Verus
Patroclus
:
OR
,
The
Weapons
of
Quakerism
,
The
Weakness
of
Quakerism
:
BEING
A
Discourse
,
wherein
the
choicest
Arguments
for
their
chief
Tenets
are
Enervat
▪
and
their
best
Defences
Annihilat
;
several
Abominations
,
not
heretofore
so
directly
Discovered
,
Unmasked
:
WITH
A
Digression
Explicative
of
the
Doctrine
anent
the
necessity
of
the
Spirits
Operation
;
AND
An
Appendix
,
Vindicating
,
Rom.
9.
From
the
Depravations
of
an
Arminian
.
By
William
Iamison
.
Tit.
3.10
.
A
man
that
is
an
Heretick
,
after
the
first
and
second
Admonition
,
reject
.
Edinburgh
,
Printed
in
the
Year
,
1689.
TO
THE
Right
Honourable
,
The
EARL
of
DUNDONNALD
,
Lord
Cochran
,
&c.
AS
,
my
Lord
,
amongst
the
innumerable
precious
Benefits
and
Blessings
,
which
God
hath
graciously
vouchsafed
to
Mankind
,
or
to
any
part
thereof
,
His
Word
,
Statutes
and
sacred
Oracles
infinitly
surpass
,
excel
,
and
,
so
to
speak
,
obscure
all
the
rest
by
far
,
more
than
the
Sun
doth
eclipse
the
lesser
Luminaries
:
so
according
to
that
common
saying
,
Corruptio
optimi
,
pessima
;
Nothing
by
many
degrees
is
so
mischievous
,
noxious
,
and
deadly
as
the
Corruption
and
Depravation
of
these
lively
Oracles
;
For
thus
,
tho
by
a
cursed
accident
,
The
Wine
of
our
Fathers
Kingdom
is
turned
into
Wormwood
,
and
that
Heavenly
and
unpressed
Honey
into
Gall
;
whereby
the
greater
part
of
the
visible
Church
hath
perished
!
For
the
Poison
hath
this
most
unhappy
advantage
above
all
others
,
that
it
is
of
an
hydropick
nature
,
making
the
infected
,
the
more
they
have
drunk
,
so
much
the
more
desirous
to
drink
.
Hence
that
sagacious
Spirit
,
the
grand
Enemy
of
Mankind
,
judged
this
the
choicest
expedient
and
mean
,
for
restauration
of
his
falling
Kingdom
:
For
to
speak
nothing
o●
the
first
4000
years
of
the
World
,
he
hath
ever
,
since
the
very
infancy
of
Christianity
,
to
his
outmost
,
put
this
in
practice
,
always
raising
up
such
as
were
most
famous
,
or
rather
infamous
,
through
their
corrupting
,
abusing
,
and
detorting
the
Word
of
Life
,
and
Charters
of
our
Salvation
:
Of
which
kind
,
in
the
early
days
of
Christianity
,
were
Cerinthus
,
Montanus
,
the
Cataphrygians
,
Samosatenus
,
Arrius
,
and
a
multitude
beside
.
But
these
first
Essays
,
by
reason
of
their
palpable
and
direct
overturning
of
the
undoubted
Fundamentals
of
Christianity
which
rendred
all
their
sophistry
,
tho
never
so
subtile
,
most
suspected
,
proved
inefficacious
to
do
the
Business
,
tho
in
some
respect
,
infectious
enough
.
Therefore
the
Lord
having
by
many
Means
,
and
in
special
,
by
the
first
four
Councils
,
blown
away
these
pestiferous
Mists
,
and
cleared
up
to
mens
minds
,
these
grand
Truths
of
the
Holy
Trinity
,
the
Godhead
of
Christ
,
the
Unity
of
his
Person
,
the
Distinction
of
his
Natures
,
and
the
like
.
The
Method
was
altered
,
and
the
following
opposers
of
Truth
acted
by
the
same
Spirit
,
that
the
former
were
,
went
more
subtilly
to
work
,
not
only
forbearing
to
oppose
these
Fundamentals
,
but
,
in
shew
at
le●st
,
endeavouring
to
defend
and
assert
them
:
By
which
it
came
to
pass
,
that
they
were
more
easily
believed
in
all
they
said
,
by
the
too
simple
people
.
In
the
mean
while
they
secretly
and
slily
sowed
their
Tares
under
the
specious
pretext
of
Unity
,
Order
,
Decency
,
Ornament
,
and
antient
Tradition
.
Under
the
covert
of
these
&
the
like
,
was
the
whole
Mass
of
Paganism
introduced
,
guilded
only
with
the
varnishing
Title
of
Catholick
Doctrine
.
For
thus
in
stead
of
the
humility
of
a
Gospel-Ministry
,
was
brought
in
a
Prelatick
Hierarchy
,
in
imitation
of
the
Pagan
Protoflamines
,
which
at
length
procreated
to
the
World
the
Man
of
Sin
,
to
head
this
degenerating
Church
in
their
Wickedness
:
And
so
they
had
Unity
,
which
was
worse
than
Division
;
and
an
Order
,
that
became
the
cause
of
the
most
horrid
Confusion
the
World
hath
hitherto
seen
.
Thus
also
the
simplicity
of
the
Gospel
was
turned
into
Heathnish
Pageantry
;
and
the
glory
of
the
Church
of
God
did
degenerat
into
a
meer
worldly
pomp
and
grandour
.
But
at
length
how
sad
and
miserable
became
the
case
of
the
Church
,
whe●
through
the
power
of
humane
inventions
,
delivered
under
the
name
of
Tradition
,
&
the
Dictats
of
the
Romish-depute
of
the
old
Dragon
,
such
poisonous
dregs
became
the
best
part
of
the
essentials
of
their
Religion
!
Justification
before
God
,
ascribed
to
the
belief
and
practice
thereof
,
and
Justification
by
Faith
in
the
Son
of
God
,
decried
and
maligned
!
Thus
were
the
same
fundamental
Truths
,
which
had
been
more
openly
assaulted
by
the
former
Hereticks
,
now
no
less
powerfully
,
but
more
subtilly
almost
overthrown
.
But
so
soon
as
the
Lord
,
as
it
were
by
the
dawning
of
a
second-Christian-day
,
had
discovered
Romes
Abominations
,
and
rendered
her
hateful
to
all
good
Men
;
the
old
Artist
&
his
associats
changed
their
method
,
tho
not
their
design
,
impugning
again
more
openly
,
these
fundamental
Truths
they
had
assaulted
in
the
early
days
of
Christianity
;
But
that
the
Weapon
,
already
blunted
,
might
yet
cut
,
behold
a
new
Artifice
!
For
these
attempts
were
not
made
,
for
the
most
part
,
by
these
who
persisted
in
the
company
of
the
now
deservedly
hated
Church
of
Rome
,
but
by
these
who
were
in
appearance
the
Deserters
and
Opposers
thereof
:
Under
the
covert
of
which
,
they
far
more
securely
infected
many
,
who
were
in
communion
with
the
reformed
Church
,
impudently
asserting
,
that
the
chiefest
points
of
Christianity
we●e
Popery
,
on
this
account
that
the
Papists
had
not
expresly
denied
them
.
