the Quakers Ergo not the Doctrine of the Quakers The Ten Commands are the Moral Laws Ergo not the Moral Law Is not that well Argued without Logick But what are not whole Sermons and Predictions of the Prophets and Christs whole Doctrine called by them and him the Word of the Lord and his Word as may be seen in almost all our preceeding Arguments Is not the whole Doctrine of the Scriptures called a Word of Prophecy 2 Pet. 1.19 20. Does not Paul call the whole Revealed Truths of God Sound Doctrine and the Doctrine of God 1 Tim. 1.10 and 6.1 Tit. 1.9 and 2.10 And must the Prophets and Apostles Christ and the Holy Ghost learn from the Quakers how their Doctrine should be named will they not allow the Scriptures their Essential Attribute which these gives them that they are the Word of God or albeit we very well know that there are many more words in the Scripture than one why will they not admit of that common Unity here which is not denied in other common Natures and a denomination conformable By these things the objection is both answered and overthrown Again they insinuate another Argument whereby they indeavour to wrest the Title of the Word of God from the Scriptures The Scriptures say they signifies Writings Therefore they mean to infer they are not the Word of God Ans It doth equally follow therefore they are not the Words of God as the Word of God as all may see and so the consequent of their present Argument contradicts the Antecedent of their former Objection and so we may see that the Quakers are but Jugling while they yield the Scriptures the Title of Gods Words whereof their present Argument again indeavours to rob them Secondly our Question is not what the word Scripture signifies but what the Doctrine written in the Scriptures is which the signification of that Word cannot Define But lastly for clear satisfaction I distinguish their Consequent thus viz. That because the Scriptures signifies Writings therefore as to the external Form and Mode which they have from the Writers Pen they are not the Word of God be it so therefore as to their enunciat Doctrine or Sentence they are not the Word of God it follows not For in the Scripture there are two things to be considered viz their Doctrine and Sentence which is the Word of God and their external Form or Mode which they have from the Pen of the Writer which gives the Word of God the Denomination of Written and therefore we call the Scriptures The Written Word Because we said that the Quakers by indeavouring to Wrest the Title of the Word of God from the Scriptures do strike at their Divine Authority therefore I shall here give a short Touch of the Notes and Arguments whereby the Scriptures are clearly Demonstrated to be from God and of Divine Inspiration such as are the Majesty of the Style of the Scriptures above all other Writings under great simplicity of words the Divine purity of the Doctrine savoring wholly of holiness and vertue The Divine Scope of the Doctrine which is to give all glory to God The Efficacy of the Doctrine in the hearts of men above all other Doctrines in the world The Infallible accomplishment of the Predictions therein contained as they were fore-told the wonderful consent of all the parts thereof being written by so many diverse Pen-men so far distant from one another both in time and place which was never to be seen in any other Book in the World especially of divers mens Writing The manifold Miracles whereby God hath born Witness thereunto which Satan could never so much as Counterfeit The irreconcilable hatred of Satan and the World against it more than against all other Books in the World The firm stability thereof and the special hand of God which appears in the preserving and transmitting thereof from Age to Age notwithstanding all the Malice of Satan and the Devices of him and his wicked Instruments against it The miserable end of the greatest Persecutors and enemies thereof The Testimony of the many Martyrs Sealing their Witness thereunto with their Blood and the Testimony of the whole Church thereunto which have a piece of weight in their own Order The Scriptures cannot be from evil men or Angels seeing they shew their villany denounce their Doom which Galls them and prescribe a Method of living quite contrary to their Inclination Nor can good Angels or Men be their Author for upon the one hand they durst not have so usurped upon God as to feign his Authority and Commission to so many Laws Ordinances Threatnings and Promises of their own meer Invention and upon the other hand if they had done it they could not have been good Angels or Men Therefore the Scriptures must be from God himself These things put together which I have but named are sufficient to convince that the Scriptures are from God and of Divine Authority and are enough irresistibly to stop the Mouths of all Contradicters Notwithstanding for the full assurance and through persuasion of Faith that the Scriptures are from God and of Divine Inspiration the Spirit is requisite by his effectual Working in with and by the same upon our hearts and minds to Seal up their Divine Authority unto us And yet this makes nothing in the least for the Quakers who Teach to follow a Spirit abstracted and separated from the Scriptures For beside that we shall shew at the following Query that the Spirit speaking in the Scriptures most straitly Ties us to the Scriptures as our Supreme Rule in all matters of Faith It is also evident that it is in with and by the Word of God written in the Scriptures that the Spirit manifests himself unto and in our hearts both in the enlightning of our Minds and renewing of our Wills and Affections as these Scriptures following Witness Psal 19.7.8 Joh. 4.41 Joh. 14.26 Joh. 15.3 Joh. 17.20 Act. 17.11.12 Rom. 15.4 Ephes 6.17 Heb. 4.12 Isai 59.21 These and a Thousand places more that I might instance do manifestly convince that the written Word of God is an Organ and Instrument in the Spirits hand whereby he Enlightens Renews and Sanctifies us more and more himself also as a Physical Cause does immediately influencing the Effect seeing all Effects must depend immediately upon God if they include any real being But say the Quakers whether or not is all that is written from Genesis to Revelation a Rule for your Faith and Manners Ans No doubt we are bound to believe all Scripture Enunciation from the beginning to the end seeing all of it was given by Inspiration of God and written for our Learning 2 Tim. 3.16 2 Pet. 1.21 Luke 24.25 Act. 24.14 1 Cor. 10.11 There is no more doubt we are bound to obey all the Commands of the Moral Law seeing that is of a perpetual binding force Mat. 5.18.19 with whatsoever is of common equity Philip. 4.8 9. or whatever injoyning any piece
