with the full bent of his will as do the wicked because he is born of God Doth not this reflect upon that pure Relation he hath with the Father and so upon the Nature of God for begetting and bringing forth such an impure birth And is not this to frustrate the end of the Son of God in being made manifest to destroy the works of the Devil whereas he that abides in Christ sinneth not see further 1 Joh. 3.5 6 7 8 9 10 verses 2. Whereas T. V. his contrary meaning to plain Scripture accuseth the Apostle John and others that were born again with committing sin from that chap. 1. vers 8. that doth not prove it against John and such as he hath so accused whereby he hath rendred John to be of the Devil for he that commits sin is so 1 Joh. 3.8 no more then James his saying With the same Tongue bless we God and curse we men doth prove himself to be one that so cursed which he said ought not to be for John writes to divers states and degrees of growth as to them that had sin to be cleansed from that they might walk in the Light to know the Blood of Christ to cleanse them from all sin vers 7. As also he said If we confess our sins he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness vers 9. Surely John was come further then a Confession of sin at that time besides having sin may relate either to a former state or to its besetting the Creature in the temptations when it is warred against and in the Faith withstood in its motions in order to a Conquest when the Creature doth not commit sin but withstands it as Paul said It s not I that sinneth so that having some sin and committing sin are two things for it doth not appear that the beloved Disciple or Apostle John was a committer of sin in that state when he wrote that Epistle for he saith vers 10. If we say we have not sinned we make him a lyar and his word is not in us which relates to a state that was past If we say we have not sinned is not all one as to say if we say we do not commit sin c. Yet he saith chap. 2.1 My little Children these things I write unto you that ye sin not Now had John been of T. V's perswasion that such a state of Perfection or not Sinning is not here attainable why should he exhort them not to sin and so plainly shew the difference between him that is born of God and him that is of the Devil See 1 Joh. 3. throughout And then as to T. V. his supposed Consequence from our Doctrine of Perfection That whoever found any sin in them were not born of God which I say that its neither our Assertion nor the Consequence of our saying That he that 's born of God doth not commit sin for having sin when it is withstood and warred against by that which is born of God and committing sin are two things yet we know that that which is born of God overcomes the World and this is the Victory even our Faith and the end of Christ's manifestation is to destroy sin that it may not have a being so long as we live in us And T.V. further adds That if they should die with any sin remaining they would certainly go to Hell and so none there yea none in the World would be saved he saith Hereby he still takes it for granted That there 's no such Perfection here as a freedom from all sin but that all God's Children die with sin remaining in them I then ask How long after death shall sin remain and when and where is the time and place of being fully cleansed after death is it in the Grave or is it in some Purgatory For if God's Children must be cleansed after death they must be cleansed somewhere and then in the mean time betwixt death and this supposed time and place of cleansing and purging where lyes the sin and pollution and the stain of it is it in the Soul or in the Body Surely not in the Body when dead neither can the Soul go to God with sin or pollution in it for no unclean thing can enter into his Kingdom or dwell with him so then the Question still remains where the Soul is after death and where is the place of its purging and fully cleansing If T. V. and his Brethren are not Papists let them answer and clear themselves and Principle from the Popes Purgatory T. V. his reviling and calling us Audacious Quakers who have not the least degree of true Grace because of damnable Opinions This his harsh language and railing signifies little to us for any proof against us or what we hold but only shewes his own peevishness and implacable enmity as one vexed and fretted in his mind and so not fit to intermeddle with things of so high concernment as he hath presumptiously attempted to stir in as about Perfection and the Deity and Satisfaction of Christ Justification Righteousness c. nor yet to call and exhort others whilst he himself had need to be called and exhorted to repent of his hard and uncharitable speeches and censours and to come to meekness and moderation which would better become his Profession And his confidence that we have not the least degree of true grace is both a false and uncharitable confidence and charge against us as also his flaunting and jearing W. P. as having but some smattering of Learning and being but little of a Scholar never to have read nor understood Logick or to have forgot or laid it aside Herein hath he manifested himself both scornful and ridiculous to make so much use of his own pretended Learning Arguments Logick Demonstration c. to such as he reckons hath neither true grace nor Learning it appears T.V. had a mind to shew himself in a vain flourish and boasting over such whom he hath endeavoured to render contemptible mean and ignorant as he hath done us all which doth but the more manifest the pride of his heart vain-glorying c. And then he adds I told them that all true Believers were perfect in a sense they were Evangellically perfect but not legally not absolutly perfect they had perfection of parts but not of degrees I Answer What confusion is here and what contradiction to his former Doctrine of Imperfection and Sin in this Life for first an Evangelical Perfection he grants but not a Legal as if either the Law or the state under it were above the Gospel or else that the state of the Gospel is not a state of Perfection exceeding that under the Law but rather inferiour both which are false and absurd For this Doctrine doth not only charge Imperfection upon the Creature under the Gospel but upon the Gospel it self whilst Evangelical Perfection is deemed either Imperfection or not a
concerning the Terms and Conditions whereon Sinners may be interested in the Satisfaction made by Christ J. O. saith pag. 167. It may also be farther evinced that there is nothing asserted in them but what is excellently suited unto the common notions which mankind hath of God and his Righteousness and that in their practice they answer the Light of Nature and common Reason exemplified in sundry instances among the Nations of the World Answ. First it is to be observed that a great stress is laid upon these Explications Declarations or Confessions of yours as relating to the terms and interest you claim in Christ's Satisfaction unto the determination of God's Will and Confirmation of Divine testimonies according to J. O's words wherein no less then Salvation appears to be concerned for without an interest in Christ and his Righteousness men cannot be saved Secondly Your Assertions herein being suited unto the common notions of mankind and as answering the Light of Nature and common Reason as it is called and as J. O's words are whether herein hath he not rendred this Light and common Reason together with the common notions mankind hath of God to be of a saving property since it so suits those things wherein Salvation is so deeply concerned according to J. O. but then if he does not reckon mens common Notions Light or Reason which is natural to be saving as indeed we do not believe that any thing natural as of man in the Fall can save then may we not reasonablely look upon J.O. to have asserted and declared those things wherein Salvation is not concerned or which we are not to look upon as answering that Light which is Spiritual and Saving but only common Notions and natural Reason whilst he and his Brethren keep not to plain Scripture Language and but run into notions terms distinctions which they have by Tradition from men mens inventions more suiting common and corrupt reason then Divine Light But and if the Light in men be Divine which manifests divine Revelations and Testimonies relating to Salvation such as J. O. would have us believe his matter to be grounded on then it follows that such a light is common or universal in mankind and not only given to a few nor natural as it hath been often rendred by such