These
were
known
by
many
names
,
as
Servetians
,
Anti-trinitarians
,
Socinians
,
and
the
like
.
But
more
general
was
that
of
Anabaptists
,
comprising
in
it self
all
these
,
and
many
other
such
Vipers
.
The
true
progeny
of
these
Anabaptists
are
these
,
now
known
by
the
Name
of
Quakers
,
the
men
with
whom
Ideal
,
who
for
design
and
method
,
are
all
on●
with
the
bulk
of
both
antient
and
modern
Hereticks
.
Two
Artifices
were
alternatively
used
by
the
antient
Hereticks
:
and
by
a
continued
succession
derived
unto
our
present
Adversaries
,
the
one
of
which
was
to
abuse
the
Scriptures
;
as
if
one
should
mould
a
Bushel
of
Jewels
,
into
the
shape
of
a
Dog
,
Toad
,
or
the
like
hateful
Creature
.
The
other
,
when
in
spite
of
all
these
shifts
,
they
were
Convicted
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
to
turn
upon
the
Scriptures
themselves
,
as
being
not
free
of
their
own
Errors
,
nor
of
Divine
Authority
.
How
exactly
the
Quakers
write
after
their
Copy
,
none
acquainted
with
their
Doctrines
,
seeth
not
.
I
hope
therefore
it
shal
not
be
unprofitable
,
if
the
following
Discourse
shall
unfold
more
particularly
these
practices
of
our
Adversaries
,
which
I
with
a
humble
confidence
can
averr
;
and
moreover
I
make
some
Discoveries
,
in
particular
of
this
more
spiritual
Mystery
of
Iniquity
,
by
none
I
know
hitherto
directly
undertaken
.
Moreover
,
this
my
Treatise
can
be
judged
by
none
altogether
superfluous
,
who
considereth
,
that
the
whole
Land
is
ready
to
be
overspread
with
the
Hemlock
o●
Pelagianism
,
now
known
by
the
name
of
Arminianism
,
with
which
the
bulk
of
the
Prelatick
Clergy
is
already
infected
,
for
with
this
Heresie
I
have
several
Rancounters
.
But
I
will
not
trouble
your
Lordship
with
a
further
account
of
this
my
small
Undertaking
;
Yet
this
I
crave
leave
to
say
,
that
whatever
I
intended
of
this
kind
,
it
was
designed
for
your
Lordship
,
not
for
instruction
;
for
to
a
higher
pitch
,
and
that
not
without
ground
I
presume
your
Lordship
to
be
arrived
,
but
only
for
a
testimony
of
my
gratitude
to
your
Lordships
most
Noble
and
Munificent
Grand-Father
,
whose
large
bounty
to
the
Learned
,
and
Learners
,
did
liberally
extend
it self
to
me
also
,
tho
most
undeserving
.
Wherefore
if
there
were
any
worth
in
this
my
small
Essay
,
your
Lordship
by
right
of
succession
may
challenge
a
propriety
therein
.
Neither
were
your
Lordships
Vertues
unknown
to
me
,
while
I
had
the
honour
of
receiving
my
Education
under
the
same
Roo●
,
and
at
the
same
time
with
your
Lordship
.
But
the
special
motive
of
my
ambition
to
prefix
your
Lordships
Name
to
my
sheets
,
is
,
that
your
Lordship
by
undoubted
arguments
hath
proved
your self
,
to
be
a
sincere
lover
of
the
now
much
deserted
and
maligned
Truths
of
GOD
,
and
a
true
favourer
of
his
afflicted
Church
,
trampled
on
these
many
years
by
oppressing
Lords
,
that
never
had
lawful
Dominion
over
her
:
whose
Prelatical
Yoak
and
Hierarchy
,
as
it
hath
proved
the
stair
,
by
which
,
beside
many
other
Tyrants
,
the
Pope
hath
got
to
the
unmeasurable
height
,
at
which
he
is
now
arrived
,
so
it
is
ready
to
become
the
bridge
,
and
pave
the
way
for
his
Retroduction
into
Britain
,
with
this
much
I
thought
to
have
troubled
your
Lordship
several
Months
ago
,
but
then
could
not
,
for
May
last
,
my
Papers
not
being
admitted
to
the
Press
without
the
allowance
of
the
then
publick
Inspectors
,
were
given
to
Doctor
Munro
,
thereunto
appointed
by
the
Prelat
of
St.
Andrews
,
by
whom
I
was
prohibited
the
publication
thereof
,
unless
I
razed
out
of
them
,
all
mention
of
Popery
whatsoever
.
So
great
hath
the
zeal
of
these
good
men
been
against
Popery
,
that
so
far
as
they
could
,
they
would
not
suffer
it
so
much
as
once
to
be
named
.
Yet
do
I
not
complain
of
any
wrong
done
to
me
,
but
only
show
to
your
Lordship
,
and
the
World
,
to
how
sad
a
pass
things
were
then
brought
!
Go
on
therefore
,
my
Lord
,
espousing
the
Cause
of
the
true
Protestant
Interest
,
in
opposition
to
Popery
,
and
whatsoever
hath
a
tendency
thereto
:
Thus
shall
your
Lordship
add
the
truest
lustre
to
your
Nobility
,
by
causing
the
Heart
of
the
destitute
,
and
widow
Church
to
sing
,
and
bringing
the
blessing
of
her
that
was
ready
to
perish
upon
your
Lordship
.
And
however
matters
shall
succeed
,
your
Lordship
shall
be
Feasted
with
the
Delicacies
of
a
good
Conscience
,
in
respect
of
which
,
the
choicest
Banquet
of
Cleopatra
with
her
Anthony
,
are
far
from
amounting
to
the
coursest
of
Commons
.
In
which
,
that
the
Lord
may
prosper
your
Lordship
,
and
bestow
upon
your
Lordship
and
Family
,
his
choicest
Blessings
,
is
,
and
shall
be
,
the
earnest
Prayer
of
,
my
Lord
,
Your
Lordships
most
humble
and
devoted
Servant
,
WILL
.
JAMISON
.
To
the
Judicious
READER
.
THou
will
perhaps
say
,
that
this
Treatise
is
but
an
Illade
after
Homer
,
or
a
thirteenth
Enclo
;
So
much
already
to
so
good
purpose
being
written
on
this
Subject
:
I
therefore
hold
my self
obliged
to
answer
this
Objection
,
by
rendring
thee
an
account
of
the
Reasons
that
moved
me
to
this
undertaking
;
which
were
,
the
dangerousness
of
,
though
but
the
least
infection
,
by
this
deadly
Disease
.
The
Proximity
,
or
nearness
of
the
Contagion
.
The
wonderful
readiness
of
its
Patrons
to
broach
Books
,
and
Papers
,
bearing
the
Names
of
Answers
of
whatsoever
is
said
,
or
written
in
opposition
to
it
.
That
Quakerism
is
most
dangerous
,
and
the
embracing
thereof
,
of
a
lamentable
and
dreadful
Consequence
;
none
that
seriously
compare
its
Principles
with
those
of
Christianity
,
can
be
ignorant
.
