thorowly purgeth them that believe and follow him Secondly Thy Inference is gross and absurd To charge all with sin whom Sathan Tempts or to make his Tempting Gods Children a reason of their not having â—n totally subdued for Christ was Tempted yet sinned not for the Pâ—ince of darkness found nothing in him And he that abids in him sins not And we being made free from sin and become the Servants of God we have our fruit unto holiness Was not this the good end of Christs coming What sayes Antichrist Satan and his Agents and Sophisters to it Priest Neither doth these Scriptures 1 Joh. 3.6 Whoever is born of God sinneth not Or that ver 9. He that abids in him commits not sin and chap. 5.18 The evill one toucheth him not prove any thing c. Do they not prove any thing Sad Doctrine Is this divulg'd in the Kirk of Scotland Thus to oppose not onely Christs work but the words of plain Scripture and say they do not prove any thing when as they Viz. 1 Joh. 3.6 9. chap. 5.18 prove that Whoever is born of God sinneth not He that abids in Christ sins not The evil one toucheth him not Doth this prove nothing Doth not this equally reflect upon Christs Apostles as well as us And implicitly say they should have been silent and not so have pleaded Christs manifestation and the state of him that 's born of God against Sin Antichrist and Decievers whereas they John wrot to were plainly cautioned not to be decieved For he that doth righteousness is righteous even as he is righteous Priest It 's not the words of Scripture pickt out which explain the sence c. This is nothing but a silly and gross cavilling to insist upon bare words contrary to their sence Answ. Must we then go to the Priests for their sence contrary to plain Scripture where t is neither parable nor allegory who pick out and reject plain Scripture according to their own private imaginations and conceptions and yet other whiles in contradiction to themselves tell us the Scripture is the Rule Life is to be had in it and not communicated without it but yet such Scriptures as apparently contradict their gross and Antichristian Principles they can throw by and reject as proving nothing as this corrupt minded man hath Priest By this way a man may prove the grossest blasphemies as the Polythrites saying there are many Gods from 1 Cor. 8.5 yet in the next verse there is but one God c. Answ. First Not by our use of the Scriptures both fro maâ— right mind and for a good end namely against sin Secondly And if in the next verse after He that is born of God sinneth not thou hadst proved that he doth Sin in that he is Tempted thou hadst said somâ—hing to thy business of accusing all Gods Children with Sin term of life but herein the Scriptures own thee not Priest That 1 Joh. 3.6 9. is to be understood in a limitted sence namely that they do not continue in Sin wilfully and with delight without repentance Answ. That 's not Johns sence but thine which is as much as to say his was not true for do they continue in Sin and yet Sin not This is a contradiction or do tâ—ey continue in it and still repent of it Where 's then the fruits and effects of true repentance Or is there not a time of confessing repenting and time of forsaking Sin And casting off every weight and burthen and of being cleansed from all unrighteousness Priest They do not commit Sin with full consent without controuling of the motions The evil one toucheth them not to entangle them in such a way of sinning c. Answ. As much as to say they do commit Sin and the evil one doth touch them but thâ—y Sin not with full consent which is all one as to say John did not say true when he said Whoever is born of God sinneth not The wicked one toucheth him not c. he commits not Sin but we have ground to believe him before Sathans Messengers who thus have contended and disputed for his work Priest He is an Advocate for our Sins is meant of the Sins present and to come Answ. Not that Sin should allwayes remain in beliâ—vers but that they should be called and delivered out of it and become Gods Righteousness in him Priest His saying if we Sin implyeth as much as when we Sin Answ. Is this thy Learning thou hast boasted of Thus to pervert Scripture and the very plain sence of words as to make if we Sin as positive or absolute as when we Sin so if in other cases may as well be taken for when as if we say we have not sined we make him a liar is as much as when we say we have not sinned c. what an absurdity would this imply against the Apostles according to thy sence of him who but one impudent would not be ashamed thus grosly to abuse the Scriptures Which else where thou seemest to lay such great stress upon Priest We know in part is an imperfect degree of knowledge and so sinful Answ. As this intends the Apostle it s a false and erronious conclusion it s neâ—ther true morrally nor spiritually degrees vary not the property of the thing their knowledge they had by degrees was Gods gift to them and was spiritual from above an effect of Life and Truth which to say is sinful so accuseth the cause of it which is blasphemous and if the Apostles knowledg was sinful because in part