I prove the Consequence because Singing of Psalms was no Jewish Ceremony and if the Adversaries will say so let them prove their Affirmative as they are obliged and until then I shall confirm the Negative viz. that Singing of Psalms is no Jewish Ceremony because first I cannot think that Christ joyned a Jewish Ceremony after the Gospel-Supper when he Sung a Hymn or Psalm as it is on the Margine of some of our Bibles Mat. 26.30 Mark 14.26 Nor that Paul and Silas used any Jewish Ceremony especially there not being any fear of Offence and stumbling of weak Brethren there when in Prison they Sung Praises unto God Act. 16.25 Again the Apostle does very plainly Exhort the Christians of the New Testament Ephes 5.19 and Colos 3.16 to speak unto themselves in Psalms Hymns and Spiritual Songs Singing and making Melody in their hearts unto the Lord and Teaching and Admonishing one another in Psalms and Hymns and Spiritual Songs Singing with Grace in their hearts unto the Lord In which Texts he shews that that piece of Worship is edifying both to our selves and also to others that joyn with us while he says speaking to our selves in Psalms and Admonishing one another in Psalms And Secondly that it is a comfortable and Heart-chearing Duty while he says making Melody in your hearts And Thirdly that it glorifies God while he says doing it unto the Lord Therefore Singing of Psalms can be no Jewish Ceremony having these Examples and Precepts for it to the Church of the New Testament Secondly In the first Epistle to the Corinthians Chap. 14.15.26 The Apostle in the one place of the Chapter and Verses Cited sharply reproves the Corinthians for their Disorder and Confusion in Singing in the publick Assemblies because every one of them had a Psalm by themselves and did not all joyn together and in the other place he directeth them how to Sing Psalms aright viz. with the Spirit and with the understanding also that is not only with the Breath or voice which there he calls the Spirit and the signification from the Original word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 most properly signifies the Breath or Wind but also in a known Tongue which the whole Context there declares he means when he says with the Understanding and so the Apostle does here Reform the abuse that was crept in into their publick Singing of Psalms and directs them how to do it aright But a Superstitious Will-worship such as Singing of Psalms must be if it be not of Divine Institution can never be performed aright it involves a plain Contradiction to say so What did Paul direct men how to Worship God aright by a Superstitious Will-worship Nay surely not Singing of Psalms then must undeniably be an Ordinance of Divine Institution under the Gospel Thirdly the Apostle James says Jam. 5.13 Is any man afflicted let him pray is any man merry let him Sing Psalms Therefore Singing of Psalms hath a Divine Warrant under the New Testament The Quakers answer that he bids us Sing Psalms only when we are merry But it seems then that the Quakers are never never Merry but are a number of Sullen Dull and Melancholick Hypocondriack Drones who cannot at all Sing Psalms Secondly there is no such exclusion in the Text as is pretended otherwise the Apostle bids us pray only when we are afflicted also seeing both these are pronounced with one Breath and the manner of the Expression and extent of the Terms are the same in both and the Quakers can shew no ground for exclusion in the one more than the other notwithstanding they may see how frequently and continually we are commanded to pray Ephes 6.18 Phil. 4.6 1 Thes 5.17 They may also see Christ and his Disciples Singing when by all Circumstances it appears they were Sorrowful seeing they were so both presently before and after as appears from Mat. 26.22 Mark 14.26 compared with Mat. 26.30.38 Mark 14.19.34 Joh. 13.21 The Apostle therefore by Merriness and Affliction points at the frame and case unto which these Duties are most especially suited no ways excluding the excercise of them in other frames and cases But let us give them for once not granting that the Apostle does there appoint us to Sing Psalms only when we are Merry yet Singing of Psalms shall by this Text even in the Adversaries own Sence be of Divine Institution under the New Testament or else in their Principles we may in our Merry and Joyful frames offer a Superstitious Will-worship unto God which I have not yet learnt to believe The Quakers applying this Text of James in the 130 page of their Confession of Faith answer us that there is none Merry but the Ransomed of the Lord and therefore they mean to infer for that is their Scope in the place that none should Sing Psalms but these But First then certainly the Quakers are Convict that they themselves are none of the Ransomed of the Lord seeing they here allow the Ransomed of the Lord to Sing Psalms which yet they cannot be persuaded to do Secondly all the Members of the visible Church professing Faith in Christ and subjecting to his Ordinances are by visible Profession and in some degree of the judgment of Charity the Ransomed of the Lord Therefore the Quakers by their own principles ought to allow them to Sing Psalms Thirdly others also beside the Ransomed of the Lord are bound to Worship God except some special piece of Worship by some special Conditions which it requires doth exclude them as the Lords Supper excludes all that do not or cannot Examine themselves discern the Lords Body and shew forth his Death albeit the Church in admitting persons must walk by probabilities and can reach no further and both it and Baptism excludes all that want a visible Interest into the Covenant But Singing of Psalms is a piece of Gods appointed Worship as is shewed and there is no special condition Recorded in all the Scripture that debars any man from Singing and joyning therein or else let the Quakers shew it if they can If they shall say as we see they do say that the Unransomed by this Text are excluded from Singing Psalms they shall speak falsly for beside our former reasons given already to this exception the Text exhorts any man Whatsoever he be unto that duty but especially when he is in a joyful frame And giving without granting the Ransomed only to be meant yet Psalms-singing will still be of Divine Institution if these be allowed and in the judgment of Charity these will be all the professing Members of the Church subjecting to Divine Ordinances And whereas they here alledge that the Ransomed only are Merry or joyful that is also false for others beside these are sometimes joyful Mat. 13.20 Luk. 8.13 and so the exception is to no purpose But the Quakers insinuate here an Argument against Psalms-singing viz. that its very unsuitable to make Songs of Davids sad Cases of Mourning Weeping Lamenting