I
say
,
that
compareth
seriously
,
for
others
who
have
their
Eye
only
,
ad
verum
corricem
;
taking
an
overly
view
of
the
outside
of
things
,
may
perhaps
judge
this
difference
not
so
great
,
and
the
Consequence
of
the
Reception
of
Quakerism
not
so
dismal
.
And
apprehend
that
the
worst
things
of
Quakerism
are
only
some
ridiculous
Stoicisms
,
and
antick
Toys
,
which
,
notwithstanding
requite
all
the
want
of
Civility
,
and
good
manners
with
sport
and
laughter
,
which
thereby
accreweth
to
the
beholders
.
But
by
this
their
sloth
,
and
neglect
to
compare
the
Doctrine
of
this
Party
with
the
Scriptures
,
they
render
themselves
more
capable
to
swallow
down
their
poisoned
wills
,
and
eat
out
of
the
Pot
filled
with
nothing
but
death
.
For
as
Ignoti
Nulla
Cupido
,
as
a
man
cannot
greatly
love
that
which
he
knoweth
not
,
though
it
be
good
,
so
neither
can
he
sufficiently
hate
it
,
be
it
never
so
evil
.
Indeed
their
carelesness
,
and
negligence
meriteth
no
less
.
For
certain
it
is
,
that
bitter
is
no
more
contrary
to
sweet
,
darkness
to
light
,
than
the
Doctrine
of
Quakers
is
to
that
of
Christ
;
being
no
other
thing
but
a
hodge-podge
of
the
damnable
Heresies
,
with
which
Christianity
hath
been
from
its
infancy
assaulted
,
and
wrested
,
with
to
so
good
success
,
that
few
,
though
otherwise
most
audacious
,
have
ventured
to
Patronise
them
,
under
their
proper
names
,
and
genuine
colours
;
but
only
under
a
mask
and
vizard
,
and
new
names
and
titles
;
all
which
are
to
be
found
in
their
Doctrine
mixed
,
and
compounded
together
,
as
if
the
Enemy
of
Mankind
,
mindful
of
that
common
saying
,
Ut
quod
non
Possunt
,
singula
juncta
valent
,
had
Collected
in
one
body
,
all
his
broken
and
foiled
Troup●
:
having
somewhat
changed
his
manner
of
Order
,
and
Marshalling
thereof
,
with
which
he
may
make
the
last
one
fall
.
The
truth
of
this
could
easily
be
evinced
,
were
this
a
place
convenient
,
and
the
Sequel
will
afford
many
instances
,
by
which
the
Reader
may
judge
of
the
rest
.
Moreover
,
supposing
that
Quakerism
were
far
less
noxious
than
it
is
,
seing
in
every
corner
of
the
Land
,
there
be
many
of
its
Defenders
swarming
among
all
people
,
it
cannot
be
judged
unnecessary
to
give
an
Antidot
against
it
,
more
than
to
write
Rules
against
any
infectious
D●sease
,
raging
in
a
Land
.
Even
although
many
things
of
this
kind
were
already
extant
;
especially
seing
these
Papers
,
with
which
I
present
thee
,
are
both
without
Prolixity
,
and
also
discover
some
things
of
great
concernment
,
which
,
for
any
thing
I
know
,
were
never
so
fully
,
or
directly
handled
by
any
others
,
which
,
I
hope
,
may
in
part
justifie
my
undertaking
.
But
the
thing
most
moving
me
to
trouble
the
World
with
any
Treatise
of
this
kind
,
was
,
that
no
sooner
did
any
Piece
in
opposition
to
Quakerism
,
see
the
light
,
but
presently
there
came
forth
another
,
bearing
the
name
of
a
Refutation
thereof
.
At
this
I
did
not
a
litle
wonder
;
for
after
a
most
impartial
,
and
serious
weighing
of
their
Principles
,
in
the
ballance
of
the
Sanctuary
,
I
found
them
(
to
say
no
more
)
directly
opposite
to
the
holy
Scriptures
.
I
therefore
,
with
all
seriousness
,
perused
severals
of
the
most
elaboured
Pieces
,
which
had
not
been
as
yet
answered
;
comparing
them
with
these
,
against
whom
they
wrote
.
After
all
which
,
my
thoughts
were
quite
altered
;
for
I
left
off
to
admire
their
promptitude
of
answering
,
and
fell
to
wonder
at
their
impudence
,
seing
in
every
point
,
they
in
stead
of
Confuting
,
Confirm
what
their
Adversaries
say
against
them
.
In
short
,
all
the
best
of
their
answers
,
are
either
a
quite
omission
,
and
passing
by
the
substance
of
what
is
brought
for
the
overthrow
of
their
Doctrine
,
or
at
best
meer
shifts
,
or
else
a
most
audacious
asserting
of
these
things
In
Ter●●o●s
,
which
are
s●fficient
in
the
estimat
of
all
Christians
,
to
render
the
Maintainers
thereof
more
abominable
than
worst
of
Pagans
,
though
they
were
but
only
inferred
by
a
long
threed
of
consequences
,
which
the
Eternity
of
Christs
Manhood
,
and
the
Souls
being
a
pa●t
of
God
,
no
less
loudlie
than
impiouslie
asserted
by
them
,
sufficiently
witness
.
These
,
I
say
,
they
either
directly
maintain
▪
even
in
their
last
peices
,
or
else
can
never
be
brought
to
disown
them
.
Of
which
dealing
,
the
Sequel
will
give
diverse
undeniable
instances
,
which
indeed
is
the
main
Scope
of
this
discourse
.
Among
these
Authors
,
I
bestowed
most
thoughts
upon
Robert
Barclay
His
Vindication
of
his
Apology
,
which
I
found
made
up
of
untruths
,
perversions
▪
false
suppositions
.
As
for
example
,
to
Vindicat
and
urge
most
of
the
places
of
Scripture
brought
in
His
Apologie
;
as
the
foundation
of
his
Doctrine
,
he
supposeth
that
from
the
same
texts
his
Adversarie
inferred
our
contrary
doctrine
,
and
thinketh
it
sufficient
to
desi●e
his
Adversary
to
prove
our
Doctrine
from
these
places
.
These
are
the
proper
Elements
of
this
Composition
,
but
to
make
up
a
fourth
,
he
knowing
that
by
all
men
the
Quakers
were
accused
of
ma●chless
rayling
,
taketh
the
Start
,
and
filleth
no
small
pa●●
of
his
book
,
accusing
His
Adversarie
,
as
an
unparalelled
railer
:
The
ground
of
which
accusation
is
,
that
his
adversarie
,
as
occasion
serveth
,
telleth
his
Reader
,
that
the
Quakers
,
and
this
Apologist
,
among
the
rest
,
were
no
less
grosse
and
abominable
than
Arrians
,
Socinians
,
Pelagians
,
Papists
,
Libertins
,
Anabaptists
,
and
the
like
.
His
Symbolizing
with
which
he
adventureth
not
to
deny
:
Which
although
at
other
times
he
doth
,
yet
groundleslie
,
as
these
Papers
will
in
part
,
and
more
fullie
,
an
entire
Colation
of
Quakerism
with
the
Principles
of
these
Sects
,
will
demonstrate
to
any
,
who
hath
but
the
least
Spunk
of
ingenuity
,
and
Candour
.