as J. O. and what doth this spiritual or divine Light teach concerning God and his Righteousness but that he is to be feared obeyed and honoured and that all sin and iniquity should be forsaken and God's Righteousness Power and Image which is Christ Jesus lived in obeyed and followed by man for herein is God well pleased and satisfied in beholding his own Image and birth renewed and brought forth which admits not of sin nor imperfection much less of either pleading contending disputing or preaching for its continuance in all term of life and this Light of Christ within however any miscall it is that which gives the knowledge of God's Love in Christ and of the vertue and efficacy of his Suffering and so of his Blood and to eat of his flesh which is given for the Life of the World wherein we partake of him as the one Offering at the Altar of God in his Sanctuary which the carnal Professors both among Jews and pretended Christians were and are ignorant of and in this Light are we come to know and receive Christ and reconciliation through his Death and also the glory of God through him in whom we have received the Attonement Peace and Union with the Father in the Son which all you that either slight oppose or deny this Light within and say its but natural are ignorant of being but in your dark notions natural apprehensions and conceivings which you intermix with Scripture so that the Dignity Glory Power and Vertue that is and ever was in Christ you do but talk of without the real sence discerning or enjoyment thereof but every one that truely waits upon the Living God in his Light and Life within whereby their minds and spirits being subjected unto his Will and their hearts truly broken before him such know the Ransom and Attonement which the Righteous and redeemed of the Lord knew and witnessed in all Ages and have that to offer unto God and such Sacrifices to present before him wherein he behold of his own glory and beauty and savours of his own vertue which is truly acceptable and well pleasing unto him who delighteth in his own Image Seed and Royal Off-spring which none truly know but who come into the Light to receive Christ the promised Seed which bruiseth the Serpents head and to eat his Flesh and drink his Blood without which you have no Life in you for all your talk and notions Pag. 185. J. O. The Sacrifice denotes his Humane Nature whence God is said to purchase his Church with his own Blood Acts 20.28 For he offered himself through the Eternal Spirit there was the matter of the Sacrifice which was the Humane Nature of Christ Soul and Body his Soul was made an Offering for Sin Isa. 53.10 his Death had the nature of a Sacrifice c. Answ. These Passages are but darkly and confusedly expressed as also we do not read in Scripture that the Blood of God by which he purchased his Church is ever called the Blood of the Humane Nature nor that the Soul of Christ was the Humane Nature or was put to death with the Body for the wicked could not kill the Soul though his Soul was made an Offering for sin and he poured it out to death he bore the sin of many and made intercession for Transgressors but what death and in what manner was it is a mystery truly to know for his Soul in his own being was Immortal and the Nature of God is Divine and therefore that the Blood of God should be of Humane or earthly nature appears inconsistent and where doth the Scripture call the Blood of God Humane or Humane Nature Neither do we read that the Blood which beareth record in the Earth and agrees in one with the Spirit and which purgeth the Conscience washeth and cleanseth the Believer in the Light from all sin was ever called by the Apostles the blood of the Humane Nature nor do we read that the Saints did eat and drink Flesh and Blood that was of a Humane Nature to receive Divine Life in them thereby for the Water of Life and Blood of Christ which are said to wash sanctifie and justifie which agree in one with the Spirit in those works and effects we never read that they are called in Scripture by the name of Humane Nature for the Spirit that quickens is divine and it is the Spirit that gives Life the Flesh profiteth nothing John 6. And the Soul of Christ is Immortal and did not die with the Body though it s deemed as being of the Humane Nature with the Body and so as of the Sacrifice in Suffering and Death whereas though his Soul
either required a thing not attainable or as if being perfect as he is perfect were but the measure of our Duty and so to be put off till the Life to come wherein the Saints had not such Commands given to them seeing they are not capable of sinning in the Life to come but John said As is he so are we in this world 1 John 4.17 And herein they knew their Love made perfect and this is more then either the small resemblance of Children to their Parents which T. D. speaks of and beyond his imperfect sinfull state and Doctrine for the perfect Love which they had was in them a perfect resemblance of God who is Love verse 16. But this way of T. D. his slighting and diminishing and falsly interpreting the Commands of God which require such perfection only as the measure of our Duty is like his Brethren saying That a Child of God his not committing Sin is to be meant he doth not make a trade of Sin which indeed is a very easie way they have taken to pervert the Commands of God and to give ease and liberty to the Transgressors in their sins as if when a thing is absolutely required of them they should put it off with this It is meant only as but in part to be obeyed and so if they should deal thus with God and say Lord then requires us not to Steal or not to commit Adultery or not to Covet but we are to understand it as that we cannot altogether abstain from Stealing Adultery or Covetousness only we are not to make a trade of these things nor wholy make it our business to be imployed in them what acceptance do they think such a Plea would have before the Lord and what Answer would he make them to this their corruption and what resentment would such Doctrine have in the minds of sober people if they should preach them and give such meanings to the Scriptures and tell them that where Stealing and Adultery and worldly â—usts and Covetousness are forbidden that they are not to go to the extent of the Commands but only not make a trade or a common practice of Stealing or these things c for thus they have dealt with many of God's Commands enjoyning perfect Holiness and Righteousness but then they have an easie way to lay all upon Christ as having paid their debt and fulfilled the Righteousness of the Law in his Person in their stead so that they must not expect its fulfilling in their persons for where the Scripture speaks of its being fulfilled in us we are to understand by in us that it is in Christ's Person and this is the manner of their course from time to time both to shut Christ his Works and Righteousness out of People so much as in them lies 1 John 3.9 Whosoever is born of God doth not commit Sin T. D. saith to this We may interpret it as he is born of God he doth not sin every Child of God is mixta persona Pag. 57. as our Law sayes of the King consists of an old and new nature and so his new nature is Principium quo the Principle from which he acts graciously and the old nature the Principle from which he acts sinfully Reply Here again he hath palpably perverted plain Scripture and contradicted the Apostle John as may be seen in that 1 John 3. For he that is born of God who doth neither commit sin nor can sin because he is born of God has put off the old nature and is not acted by that Principle which leads to act sinfully because he cannot sin and that gracious Principle in him hath overcome the sin and the nature of it and so to tell of his being mixta persona is T. D's gross blindness For first that which is born of God that overcomes the World is not mixt with sin nor with the old sinful nature Secondly He or whosoever is born of God whose Seed remains in him who abideth in Christ is not acted by that old sinful nature because he is born of God and abideth in Christ in whom is no sin neither is mans having divers parts as Body and Soul c. or his being liable or not liable to death any reason to shew that he that is born of God doth act sinfully from the old nature for the Bodies of the Saints were the Temples of the Holy Ghost and their Bodies were sanctified and so brought into subjection unto the Divine Spirit or Principle in them so as they might glorifie God in their bodies and in their spirits which were his Again T. D's meaning to that first of John 3.9 is