to Contradict what he had delivered formerly Yet at length speaking of Infants he concludeth they all need that God be merciful unto them for Christ's sake and therein I agree with him but to different Ends For I distinguish between Mercy and Justice the not punishing Infants who have not sinned is a Fruit of his Justice the preserving them from sinning by his Divine Seed is a Fruit of his Mercy And thus I close this Section Sect. III. § 1 He begins his Sect. 3. with a Quotation out of Rector Corrected Printed Anno 1680. p. 22. thus By Christ his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World we understand both the Offering up of his Flesh as his dying for us upon the Cross and also his giving his Flesh to eat and his Blood to drink c. Which distinction I admit viz. that his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World had a twofold signification the one was Propitiatory a Dying for us upon the Cross as he hath it the other his giving his Flesh to eat was Spirit and Life and fed the Soul And herein we agree with him What he adds that he did not place all our Salvation upon the Light within excluding the Man Christ without c. but that he did lay a great weight upon iâ— is not the Matter in Controversie as he hath been often told We both lay a great weight upon Christ's outward coming and do not place all our Salvation upon the Light within exclusive thereof and also have not charged him with what he here seeks to purge himself from any otherwise than as argumentum ad hominem i. e. that we are no otherwise so than himself who hath with us formerly born Testimony to the sufficiency of the Light where the History hath not been revealed distinguishing as himself hath done between the necessity that Christ should come and suffer for all and of the Revelation of the History thereof where the means aâ—e not afforded its being indispensibly necessary to Salvation to such Before I take notice of the Citation he gives out of Rict Corr. p. 26. I shall observe what he saith to that passage of his ibid. p. 25. that by his Flesh and Blood â—ohn 6.50 51. Châ—ist meaneth ONLY Spirit and Life which he holds it needful to retract aâ—d correct as â—e saith yet assigns it as either a Typographical Error 〈◊〉 an Oversight in him for want of due Consideration That it was neither but a Judgment upon deliberation â—d that he hath abtruded a Falshood upon his Reader thus demonstrate first that the Matter in Dispute â—tween him and his Adversary would not be suppoâ—d to be Whether the words spoken by Christ were Spirit â—d Life or no. Christ had expresly affirmed it and â—e Rector doth not deny it and it were idle to suppose â—xcept he had been so presumptuous as to say so in â—idem verbis the Rector would alledge that when â—rist said they were Spirit and Life that he meant â—y were not Spirit and Life But whether they were 〈◊〉 so might admit of Dispute 2dly As Christ had 〈◊〉 It is the Spirit that quickneth the Flesh profiteth noâ—g so G. K. gives us those very words And to his â—ersaries objecting Spiritual Flesh cannot be broken nor â—itual Blood shed which relates to the Spiritual â—h and Blood only for the other might be broken and 〈◊〉 G. K. alledgeth the Scripture speaks of a broken â—it and the Holy Spirit 's being shed Whereas had not G. K. meant that it was only Spirit and Life this instance had been wholly remote and it had been enough to have said it related to both outward and inward Flesh and Blood and that the outward might very well be broken and shed To drive it yet more home I betake my self to his Citation out of p. 26. which shall give more fully than he hath done viz. Although the Saints do not eat the Visible Flesh of Christ he adds here to wit by the Bodily Mouth and drink his Visible Blood yet they partake of the Benefit and Vertue of both his Flesh and his Blood and the Substance of both doth remain which is his glorified Body in Heaven and the Vertue of which doth really extend unto thâ— Saints both in Heaven and on Earth by which they are Spiritually refreshed and nourished as with Meaâ— and Drink and thus we do not divide Christ herâ— G. K. stops with an c. but I go on nor his Fleâ— and Blood although a distinction there is betwiâ— that Flesh which he had from the beginning aâ— which the Saints fed on in all Ages from the begiâ—â—ing and that which he took upon him in the Virgiâ— Womb. From this latter which G. K. would haâ— concealed from us I observe he allowed of a distinctioâ— betwixt the Flesh and Blood Christ had from the bâ—â—ginning and that which he took upon him in the Viâ—â—gins Womb. Let him now tell us therefore what