which gave them forth and to him whom they testify of to wit Christ by whom they are to be fulfilled unto the true believer that reads them in a right mind and Spirit Secondly But where having Life in them Viz. in the Scriptures is laid down as following believing This is an error depending upon the former and a contradiction to the Scripture that saith That believing ye might have Life through his name he doth not say in the Scriptures nor by searching them but through his name of whom they testify and those to whom these things were written that they might beleive that Jesus is the Christ c. and have Life through his name They were in some measure prepared by the Spirit or Light of Christ allready manifested to receive those things which tendâ—d to the furtherance of their Faith and confirmation of their Belief concerning Christ that they might have life through his name Pr Whoso holdeth this denieth them really and interpretatively Answ. Is this thy proof of thy false accusation against us of denying the Scriptures that we deny them interpretatively so then our denying the Priests Interpretations upon Scripture which are not Scripture must be deemed a denial of Scriptures as if they were either the same or of equall authority with Scripture or when they tell us of finding Life in the Scriptures we must take it for granâ—ed that they mean in their Interpretations upon them whereby in many things they contradict plain Scripture as hath been proved any times so however when they bid People search the Scriptures for Life Eternal in them they intend they should take their meanings along with them and believe as they say and so people must run into an implicite Faith if they take things on their Authority and Credit for by their meanings and Interpretations they can sit as Judges over Scriptures and tell people they must give the sence and reconcile them and over the Ligâ—t and Spirit within and tell them its but an Enthusiastick Fancy but who are not so Ignâ—ble as to receive a Belief or Faith from them on such a dark implicite and slender account as this of Priests But wait in the Light of Christ within for a right understanding of things that are Spiritual relating to Faith and Salvation Such find they have cause from the certain demonstration and testimony of the Spirit of Truth within to believe Christs Light and Spirit rather then the Priests meanings and private Interpretations wrestings and perverting of Scriptures Priest It is not about the expression of the Word of God that debate should be kept up if in a sound sence granted that they are called the Words of God Answ. So Then the Scriptures are granted to be words of God why then holdst thou debate against us but to shew thy cavilling Spirit For the Word was that from whence words and Scriptures procâ—eded and came to the Prophets and Messengers of God before they spoke the words to Write them Priest Ye deny that Faith cometh by hearing of the Scriptures which is the Word of God for that we receiving them by Faith are saved which is plainly asserted Joh. 5.39 Answ. We deny that Faith comes barely by hearing the Scriptures for if it did so come then all that hear or read Scriptures must have Faith and hear the Word but we see the contrary and Christ told the Jewes they could not understand what he said because they could not hear his words and yet they could hear Scriptures and him speak outwardly to them But this is a mistery hid from such as thou art and there were those whom the Word Preached did not profit bâ—cause it was not mixt with Faith in them Priest Your selves acknowledg that they are the words of God then this or that perticular saying is the Word of God seeing there is a singular where there is a plural Answ. But Singular and Plural differs and though there be a Singular included where there is a Plural is it therefore good Logick to say that Singular includes Plural or they are both one Or to saâ— that because there are Words of God in the Scriptures and where there are words in the Plural there must needs be a word in the Singular therefore these words are the Word and so are the Scriptures Is this thy Lâ—arning and Logick Surely thou art so far from knowing the Word which lives for ever and was before either the Scriptures or words in it were given out that thou art yet as one senceless and confounded in thy expressions and cavilling against â—ruth Priest The Scriptures in the Bible are called the Word of God Mark 7.13 Answ. This is a very general expression of the Scriptures in the Bible being the Word of God when they do not say so of themselves whereas all the Scriptures in the Bible are so far from terming themselves the Word of God in such an eminent expression that they cannot all be truely termed his Words there being in many places