That it may intend the manner of sinning so the 8 th verse seems to limit it be that committeth sin is of the Devil for the Devil sinneth from the beginning the Comparison quoth he is not between the act simply for then it should have been said only for the Devil sinneth but from the beginning implies a Comparison between the manner of man's sin and the Devils in respect of which he is said to be of the Devil because he immitates his example who from the day he began never ceased to sin nor ever did one truly good action Observ. By this we may gather T. D's limitation put upon that of 1 John 3.9 and the Comparison he makes between not the act simply but the manner of mans sin and the Devils still taking it for granted that he that is born of God doth sin and acts sinfully from the old nature but not in that manner as he that is of the Devil who intimates his example so that his meaning and comparison seems to amount to this that he that is born of God doth sin but not always or not as the Devil sinneth he is somewhat better then the Devil in that he doth some good actions but the Devil doth none Reply Surely our opposer hath come off but very poorly in his arguing for the Devils work contrary both to the state and testimony of such as were born of God whom he hath here very meanly debased and sadly abused the Scriptures misrepresenting Gods Children whom he by his Eternal Power hath delivered from the power of Sin and Satan and given them a Heavenly place in Christ where the Devil cannot come and in whom the Prince of the World hath nothing nor his sinfull Ministers any part or interest whilst they plead against God's Promises holy Commands and against the very end and purpose of Christ's manifestation as T. D. and his Brethren have done wherein they have shown themselves to be Antichrist's Agents and Ministers and not the true Christ's Now touching Christ's Enlightning every man whose Light we affirm to be saving this is set down as an Error by T. D. he and his Brethren denying the Light of Christ in every man to be Saving in its own nature and property which we do affirm it to be but that he enlightens every man to
was made an Offering for sin he having offered himself through the Eternal Spirit yet his Soul or Spirit did not die with the Body though J. O. hath ignorantly made no distinction but joyns both as being but Humane Nature which was Sacrificed to death but yet its evident that though his Soul and Spirit did not die with the Body yet his Soul was offered for sin for the sins of men were laid upon him or did meet on him as is frequently confessed and so he suffered and his Soul travelled under the burthen of them so that his Sufferings were twofold both inward and outward and which were the greater suppose ye Professors and whether there be not a mystery to be known in the Sufferings Death and Blood of Christ beyond what could be seen or perceived with the carnal or outward eye since that he is truly and savingly to be known after the Spirit as the Apostles knew him who experienced the Fellowship of his Sufferings and a conformity unto his Death and bare in their bodies the Dying of the Lord Jesus that his Life might be manifest in them And Christ being touched with the feeling of their Infirmities was able to relieve them that were tempted and as Paul saith Colos. 1. You that were sometimes alienated and enemies in your minds through wicked works yet now hath he reconciled in the Body of his Flesh through death to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight if you continue in the Faith grounded and setled and be not moved away from the hope of the Gospel which you have heard which is preached to every Creature which is under Heaven whereof I Paul am made a Minister who now rejoyce in my sufferings for you and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his Body sake which is the Church verse 21 22 23 24. where mark that the reconciled state was not that of enmity in their minds and the end of this reconciliation through his Death was to present them holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight which does not admit of sin and imperfection term of life nor yet of Professors arguing or pleading for sin as they do and was there any of Christ's afflictions or sufferings then to be filled up in the Apostle for the sake of his Church how do Professors resent this Doctrine and what meaning will they give to it can they say that Christ's suffering was all at an end or fulfilled at once whilest yet some was behind to be filled up in his Saints and that for his Churches sake although still he was the one Offering Ransom and Sacrifice for sin and was offered once for all as both being opposed to and ending the many Offerings under the Law and consecrating a new and Living Way and establishing an Everlasting Covenant of Life and Salvation as also that in what he did and suffered be set us an Example bare Testimony unto and confirmed the Truth this J. O. confesseth page 199. And as to his being a perfect High Priest and discharging the Office thereof and all other the Father required of him these we never opposed nor went about to slight or lessen as some injuriously represented us Neither would we have any unreverent and slighty Contests entertained on any hand about the Sufferings Afflictions and Death of Christ in the least to lessen or undervalue them nor yet ought you to meddle and tamper about either God Christ or Holy Spirit or about the Suffering and Sacrifice of Christ with your pitifull sorry confused School-terms and distinctions and beggerly scraps of mens Traditions and Rudiments of the World c. wherein you have laboured more to fill your heads with airy notions invented words and brain knowledge rather then your hearts and souls with a saving Knowledge and experimental sence and feeling of the Life and Power of Godliness or of the Vertue and Efficacy of Christ Jesus and his Reconciliation as the one Offering and Sacrifice which puts away sin and whose Blood both remits and clenseth from all iniquity But to evade these blessed Effects which are only known to them that walk in the Light 1 John 1.7 many of you Professors have found out a very easie way and notion of all being fully satisfied and payed for you both for sins past present and to come and of all being suffered and perfectly obeyed for you by Christ in your stead though you deny his dying and being a Propitiation for all men in the whole World so that you can plead and wrangle for sin imperfection and body of sin all your life and say Christ hath fully payed all and perfectly obeyed for you as also you can easily evade or refuse to suffer either with him or for him if but a little Storm Trial or Persecution doth arise you and your Leaders can secure your selves and creep into corners though now you can make a shew and bluster in this time of calm and some of you make a boasting and insulting against W. P. and a hidious reviling of him now he is in suffering and you at liberty thinking probably that you may get your selves some credit and repute with those in power by your railing Pamphlets which you bring out one after another like cowardly base spirited men so many to go to trample upon a man that is already underfoot as to the outward man in regard of his confinement which some report that some of you Presbyterians were the Instigators and occasion of by such invective Clamours and Complaints as some of you are accustomed to clear your selves as well as you can but yet withal you do but befool your selves in so many of you going to war against and reproaching a poor man in Prison who freely offered up himself to suffer which the most of you would be loath to do for by that your so great stir and noise you make against him you render him how mean soever he be in himself such a potent Antagonist contrary to your many slighty and scornfull Characters of him in your Books that you make many momoderate people the more enquire after him and to have the better conception of him because of your enmity and outrage but such who wait upon the Lord and in his Light stand still can see beyond you all and your spirits and work which the day hath declared More Errors escaped the Press IN the Epistle Page 2. Line 12. for agree in read are p. 23. l. 2. blot out 1. l. 23. for for r. in p. 25. l. 10. r. produced l. 35. for 13 r. 3. In the Answer to T. V. p. 65. l. 1. blot out that In the Answer to T. D. p. 2. l. 24. for gifts r. gusts p. 5. l. 18. for in r. on p. 7. l. 5. for 13 r. 3. l. 11. for by r. high p. 9. l. 10. for and all r. an act p. 12. l. 2. for he r. the. p. 17.