thâ— Flesh which Christ had from the beginning and whiâ— the Saints fed on in all Ages was besides Spirit aâ— Life Again as he gave us not this part of the Ciâ—â—tion which he could not stumble over without soâ— hurt to himself so to what he did give he foists 〈◊〉 the words so wit by the Bodily Mouth and iâ— proves it as an Evidence that the word ONLY was most an Oversight in him that he did not intend that Faithful did not partake of the unspeakable Benefit of Flesh and Blood that was outwardly broken and shed but his sense was they did not eat it with the Bodily Mouth but by Faith and that the Vertue conveyed may be said to be Spirit and Life i. e. had a spiritual sense and signification Aâ—sw What he said above of the Saints feeding could not be an eating visible Flesh either with bodily or spiritual Mouth seing it was a feeding common ro Saints in Heaven and on Earth too Nay the substance of the Flesh and Blood doth remain even according to him and what they feed on is not on the substance even of Christ's glorified Body in Heaven but of the Virtue which extends therefrom And what is this Virtue Is it not only Spirit and Life However seing he is so fond of his addition viz. by the Bodily Mouth I desire to be resolved in one thing as a Point of Philosophy Whether if that which be to be eaten be Bodily any thing but a Bodily Mouth can eat it and whether if the Mouth be not Bodily the Food can be said to be Bodily for that a Corporeal Substance a Substance which is not only Spirit and Life but also Bodily should be fed on by an Incorporeal Mouth is equally as inconceivable by me as that a Corporeal Mouth should seed on an incorporeal Substance If G. K. resolve me this fairly erit mihi magnus Apollo § 2 In p 26. of these Explications for now I trace him by Pages not by §'s he alledgeth for his having brought
the True Ministers and Members from the False but whether it be a remaining Gift to this day So that his varying the Terms from the present time to the time past is a meer Sophistical Shift who when he gives his former words hath it is when he makes his Inference hath it was Whose Sence formerly relating thereto is given Imm. Rev. p. 179 to 183. and p. 188 to 191. which T. E. hath laid before him in his Truth Defended p. 47 to 50. and G. K. hath not yet retracted He in p. 179. thus hath it Whereas they say The Tree may be known by its Fruits and it is so but by what are the Fruits known Two Men may be found doing the same outward Work which hath the same outward Appearance and yet the one a meer Hypocriâ—e the other a sincere Christian Then by what can their Works and Fruits be known These Worâ— which carry in them an appearance to be Good anâ— yet are not Good but dead Works empty withoâ—â— Life though they have a fair shew yet are they roâ—â—tenness within And p. 180. The Works having bâ— the Appearance they are also seen and discerned 〈◊〉 be such and being Evil they cast an evil Savour bâ— which in the Light which begets the discerning theâ— are felt and he can have no Union with them nâ—â— with the Tree on which they grow and this Maâ— discerneth in the Manifestation of the Light both hâ—â— own and his Neighbour's Works of what Nature theâ— are by the tasting and smelling of the Fruit the Treâ— is known And a little lower he adds Hereto I givâ— my Testimony that there is such a thing and I Dâ— WITNESS IT in my measure c. This shoâ— touch is enough to shew what the Man held formerlâ— and pretended to witness in his measure though noâ— being gone from the Light in which the discerning 〈◊〉 received and from that measure he then witnessed 〈◊〉 now wrangleth against it for he saith Whatever inward Sense or Discerning any may pretend 〈◊〉 have of another Man's Spirit being bad yet we find no waâ—â—rant from Scripture to receive an Accusation against anâ— far less a positive Judgment without plain evidence of Maâ—â—ter of Fact against them by credible Witnesses 1 Tim. 5 1â— Answ Accusation implies an Accuser and this respecâ— outward Conversation But what is this to the Instancâ— of a Man's Spirit being bad or to those outwarâ— Works which he said in the Citation above had thâ— same outward Appearance and yet the one might be meer Hypocrite the other a sincere Christian As he theâ— queried By what can their Works and Fruits be known Sâ— may I By what Evidence from without can they be coâ—â—victed when the Charge relates only to the Man's Spâ—â—rit being bad even when his Conversation is not acâ—cused For where Matter of Fact as without is objected the Evidence must be correspondent but where the Fruit and Taste is inward the Evidence and Demonstration