I
forbear
to
say
,
although
I
could
,
that
our
Vindicator
is
no
novice
in
the
very
Crime
,
of
which
he
so
oft
accuseth
his
adversarie
.
However
the
matter
be
,
he
might
have
forborn
his
accusations
of
that
which
he
knew
his
Brethren
,
to
be
of
all
Men
most
guilty
,
which
,
not
to
mention
others
,
Burroughs
answer
to
Bennets
queries
,
and
Hub●erthorns
reply
to
Sherlok
,
evidently
witness
,
Quis
tulerit
Grachos
de
sedi●●one
querentes
.
The
like
I
say
of
Geo
:
Keith
in
his
book
,
intituled
,
Truth
defended
(
evil
enough
,
I
am
sure
)
For
in
it
he
never
speaketh
to
the
purpose
,
or
toucheth
what
His
Adversarie
Mr.
John
Alexander
had
said
,
or
else
marreth
in
stead
of
mending
the
matter
:
for
others
,
I
forbear
to
speak
of
them
,
these
mentioned
being
the
most
learned
of
their
Authors
.
Neither
can
I
expect
any
better
dealing
,
than
these
and
the
like
have
met
with
,
and
altho
they
,
as
some
of
them
have
begun
to
do
al●eady
,
upbraid
me
with
the
infirmity
in
which
divine
Providence
hath
stated
me
,
they
will
instead
of
doing
their
business
hereby
,
only
shew
to
the
World
,
that
they
have
been
too
docil
of
a
bad
Lesson
,
taught
them
by
the
Phari●ees
long
ago
.
John.
9.
Neither
do
I
intend
at
present
to
trouble
my self
and
others
,
with
whatsoever
they
shall
give
under
the
name
of
an
answer
,
seing
the
badness
of
their
cause
will
not
permit
them
to
give
any
better
,
than
What
they
have
given
to
others
:
In
which
,
they
have
been
so
unhappie
,
that
one
would
have
thought
,
that
they
of
purpose
verified
that
saying
of
the
Poet
,
Causa
patrocinlo
non
bona
major
erit
.
And
although
they
say
,
that
this
is
only
but
a
shift
to
save
me
the
labour
of
a
reply
.
I
value
it
not
,
but
appeal
to
all
the
Reformers
.
Confessions
of
Faith
,
yea
and
all
the
Reformed
Churches
,
as
sufficient
●mpires
in
the
case
.
Yea
and
in
many
points
to
all
Christians
of
whatsoever
profession
,
except
the
Socinlans
,
who
retain
nothing
of
Christian
Doctrine
,
but
only
arrogat
to
themselves
the
name
.
Neither
let
them
say
with
Rob:
Bar
:
Vind:
Sect:
6
▪
That
our
Doctrine
is
contrary
to
that
of
some
of
the
reformed
Churches
,
in
most
weightie
points
,
as
for
example
Election
,
and
Reprobation
and
the
like
;
because
in
these
we
oppose
the
Modern
Lutherians
,
seing
(
as
Wendelin
in
his
Exercitations
,
and
in
special
Exerc.
16
,
17
,
18.
Hath
fully
evicted
)
the
Modern
Lutherians
are
altogether
opposit
in
these
points
to
the
ancient
Lutherans
,
such
as
Herbrandus
,
Hesnusius
,
Brentius
,
and
most
of
all
Luther
Himself
:
And
therefore
are
so
far
as
touching
these
points
,
from
deserving
the
name
of
Reformed
,
that
they
ought
to
be
accounted
their
capital
adversaries
.
But
not
to
prefix
a
long
preamble
to
a
short
discourse
:
In
a
word
,
I
say
,
that
as
the
Doctrine
of
Quakers
is
a
heap
of
Non
such
Bl●sphemies
▪
so
their
defences
are
mera
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
Subtertuges
so
naked
and
sillie
,
that
one
would
admire
,
how
any
rational
man
could
satisfie
himself
with
them
,
but
Qui
bibit
inde
,
furit
,
procul
hinc
discedite
,
queis
est
Cura
bonae
mentis
,
qui
bibit
inde
,
furit
.
He
straight
runs
mad
who
drinks
hereof
,
Flee
hence
,
who
ever
had
A
Love
unto
your
precious
Souls
,
who
drinks
hereof
runs
mad
.
Touch
not
,
taste
not
,
handle
not
the
unclean
things
.
For
which
end
I
present
thee
with
these
Sheets
,
of
which
that
thou
may
reap
profit
,
and
advantage
to
thy
Immortal
Soul
,
standing
in
hazard
from
the
infection
of
the
Mortal
disease
of
Quakerism
,
is
▪
and
shall
be
the
earnest
Prayer
of
thy
Servant
,
to
serve
thee
in
the
Lord
.
William
Jamison
.
CHAP.
I.
Of
the
Holy
Scriptures
.
A
GOOD
Name
is
better
than
precious
ointment
,
saith
the
Preacher
,
Eccl.
7.1
.
Whosoever
therefore
intend
to
bring
either
Persons
,
or
Things
under
Disesteem
and
Contempt
,
labour
in
the
first
place
to
Spoil
them
of
any
Good
Name
,
or
due
Titles
belonging
unto
them
,
to
the
end
,
They
may
the
more
easily
Effectuate
their
Purpose
;
This
Method
the
Quakers
have
thought
very
fit
and
apposit
,
whereby
to
discredit
,
and
finally
to
overthrow
the
Holy
Scriptures
.
For
in
the
first
place
,
they
endeavour
to
rob
them
of
the
chiefest
Titles
,
and
most
famous
Elogies
,
with
which
the
Holy
Ghost
hath
adorned
them
:
among
which
,
that
of
being
called
the
Word
of
God
,
is
not
the
least
.
An
Instance
of
this
may
be
Iames
Nailor
,
who
in
his
Answer
to
the
Iews
,
pag
▪
〈◊〉
Saith
,
It
's
the
Devil
that
contends
for
the
●●●●ptures
to
be
the
Word
of
God.
Others
of
Them
say
▪
They
are
not
the
Word
of
God
,
but
the
Words
of
Men
that
spake
them
freely
:
Yea
generally
,
All
the
Quakers
unanimously
deny
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
,
or
ought
to
be
called
the
Word
of
God
:
But
in
so
doing
,
they
flately
contradict
God
speaking
in
the
Scriptures
;
For
there
they
are
most
frequently
called
the
Word
of
God
,
As
Num.
3.16
.
Deut.
5.5
.
1.
King.
12.24
.
Ier.
1.2
.
and
6.10
.
and
20.
8.
Hos.
1.2
.
Amos.
8.12
,
Zeph.
2.5
.
Luke
.
22.61
.
1.
Sam.
9.27
.
Mark.
7.13
.
compared
with
10.
These
Scriptures
,
and
many
others
that
might
be
Cited
,
unanswerably
prove
that
the
Scriptures
are
,
and
ought
to
be
called
the
Word
of
God.