named amongst them as becometh Saints Eph. 5. And how corrupt and grosse is T. V's reason for his wicked and unsavoury Doctrine before in saying Because the defilement of the Soul is more deep and more hard to be washed off than the defilement of Whoredom or Adultry As if they did not defile the Soul but the Body only this is a Doctrine that may gratifie Whoremongers and Adulterers and not only to reject the wholsom Warnings and Reproofs against all such Wickedness which both in their own Consciences and in our Meetings is declared and Preached against but also it tends rather to incourage them to go to Bawdy-houses than to our Innocent and Godly Meetings wherein the Truth Righteousness and Power of God which cleanseth and frees from sin and unrighteousness is exalted and born witness to T.V. having so manifestly discovered his Spirit he had now better go and sit down under the Common Prayer and confess himself a miserable Sinner among the rest and not remain in a separation with his whewling and whineing Prayers feigning himself as one more Holy and Humble than they What sober People could have thought that such foulness should lie under these Presbyterians coverings as is mentioned before and after And T. V. further adds to explain his gross corrupt Doctrine these words viz. I told her if there stood a Cup of Poyson in the Window I would rather drink it than drink in their damnable Doctrines because poysoning of the Body is not so bad as poysoning and damning the Soul By which the Reader may further see how his prejudice and envy hath blinded him thus to imply as if Persons might commit either Whordom or Murder upon their Bodies and their Souls not be defiled or damned thereby and then what actual wickedness may not People commit and their Souls not be damnified nor prejudiced by it from this Doctrine whereas the wicked slayeth his own Soul lifteth up his Soul to vanity the Peoples lusting after evil things caused leanness to enter their Souls tribulation and anguish is to come upon every Soul of man that doth evil And it is only the Power and Life of God which purifies the Soul sanctifies the Creature throughout in Body Soul and Spirit and so leads into Righteousness and thereby saves and brings the Soul to God and gives it Life and indues it with the Image of the Heavenly But after this T. V. hath uttered such corrupt Language and Doctrine as before he is so bold as to justifie himself in these words viz. I am sure I neither did nor spake any thing unbecoming a Minister of the Gospel That I refer all modest and sober Readers to judge of Whether T. V. hath spoken Truth herein yea or nay and whether or no it had not been more prudence for him to have studied quietness and quietly to have followed his Devotion with thankfulness for the Liberty they are permitted to enjoy then thus to have shewed himself in outrage with clamorous reproaches and reviling against us who mean him no harm to the great disgrace both of himself and his Religion and them that adher to him therein And as for his accusing me with confused Discourse and indirect Answers to his Arguments and with filling my Mouth and the Peoples Ears with a multitude of words wherein was so much ambiguity and obscurity that the sentiments of my mind were not easily to be perceived as he saith Wherein I have as much cause to complain of not having direct Answers from him as he seems to have against me whilst he was so puzled and put to it with what I said though I answered them in plain Scripture-language And wherein their Questions or pretended Arguments were either indirect or in terms which accorded not with Scripture-language I did not judge my self ingaged so far to admit of the stating their matters as being infallible in the manner and terms of them as to be tyed to Yea or Nay denial of Major or Minor without further scruple Their Arguments appear hereafter And whereas T. V. pleads for using some words in explaining Scripture which are not in the Scripture saying That the Quakers in their Books use many words which are not in the Scripture I Answer We neither contend with words or matters which are not contrary or do not tend to vail or darken the Truth 's or simplicity of the innocent language contained in Scripture neither do we go about to impose one manner and form of expression upon others or limit them therein whilst they speak the Truth or what is in or according to Scripture We are not of Kin to the narrow Spirit of the ridged Presbyters that will count a man a blasphemous Heretick Socinian Arian and what not if he can't repeat his Creed of the Deity or Father Word and Spirit in their invented School-terms although he really believeth and confesseth according to Scripture unto the only true God the eternal Word and Spirit or the Father Son and Holy Spirit and that they are One and in Unity inseparable And whereas T. V. saith That W. P. puts forth the sting of the Serpent in tearming his Prayers strangely affected Whines what more opprobious terms saith he would the Damn-me Blades of the Times have used c. Answ. To which I say That he did not only use a strange affected way of Whineing in his feigned Praying but also therein most falsely accused us for Blasphemers in telling God That we compared Him and his Son and Holy Spirit to three finite Creatures which more justly was charged upon himself and his Brethren from their distinction of Persons in the Deity T. V's lye to God was so apparent in this matter that some that were by said The next time he Prayed he had need to ask God forgiveness for telling him that Lye for our comparison was to evince the natural consequence of their own distinction and the gross tendency of it as further is mainfest and not to represent the infinite God like unto man or finite Creatures as they have done about their Personalities And his comparing W. P's words to such tearms as those use he calls The Dam-me Blades of the Times he should rather have began at home and judged himself for his own wicked opprobious terms in saying It was worse to go to the Quakers Meetings than to a Bawdy-house what more gross terms could the Damners and Sinkers have used but evil words corrupt good manners And as for his Confidence that it is a falshood that they did use such words as impudent villain that there was striking among some of T. V's Hearers There are Persons of repute and credit who can testifie both against them and to my knowledge an honest sober Women did affirm That one of his Hearers thumpt her on the Breast when we were about that Dispute with them besides the malice envy and rudeness that appeared amongst them in clamouring railing and reviling us like the Billings-gate folks though
Heavens and is thereby become a most compleat Captain and perfect Example Obs. Here Christ is confest to as the Gift of God's Eternal Love for the Life and Salvation of men that come to receive him and his Appearance to destroy the works of the Devil which his own Light and Grace maketh manifest as it is believed and waited in and so Christ is the Leader and Captain of such and is made unto us Wisdom Righteousness Sanctification and Redemption And I ask who are those T.V. saith That the Lord extendeth his special Mercies to And whether is Mercy extended to All in sending his Son into the World and what more special Mercies can there be than the only begotten Son of God who is given for a Light for a Leader for a Covenant for Life and Salvation that whosoever receives and believes in him might receive the blessed End and Priviledge of his Coming and Manifestation to wit Life and Salvation in him from Sin Death and Destruction And whereas T.V. in pag. 65. brings an Instance That the Soul cannot see without the Body for want of an Organ and that therefore tho God separately cannot satisfie because he cannot suffer and man separately cannot satisfie because the satisfaction would not be of infinite value yet as God-Man he satisfied c. Reply Do but mark what an Instance and Comparison he has here brought in Competition with the Infinite Omnipotent God to shew us that God separately cannot satisfie any more then the Soul can see without an Organ And who is it that God cannot satisfie Is it himself Can he not satisfie or please himself Is he ever divided or displeased with himself What gross darkness appears in this Comparison Instance and Assertion to say God cannot satisfie c. and thus to bring the Infinite God and his Infinite Power under the Limitations of finite Creatures Is this any less then Blasphemy let but the indifferent judge in this case Have not these our Oppossers been ready to call us Blasphemers but for bringing an Instance to shew the absurdity of their Doctrine whereas this is an Instance from a finite to an infinite tending to lessen the infinite Power of God And as to his telling That the Soul cannot see without an Organ in one sense that 's not true though he meant outwardly yet it hath a spiritual sight As to his saying That God cannot suffer is in one sense not true though he intended as to Death yet the Spirit of God hath suffered and hath been grieved by man's Transgressions The Rebellious Jews grieved and vexed his Holy Spirit until he became their Enemy and fought against them Isa. 63.10 And did not the