Recorded both words of Wicked men and Devils though the Historical part that relates these things be true as to the narration of them And they Mark 7.13 that made the word of God of none effect by their Tradition and rejected his Commandment did really act contrary to the Word within which Moses preached and against the Law of God without so that 's no proof of the Scriptures in the Bible being called the Word Priest That which maketh wise to Salvation or maketh the man of God perfect c. is inspired of God that is the Word of God which maketh wise profiteth 2 Tim. 3.15 Answ. Here again hast thou fallen short of proof of thy matter for where it is said All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God c. Is is added So it 's All Scripture given by inspiration But if that must be called the Word of God in thy sence then it may be read All the Word of God is given by Inspiration of God How will that sound and signify Or All the Word of God given by inspiration of God c. See thy ignorance and impertinency for though we grant that all Scripture given by Divine Inspiration is profitable to the man of God for the making Wise to Salvation but it is through Faith which words through Faith I find theâ— to have taken little notice of if any or of his being the man of God first that knows the profit of the Scriptures which are given by Inspiration that he may be Perfect which the Priests deny in denying Perfection and that he may be thorowly furnished And many things were written and directed to the Saints and not to the world c. But what thou concludest from hence doth not follow Priest Is there any Prophesie almost or Book of the Scripture but it calleth the things contained in them the Word of God Thus saith the Lord c. Answ. For as was hinted there are many things written in the Scripture
That good that I would do I do not if he had spoken to their capacity as weak he would have told them he had been under such a condition but he was delivered from it When Paul speaks of a condition wherein he was he does not say I am c. Ans. Paul did speak unto the Romans after the manner of men because of the infirmity of their flesh Rom. 6. He did also signify the several states which he had passed thorow as how it was with him before the Law came and how when it came and his warfare as also his deliverance so that I say again and still affirm that Paul could not be in all those states he mentions or represents to the Romans at one and the same time when he so writ as in the present time as thou very blindly hast asserted argued from hence and caviled against the truth of what I said and the most stress of what thou sayest for reason or proof against me is as much as a Child might say that has learned his Accidence Viz. that the present Tense is not the preterperfect Tense whereas if it must be taken for granted from thy feeble reason that Paul was in all those states at one and the same time then he was both carnal sold under sin and yet spiritual a faithful Apostle that could preach in the fullness of the Gospel as if carnal sold under sin and spiritual made free from the Law of sin and death by the Law of the Spirit of Life were both one but to be carnal sold under sin was miserable bondage not consistent with his Saintship and Spirituallity And when he said With me to will is present but how to perform that which is good I know not if that was his present condition then as thou arguest because spoke as in the present Tense Then what did Paul at that time in writing that Epistle Did he perform that which is good yea or nay If he did Then knew he what he did Or did he do he knew not what in it Surely thy Doctrine doth strangly misrepresent and wrong Paul that Servant of Christ and the Lords-Freeman who knew the Mysteries of Christ though sometimes he became as weak to the weak c. But if it should be objected as some vainly have done that there was an unregenerate part in Paul of which he speaks in those cases then this would make much of his Epistles to proced from an unregenerate or carnal part which were gross and contrary to their own Doctrine And to that saying if he had spoke to them as weak he would have told them he had bin under such a state but he was delivered from it to the very same purpose he did speak to them Rom. 7.5 For when we were in the flesh the motions of the sins which were by the Law did work in our members to bring forth fruit unto death but now we are delivered from the law that being dead wherein we were held that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter So that its plain he told them both of his captivity and of his deliverance speaking in the fore-part of the chapter plainly in several things with relation to what he was in the flesh in the time past and also how he was delivered and so both the body of sin and death and the law of sin he came to be delivered from by the law of the spirit of life in Christ through whom also he was more then a