is also inward But G. K. upon these false Premises labours to detect the ill Consequences of Mens being judged to be of a wrong Spirit only by the pretended discerning of Spirits Answ If it be only pretended not real this doth not destroy the Doctrine or render it unsound because abused by ill Men any more than pretending the Spirit is the Rule is an unsound Principle in it self because some pretend thereto and act contrary Again How came none of all this to be foreseen and fenced against by himself formerly when he gave Testimony and that even from his own Experience to such a Taste Savour and discerning of the Works that had the same outward Appearance yet the one good the other rotten within Why did he not thus even then distinguish between the Pretence and what was Real to make void the Judgment which is the Product of that Relish of that Dis-union if he thought Men with whom we can have no Vnion they are his own words above ought not to be judged to be of a bad Spirit or that we may not declare we have no Union with them He adds at the close And even to know Men by their Fruits is a Gift of the Spirit and proceedeth from a true Spiritual discerning that is given in some measure Vniversally to all the Faithful though they have not always such due use of it but they may be and are at times mistaken Answ If these Fruits be outward Fruits visibly evil or good Fruits that the very Wicked have a discerning of But if the Fruits be inward perceptible by the inward Senses the most extraordinary Endowments judgeth not without them By their Fruits ye shall know them even them who come in Sheeps clothing but are inwardly ravening Wolves said Christ to the very Apostles Matt. 7.15 16. i. e. Ye shall taste them ye shall savouâ— them ye shall see through the Sheeps clothing the outward Appearance to the inward ravening wolfish Nature That being the way by which alone the most experienced discern the inward State of any As well aâ— to assert formerly an infallible way of discerning thâ— true Ministers and Members from the false is given and now that there is not enough of it given to all the Faithful to keep them out of Mistakes shews how confused the Man is in his present Shiftings and Shufflings § 4 Whereas he had said Imm. Rev. p. 12. This Seed groweth up into a perfect substantial Birth which is Christ formed within the Body of Christ his Flesh and Blood which cometh down from Heaven and giveth Life unto Man which eateth it And it is called the Body and Flesh and Blood of Christ because his eternal Life and Spirit dwelleth in it immediately He here bids us Note By this perfect substantial Birth he did not mean as he now doth not any Substance NEWLY PRODVCED but only a vital Vnion of Substantial Principles formerly existing Answ A Substance then he allows it to be but not newly produced Was that the Matter in debate then Whether the Substance was newly produced or no or Whether it was a Substance or no Or is not this rather an empty Shift that he might seem to reconcile his former with his latter Writings without retracting either Had another committed such a Blunder he had like enough to have been one of the first that would have reflected on him But he now seems to forget what himself said Ex. Narr p. 24. when he undeservedly taunted at W. P. who had administred no occasion crying This is rare Logick and added You know there should be no term or thing of Importance in the Conclusion of any Syllogism or Argument but what should be in the Premises Let him therefore keep to his own Rule better or never pretend to correct others Logick For as is the Man's Cause so is his way of defending it In p. 4. he adds Whereas I did call that inward substantial Birth the Flesh and Blood of Christ I did so call it only by
a Metaphor or Allegory for with such Metaphors Allegories and figurative Speeches the Scripture aboundeth in treating of the Spiritual and Divine Refreshments and Enjoyments of the Saints as when they are called Bread Wine Milk c. Answ To this himself shall reply out of p. 14 15. of the same Book where having proved from several Scriptures adduced that the Spiritual discerning is held forth under the names of all the five Senses of Seeing Hearing Tasting Smelling Feeling or Handling he adds But saith the Natural Man such an one as G. K. is now become say I These are only but Metaphors and Figures and then replies Albeit these names be so yet that hinders not but the Spiritual Mysteries represented under them are real and SUBSTANTIAL things as really affecting the Spiritual Senses as the outward Things affect the Natural And indeed these Outward Things are but