Lord say Behold I am pressed under you as a cart is pressed that is full of sheaves Amos 2.13 So did not he suffer in being pressed by them then and did not he say My heart is turned within me my repentings are kindled together I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger I will not return to destroy Ephraim for I am God and not man the Holy One in the midst of thee Hos. 11.8 9. Did not herein his Suffering and Forbearance declare him to be God the Holy One and not man rather then the Execution of the fierceness of his Anger And was not God's being grieved by the rebellious Jews a Suffering when they hardened their hearts and provoked him in the Wilderness for he said Forty years long was I grieved with this generation Psal. 95. therefore to day if ye will hear his voice harden not your heart And did not God suffer long by the old World before he destroyed them seeing when he saw their wickedness it grieved him at his heart Gen. 6.6 Also he said His Spirit should not alwayes strive with them vers 3. So that his Spirit did suffer and was grieved by them before they were destroyed Again How oft did they provoke him and grieve him in the Desart Psal. 78.40 And did not he Complain against the People when they were Rebellious and Polluted saying Your new Moons and your appointed Feasts my Soul hateth they are a trouble to me I am weary to bear them Was not this trouble and being weary with them matter of Suffering and was not this his Suffering for some time before he did ease himself of his Adversaries and avenge him of his Enemies See Isa. 1. And also it 's said Chap. 7.13 Hear ye now ye House of David is it a small thing to weary men but will ye weary my God also And Chap. 43.24 25. Neither hast thou filled me with the Fat of thy Sacrifices but thou hast made me to serve with thy sins thou hast wearied me with thy iniquities I even I am he that blotteth out thy transgressions for my own sake and will not remember thy sins Mark for my own sake So then surely God could satisfie himself seeing it was for his own sake that he blotted out Transgressions and here the infinite Value Ransom and Satisfaction was in himself and what Patience Forbearance Long-Suffering and Forgiveness as was signified by Christ and testified of by his outward Suffering and Death was really in being in God before and in the fullness of time a signal testimony thereof given to man 〈◊〉 induce him to receive the free Love and Grace of God and Life and Salvation in the Son of his Love T.V. Who do ascribe more Grace and Mercy to God than we who do apprehend it in his Son pag. 65. Reply Indeed your apprehensions in that matter are sufficiently manifest before had T.V. added Who do apprehend more Grace and Mercy in God then we that say he cannot Satisfie himself and Christ as man could not satisfie him by finite Suffering and the Grace we ascribe we apprehend it only to extend to a few a select number c. Had T.V. spoke this plainly together People might the more easily have judged whether he has truly ascribed or apprehended concerning the Grace of God and whether many thousands do not ascribe more Grace and Mercy to God that own it in the free and general Extent of it to all men than he hath done Again his confessing That God doth execute his Justice freely as he doth love his Image in his People freely yet both are necessary because Natural and neither forced nor compelled by any External Agent Reply So here 's a better Confession then much of his Work before and it contradict much of it For 1st If his Love be as free as his Justice and neither compelled neither fotced by any External Agent how then is he obliged to take vengeance upon all that have transgressed when upon Repentance he readily pardoneth and passeth by former offences and how then is it impossible for God freely to Pardon 2dly What is that Image in his People he loves freely is it perfect or imperfect if perfect then how do they deny the perfection of any thing within or that 's inherent in the
and his own notions and conceptions which are not grounded on Scripture and therefore we may not have our Faith imposed upon by them as to accept of his humane conceptions and notions which cannot reach the nature of God for divine verities And how says T. D. That infiniteness being a property of the Divine Nature agrees to each Person subsisting in that Nature contrary to his worthy Master Vincent's saying that infiniteness is not ascribed unto the Personality but such like confusion and conrradiction we have enough of from them And indeed such nonsensical stuff as is in both their Pamphlets I have seldom met withal as one while T. D. saith We do not affirm the Person in the Godhead to be finite but infinite another while T. V. saith infiniteness is not ascribed to them another while T. D. saith pag. 14. That they are one among themselves only in respect of that wherein they agree not simply What kind of oneness or agreement doth he reckon is in the Diety if it be not simply Was there ever such darkness and confusion uttered and what blind Sophistry and silly Logick and babling do these men use and put upon the Immortal God whom with all their inventions airy notions and vain conceptions they can never reach the knowledge of neither will nor can their Heathenish Phylosophy tearms of Aristotle nor apostate Christians and Papists demonstrate or discover the Knowledge of either Father Word or Spirit to any people that want the knowledge thereof but make them more dark and ignorant and shut them up in more blindness as they have a long time done And his saying that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may by a metalepsis yea must be rendred Person or Subsistent or some word to that effect and so tells that Just. Martyr applies 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to Father Son and Spirit pag. 17. Reply Surely T. D. is put very hard to it to word his Doctrine by his Anology and Metalepsis for his distinctions of Persons and his thereby rendring 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Person of necessity Where proves he this and those tearms by Scripture and if they signifie one and the same thing why is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Hebr. 1.3 and Chap. 11.1 as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As in Hebr. 11.1 Faith is the Substance of things hoped for it is not Person of things hoped for the same word that is for Substance in that is Hebr. chap. 2. verse 3. where it is speaking of the Son of God who being the brightness of his Glory and the express Image of his Substance Besides what ever Authors or Fathers so called did put names distinctions and tearms upon the Godhead which were either improper or unscriptural we must believe the Scriptures rather then them And do they count all Justin Martyr wrot One hundred fifty years after Christ to be of equal Authority with the Scriptures of Christ and the Apostles Or might not probably Justin bring in some of his Philosophy which is not Scripture And we do not read in the Scriptures either of three distinct Substances in God or three distinct Persons for where are they so rendred either in the Hebrew Greek Latine or English in Scripture from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the Revelations But if they be not three Substances as Tho. Vincent saith how doth T. Danson make 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 equivolent or apply both to Father Son and Spirit Is not here a manifest contradiction between these two Brethren unto themselves and their own Doctrine in this matter As for T. D. his Discourse about satisfaction there needs not much to be said unto it for that the matter hath been answered before as also in part he assents to W. P. in what he hath said for he T. D. doth not affirm any impossibility of forgiviness without a plenary satisfaction made as in the sence and notion some of them have c. And though he knows some worthy Persons do deny W. P's Affirmative yet he cannot joyn with them therein He saith also God is free in his determinations what attribute he will manifest and in what degree and manner and that between Justice and Mercy and their effects and all of his meer will interveens c. By all which in a great measure he hath confest to what W. P. hath writ in that case though in contradiction to his Brother Vincent as is evident But where he speakes of Vindictive Justice that God might onely have manifested when man fell as he does upon the reprobate Angels or Devils c. Now I query then Is this Vindictive Justice that which Christ under-went at God's hand and satisfied according to their Doctrine if they say it is where do the Scriptures say so or that God inflicted the same revengefull justice as I think they mean upon Christ that he doth upon the reprobate Angels or Devils and then make this the means and manner of full satisfaction for mankind let us have plain Scripture for this Doctrine was God's Love to man purchased by such revenge upon his innocent Son as he lays upon reprobate Angels or Devils or is it not rather blasphemous to suppose that Christ could ever be so far out of Gods favour as to construe his Sufferings to the height of revenge as goes against reprobate Angels and Devils