Several
of
these
Passages
with
many
others
calling
the
Scriptures
,
or
a
part
thereof
the
Word
of
God
or
of
the
Lord
in
the
singular
number
,
are
adduced
by
Mr
Brown
Chap.
4.
N.
2.
To
all
which
Robert
Barclay's
reply
Vind:
pag.
31
,
is
a
flat
contradiction
of
these
Scriptures
,
saying
,
That
the
thing
which
the
Prophets
spake
,
was
only
the
words
which
came
from
the
Word
of
God.
Judge
therefore
,
Reader
,
if
such
replies
as
these
can
either
help
the
Author
,
or
hurt
his
adversaries
.
Notwithstanding
these
Men
have
something
to
say
for
themselves
,
and
so
had
they
who
denyed
the
fire
to
be
hot
,
or
the
snow
white
.
Their
first
Reason
,
why
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Word
of
God
,
is
,
Because
Christ
is
called
the
Word
of
God
:
but
this
reason
sayeth
nothing
,
but
upon
supposition
that
one
word
,
or
phrase
cannot
undergo
divers
acceptations
,
which
is
most
false
,
yet
Robert
Barclay
in
the
Vindication
of
his
Apology
Pag.
31.
to
strengthen
this
Reason
,
sayeth
,
that
one
epithete
(
or
attribute
)
cannot
be
predicated
,
(
or
affirmed
)
of
two
things
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
(
or
by
way
of
eminence
)
without
a
grosse
contradiction
:
But
in
this
he
only
bewrayes
his
own
ignorance
of
the
Laws
of
a
Contradiction
,
and
his
desire
of
contradicting
the
Scriptures
with
a
shew
of
Reason
:
For
whether
by
the
Word
of
God
▪
Christ
or
the
Scriptures
are
to
be
understood
this
Elogie
is
still
ascribed
to
either
of
them
,
with
a
peculiar
eminency
;
But
by
the
diversity
of
the
acceptation
the
Contradiction
is
removed
,
which
diversity
may
be
easily
Perceived
by
any
that
read
or
hear
the
Scriptures
,
or
other
Discourses
,
in
which
mention
is
made
of
the
Word
of
God
:
As
for
Example
,
who
could
read
these
two
Texts
of
Scripture
,
Mark.
7.13
.
and
Rev.
19.13
.
but
they
would
presently
see
,
that
in
the
latter
of
the
Texts
,
by
the
Word
of
God
,
Christ
is
to
be
understood
,
and
in
the
former
,
the
Scriptures
?
except
he
were
altogether
stupid
,
and
so
there
is
not
the
least
appearance
of
a
Contradiction
.
Therefore
in
short
,
where
by
the
Word
,
Christ
is
understood
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Word
is
taken
improperly
,
viz.
For
a
Person
,
the
essential
and
substantial
Word
of
God
,
in
so
much
as
Christ
is
the
Principal
Declarer
of
the
Mind
of
God
,
or
upon
other
such
accounts
,
such
improper
Attributes
being
frequently
ascribed
to
Christ
,
as
a
Door
,
a
Vine
,
and
the
like
.
But
on
the
other
hand
,
where
by
the
Word
of
God
,
we
are
to
understand
the
Scriptures
,
there
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Word
is
taken
in
a
more
proper
acceptation
,
for
a
discourse
composed
of
Letters
and
Syllables
.
The
same
Author
hath
yet
another
Reason
,
and
it
is
a
rare
one
,
viz.
That
there
are
moe
words
in
the
Scriptures
than
one
,
Therefore
they
cannot
be
called
the
Word
of
God.
Behold
,
Reader
,
with
what
ridiculous
Shifts
,
these
men
endeavour
to
uphold
their
impiety
,
and
oppose
themselves
to
God!
Who
but
he
that
desired
the
Fools
Coat
,
would
thus
reason
?
It
is
a
lie
to
name
an
Epistle
sent
from
one
Person
to
another
,
a
Letter
,
because
in
it
there
are
moe
Letters
than
one
.
Not
only
the
Jews
who
were
Christs
Enemies
,
but
even
the
Apostles
themselves
,
had
done
right
in
the
judgment
of
this
Quaker
,
if
when
Christ
▪
Mark
7.13
,
called
the
Scriptures
the
Word
of
God
,
they
had
flatly
contradicted
him
,
and
said
,
this
is
a
lye
,
seing
there
are
moe
Words
in
the
Scriptures
than
one
.
Here
is
ridiculous
folly
and
impious
Blasphemy
mixed
together
.
And
yet
worse
,
(
if
worse
can
be
)
unavoidably
followeth
this
their
Doctrine
,
even
that
the
Son
of
God
was
not
from
Eternity
,
For
according
to
them
,
when
it
is
said
,
Hos.
1.2
.
The
Beginning
of
the
Word
of
the
Lord
,
the
meaning
must
be
,
the
beginning
of
Christ
.
With
the
like
sacrilegious
audacity
they
endeavour
to
bereave
the
Scriptures
of
that
sweet
and
heart-melting
Title
of
the
Gospel
,
saying
,
Matthew
,
Mark
Luke
and
Iohn
,
are
not
the
Gospel
,
but
the
Letter
.
The
Defence
of
this
wicked
and
bold
Contradiction
of
the
Scriptures
,
William
Pen
undertaketh
in
his
Rejoinder
to
Iohn
Faldo
,
Pag.
117.
His
Reasons
,
whereby
he
would
prove
it
,
are
,
1.
Because
the
Gospel
is
called
the
Power
of
God
to
Salvation
,
so
are
not
the
Scriptures
.
To
which
I
answer
,
That
the
Scriptures
may
as
well
be
called
the
Power
of
God
to
Salvation
,
as
the
Gospel
,
seeing
it
was
the
same
Doctrine
which
the
Apostles
both
preached
to
the
People
,
and
committed
to
Writing
:
And
the
Righteousness
of
God
is
revealed
from
Faith
to
Faith
by
this
Doctrine
,
when
it
is
committed
to
writing
,
as
well
as
when
it
was
Preached
by
the
Apostles
.
2.
By
the
Power
of
God
to
Salvation
,
no
other
thing
can
be
understood
but
the
Mean
,
Organ
,
or
Instrument
,
whereby
God
exerteth
,
or
putteth
forth
his
Power
to
the
saving
of
Sinners
:
Which
kind
of
Metonymie
is
frequent
in
Scripture
.
The
next
Reason
to
prove
that
these
Books
ought
not
to
be
called
the
Gospel
,
which
the
Mans
copious
invention
brancheth
into
two
,
is
,
That
the
Gospel
is
everlasting
,
and
was
Preached
before
the
Scriptures
were
,
therefore
they
are
not
the
Gospel
.
Ans.
1.
The
Principles
of
Truth
are
everlasting
,
and
were
before
any
Quakers
Books
were
extant
,
Therefore
a
Pamphlet
,
which
the
Quakers
have
entituled
,
The
Principles
of
Truth
carrieth
as
a
token
of
what
is
within
,
a
lie
in
the
Frontispiece
thereof
,
which
I
believe
William
Pen
will
hardly
admit
.
Ans.
2.