Salvation whereas these men there spoken of were before of old Ordained to Condemnation says the Text. Fifteenth QUERY Whether or not the Prophets Christ and the Apostles and holy Men of God did preach down Perfection and said that Men should not be perfect while they were on Earth but that they should carry about a Body of Death with them while they were on this side of the Grave Let us see where this is written by any of them all SVRVEY The Quakers here are fighting with their own Shadow and however this mock-Inspirer drops in the Quakers own Principles sure I am he is a base Traducer of other mens Doctrine for What Minister of ours did ever preach that Men should not be perfect here in this Life sure enough they should be perfect but the Question is not what is their Duty and what they should be but what is their Reach and Attainments The Saints are indeed perfectly justified here-away Rom. 8.1 nor can a Remission or Pardon of Sins or an Imputation of Righteousness be understood except it be a full Pardon and a full Imputation The Question therefore is only concerning the Saints their Sanctification in this Life in regard of which I must distinguish a Perfection of Parts which is when we have a degree of every Grace and are renewed in some measure in every power and faculty of the whole Man though we be not come to the just and due measure in any of them And a Perfection of Degrees which consists in the compleat measure of our Conformity and our exact Correspondence to the Law of God in respect of all whatsoever it requires But George Keiths Divine Condescension or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein he abuses some worthy Men does not consist in Gods remitting or nullifying of his Law in it's Direction and Obligation as our Rule which cannot be Matth. 5.18 19. but in the Divine acceptance of the Righteousness of a Redeemer and Surety instead of our own Personal Righteousness of Works The first kind of Perfection I willingly yield to the Saints in this Life seeing every true and real Saint hath some measure of every Grace and is in some degree renewed in every power and faculty of the whole Man Ephes 4.24 Colos 3.10 But that any man is Perfect in this Life in the second sence of Perfection which yet is the most proper so as to be altogether sinless as George Keith would have it in his Quakerism no Popery pag. 37. 38. I utterly deny and albeit the Affirmer be still obliged to prove not I the Denier yet I prove it First Because David says Psal 19.12 Who can understand his Errors and he prays Psal 143.2 That God would not enter into judgment with him for in thy sight says he no man living shall be justified viz. by his own Righteousness and Goodness and so he intreats not to be Examined or Judged according to what he was in himself and I still believe that he was as perfect as any Quaker or George Keith an Antesignanus or Banner-Bearer amongst them Secondly Solomon who was as wise as any Quaker says Prov. 20.7 Who can say I have made my heart clean I am pure from my sin The Quakers answer him forsooth that they can say it Let them be doing then and contradict him and the holy Spirit too by whose Inspiration he was ordered in writing of that for I cannot hinder them Their Moon is at the Full. Thirdly The Apostle tells us Galat. 5.17 That the Flesh lusteth against the Spirit and the Spirit against the Flesh in Believers for he speaks not of others who are all Flesh or wholly Carnal and have no Spirit or Renewed part so that they cannot behold how peremptory the Expression is do the things that they would Such men are not perfect then albeit the Quakers may possibly differ from the Apostles Judgment Fourthly The Apostle John says most peremptorily 1 Joh. 1.8 That if we say we have no Sin we deceive our selves and the truth is not in us The Quakers answer That the same Apostle says Chap. 3.9 That whosoever is born of God doth not commit Sin for his Seed remains in him and he cannot sin because he is born of God But first This Text cannot be meant of a full and compleat Perfection seeing every Man hath Sin and he deceives himself that thinks otherwise by the former Text and he that hath any Sin cannot be compleatly Perfect Secondly If this last Text were meant of Perfection it would prove every true Convert from the very first new breath in him seeing even then he is born of God which is the Apostles ground why he cannot commit Sin in the manner that he means to be compleatly Perfect and exempted from Sin which yet I think the Quakers themselves will not say The Apostle therefore in the first Text means of Sin dwelling in the best of Saints here away and therefore he expresses it by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to have sin and in the second Text he means of sin not only dwelling but reigning in us and made as it were a trade of and acted with full consent which Renewed Men cannot do and therefore he expresses this by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying to make and devise or contrive Sin as it were by Trade George Keith answers That though we have Sin in us yet it is not our Sin but our Temptation Quakerism no Popery pag. 38. 39. and that this does not infer Actual Sin however Contrariwise The Apostle calls it Sin and that peremptorily certifying us That we deceive our selves if we say we have it not How then does George Keith call it only a Temptation to Sin and Whether shall we believe him or the Apostle that calls it expresly Sin Secondly If it be not our Sin whose Sin I pray is it it's not the Devils seeing not he but we have it says the Text and I am sure they will not be so impudently Blasphemous as to ascribe it to God Therefore it is certainly ours seeing it must be some bodies and it will also mud and defile our actions Fifthly The Apostle Paul who was I believe more perfect than any Quaker most heavily complains Rom. 7.15 ver to the end of his Corruption Imperfection and Sin dwelling in him against his will his heart and his strong Inclinations to the contrary and therefore certainly he was not perfect and I know not who dare pretend beyond him But George Keith replies Quakerism no Popery pag. 39. 40. That the Apostle is not there describing his then-present-Condition but the Condition of himself and others as they were in the strugling and warfare Estate before the Victory was attained But Contrariwise he is describing his then-present-Condition for he was not then perfect nor long after it when he wrote the Epistle from Rome to the Philippians compare Philip. 3.12 with Rom. 1.11 13 15. and 15.22 23. which was several years after his writing of the