and doth not this also accord with T. V. his Doctrine whereas Chrit was the beloved of the Father even his onely begotten the Son of his Love in whom his Soul delighted and was always well pleased both in his works and Sufferings both in his life and death for Sinners but angry with the wicked such as persecuted him and crucified him afresh unto themselves as he was also crucified in Spiritual Sodom and Egypt such Adversaries God will be avenged of but his pleasure shall prosper in the hand of his Anointed Seed Christ but these things T. D. his weak judgement as he confesseth it to be pag. 18. cannot reach And indeed in much of his Discourse about this matter he has talked more like a Lawyer then a Divine and has brought several similitudes which will not hold in matters of such high concernment But I shall not need much to take notice of his dark kind of reasoning in this particular which proceeds but from his weak judgemnt and private conceptions since the matter is answered elsewhere and the extent of his and their Principles therein is further manifest and handled about his and their Doctrine of Imputed Righteousness and his Arguments for Sin and Imperfection in all tearm of life yet a little to some particulars I may observe by the way of this point after he saith he shall give us his sence confessing that Satisfaction is not a Scripture phrase pag. 19. However we will chuse Scripture phrase rather then T. D's weak judgment and conceptions therein having
in the Flesh hath ceased from sin that he no longer should live the rest of his time in the Flesh to the lusts of men but to the Will of God Chap. 4.1 2. Now the ceasing from Sin and following of Christ's steps in the harmless sinless state is the right use and end of his Suffering for man and his Example to man But then mark T. D's Doctrine as followeth what an example and subject of Wrath and Vindictive Justice so tearmed he renders Christ viz. T. D. pag. 36.4 Christ when he suffered was not innocent and when God required satisfaction of him it was due from him Christ was guilty of our sin when he suffered for it for guilt is but obligatio ad paenam an obligation to undergo punishment which Christ was under by contract Hebr. 7.22 Answ. It s no wonder that these Presbyterians and those of their affinity accuse all Christ's Followers of being Sinners and imperperfect all their life time since that T. D. one of their Leaders or Chieftains hath accused Christ not to be innocent when he suffered saying also Christ was guilty of our Sin when he suffered for it which how false and blasphemous this charge is against Christ I appeal to all sober and moderate Professors of Christianity who have any real esteem and reverence to the Name of Christ and his Glory and how contrary to plain Scripture-testimonies plentifully given of him as being a Lamb yea the Lamb of God which declared his innocency and purity being without sin or guile who offered up himself by the Eternal Spirit a Lamb without spot to God 1 Pet. 1.19 chap. 2.22 Hebr. 9.14 Isa. 53.7 Acts 8.32 Now his being a Lamb without spot and without blemish manifests him to be a perfect Offering and Sacrifice for Sin as also how guilt is more then barely an obligation to undergo punishment being always imputed to the Transgressors and disobedient for sin and not to Christ Rom. 3.19 Jam. 2.10 1 Cor. 11.27 Deut. 19.13 and 21.9 Exod. 34.7 Although t is true those chief Priests false Witnesses and Persecutors of Christ among the Jews and such as accused him for a Blaspemer they said also that he was guilty of death Mat. 26.65 66. Mark 14.64 whose example T. D. hath followed in accusing Christ of being guilty and not innocent But if T. D. should say he meant not that Christ was really or inherently or personally guilty of sin but by imputation and so not innocent but guilty of our sins by this we may perceive then what he means by imputation that on the one hand an innocent person is made guilty and is not innocent whilst he hath no sin nor guile or evil in him and so on the other hand by their own rule of contraries contraria contrariorum ratio persons are to be reckoned imputatively righteous and innocent in God's sight whilst there is neither righteousness nor innocency really in them which is both unreasonable unscriptural and apparently false It was a false imputation of the persecuting Jews and Tho. Danson to impute guilt of sin to Christ and to accuse him with not being innocent when no sin evil nor guilt was in him and it is as false an imputation of theirs to impute Christ's Righteousness to sinfull persons who are not in it nor partakes of it in them so it s neither God's imputation nor Christ's for had Abraham no righteousness really in him when his Faith was reckoned to him for righteousness where then was his Faith and the righteousness and obedience of it if in reallity he was not a partaker and an enjoyer thereof within from whence did his acts or works of real obedience proceed and flow if not from his living Faith and its righteousness within Surely they are of very mean capacities that cannot see T. D's absurdities ignorance in these matters And his vain imaginations and conceits about imputation further will appear and that the stress and drift of all his and his Brethrens work in these invented Doctrines â—s to keep people in their sins and imperfections all their dayes and so their work in rendring Christ the subject of guilt and so of vengeance that belongs to Devils and their rendring people the subjects of his Righteousness and Justification by imputation whilst unjust and sinful in themselves it all centers in their sinfull Doctrine for sin and imperfection term of life Pag. 37. As to T. D's telling of the Son of God's Incarnation the creation of his Body and Soul the parts of that nature he subsisted in c. To this I say if the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both Created doth not this render him a Fourth Person for Creation was in time which contradicts their Doctrine of Three distinct Increated Co-eternal Co-essential Persons in the Deity seeing that which was created was not so but herein whether doth not his and their ignorance of the only begotten of the Father and their denial of Christs Divinity plainly appear yea or nay where doth the Scripture say that his Soul was created for was not he the brightness of his Fathers Glory and the express Image of his Divine Substance But supposing the Soul of Christ was with the Body created in time I ask if from Eternity he was a Person distinct from God and his holy Spirit without either Soul or Body and where doth the Scripture speak of any Person without either Soul or Body le ts have plain Scripture Pag. 38. Whilst T. D. grants our actual freedom from sin and wrath depends on what Christ did and suffered as on and upon its means what becomes of his Doctrine and Pleas for sin and imperfection which they that continues in term of life cannot be truly said to be Actually freed from sin nor yet imputatively righteous in Gods sight whilst actually and really sinfull And if Christ's obedience was not intended to exempt us from a personal obedience to the Law as is confest in pag. 38. then it s contrary to the end of his Obedience to live in sin and disobedience term of life and for any to be reckoned imputatively righteous when actually disobedient Secondly And if we be only so far made righteous by Christs Obedience as unrighteous by our own disobedience how far is that have we not been actually unrighteous and shall we so far be made righteous by Christ's Righteousness Is not this more then your Doctrine of Imputation whilst personally sinfull amount to but your flat contradictions in these matters are evident Pag. 39. And though Christ is our Surety this doth not exempt us either from following him or walking in the Way of God but the more ingage us therein and herein we know acceptance in the Beloved of God in that holy conversation which his pure Law within enjoyns without obedience to which God is not well pleased nor satisfied on man's part though he was even well pleased and satisfied in his own Son both in his doing and suffering