The
Doctrine
contained
in
those
Books
is
the
same
with
,
and
therefore
no
lesse
everlasting
than
the
Gospel
proclaimed
by
the
Angel
,
Rev.
14.6
.
cited
by
Pen.
His
two
last
Reasons
whereby
he
would
prove
those
Books
not
to
be
the
Gospel
,
are
that
the
Gospel
is
but
one
;
and
that
it
is
glad
Tidings
,
but
the
Books
of
Matthew
,
Mark
,
Luke
,
and
Iohn
are
four
,
and
but
Narratives
,
and
not
glad
Tidings
,
are
of
the
like
nature
with
the
former
:
For
he
knoweth
well
enough
that
Matthew
,
Mark
,
Luke
and
Iohn
deliver
not
a
contrair
Doctrine
one
to
another
,
but
only
divers
Narratives
of
the
same
Doctrine
;
All
which
Books
contain
the
glad
Tidings
of
the
Birth
,
Life
,
Death
,
and
Resurrection
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ
,
the
Saviour
of
the
World
:
And
this
I
assert
in
opposition
to
this
Quaker
,
who
here
discovereth
himself
in
his
own
Colours
,
in
that
he
denyeth
that
the
Books
of
Matthew
,
Mark
,
Luke
and
Iohn
contain
glad
Tidings
;
what
could
the
Devil
himself
utter
more
black
and
Hellish
than
this
?
Behold
,
Reader
,
with
what
ridiculous
Sophistry
these
men
can
cheat
their
own
Souls
,
which
is
so
blunt
,
that
a
school-boy
would
be
ashamed
to
bring
it
forth
,
and
what
black
,
and
Hellish
Impieties
they
not
only
swallow
down
themselves
,
but
with
open
face
avouch
before
the
world
.
Lastly
,
if
these
Books
,
as
for
example
,
Mark
ought
not
to
be
called
the
Gospel
,
and
by
the
Gospel
ought
alwayes
to
be
understood
the
power
of
God
,
or
the
essential
Attribute
of
Gods
Power
(
for
thus
they
with
abominable
Suenchfeldius
understand
Rom.
1.16
.
)
then
the
meaning
of
Mark
▪
1.1
.
must
be
the
Beginning
of
the
Power
of
God
,
of
Iesus
Christ
the
Son
of
God
;
which
place
,
if
it
have
any
Sense
thus
understood
,
must
have
a
black
one
,
viz.
That
the
Power
of
God.
i.
e.
God
Himself
was
not
before
Mark
wrote
his
Book
,
or
else
,
that
the
first
Verse
is
a
lie
;
let
them
chuse
which
of
them
they
will
admit
.
2.
But
with
no
less
Earnestness
,
and
Industrie
do
these
men
labour
to
clothe
the
Scriptures
with
base
Epithets
,
and
contemptible
Aspersions
,
than
to
bereave
them
of
the
honourable
Titles
,
and
Divine
Encomies
,
of
which
God
their
Author
hath
thought
them
worthy
;
not
unlike
the
Heathens
,
who
the
better
to
induce
Lions
and
other
Wild-beasts
to
devour
the
Christians
,
sewed
them
in
Skins
of
other
Beasts
,
hated
by
these
to
whose
Fury
they
exposed
them
;
This
Charge
I
make
out
by
these
following
Expressions
of
the
Quakers
;
for
they
ordinarly
call
the
Scriptures
the
Letter
,
and
by
way
of
Disparagement
,
Writings
,
as
the
Queries
given
to
Mr.
Iohn
Alexander
witnesse
,
Barclay's
Apolog.
cap.
2.
Ink
and
Paper
,
Cited
by
Mr.
Hicks
in
his
Dialogues
,
Pag
,
41
:
And
that
,
It
is
Idolatry
to
call
the
Scripture
,
a
Means
;
George
White-head
,
in
his
D.
P.
pag.
13.
and
account
them
no
better
than
an
old
Almanack
,
witness
Hollbrow
,
cited
by
Hicks
,
pag
,
20.
And
that
it
is
dangerous
for
People
to
read
them
,
Fox
,
and
Huberthorn
,
in
Truths
Defence
,
pag.
101.
And
that
Faith
grounded
on
the
Scriptures
,
is
but
an
empty
and
implicite
Faith
,
and
bespeaks
such
Persons
void
of
the
knowledge
of
God
,
Christ
,
and
to
be
yet
in
their
sins
,
And
that
such
Men
walk
in
their
own
Fancies
and
Imaginations
,
Christ
ascended
,
pag.
11.
and
that
that
which
is
spoken
from
the
Spirit
of
Truth
,
in
any
(
to
wit
)
of
the
Quakers
:
Is
of
as
great
Authority
as
the
Scriptures
,
yea
greater
,
George
White-head
,
in
his
Apolog.
pag.
49
,
And
he
that
perswades
the
People
,
to
let
the
Scriptures
be
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Practice
would
keep
the
People
in
darkness
,
for
whoever
walketh
by
the
Rule
without
them
&
teach
men
so
to
do
,
would
make
void
the
Covenant
of
Life
and
Peace
;
Edward
Burrows
,
pag.
62.
And
that
is
no
Command
to
me
,
which
is
a
Command
to
another
.
Neither
did
any
of
the
Saints
act
by
a
Command
that
was
given
to
another
.
Edward
Burrows
,
pag.
47.
And
again
he
says
,
such
as
go
to
Duty
in
imitation
of
the
Letter
,
which
was
a
Command
to
others
,
their
Sacrifice
is
an
abomination
to
the
Lord
.
And
Pag.
105.
That
they
that
take
up
a
Command
from
the
Scriptures
,
are
in
the
Witchcraft
.
And
that
if
the
Bible
were
burnt
,
as
good
an
one
might
be
writ
,
Sayes
one
Nicolas
Lucas
,
cited
by
Mr.
Hicks
,
Dialog
.
2.
Pag.
5.
and
evinced
by
him
against
Pen
,
Dialog.
3.
pag
,
86.
Moreover
,
William
Pen
in
his
Rejoinder
,
to
Iohn
Faldo
,
pag
,
70.
Saith
,
but
we
have
good
Reason
to
deny
them
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Iudge
of
Controversies
,
which
can
neither
give
nor
govern
Faith
,
nor
judge
of
Controversies
,
and
again
pag.
73.
In
short
,
The
Scriptures
are
not
the
Rule
,
but
a
Declaration
of
Faith
and
Knowledge
.
And
Chap.
3.
pag.
35.
He
endeavoureth
what
he
can
to
render
the
Scriptures
altogether
uncertain
,
Saying
,
I
cannot
but
observe
after
what
a
suspected
rate
the
Scriptures
have
been
both
first
Collected
,
and
then
conveyed
through
the
several
succeeding
Ages
.
And
again
,
Are
we
sure
that
the
Iudgment
of
those
who
Collected
them
,
was
sufficient
to
determin
what
was
Right
,
and
what
not
?