name Psal 79.6 Jer. 10.25 But the Quakers have somewhat to say in defence of this their impious Doctrine viz. unrenewed men say they cannot but sin in their Worship to God Ergo they ought not to Worship him Ans By this Quaking-Argument no man on Earth should offer to Worship God seeing there is somewhat of sin cleaving to the best Actions of the Saints hereaway being still defective in the measure and degrees of goodness prescribed by the Law and coming from an heart that is not perfectly clean Prov. 20.9 but the Flesh still lusting against the Spirit so that we cannot do the things that we would Gal. 5.17 much less can we reach the whole Dimensions of our Duty Again even the Plowing and so the Eating Sleeping c. of the wicked is sin Prov. 21.4 shall the wicked then do nothing at all because whatever they do they will go about in a sinful manner I think not And hence we deny the Consequence of their Argument Secondly no man indeed is obliged to sin but yet all men are obliged to worship God which is another thing and is I am sure no thing but a Duty and that unrenewed men sin in the manner of performance it is their own fault proceeding from the corruption of their hearts which can never excuse them from their Duty Does mens Faults that they are Guilty of absolve them from their Duty and Discharge their obligation to the Law say it not for shame And hence again we deny the Consequence Lastly the worship and obedience performed by unrenewed men such as it is or may be called for it is not simply obedience but it is only such and so called in respect of the matter and substance of the Act which is according to the Law though the Principles Manner and End are not is much better than a total rejection of the Commandment seeing that is good in respect of the matter and substance of the Act which agrees with the Law as for example when an unrenewed man gives a poor man an Alms or does any other Action commanded by the Law But the total rejection of the Commandment is upon all accounts and every way evil And hence again we defie the Consequence See this objection in the Quakers Pamphlet fore-mentioned called the Priests Principles in the 14 and 15 pages thereof Again they object that no worship is acceptable to God but that which is in the Spirit and that therefore no man ought to worship God that hath not received the Spirit Ans Albeit no obedience or worship which unrenewed men are in that state able to perform be acceptable to God yet they are still obliged to worship God and that with an acceptable worship nor does or can their Inability to perform acceptable worship take away their obligation to perform it seeing we did all once receive ability in our common Parent and representative head Adam and the losing of it is our fault whereof we are Guilty Rom. 5.12.19 and whereby we can never be excused from our Duty or God and his Law lose their Authority over us And hence the Consequence perishes Secondly we have shewed already that the worship and obedience of unrenewed men such as it is as was explained is better than their total disobedience and utter rejection of the Commandment its better to live Chaste though neither Principles Manner nor End be good than to commit Adultery with our Neighbours Wife And hence again falls the Consequence See this Objection in their forementioned Book called The Principles of Truth or a Declaration of their Faith pag. 81 90 91. The Quakers while they are handling this head in their Book called The Principles of Truth in the pages Cited are so extreamly confident of victory to their Heretical sentiments thereupon That they provoke and appeal all the prudent Orthodox and Learned Divines in Europe and every Quarter of the world with the wisest of the Sons of men to produce their strong reasons and encounter them in this point as if forsooth they had intended to out-strip the Devil not only in the defence of lies but also in his Arrogance and Pride in daring so many learned and worthy Champions of the Truth But they must needs run whom the Devil drives As for the 〈◊〉 Commandment it is most manifest how they do oppose themselves thereunto by their rejecting wresting and abusing the word of God which is a most glorious peice of his name and in their opposing and trampling upon his precious Truth and avowing of Error and Blasphemy yea it is evident how lightly they regard this Commandment by their very swallowing down of their Meat and Drink as so many Brutes without Prayer and Thanksgiving without which if they will believe the Apostle 1 Tim. 4.3 4 5. they are not sanctified Let them seriously consider the Text for the Apostle does there expresly say that God hath created our Meat to be received with Thanksgiving and so the receiving of it without that is contrary to Gods appointment and that every Creature of God is good and nothing to be refused upon this condition taken in and so no otherwise viz. to us if it be received with Thanksgiving and he adds a reason to prove that its good viz. because it is Sanctified by the Word of God allowing us the use of it and Prayer which asketh Gods blessing thereupon And albeit the same Apostle says Tit. 1.15 Vnto the pure all things are pure yet he does not say that without Prayer and Thanksgiving they will be so or blessed in their use nor does he in this Text contradict or retract what he says in the fore-cited Text where he explains how they are Sanctified and made pure to us viz. by the Word of God and Prayer and so the one Text supplies and explains the other The Fourth Commandment they do openly impugn in one of their following Queries unto which place we refer the Controversie The Quakers respects unto the Fifth Commandment is sufficiently known by their denying to all men that external Civil Reverence which it plainly enjoyns and their opposing and condemning the practice thereof in others as unlawful and Idolatrous Thus Mr. George Keith one of their chiefest Antesignani declares all bowing and taking off of Hats unlawful in his Quakerism no Popery page 100 101. Now that this command enjoyns us to give Civil Reverence to men is most manifest seeing it enjoyns to give Civil honour to men Ergo Civil Reverence seeing honour void of all Reverence is a plain contradiction honour being nothing else but a paying of Reverence and regard And that this command enjoyns the external part as well as the internal cannot be doubted seeing the Precept is given unto the whole man not the Soul only nor can the Body being capable of the Duty be exempted from the Law of God more than the Soul they being equally liable to his Soveraignity and the Law and the Law-giver not distinguishing or