Figures of the Inward and Spiritual which as far exceed and transcend them in Life Glory Beauty and Excellency as a living Body doth the Shadow so that this whole visible World is but a Shadow in respect of the Spiritual and Inward Thus far G. K. formerly whereby it appears that he then ascribed the Shadow the Metaphor to the Outward the thing shadowed forth to the Inward Now he assigns on â—he contrary the Metaphor Allegory or Figure to the â—nward and the thing shadowed forth to the Outward â—nd yet he is not so Ingenuous as to own a Change in his Judgment but would render his meaning now and formerly the same Nor hath he here only asserted That the Seed was a Substance but also in his Way cast up p. 60. a Book printed Anno 1678 and as yet unretracted hath ranked the contrary Opinion among the great and woful Mistakes and Misconceptions of the Professors of Christianity who in his seventh Argument p. 64. thus hath it The Saints feel it in them as really to be a part or Particle of the very Substance of Heaven viz. Of that Spiritual and Invisible Heavens where the Saints live as they do feel the Body of their Outward Man to be a Part or Particle of the Substance of this Outward World And having described this Divine Birth to be not only a Substance but a composed Substance of Body and Spirit he plainly affirms p. 65. The Spirit is a measure of the Spirit or Soul of Christ the Heavenly Man But if he will not believe what himself said formerly nor yet retract his manifold Contradictions and Absurdities 't is to be hoped the unbyassed and considerate will see him in his proper Colours and that his Covering is but a Fig-leaf Garment But this Allegorical and Figurative Sense as he termeth it of Christ's Flesh and Blood he saith ought not to divert our Minds nor take off our Faith from Christ's Flesh without us c. Answ I readily grant it For the advantage of that Faith as Paul said of Circumcision of old to the Jews is much every way Rom. 3.1 2. Yet this excludeth not the Heathen to whom the History hath not been revealed and who are the Vncircumcision that keepeth the Righteousness of the Law Chap. 2. v. 26. from any Benefit thereby though not an equal This himself seemed sensible of when in his Light of Truth Triumphing printed Anno 1670 and not yet retracted he said As many have suffered Hurt through the Disobedience of the First Man to wit Adam who have not known expresly that ever such a Man was oâ— the manner of his Disobedience so why may not EVEN MANY receive Benefit through the Obeâ—dience of Christ in the outward who have not expresly known his outward Coming and Sufferings otherwise Adam's Disobedience were more effectual for Man's Destruction than the Obedience of Christ were for his Salvation His following Assertion that to believe in Christ as he gave his Body of Flesh outwardly to be broken for us and his Blood outwardly to be shed for the Remission of our Sins is the eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood as well as the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us and that this is clear from John 6.29 35 40 47 48. I must a little compare with what he hath said elsewhere In his Book entituled Rector Corrected Printed Anno 1680 a passage not yet retracted he blames his Adversary p. 19. for saying He would prove that the Flesh and Blood spoken of John 6. are not a spiritual invisible Substance retorting thus Then what must we infer from this Interpretation of thine but that we must eat visible Flesh and drink visible Blood But hear him further ibid. When the Capernaanites understood it of visible Flesh and Blood he told them He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me and I in him to signifie that it was an inward and invisible Eating of an inward invisible Substance whereof he did speak For proof of which he then quoted John 61 62 63. at large Again P. 21. he saith Christ's giving his Flesh for the Life of the World is more than to offer up his visible Flesh upon the Cross for he giveth his Flesh to eat and his Blood to drink whereas many that believe Historically that his visible Flesh was offered upon the Cross do not eat his Flesh and drink his Blood for they have not Life in them c. So that with G. K. one while eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood is an inward and invisible eating of an inward and invisible Substance and it is proved to be so out of John 6. and his Adversary branded with Capernaanitism for denying the Flesh and Blood there spoken of to be a spiritual invisible Substance Anon Christ spake there of a Belief in him as his Body of Flesh and Blood was broken and