of it in the Unregenerate state not come to know the Image of God renewed in them for men are not imputedly Righteous when actually sinners as impiously hath been Asserted nor imputedly saved when actually damned no more then imputatively Saints while actually Devils Seventhly Neither doth God account men Justified or reckon them Righteous whilst they are really unjust being reproved and judged as Unrighteous by his Light and Spirit in them for God's accompts and reckonings are true and Righteous and he Just and True in all his wayes and his Judgments are Right and he can no more therein Contradict his own Light in Man or it's Judgment and Testimony than he can oppose or deny himself Eighthly The Unrighteous shall not inherit the Kingdom of God and the Wrath of God is revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men they that are or continue actually sinful and polluted are neither acquitted nor Righteous in God's account but must bear their Iniquity which will be their ruine unless they Return and be reconciled in their minds to the Light of Christ within which reproves them of sin and evil and so except men Repent and forsake their sins they shall surely perish they that neglect the great Salvation cannot escape Condemnation If I sin against thee then thou markest me and thou wilt not acquit me from mine Iniquity Job 10.14 Psal. 32. God imputes sin to none but them in whom it is in being so he imputes nor Righteousness to any but them in whom it is as the blessed man to whom God imputeth not sin c. in his Spirit there is no guile Finally All that profess to be Ministers of the Gospel and Teachers of others ought to Preach or Teach nothing but what may make or tend to the Glory of God and Honour of Christ Jesus in the Exaltation of Truth and Righteousness in the Earth and all the Contrary as all sin and sinful Doctrines with all sin-pleasing and sinners-soothing Principles to be abhorred rejected and opposed by all professing Christianity that tender the Honour of Christ and desire the Exaltation of his Kingdom which stands in Righteousness T.V. his Contradictions W. Madox * Christ's Divinity owned * The Vnity of the Deity and Divinity of Christ Asserted * A poor Tryal * The Father the Word and the Spirit truly confessed by us according to the Scriptures but these Priests mis-calling them denyed * See our Opposers blasphemous Distinctions and Contradictions * W. M's Rayling * Presbyters vain prophane babling confusion and blaspphemous work * Contradictions * The Pit they have digged for others they are fallen into themselves Here you may see T.V. his invented un-scriptural riddle * Yet in Contradiction they other whiles state it as an Act of Law and Contract between Creditor and Surety depending on Christ as a second Person but in Contradiction again 't is as God-Man as their words are * Where then is his absolute Power and soveraignity so much profest Confusion and Distractions * For a life in sin is not God's terms * But J. Owen confesseth otherwise That God requireth Faith and Repentance in Sinners antecedently to their Participation of Pardon * This being God's Pleasure in both where do the Scripture call it his Vindicative Justice upon him as T. V 's words are which J. O. and T. D. call Vindictive Justice but by what Scripture we know not for the Scripture calls it the Chastizement of our Peace that was on him * The Souls that he hath made his Justice doth not with-hold pity from them to gain upon them Heb. 12.9 10 11. * It was Christ's Persecutors that charged or imputed Sin Guilt and Blasphemy to him and so such they are that impute Righteousness to wicked or sinful Persons T.V. ‖ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Three Witnesses Page 14. Page 16. ‖ Here they deny the full satisfaction or plenary as they call it ‖ Here T. D. hath shot at us in the Devil's Bow as formerly he confessed he did ‖ But man in the faln state is worse then meerly a Debtor for he is a Malefactor guilty of high Offences and Crimes against the pure Law of God for which he must feel Justice in the Ministration of the Law and Sentence of death inwardly upon the Transgressor before he receive and enjoy the attonement ransom and peace with God ‖ Though God was alwayes well pleased and satisfied in Christ in his doing and Suffering and as he was a Sacrifice for Sin yet this is not enough for us to profess and believe without knowing the Work of Christ and Effect of his Sufferings and Righteousness within and his Spirit to make intercession c. Rom. 8. Phil. 3.9.10 Of Justication To Justifie what it is Of Perfection Of the Light within Of the Scriptures Of Baptism and the Lords Supper ‖ Rather Hireling at Sandwich Galat. 3.4 Chapters Of the Resurrection 1 Cor. 15.35 36 37 38. Pag. 156 157 and 160. Pag. 163. and 176. Pag. 178. and 180. ‖ But what a strange instance is that of J. O. that God cannot lye he cannot deny himself c. to prove that he cannot freely pardon sin c. pag. 178. as if the one were as much contrary to his nature as the other and yet upon Faith and Repentance which are his gifts he doth pardon his Creature man Note also that J. O. to the Reader saith of his Authors that many of them do expressly blame some of the School-men as Aquinus Durandus Biel Tartaretus for granting a possibility of pardon without satisfaction as opening a way to the Socinian error See here J. O's Authors great able learned defenders how they censure and contradict one another yet he would have men be wary how they censure them notwithstanding ‖ Who with his Brethren were fully manifested and confuted by Sam. Fisher in his Book stiled Rusticus c. never yet answered by them nor like to be ‖ For it was committed into the hands of the Father and was that day in Paradice ‖ Whether his Soul's travel and suffering under the burthen of Mans Transgression also even till he was in an Agony or his Body suffering under the violence of the wicked hands to death and the shedding of his Blood c. And why hast thou forsaken me Mat. 27.46 implies a deep suffering for Sinners under a cloud of Affliction yet not the Infinite Wrath or Eternal Death that 's due to the Wicked who reject God's Love and good will that 's tendred in Chirst we desire all may have as good an esteem of Christ in his Sufferings as may be but methinks you Professors do ascribe very mean honor to Christ and his Sufferings who therein reckon him not innocent but guilty of your sins and therefore that he suffered the same Vengeance or Vindictive Justice due to Reprobate Angels and Devils is this the Dignity you confer upon Christ Oh Miserable ‖ For if but a
was the Word and all things were made by the Word and were all things made by the Scriptures And we say the Scriptures are a better Rule than your Directory for if the Scriptures be the Rule why do you set up a Directory to be your Rule What! will you bore out Peoples eyes that they shall not see how you dissemble And why did you make a Church Faith at Savoy in eleaven dayes time if the Scriptures be your Rule But it seems the Scriptures are not a sufficient Rule for you but your Directory and your Church Faith it seems is your Rule Scriptures are not sufficient to be your Rule And why do you deny Common Prayer and set up a Directory and a Church Faith of your own making And there in your Directory do you not set up your Imaginations and Meanings above Scriptures Come People will not sell their Wits Reason and Understanding Come People you all know that when you come to discourse with these Presbyterians or Independants about Scriptures who say it is their Rule they will presently fall and give it a meaning and say it is their Opinion and Judgement and conceive it to be so And so then the Presbyterians and Independants Meanings and Opinions and Thinkings and Conceivings and Imaginations and Judgements this must be the Rule and not the Scripture then you must not take it as the Scriptures speake The Quakers will take it Literally cry they and these have been the Presbyterian and Independant tricks this long time What think you do we not know your tricks And so you would make People believe what an Esteem you have of Scriptures when it is nothing but Meanings and old Directory and Church Faith Do you think we have forgot your old Malice and Envie when you haled above three thousand of us to Prison in the other Powers dayes and persecuted to Death about thirty three which stands upon Record to this day whose Blood you have drunk and mingled with your Sacrifice and whose innocent Blood lies upon your heads Was the Scripture your Rule to do thus Nay Christ bids you love Enemies let Scripture be your Rule Have you not been like Judas and the Persecuting Jewes and the Heathen that Persecuted the true Christians You have banished the Rule which is to love Enemies and love one another And Christ saith Freely ye have received freely give But you will not give freely for you have not received freely You will have the Club and the Bagg For what havock have you made of them that could not put into your mouths what Imprisoning and spoyling of Goods did you make when you had Power this is not Gospel this is besides the Rule You are worse than the outward Jewes for where did they ever take trebble damages of them that did not hire them It was time for the Lord to bring you down who are judged by your own Rule 10 thly And why do you belye the Quakers with saying That your good Works that is of self are the Meritorious Cause of Justification Answ. Christ Works all our Works in us and for us who is our Justifier S. F. hath sufficiently cleared this matter and answered you 11 thly And where doth the Scripture say The Works of Faith and the Works of Grace and the Fruits of the Spirit are sinful 12 thly And where do the Scriptures hold forth the Sprinkling of Infants and call it an Ordinance and tell of a Sacrament and call it an Ordinance Let us see Scripture for these things and that the Apostles practised them as you do and whether your practises were according to theirs And have you the same Power and Spirit as they had that gave forth Scriptures Answer plainly in plain words of Scripture that you do not err from the Words and Rule which you say is your Rule But do you not remember you Presbyterians and Independants what havock you made of the Goods of the People of God whom in scorn you called Quakers