granting all this to be most true yet the Knot is not untied For how shall I know and discern an Imposture of the Devil meeting with my deceitful heart from the Dictate of the Spirit without some Rule to trie it by Thou wilt answer that the Dictates of the Spirit have a Self-evidence in themselves to assure that they are his Dictates and hereby they shall be known But first the Spirit does not now adays Inlighten us in that measure as to make us immediately Inspired and Infallible seeing George Keith himself may possibly both Speak and Write and so think too in a mixture for all his Spirit Secondly all men have not the Spirit to direct them Infallibly though he did do it to them that have him by an immediate Dictate Thirdly let the Dictate within have a Self-evidence unto him to whom it is actually presented yet the Devil a cunning Serpent and subtil Sophister and a great pretended Saint too when he transforms himself into an Angel of Light can present an Imposture unto another man that wants that Dictate or to him that had it at another time but now he at the time present actually hath not that Dictate with so much seeming Evidence as with the concurrence of a deceitful heart will make it be received for a Divine Truth for he had strong Delusions in his Treasury 2 Thes 2.11 or Efficacious as the word is which mainly consists in their seeming Evidence What shall we do now if we want a Rule to discern the one from the other by viz. we 'l fall into the Devils Catch-net as before the Scriptures were Written they were but very few that escaped his Snare whereas with the spreading of the Scriptures into the World the Worship of the true God and Religion grew also nor is the true God at this day Worshipped where the Scriptures are wanting SECT III. Answering the Quakers Objections First therefore they Object from Deut. 30.11 12 13 14. Where Moses affirms that the Commandment which he Commanded the Israelites was not hidden from them or far off but was nigh them in their Mouth and in their Heart Therefore the Light within in the heart is the Rule See this Objection in the Quakers Confession of Faith above-named pag. 136. Ans It is so manifest how straitly Moses Ties the Israelites to the external written Word of the Scriptures for which see Deut. 17.18 19 20. and 28.58 and 30.10 and 31.9 10 11. 12 13 26. and 32.46 That it is a wonder that any man can be so impudently Effronted as to urge this Text against Scripture-Rule and for Establishing the Light within for the Rule It is sure by the Scriptures Cited and by the Context of the place Objected that Moses straitly Ties them to the Scripture-Rule and so he cannot mean in the Text objected to absolve them from it or send them to the Light within as the Rule Therefore they cannot gain their point here Secondly Moses Means as Paul expounds him Rom. 10.6 7 8 9. compared with vers 5. of the easiness of the conditions of the Covenant of Grace in regard of the conditions of the Covenant of Works which both in themselves are more hard and difficult and also want that Promise and Efficacy of the Spirit which is joyned with the Covenant of Grace to make it effectual In which Sence it can make nothing at all for the Quakers Thirdly I grant that this Text further Imports that the Doctrine of the Scriptures Written by Moses was in regard of things necessary to Salvation in some where or other so perspicuous and plain that it was not hidden to these Israelites to whom he there Speaks but that they in some measure understood it viz. some of them with an External Historical and Grammatical Evidence only as men unrenewed others of them with a Spiritual Internal and saving Evidence also as renewed men who albeit the Object be the same yet they see with other eyes and another Evidence then the other But is there any thing here for the Government of the Dictate within Nay neither less nor more but on the direct contrary comparing 9 10. Verses there with 15 16 17 18. he ties them to the Scriptures as their chief Rule under the pain of Death and Perishing But the Quakers are so exact at consequences that they can infer from any Text a flat and direct contradiction to it self Their Spirit hates Logick Secondly They object from Jerem. Chap. 31. Vers 31 32 33 34. where God says He will make a new Covenant with the House of Israel and Judah not according to the Covenant he made with their Fathers when he brought them out of Egypt which Covenant they brake but this is the Covenant says he that I will make with the House of Israel after those days I will put my Law in their inward parts and write it in their hearts and they shall no more teach every Man his Neighbour and Brother saying Know the Lord for they shall all know me saith the Lord Therefore say the Quakers What needs Scripture-rule under the New Testament seeing the Law is written on peoples hearts See this objection in their foresaid Confession of Faith page 112. Ans First This Text will not serve the Quakers turn for all men whatsoever for these on whose hearts the Law here is to be written are also to have all their iniquities forgiven and to know the Lord as the Text says But these things come not to pass in all men whatsoever and so it cannot prove that the Dictat within is to be the Rule for all men whatsoever Secondly The Law was written in some measure upon the hearts of Gods People in Old Testament times and yet they were straitly tied to the external Scipture-rule as was even now shewed and so the writing of the Law upon our hearts does not absolve us from Scripture-rule more than them or establish the Dictat within for the Rule Thirdly The Law is never perfectly written upon our hearts in this Life as shall be proved at their Query concerning Perfection and the Scriptures are an effectual Instrument whereby God doth more and more write his Law upon the hearts of his People Psal 119.93 98 99. 104. Joh. 14.26 Joh. 20.31 Act. 17.11 12. Rom. 10.14 Eph. 6.17 2 Tim. 3.16 Seeing then the Word of God written in the Scriptures is an Instrument by which God writes his Law upon our hearts enlightning instructing renewing correcting us albeit he can work without Instruments if so he pleases it is evident that this Text of Jeremiah is so far from overthrowing the External Rule of Scripture that on the contrary it includes it 's subordinate influence in the writing of the Law upon the hearts of People as a thing requisite seeing the Instrument of any work is requisite to the work till it be finished Therefore Fourthly We say that the Prophet is there comparing the new Dispensation of the Covenant under the Gospel