shed outwardly it is not Capernaanitism in him it seems so to assert though it was in the Rector and that very Scripture is referred to for proof that he did so and yet G. K. no Changeling the mean while if ye will believe him who not only acknowledgeth That the Flesh which he said they were to eat and his Blood they were to drink was that which he had before he descended Imm. Rev. p. 228. but also in the foregoing Page hath it That they did eat his Flesh and drink his Blood as TRULY and REALLY in measure before he came in that Body of Flesh which was born of the Virgin Mary as the Saints have done since Again p. 258. This Body of Christ of which we partake is NOT THAT which he took up when he came in the Flesh outwardly but that which he had from the beginning c. See also Way cast up p. 95. And thus referring my Reader to what may further occurr upon this subject when I come to my Sect. 3. § 1. I betake my self to his next Paragraph § 5 Upon his giving us § 5. a Quotation of Imm. Rev. p. 36 37. relating to Infallibility that As it relates to the Seed
is not builded on this Foundation Christ Jesus immediately revealed both in the whole Body and every Member thereof is not the true Church but a Synagogue of Satan a vile Harlot Mystery Babylon the Mother of Fornicators for the true Church is one in all Ages and hath ever had one Foundation Jesus Christ the same yesterday to day and for ever Note this must relate to his inward Appearance only for he had not taken Flesh of the Virgin from everlasting He proceeds to Query What was this Foundation of the Church of God before ever Scripture was writ c. Was not that before his outward Appearance in Flesh say I Was it not Jesus Christ the Word which was in the Beginning c. To which he answers It was even the Word which came from God himself and taught them immediately Again p. 105. to prove that Moses testifieth to this Foundation Christ revealed in Man he quotes Deut. 30. v. 11 to 16. which treats of the word nigh in the Mouth and Heart And p. 107. The Jews and People of Israel who lived in Moses's time and were SAVED he saith it was through Faith in this Word in this Prophet raised up IN them in their Hearts not AT A DISTANCE but nigh And this he calls Christ in them the Hope of Glory the Mystery hid from Ages and Generations but was EVER made manifest in the Saints Again p. 112. he shews that under the Name of Wisdom Solomon manifestly points at this Principle and Foundation Jesus Christ the Wisdom and Power of God Then asks p. 116. Where is this Wisdom to be found How are Men bewitched from the true Path where it appears and how were we bewitched by them seeking her without us And now I leave it to the Reader to judge what G. K. meant by saying Jesus Christ revealed in Man is the Foundation of the true Church and whether he hath not falsified his Sense formerly rather than he would retract what yet he dares not defend who hath done it premeditatedly most of these Quotations having been more than once laid before him in Print already and argued upon to which he gives the Go-by while he obtrudes such an Interpretation of his words formerly as these passages do directly oppugn and takes no notice of what we have alledged out of them What he next offers out of p. 243 to 247. he pretends as a proof that he did then own the Man Christ without us in Heaven as our Head and Foundation and object of our Faith Answ He speaks indeed there of the Man Christ who suffered in the Flesh at Jerusalem his being the Spring out of which all the living Streams flow into our Souls p. 245. and that he is to be prayed to p. 247. which none of us deny But the question being about the object of Faith and this Quotation therefore adduced by him to prove the Man Christ without us in Heaven is the Object of our Faith though that is not treated of in the Citation given I shall shew what G. K. spake of the Man Christ even as inwardly revealed Who p. 244. l. last calls him The hidden Man of the Heart whom Paul witnessed that he lived in him this he understood of Christ as Man saith G. K. Which shews he there spake of him as a Spiritual Man but the Body which the Jews Crucified he p. 245. calls That Temple in which the Fullness and Centre of Life did dwell And in his Way cast up a Book not yet retracted p. 102. he is yet more positive that It is not the outward Flesh and Blood that is the Man but the Soul or inward Man that dwelleth in the outward Flesh such as Christ was even from the beginning So that by this Position when he speaks of the Man Christ he must mean not the outward Flesh and Blood but the Soul or inward Man which was from the