For
that
which
gives
Scripture
its
Canon
,
is
not
plurality
of
Voices
,
but
that
Word
of
God
,
which
gave
it
forth
;
If
that
Divine
Counsellour
preceeded
not
,
what
assurance
have
our
Anti-revelation-adversaries
of
their
Doctors
Choice
,
and
granting
,
that
they
have
not
rejected
any
Writing
given
forth
by
the
Holy
Ghost
(
which
is
a
great
Question
)
and
that
which
they
have
given
us
,
was
in
the
main
Writ
by
his
Inspiration
(
which
I
believe
)
Yet
how
we
shall
be
assured
that
in
above
300
years
,
so
many
hundred
Copies
as
were
doubtless
taken
,
should
be
Pure
,
and
Vncorrupted
,
Considering
the
private
Dissensions
,
the
readiness
of
each
Party
to
bend
things
to
their
own
Belief
,
with
the
growing
and
succeeding
Faults
of
leaving
out
,
adding
,
transposing
,
&c.
Faldo's
Skil
upon
his
principles
to
inform
us
.
From
hence
we
may
observe
the
uncertainty
of
John
Faldo's
Word
of
God
,
who
by
Authorities
can
never
prove
the
Scriptures
to
be
given
forth
by
Inspiration
,
nor
that
they
are
truly
collected
,
neither
could
these
Persons
,
who
first
made
them
Canonical
,
be
assured
of
the
exactness
of
those
copies
,
they
then
found
Extant
;
Nor
was
the
Collectors
Iudgment
infallible
,
And
to
come
nearer
to
our
Times
,
Learned
Men
tell
us
of
little
less
than
3000
several
Readings
in
the
Scriptures
of
the
New
Testament
in
Greek
.
Thus
ye
see
he
laboureth
with
all
his
Pith
,
to
overthrow
the
extrinsical
Arguments
,
whereby
the
Divinity
of
the
Scriptures
is
proved
:
And
on
the
other
wing
of
this
Ethnick
Army
,
Robert
Barclay
Assaulteth
the
intrinsick
Arguments
,
and
Divine
Characters
,
imprinted
on
the
Scriptures
;
saying
in
his
Apolog.
Chap.
2.
That
they
do
not
think
that
the
Authority
of
the
Scriptures
,
doth
depend
on
any
Efficacy
,
or
Virtue
placed
in
these
Writings
.
and
in
his
Vindication
(
I
had
almost
said
Abridgment
of
his
Apology
)
he
denyeth
,
That
there
is
any
stamp
of
Divine
Authority
upon
the
Scriptures
;
and
impiously
ascribeth
the
same
to
some
other
Spirit
,
separate
from
,
and
besides
the
Scriptures
,
which
cannot
be
the
Spirit
of
God
,
Seeing
he
himself
asserteth
elsewhere
,
That
this
Spirit
is
in
all
men
,
and
the
Scripture
saith
,
That
some
men
have
not
the
Spirit
of
God.
But
shall
not
the
Scriptures
,
which
were
dictate
by
the
living
God
carry
something
of
the
Stile
of
the
Author
?
Shall
the
writings
of
Livy
,
Virgil
,
or
Cicero
,
carry
such
Evidences
that
they
were
theirs
?
So
that
a
Humanist
may
distinguish
the
True
from
the
Counterfit
,
although
he
had
never
heard
these
men
immediatly
relate
,
Sing
,
or
Declaim
;
Surely
this
will
be
denyed
of
none
but
a
Quaker
:
Shall
then
God
himself
be
outstripped
and
overcome
by
these
Writers
?
The
Scriptures
then
according
to
the
Quakers
have
no
Majesty
of
Stile
,
no
harmony
of
Parts
,
no
Scope
of
the
whole
&c.
Nor
any
such
Notes
,
whereby
they
may
declare
themselves
to
be
the
Dictates
of
the
Living
God.
Hence
we
may
see
,
That
these
men
are
fitter
Companions
for
Porphyrie
and
Celsus
,
the
two
Heathnish
Champions
,
than
for
a
Christian
,
seeing
they
bend
all
their
Wit
and
Skil
to
revive
again
Heathnisme
under
the
name
of
Quakerisme
.
I
shall
only
add
for
confirmation
of
my
Assertion
the
Words
of
Benjamin
Furly
a
Quaker
in
Rotterdam
,
cited
by
Mr.
Hicks
,
in
his
Quakers
appeal
answered
,
pag.
16.
There
is
nothing
(
Sayes
he
)
in
the
Scripture
that
is
a
Duty
upon
me
,
or
which
I
am
obliged
to
Obey
,
because
there
recorded
;
Whatsoever
is
a
Command
to
me
,
I
must
not
receive
from
any
man
,
or
thing
without
me
,
nay
,
not
the
Scripture
it self
;
yea
it
is
the
greatest
Error
,
in
the
world
that
ever
was
invented
,
and
the
ground
of
all
Error
,
to
Affirm
that
the
Scriptures
ought
to
be
a
Rule
to
Christians
.
3.
By
this
time
I
have
abundantly
justified
my
Charge
,
having
set
down
already
so
much
of
this
blasphemous
Doctrine
,
as
I
am
confident
,
hath
filled
my
Reader
with
Horrour
and
Indignation
,
if
he
retain
but
the
least
spark
of
Christianity
,
or
love
to
the
Holy
Scriptures
.
And
O
that
while
we
consider
these
Abominations
,
we
could
mourn
and
tremble
in
Contemplation
of
our
heavy
Transgressions
,
that
have
provocked
the
Holy
God
in
his
just
Judgment
,
to
let
loose
and
permit
these
satanical
Spirits
to
rage
abroad
,
and
pollute
the
very
Air
with
their
poysonous
Breath
,
and
pestiferous
Blasphemy
!
This
last
passage
I
should
not
have
set
down
,
were
it
not
that
Robert
Barclay
,
in
his
Vindication
of
his
Apology
,
of
the
many
scores
of
passages
,
quoted
out
of
the
Quakers
own
Books
by
Mr.
Brown
,
to
prove
the
blasphemousness
,
and
absurdity
of
their
Doctrine
,
in
the
Defence
of
this
only
,
adventureth
to
say
somewhat
,
I
shal
therefore
set
down
what
he
sayeth
,
and
refute
the
same
:
His
words
are
.
Vind.
Pag.
37.
But
what
he
urgeth
of
this
further
.
Pag
57.
and
59.
from
the
saying
of
some
Quakers
,
affirming
that
it
's
not
a
Command
to
them
which
is
given
to
another
,
albeit
I
might
justly
reject
it
,
as
impertinent
till
he
prove
it
,
for
the
Reasons
above
Declared
upon
this
occasion
;
yet
because
he
mentions
Benjamin
Furley
in
Rotterdam
,
having
some
Knowledge
of
that
Matter
,
I
answer
,
whether
will
he
say
,
All
the
Commands
in
Scripture
to
every
Person
therein
mentioned
,
are
binding
upon
every
individual
now
.
If
he
dare
not
,
say
they
are
,
as
I
know
he
dare
not
,
how
must
I
then
distinguish
betwixt
what
binds
me
,
and
what
binds
me
not
?
must
it
not
be
by
the
Spirit
,
(
suppose
it
were
only
subjectively
,
as
he
will
confess
)
enlightening
the
understanding
to
make
the
Distinction
:
Then
it
seems
it
is
the
operation
of
the
Spirit
that
makes
them
know
their
Duty
,
and
sure
they
cannot
obey
before
they
know
.