because they would not pay for the Bread and Wine you eat and drunk you drunk it your selves and eat it your selves and made them Pay for it did the Apostles ever do so to spoyl any ones Goods because they would not pay for their Bread and Wine they eat and drunk Come let us see your Scripture your Rule which you boast so much of for these things who make People believe it is your Rule let us see a Rule for this But you grumble because you have not Power to fall upon the Quakers to make them pay for your Bread and Wine you eate and drink as you have done formerly and then when you have done boast that Scripture is your Rule and you say this is Gospel this is Glad Tydings is it and then you spoyl their Goods for your Bread and Wine Where were you in the time of Persecution we could see but few of you then for then you slunk into Holes and Corners had out your Scouts and now when you have a little Liberty what a bawling you make against Quakers You are a little hungry bitten because you have not Tythes and Easter Reckonings and Midsummer Dues and Money of the Quakers for your Bread and Wine will you avenge your self of the Quakers 13 thly And do you not say That your Sanctification and Justification and your Prayers and Graces and Faith all are imperfect as manifest in you Is not Christ Justification and Sanctification And must you not Pray in the Spirit of God And is it not perfect What darkness is this Must not Christ be in you And is not he in you and Faith in you and the Spirit of God in you to Pray by And so if it be imperfect then it is your own Praying and your own Justitication and Sanctification and Faith and Application it 's of your own making and not Christ's for Christ is perfect who Sanctifies and Justifies and his Spirit is perfect Priest Danson Presbyterian how now Dost thou not bring Cardinal Pool and Aquinas and Aristotle to prove thy Assertions and thy Imaginations it seems Scripture is not sufficient Thou wouldst make People believe that the Presbyterians were against the Papists and Heathen both but now they must be the Presbyterians Patrons and yet could make People believe that the Scriptures were their Rule but this must be their Rule the Papists and the Heathen Read Danson's Synopsis of his Quakerism what a bundle of Lyes he hath drawn up together he may take them home to himself 14 thly And why do you Presbyterians cry against the Quakers Light which is Christ as being but an Heathenish light and now to oppose them you are fain to run to the Heathen and to the Papists to find Arguments and then tell People the Scripture is your Rule O Deceipt 15 thly Where doth the Scripture speak of an Humane Nature of Christ in Heaven Is not Christ and his Body Glorified and he the Lord from Heaven for is not
Christ's Nature Divine and his Soul Divine which comes out from God And where is his Soul called Humane Come to the Accidence again thou that professes thy self to be a great Schollar tell us what Humane signifies 16 thly Thou speaks of Three Persons and a man is a Person What doest thou infer from this Is God a Man No he is a Spirit I tell thee the Scripture sayes so Is the Holy Ghost a Man It is call'd the Holy Spirit and Christ was a man the man Christ Jesus So it seems the Presbyterians can say little of himself but he hath learned something of the Learned Wotton in pag. the second but he doth not tell us what he is whether a Papist or an Heathen 17 thly Thou sayest the Soul is part of man's Nature Where doth the Scripture thy Rule say so For the Scripture saith God breathed into man the breath of Life and man became a Living Soul 18 thly Thou sayest the word Person cannot properly be attributed to the Father Son and Holy Ghost Why doth the Presbyterians rage so against the Quakers It seems you cannot agree among your selves because the Quakers speak as the Scriptures do Father Son and Holy Spirit and say the Scripture doth not speak of Three Persons as thou thy self in thy third page sayes the word Person cannot properly be attributed to the Father Son and Holy Ghost See how this man is in Confusion who saith sometimes there are Three separate Persons and another while the word Person cannot properly be attributed to the Father Son and Holy Chost But we do charge Danson and his Brethren to make this good by Scripture in plain words For the Scripture saith The Father is in the Son and the Son is in the Father and the Holy Ghost proceeds from them So how can you say they are separated when they are one in another but it shews you have little knowledge of God or Scriptures either 19 thly The Priest saith concerning that distinction in the God-head it cannot be apprehended by us and yet he will call them Three separated Persons and a Trinity and gives them Names which are not apprehended by you you might have been silent then in what you did not apprehend And yet you will lay Principles down concerning God the Son and Spirit which you do not apprehend your selves but presume above what is written and so go contrary to your Rule Should you not call the Father Son and Holy Spirit as the Holy Men did call them in the Scriptures 20 thly In the 4th page thou sayest The Father the Son and the Spirit are said to be Three yet but one God and yet thou sayest we do not know what to call those Three but Three Persons and there is that ascribed to them thou sayest Properties which agree not simply Answ. The Father Son and Spirit agree but that which you do ascribe do not agree with Scripture with them nor among your selves about them And if you do not know what to call the Father Son and Spirit but Three Persons you might have holden your Tongues then till you did know who calls them and gives them Names contrary to Scriptures and the Holy Men of God who called them Father Son and Spitit who were wiser Men then any of you 21 thly And again in thy 4th page thou sayest Thre Subsistents that is Persons though not strictly yet proportionably or Anologically so called in the God-head People Did you ever hear such a Mash We do charge this Presbyterian to make these words good by plain Scripture viz. Three Subsistents Three Persons and Analogically Is this a Scripture word People Where did the Apostles use any such dark words Hadst thou not this word from the Heathen Well Mark Reader he sayes there are Three Persons and Three Subsistents in the God-head and hath not he made Four here If there be Three in the God-head he hath made Four for what is the God-head God is One and he hath made Three besides see pag. 4. of his Book And so in the Title of his Book he speaks of Three Persons in the God-head Are there not Four then And in the said 4th page he sayes he thinks he hath answered all the Arguments of the Antitrinitarians he doth but think so it seems Answ. The Scripture saith 1 Joh. 5.7 That there are Three that bear Record in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these three are one But he doth not say that they are separated nor distinct neither doth call them Persons And thus we call them as the Scriptures call them Father Word and Holy Ghost and the Apostle doth not say they are separate nor distinct and we are not to presume above what is written We charge you Presbyterians to give us printed Scriptures for these following words and let us see in what Chapter and Verse they are printed Come to the Rule and do not presume above what is written Concreet Abstract Predicate the Relative Co-eternity Co-essentiallity Co-equallity Communication of Properties Co-essentiallities Modallities Suppossitallities Incommunicable Subsistances and Hypostatical Unions Come are these words spoken in the Rule the Scriptures let us see the Chapter and Verse that we may see where such terms are spoken of the Father Word and Spirit which are one Had you not them rather from your old Logical and Philosophical Books And have not they been your Rule for such words and not the Scriptures which the Holy men of God spoke forth Thou sayest in the 12th page of thy Book That we must not take Man here for a Person but a Nature as you do God c. And yet before thou saidst That Man was a Person and so it is the Nature that is a Person and not the Man nor God but thou hast not defined to us what a Person is nor what the word Person signifies for all thy Schollar-ship And thou sayest Ye mean no more then the Name Man to be attributed to Peter James and John because the same human Nature specifically agrees unto them and so is the Name God attributed to each Person because the same Divine Nature subsists in each of them Answ. This is a dark thing to whom will you liken me saith God like Peter James and John or like unto some corrupt person The Saints were partakers of the Divine Nature What do you say of them therefore And where do the Scriptures speak that the Nature of God is so simple c. where learned you this word And where doth the Scripture use these words Accidents and Integrals of the God-head and this is your Conceptions and Notions of God and the Word and the Spirit as it 's said in the 13th page of Danson's Book It 's a Conception and Notion indeed For you say in the same 13th page The Conception or Notion that we have of the Father c. so it 's but a Notion and Conception it seems that you have of the Father and