Beginning and in time suffered in Flesh whom Paul and the Saints witnessed in them as Man which he seemed to foresee when he tells us here Lest any should surmise that by Christ Jesus in all this large Citation I did mean the Light Within only and not the Man Christ Jesus without us I expresly mention the Man Christ Jesus without us p. 246. who is ascended c. Answ He then said even in behalf of us whom he hath since traduced as well as himself that We own Christ Jesus not only as God but as Man and that both inwardly and outwardly But the immediate Fellowship and Union with the Man Christ Jesus without us who is ascended c. We have saith he there through the measure of the Life of Jesus Christ as Man made manifest in us Thus he tells us the effect of the Faith wrought viz. Immediate Vnion of the Man Christ without us who is ascended is by the inward Manifestation of the Man Christ Then surely that Manifestation must be the Object of our Faith say I viz. That which being presented before us gives the Fellowship gives the Union within as ascended Yet so much Flourish doth he make upon this Quotation that he angrily suggests p. 10. It is abundantly sufficient to discover the Impudence of his late Adversaries who by perverting his words assert That he made the Light the alone Object of Faith which he saith he never did Answ What we have charged yea and proved upon him on this head he is neither so fair as to give nor sincere as to retract therefore I shall for the Readers Information repeat some of them For he not only saith Help in time of Need p. 66. The Object or thing which is ministred is Christ the living and eternal Word nigh in the Heart c. Again Imm. Rev. p. 132. agreeing with both Papists and Proâ—estants that God speaking in Men is the formal Object of Faith he p. 151. representeth the hidden Manna white stone and new name as the Object of his Knowledge that overcometh and saith none knows this Object but he Doth none know that Jesus is ascended but he â—hat overcometh seing none knows this Object but he But he goes on What is the Object but Jesus Christ himself not only revealing but revealed in the Soul c But also in his Book of Vni Grace p. 80. a Passage not yet retracted from what was said Rom. 10.14 and Psal 62.7 8.65.2 he infers If the Lord hath required them the Heathen and Kingdoms of the World to believe then Christ the Name of God the Object of Faith the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath been in some measure manifested and held forth unto them Whence I Query Whether he did not then make the Light Within the inward Manifestation of the Man Christ the ALONE Object to the Gentiles Or could that be the Object of theirs or of the Jews Faith which our Lord had not yet received of the Virgin which was not Conceived nor Born much less ascended And yet they had Faith and that Faith
which Christ Jesus was and is and in which he is now glorified in the Heavens that he is the Root and Vine not simply as the Word but as the Word incarnate and as dwelling in that most pure and wonderful Vessel that suffered at Jerusalem So that here he could distinguish between the Holy Manhood that dwelt in the Vessel and the Vessel in which it dwelt between that which was in time and created and that which was from the Beginning He tells us that T. E. hath argued in his late Book but where he saith not that if Christ be a Creature he is not God Then adds But all who have the sound Faith believe that Christ as Man is a Creature or created Being but as he is the eternal Word he is God and not a Creature whereupon he suggests we do not own Christ hath a Two-fold Nature essential to him the one Vncreated as God the other Created as Man Answ He slanders us for as we own a Two-fold Nature in Christ so we confound them not that which was created and that which was uncreated For we say as he himself said in the Citation given even now as he is the eternal Word he is God and not a Creature but that God was Born of the Virgin Mary and died we read not So that by distinguishing as G. K. once did between the Holy Temple which is united to the Godhead and in which the Godhead dwells bodily and the Word which is God and not appropriated to that Vessel what is only applicâ—â—ble to the Godhead we confound them not together which the asserting the Creature or what was createâ— to be God would do Nor doth he explain what I means by Christ as Man his being a Creature Doth 〈◊〉 mean the outward Flesh and Blood which Way cast 〈◊〉 p. 102. he saith is not the Man but the Soul or inward Man such as Christ was even from the Beginning Or doth he mean what he calls