Conqueror Pr. How bold are you charging the present time for the by-past for which you have neither passage in that nor any other Scriptures the sence of the words being all along in the present time c. Answ. This is but like the former from ignorance both of the Scriptures and the Apostles states concluding them in all those staâ—es wherein they personated themselves either to represent what they had gone thorow or the condition of others to whom they wrot or spoke but from this mans Argument where Paul said Christ came into the world to save sinners of whom I am chiefest and the Apostle James with the same tongue bless we God curse we men these things ought not to be this being spoken in the present time when they writ from this mans Argument Paul was then the chiefest or greatest of sinners How was he then counted faithful and put into the Ministery Or was he the greatest or chiefest of sinners when faithful Then who are the least of sinners if the faithful such as are saved by Christ be the chief And was the Apostle James one that did curse men when he exhorted against it or what he said had relation to them or some of them to whom he writ And Pauls being the chiefest of sinners to his being injurious and a persecutor before converted or if the chiefest of sinners after conversion and counted faithful What was he before conversion Or if it was before Then did he not amend and become better when he came to be converted to receive Grace and Apostleship Pr. As for that by gone state before he was begotten Was he groaning under a body of death Was he giving thanks for victory through Jesus Christ Yet all these are knit together Secondly If ye say it was a state after he was begotten of God ye grant all that we affirm that a Believer ever after he is begotten of God is not free from Sin Answ. This still depends on thy former errors and absurdities against Paul for groaning under a body of death for deliverance or victory and giving thanks for victory through Jesus Christ are two differing states and not knit together as if they were one and the same condition How blindly and sottishly hast thou reasoned herein Secondly If we say it was a state after he was begotten Viz. that he was groaning for deliverance we do not grant therefore that a Believer ever after is not free from Sin as falsly and absurdly thou infeâ—rest upon us as if a Believer had no growth nor encrease in faith and victory after begotten of God which if it be thy belief according as thy words imply it is not ours for we know and believe a growing from strength to strength and a revelation of Gods Righteousness from Faith to Faith in the true Beleivers and that by Faith victory is obtained by degrees with such as are begotten and born of God whom the wicked one cannot touch and through Faith in the Power of God Everlasting Salvation comes to be attained to by them such as keep the Faith and hold fast the profession of it without wavering Pr. They do not so perfectly mortify as that there are no lusts in them otherwise it were to no purpose for Peter to exhort the believing Hebrews to abstain from their lusts Answ. Nay Herein thou hast erred and perverted and wronged Peters end and intention which is clearly against such as thou art
the Father the word and the spirit and those three are one Then we own what the Scriptures assert of the Deity oâ— the Father Word and the Spirit which are one this is no blasphemy no fancies as malitiously we are accused Except ye call all the words of Scriptures clearly confered together a cavilling Viz. touching three distinct Persons in the Deity c. Although the Scriptures do not in so many words make mention of the three Persons c. who are one God we disalow all Traditions or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture Then three dictinct Persons in the Deity distinct in the personal Subsistance are not the words of the Scriptures but a Tradition and why do you then alow of that which is not Scripture but that There are three that bear record in heaven and these three are one is Scripture The Apostles telleth that the Corinthians were to shew forth Christs death till he came again The Bread spoken of to them behoved to be this of outward Bread c. It behoved to be such a coming againe as was yet future and unaccomplished in the Corinthians time Were the Corinthians then to eat and drink outwardly after their time or so long after their deceases What absurdity and grosness is here Infants Baptism was approved by the Orthodox Church and the Renouned Teachers and Guides thereof and sound Father as Tertullian Ciprian Lactant Augustine Jerom Basil c. It s derived from the Church when pure We disallow all Traditions or any un-written Rule which is not Scripture whether they be under pretence of Revelation which Enthusiasts hold or Traditions as Papists in this agree Then Infants Baptisme not being Scripture but a popish Tradition is therefore to be disalowed of Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant as Abrahams were Circumcision was the Seal of the old Covenant and it was administered on Males onely page 35. Circumcision of the Males onely was in its time Commanded of God which is no proof of sprinkling Infants both Males and Females which was never cammanded of God pa. 38. The Fathers or Isralites who fell into gross sins professed the same Doctrine of Salvation to profess Christ is called a drinking of Chrâ—st c Abraham and his Seed under the old Covenant had the same Mediator which is Jesus Christ he was the same yester-day to them that he is to day to believers Their having the same Mediaâ—or Jesus Christ the same c. And drinking of Christ was more then to profess him or the Doctrine of Salvation And Did such fall into gross sins What fell they from if not from Grace Ye say thereis no express command for sprinkling of the Infants of believers pa. 36 But we disalow all Traditions or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture pa. 35. You ' have confest what I said that there is no express command for sprinkling Infants therefore in alowing of it you contradict your selves Though there be no express command yet it s of Divine Institution and Warrant if it be drawn by good consequence from the Scriptures Truths and Doctrines is to be tried by the Scriptures so far as can be found in the Scriptures page 29. Christ bid search the Scriptures they reveal the Misteries page 27. I deny any immediate teaching by God page 14. Although a great stress and necessity is laid upon the Scriptures and immediate teaching so confidently denied yet no Sprinkling Infants to be found or required in Scripture and whilst any imediate teaching is denied How is it of Divine Institution Surely Edward Jamisons consequence herein is not Divine who denies any immediate teaching pa. 37. If I had said it Viz. Infants Baptism brought them to the Church those places and many others do hold it as Gal. 3.27 it s the ordinary way of putting on Christ c. I said not that it did bring them into the Church but that it is a Seal of our entry into the Church page 26. sprinkling of water is enough to signify inward washing If it doth not bring into the Church it is but a signe of inward washing it s not a putting on Christ neither can the Scripture prove it when there is no Scripture for it and were the Scriptures deemed the ordinary way and means but now sprinkling Infants What ignorant and gross contradictions are these Ye say Baptisme doth not bring them into the Church it s a bold Sacrilegious usurpation in detracting from the words of the Book of God which shall be punished with all the curses of that Book Though there be no express command for sprinâ—ling Infants yet it s of Divine Institution if it be drawn by good consequence pa. 36. See what Curses these Priests have laid upon them that deny the Infants Baptisme their Scripturles Tradition to bring into the Church and are not they herein evidently Guilty of Sacrilegious usurpation and adding to the words of the Book of God by their false consequence Baptizing of Children or others a standing Ordinance of Christ which he hath appointed to continue to the end of the world Mat. 28. and ordinary means for Salvation Maâ— 16.16 There be no express commands for sprinkling Infants Act. 2.38 repent and be baptized Mark 16.16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved They to whom Repentance and Faith was preached were not Infants such as the Priests sprinkle of a few dayes old which is not the Baptisme that saveth but that of the Spirit or the answer of a good conscience is saving Page 37. That many Ministers baptize the Children of those who are prophane and drunkards and so not believers They that profess the Gospel though they be not sincere believers yet they are in this sence accounted belivers Page 85. The Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant to believers and their Seed that promise belongeth those to whom that promise That God would be their God and the God of their Seed should be baptized Viz. Infants who are in the Covenant with God Page 36. It seems these Priests can make believers at an easie rate whilst they can take the prophane drunkards for believers upon their professing the Gospel but surely God is not the God of the prophane and drunkards nor are they in Gods Covenant as true believers are but under Satans power and their taking it for granted that the sprinkling Infants is the Initial Seal of the Covenant is false and but a beging the question Those who are under the profession of the Gospel are to be reputed as in Covenant pa. 39. Unbelievers who have a profession and yet have not sincere faith c. are not Righteous nor Holy c. Then it is not the profession of the Gospel that makes them believers or in Covenant with God An Arminion and Popish Doctrine that believers may fall from Grace The Fathers many of them fell into gross sins as is cleared from the Histories of