They object That Christ promises to send his Spirit to guide us into all Truth Joh. 16.13 Therefore there is no need of External Rules and Ordinances to guide us yea in their Confession where they propound this Objection they contend That all External Ordinances ought to be rejected because of this promise of the Spirit See their Confession pages 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82. Where they so triumph in this Argument as if now they had incontrollably gained the day and for ever banished all External Ordinances out of the Church and had no more to do but sing Te Deum Victory We have won But he that Reckons without his Host may come to Reckon twice Therefore I answer first That this promise is only made to Believers Joh. 7.38 39. and 14.17 and so it will not serve their turn for absolving all Men from External Rules and committing them to the conduct of their Dictate within Secondly Though they should crack and rent their Brains to do it they will never prove from hence that the Spirit is to guide us without the Word and External Rule of Scripture which yet is the very thing in Controversie and which they must either prove or else lose the Cause for all their boasting for Christ does not promise here nor any where in Scripture That the Spirit shall guide us without the written Word and so from this Text they can never prove their point Thirdly I proved at the Survey of their third Query above and in my Answer to their second Objection here That the written Word of God is an Organ and Instrument whereby the Spirit of God worketh upon our hearts enlightning converting renowing and quickening us thereby and so the Spirit is not here promised to guide us without the written Word but with it Lastly We have the word of that same Spirit for it and that since he was poured out in the largest measure That it is not he but a Spirit of Error that leads men when they hearken not to the Doctrine of the Apostles which is written in the Scripture 1 Joh. 4.6 He exhorts us to take heed to the Scriptures 2 Pet. 1.19 20. He affirms the Scriptures were written for our learning and that we might have hope Rom. 15.4 He affirms that the Scriptures are profitable for Reproof Doctrine Correction and Instruction in Righteousness 2 Tim. 3.16 He threatens to take away their part out of the Book of Life that diminish from the Scripture-rule Rev. 22.19 He pronounces them blessed that read hear and keep the Doctrine of the Scripture Rev. 22.7 and 1.3 Whoever then rejects the Scripture-Rule he intends not to learn or have hope or profit any more in the way of Righteousness or be blessed but to have his part taken out of the Book of Life Will not that Man be a good Christian and a happy Saint no doubt Christ then means nothing less than to absolve us from the External Rule of Scripture in this Text of John which the Quakers here wrest to that purpose Vaunting themselves of an Abortive Victory which shall never see the Sun like so many windy Bravadilloes Et preterea nihil Fifthly They object from the first Epistle of John 2.20 27. where Saint John says But ye have an Unction from the holy One and ye know all things and the anointing which ye have received abideth in you and ye need not that any Man Teach you Therefore there is no need of External Rules and Teaching seeing there is an Unction within that teaches all things Answ First The Apostle does not say That all men whatsoever have that Unction to teach them but only such as he writes to viz. Believers and so this Text will not serve their turn for all men Secondly He does not say That that anointing teaches without the External written Word yea in this same Epistle Ch. 4.6 Ch. 5.13 He plainly shews the contrary where he affirms That those that are of God hearken to and so are taught by for there is no other end of their hearkening but to be taught their External Doctrine which is written in the Scriptures and that he wrote this same Epistle of purpose to be an Instrument of Faith and Knowledge unto them And would they then force an Argument from this Epistle against Scripture-Rule nay there is in this Epistle evident demonstrations establishing it Thirdly We have before shewed That the Spirit teaches us by the External written Word and the Quakers with all their wranglings can never make it appear that he teaches us without it For all the Texts which they produce or can produce prove no more but only that the Spirit teaches us which we never denied but heartily acknowledge but not one Text in all the Scriptures can prove that the Spirit teaches us without the External Word which is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet the Quakers by a new sort of Logick invented by their Alogical Spirit for the abuse of Mankind do from every Scripture-Text where it is said That the Spirit teaches us very bruto-rationally infer Ergo he teaches us without any External Mean or Rule As for that of their knowing all things it is not to be understood of all things whatsoever without exception or else they had been too wise and their knowledge too infinite but it is meant of all things Essential to Salvation which they knew in some measure though not perfectly 1 Cor. 8.2 and 13.9.12 and therefore still needed Scripture-Rule to teach them more knowledge And therefore that part of the Text That they needed not that any man should teach them is the same with that of Jeremiah whereof before and hath the same comparative meaning That the knowledge of Christ and of the Covenant was now so manifest and clear that having received the anointing for opening the eyes of their understanding viz. Effectively which is therefore called Eye-salve Rev. 3.18 which an inward objective Dictate cannot well be called that they might be able to behold it They in regard of and compared with their Fathers living under the Old Testament Dispensation did scarce seem to need a Teacher which is most true For though they needed still Teaching yet in comparison of them they might all rather have been Teachers of others and so the Scope of the place is to commend the New-Testament Dispensation above that of the Old and to decry External Ordinances and Rules or Teaching by Men Yea and if it were meant so then the Apostle did here by his Practice contradict his Doctrine and by his Doctrine condemned his Practice as needless and idle for which he had a sad Accompt to make according to Christs Doctrine Matth. 12.36 and if the Quakers think that this Text overturneth all Teaching by Men we again Charge them in their own Principles and by the Law they live on to give over their Teaching and spreading of their damnable Delusions by Word or Writ for I am sure the