elsewhere the Vessel or Temple in which Christ Jesus now is For the Man doth shift and vary his tearms so often that it is hard to know whereto to hold him Else methinks he should not find fault with another's saying The Creature is not God The next Quarrel is at W. P. whom he cites not fairly although he saith W. P. expresly saith it in his Serious Apology p. 146. W. P's words are these He that laid down his Life and suffered his Body to be Crucified by the Jews without the Gates of Jerusalem is Christ the only Son of the most High God but that the outward Person which suffered was properly the Son of God we deny What G. K. gives is thus and as he saith expresly ' That Man or outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem is not properly the Son of God in which he is doubly injurious First in concealing that part where Testimony was born by W. P. that he who suffered was Christ the Son of the most High God 2ly In adding the word Man which was not there but only outward Person which besides the pretending to give the words expresly is so much the worse in him in as much as he hath distinguished between the Man Christ and the Vessel or Temple in which the Christ Jesus now is But these Tricks will do him no good but be a means further to detect and expose his Fraudulent dealing § 3 The next passage he gives is out of Rect. Corr. p. 27. Before he enters upon the Explication of his â—wn Sense now he vents an old Slander against G. W. not oftner brought by him than rejected and refuted â— such by T. E. of which G. K. takes no notice here viz. that he knew not in the least for how could he know that was not knowable but a malitious and false Charge â—hat G. Whitehead had put the Sense upon Heb. 9.28 in â—rejudice to Christ's coming without us to judge the World 〈◊〉 his glorified Person which since he hath found he saith Yet in p. 28. of these Explications after having alledged 〈◊〉 without proof that G. W. and other leading Men among â—he Quakers have by their printed Books led them into this â—oul Error he as if he were conscious to himself of â—ver-charging them adds although now he and some â—thers seem to own it that Christ will outwardly come again â—hough lest this Grant should seem too favourable to â—ch to whom he will not be Just he insinuates that if 〈◊〉 Scrutiny were made among them one by one few among â—hem in comparison would be found to own it in respect of â—e many that would deny it Thus instead of fairly conâ—ssing his own fault in traducing us undeservedly he â—eaps up False Accusations without proof and that â—e the Fruits of Prejudice and Enmity for which will â—e Bitterness to him in the end when Christ shall â—ome to Judge him except he unfeignedly repent He hath not spent so much time in venting groundâ—â—ss Calumnies at others but that he will make amends â—r it if that will do in being as short when he comes 〈◊〉 his own part He is convinced he saith p. 27. that â—e true Sense of those words Heb 9.28 is of Christ's outâ—ard Coming the second time in his glorified Body to judge â—e World but he shall not enlarge to give his Reasons at preâ—t why he so understands it nor to answer LARGELY â—e Reasons he gave in that Book for that would take up too â—ch time and it sufficeth that he retracts that Sense formerly given which he thinks is the more general sense Christian Expositors Answ One would think that froâ— the third Month 1695 to the tenth Month 1696. 〈◊〉 which this came out as I take it had been time enoâ— to have made his Work more compleat if not by 〈◊〉 consent he should have had eighteen or nineteen Montâ— longer to have done it in But I guess there was somâ—â—what else in the Wind he can better find time to cut oâ— new Work Summon us to his Court at Turners-Hâ—â— and bespatter us behind our Backs than cope wâ— those Reasons he offered in that Book for I am peâ—â—suaded they are too Mighty for him and that he woâ— not have given us this little if he could possibly haâ— avoided it with any Credit However I observe he 〈◊〉 modest all of a sudden that he will not averr all Châ—â—â—stian Expositors are of his Mind nay he doth but thiâ— it is the more general Sense of them which is preâ— fair for a Man that runs on at his rate and is not oveâ— much upon the guard in his Assertions And it is 〈◊〉 he will allow any to be Christian Expositors who aâ— not of his Mind Somewhat was the matter sure thâ—â— he is no more Positive nor Uncharitable Yet that he may not seem to have nothing to say 〈◊〉 himself though he will not cope with his former Reâ—â—sons he alledgeth that whereas it is said He will aâ—â—pear the second time without Sin