Covenant hath a Divine right unto Baptism under the New Testament but Children of believing Parents are by God Adopted and received within the Covenant as is plain from Gen. 17. ch Mat. 19.14 Act. 2.39 1 Cor. 7.14 Therefore Children of believing Parents have a Divine right unto Baptism under the New Testament The Minor is Evident by the Scriptures Cited I prove the Major because Baptism under the New Testament is the Initiating Seal and Symbol belonging and appended to our Entry and Reception into the Covenant as was before proved under the New Testament and so it belongs to every person that is received into the Covenant upon the accompt of their Reception or else it shall belong to their Entry and Reception as is supposed and above proved and yet not to them as Entered and Received which involves a manifest Contradiction Thirdly all who are probably Partakers of the Spirit of Grace and Regeneration have a Divine Right under the New Testament unto Baptism in the Churches Court and she ought to admit them thereunto as was before proved from Act. 10.47 48. But the Children of believing Parents are probably Partakers of the Spirit of Grace and Regeneration under the New Testament Therefore they have a right unto Baptism in the Churches Court and she is bound to admit them thereunto The Major was evidently proved before I prove the Minor for Gods taking them in within the Covenant Gen. 17. chap. makes it probable His promising to Circumcise the hearts of the Children as well as the Parents Deut. 30.6 makes it probable Gods Sanctifying some of the Children of believers from the Womb Jerem. 1.5 Luk. 1.15 makes it probable Pauls calling them Holy 1 Cor. 7.14 viz. federally and externally makes it probable And if it were not probable that the Children of Believers did partake of the Spirit of Grace and Regeneration then it could not be probable that any of them Dying in Non-age should be Saved seeing none but such as are Born of Water and of the Spirit can enter into the Kingdom of God Joh. 3.5 And lastly for I am sure I need no more Christs declaring and asserting their Interest into the Kingdom of Heaven Mat. 19.14 Luk. 18.16 whereunto they cannot enter without being Regenerated makes it probable These things make it Infallibly certain as to the Kind or Quoad Speciem and probable as to particular persons or Quoad Individua But against this Last the Quakers except with the Aâ—abaptists That Christ does not in these Texts say that the Kingdom of Heaven pertained to these Infants that were brought to him and such other Natural Infants but unto Spiritual Infants whom he means of when he says Of such is the Kingdom of Heaven Ans But then Christs reasoning runs thus suffer little Children these were true Natural Infants that were brought to Christ as we shall presently see wanting Interest in the Kingdom of Heaven to come unto me for the Kingdom of Heaven belongs to mature persons regenerated which are Spiritual Infants and Infants Improperly so called This would have been so bad a Consequence that it would have bereft the Discourse of all Sence Secondly hereby they shew that in their opinion there are no Infants that have Interest into the Kingdom of Heaven otherwise they should have granted Christs words in respect of Infants properly so called and then farewel to the Objection Thirdly we here appeal the Analogy of Faith without some necessity from which the words must not be detorted from a proper to an Improper Sence Secondly they except that these were not young Infants that were brought to Christ but grown to some pretty Age because Christ says Suffer them to come intimating that they themselves could Walk Ans But when I Marvel did Come begin so necessarily to signifie walking on ones own Feet A man is said to Come from America albeit he should lie all the while in a Ships Cabin The Text shews that these Children came not on their own Feet For in the Text of Luke they are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is Sucking Infants And in all the Texts there is a word used for their bringing that signifies to bear or carry 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Again Christ took them in his Arms and Blessed them but never a word of his Teaching them These that brought them spoke as the Texts Intimate but never a word in their head And if they had been in any small measure capable of Christs Doctrine the Disciples it seems would not have forbidden their coming Lastly they except against the Body of the Argument that it cannot be discerned if Infants have received the Spirit or not Ans I have shewed before how as to the Kind quoad Speciem it may be Infallibly discerned and probably as to Individuals Now probable Evidences are sufficient for the Baptism of particular persons Old or Young or else none at all should be admitted to Baptism seeing heart-searching is Gods Prerogative Jer. 17.9 10. nor did the Apostles themselves Infallibly discern peoples hearts as may be seen Act. 8.13 with 23. and 9.26 27. 1 Joh. 2.19 Fourthly all the visible or appearing Disciples of Christ ought to be Baptized under the New Testament as is evident from Mat. 28.19 Where Christ commands to make all Nations his Disciples Baptizing them c. From which Text it is as clear as Noontyde that whoever is once visibly or appearingly become Christs Disciple for the Church cannot go beyond probabilities here ought to be Baptized and that forthwith assoon as it can be conveniently done as the Expression imports Go make them Disciples Baptizing as if they should be Baptized in the very same instant that their Interest and Discipleship appears without requiring or expecting any further that as being the Condition being once probably discovered But the Children of believing Parents are visible Disciples of Christ Therefore they ought to be Baptized under the New Testament The Major needs no more proving I prove the Minor for all the visible Members of Christs School are his visible Disciples seeing to be a Member of ones School and to be his Disciple are both one thing as is undeniable but the Children of believing Parents are visible Members of Christs School seeing Christs School is his Church whereof the Children of believers are certainly Members seeing they were Members thereof in the time of the Old Testament and doubtless Christs coming in the Flesh when the Grace of God was enlarged hath not deprived them of so merciful a Priviledge surely not and since God received them into the Covenant we never heard of his putting them out again and they are Holy viz. federally and in order to Church-membership and of such is the Kingdom of Heaven all which iâ— already declared The Anabaptists use to urge this Text of Matthew against Infant-Baptism reading the words as they are in our Translation Go ye therefore and Teach all Nations Baptizing them c. From whence they
Sloath It may be they do for they will not so much as pray to God Except when they Incline to it by a free motion and Instigation within The Quakers in the Close of their query require us to distinguish betwixt Temporal Babylon and Egypt and Spiritual Babylon and Egypt Ans I have hitherto abundantly vindicated our Church from the Aspersion of being a Spiritual Babylon wherewith the Quakers do ordinarily and wickedly traduce her and it is the scope of this Epilogue of their Queries they must end as they began slandering and accusing the Brethren and it may be also seen in their Confession of Faith pag. 122 124. Upon the other hand I have charged home the Quakers with their Errors Blasphemies Contradictions and shall do in a Post-script with their Papism and with Irresistible Evidence have made good every Article of my charge against them Only in the general to this part of the Query I Answer that Temporal Babylon and Egypt are understood properly of the places so called by the Inhabitants and were a tipe of the Spiritual but Spiritual Babylon and Egypt are mystically and improperly understood and are the Anti-tipe of the other And hitherto the Quakers possibly will consent But we will surely discord in the Application for the Quakers make that great Babylon Spiritually and mystically so called so much spoken of in the Book of Revelation to be only inward in the hearts of people See their Confession pag. 114 115 121 122 138 140. Where they alleadge that great Spiritual Babylon to be within in the hearts of people and affirm the great Whore and mystery Babylon to be our wisdom and the Beast be our will whereupon our wisdom sits I Confess the Pope is deeply obliged to the Quakers and belike some of them are asmuch obliged to him he is not so unreasonable as to make them work for nothing The whole Protestant Church hath hitherto proclaimed the Pope to be the great Antichrist and Beast and the Church of Rome to be that mystery Babylon great Whore and Mother of Harlots The Quakers are so tender of his and her credit as to Contribute their best endeavors by a new Invention because all other devices have long since failed for Enervating our Churches libel and for wiping the reproach from off them both But go to is mystery-Babylon our wisdom and the Beast and Antichrist our will Let the Quakers then Answer these few following Arguments First albeit all Hereticks are Commonly called Antichrists 1 Joh. 2 18. yet the great Antichrist singularly and Eminently so called was not revealed in the time of the Apostles but to be afterwards revealed 2 Thes 2 3 5 6 7 8. But it cannot be said that the Corrupt wills of men were not then revealed Secondly it cannot be understood how the Kings who give their power for a season to the Beast Revel 17 12 13 and afterwards destroy the Whore ver 16. there shall destroy the carnal wisdom of all men so that it shall be found no more at all as it is said of that great Whore Babylon after these Kings have destroyed her Revel 18 21. Thirdly seeing they will have our wisdom to be Babylon the great Whore what then are these Seven mountains whereupon that Whore sits and what are these Seven Kings Five whereof were fallen before the Book of Revelation was written one then was and another was not then come which are the Seven heads of that whores Beast and what again are these Ten Kings which are the horns of that Beast Revel 17.3 5 9 10 12. how shall these things be applyed to the Seat Heads and Horns of our wisdom and will Such an application will be an excellent Romance I le warrand Fourthly the great whore Babylon hath in her Harpers Pipers Trumpeters Craftmen Milstones Bridegrooms Brides c. Revel 18 22 23. But are all these things in peoples hearts in their wisdom The Quakers would make Heraclitus turn a plain Democritus nay almost a dead man to laugh himself alive by their jocund and facetious humor Lastly the place where Babylon stood becomes an Habitation of Devils the hold of every foul Spirit and a Cage of every unclean and hateful Bird after her destruction by the ten Kings Revel 18 2. But I would think that after the destruction of our carnal and corrupt wisdom that the Devil and all his foul Spirits should get the less access unto and worse lodging into our hearts where our carnal wisdom before remained Hence we see what a wild Romance the Quakers gloss upon the Beast and great whore amounts unto and upon how Ridiculous a fiction their apology for the Pope and Church of Rome is founded and yet I think the great Doctors of the Quakers deserves rewards at their hands for they have done what they could and who can do more Albeit the success and event which who can help does not answer their desires And now I hope that boisterous wind of Arrogance and storm of pride wherewith that supercilious Inscription of the Quakers the haughty Harbinger of these Queries did Insolently swell is a little calm'd and I trust I have by the evidence of Irrestible truth so overturned their Bulwarks and dashed the force of their Heretical Armado of falshoods that they shall not so confidently hereafter Summon the Armies of Israel with a defiance But if their courage be so undaunted that no routing of their Forces can abate it nor Impose silence upon them but they will still be smattering and will yet rally upon us with the new supply of a Reply then I must require them at the Instance of all rational Creatures to speak Reason and sense for in earnest not in jest I say it they are often so obscure in their Aenigmatical Riddles and abstruse Expressions of mysterious and Cloudy non-sense that they transcend and over-reach the most Metaphysical capacity of all mortals This demand is so exceedingly reasonable that I presume if any Quaker shall as yet have the boldness to Compear in the defence of their heretical Interest it will without further pressing be accepted and granted Another thing I must desire of the Quakers viz. That they trouble us not with new controversies as their manner is when they are overpower'd and non-plus'd in any one purpose to skip away to another and from that again to a third without either yeilding or satisfying untill they have First methodically in form and order answered and satisfied this Survey of their present Queries and this I expect to see at the Greek calends let the Quakers then who I have often heard are Threatening a reply perform these Conditions therein which most justly I demand or else I assure them for ought I yet know I will trouble my self no more with their Confuse Rapsodies of nauseous non-sense A Postscript for George Keith which I divide into two Sections The first shall wipe off his calumnies of Popery cast upon us The Second shall fix Popery upon