But
if
he
say
,
that
tho
they
should
want
that
operation
of
the
Spirit
,
and
did
not
know
nor
acknowledge
them
to
be
their
Duty
,
yet
that
they
are
binding
upon
them
,
neither
Benjamin
Furley
,
nor
any
Quaker
will
deny
.
But
even
the
Commands
of
Gods
Spirit
,
and
the
Precepts
of
the
Scripture
,
which
now
concern
all
,
are
binding
upon
all
,
so
that
they
shal
be
justly
condemned
for
not
obeying
,
albeit
by
the
perversness
of
their
hearts
and
Wills
,
they
either
refuse
to
obey
,
or
will
not
acknowledge
them
;
so
that
his
urging
of
that
Pag.
60
,
and
61.
And
his
pleading
for
it
,
is
unnecessary
,
and
needs
no
Answer
;
yet
who
could
say
,
they
could
obey
to
any
advantage
of
their
souls
,
without
this
operation
of
the
Spirit
,
since
whatsoever
is
not
of
Faith
is
sin
?
But
as
to
these
words
said
to
be
written
by
Benjamin
Furley
,
he
is
challenged
to
prove
they
are
his
without
adding
,
or
diminishing
(
and
it
is
very
well
known
,
the
adding
or
diminishing
of
two
or
three
words
in
a
few
lines
will
quite
alter
the
Sense
)
and
before
he
has
answered
this
Challenge
,
and
freed
himself
from
the
just
Censure
of
a
Callumniator
,
albeit
he
take
the
help
of
his
Author
Hicks
,
he
will
find
his
folly
in
accusing
men
at
second
hand
proofs
,
and
upon
the
Testimony
of
their
Adversaries
.
Thus
he
.
All
the
Reasons
he
gave
above
,
why
he
ought
not
to
vindicate
the
blasphemous
Passages
cited
out
of
several
Quakers
were
,
because
these
Passages
were
cited
by
these
that
are
adversaries
to
Quakers
,
such
as
Hicks
,
Stalham
,
and
the
like
,
who
still
cite
Book
and
Page
of
the
Quakers
,
where
they
are
to
be
found
,
so
truly
,
that
this
Vindicator
hath
not
one
instance
to
give
where
they
have
dealt
unfaithfully
;
Hence
this
Reason
according
to
him
proveth
his
Vindication
unworthy
of
an
answer
,
seing
the
citation
of
Passages
is
enough
to
Vindicate
these
Authors
from
an
unjust
charge
.
Therefore
let
it
be
observed
,
that
the
whole
multitude
of
Passages
which
are
fraughted
with
Blasphemies
and
Absurdities
,
even
to
the
begetting
of
an
utter
detestation
at
the
Principles
of
this
party
,
in
the
hearts
of
all
the
Lovers
of
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
which
are
cited
by
Mr.
Brown
,
remain
without
any
Vindication
,
or
Mollification
,
except
that
which
rendereth
the
Author
of
this
Vindication
ridiculous
,
and
the
Principles
of
his
party
more
abominable
.
But
let
us
come
to
the
Matter
of
Furley
,
of
which
he
sayes
,
he
has
some
Knowledge
,
we
may
therefore
expect
a
sufficient
Resolution
about
it
(
as
for
other
passages
of
this
Nature
,
he
insinuateth
a
profound
ignorance
concerning
them
)
wherefore
he
meriteth
a
sharp
Censure
from
his
Brethren
,
for
undertaking
that
of
which
he
was
altogether
ignorant
,
and
they
the
note
of
folly
,
for
the
permission
of
the
publication
of
the
same
,
for
in
Reason
we
ought
to
suppose
that
they
revised
it
.
In
the
first
place
,
The
Dilemma
wherewith
he
endeavoureth
the
Protection
of
his
Brother
,
is
altogether
impertinent
,
and
helpeth
him
not
a
whit
,
for
seing
he
insinuateth
,
that
there
are
no
subjective
Revelations
,
and
elsewhere
clearly
denyeth
,
that
there
are
any
,
this
Dilemma
if
it
can
do
any
thing
,
it
will
only
be
Argumentum
ad
hominem
:
And
so
according
to
the
Quakers
,
men
shal
not
be
bound
to
obey
any
of
the
Commands
of
God
:
As
for
Example
,
to
abstain
from
Murder
except
the
Lord
by
an
immediat
objective
Revelation
,
such
as
he
gave
to
Moses
or
the
rest
of
the
Prophets
,
enjoined
this
unto
them
.
Behold
,
Reader
,
the
dangerous
Conclusion
!
The
abominablenesse
of
which
maketh
this
Vindicator
use
many
Shifts
,
and
Tergiversations
to
varnish
the
same
,
notwithstanding
of
which
it
inevitably
recurreth
,
and
sticketh
fast
unto
him
.
2.
Neither
doth
this
Dilemma
involve
his
Adversary
,
or
any
of
the
Reformed
in
any
thing
like
the
absurd
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
,
for
although
the
subjective
illumination
of
the
Spirit
be
very
necessary
for
the
true
Understanding
of
the
Scriptures
,
yea
and
of
absolute
necessity
for
such
a
knowledge
of
them
,
whereby
we
know
God
revealed
in
them
,
so
that
we
have
true
Love
and
Fear
,
and
Faith
in
him
as
the
Effects
,
and
Concomitants
of
this
knowledge
;
yet
he
that
shall
deny
,
that
any
Reader
of
the
Scriptures
,
tho
endued
with
sound
Reason
,
only
can
distinguish
between
Commands
given
to
a
particular
People
,
for
a
certain
time
,
such
as
to
offer
Sacrifice
,
or
to
abstain
from
Swines-flesh
,
and
these
who
bind
at
all
times
,
as
for
example
,
Not
to
prophane
the
Name
of
God
,
or
to
honour
Parents
,
must
have
abandoned
the
exercise
of
Reason
.
3.
While
he
alledgeth
,
That
neither
Benjamin
Furley
,
or
any
other
Quaker
will
deny
,
that
Scripture
Precepts
,
which
concern
all
are
binding
upon
all
,
he
openly
contradicteth
Furley
,
who
denyeth
,
that
he
ought
to
receive
any
Command
,
from
any
man
,
or
thing
without
him
,
yea
or
from
the
Scriptures
themselves
;
And
further
denyeth
without
any
limitation
,
that
the
Scriptures
ought
to
be
called
a
Rule
.
And
all
this
,
tho
most
blasphemously
and
absurdly
,
yet
most
consonantly
to
the
Quakers
Principles
:
Our
Vindicator
,
in
stead
of
doing
Service
to
his
Party
,
notably
prevaricateth
their
Cause
,
not
sticking
to
give
away
their
great
Principles
,
while
other
shifts
for
defence
thereof
fail
him
.
4.
What
he
addeth
,
without
the
operation
of
the
Spirit
men
cannot
obey
to
the
good
of
their
own
Souls
,
is
altogether
impertinent
,
as
if
one
should
in
answer
to
a
Man
enquiring
,
what
Duties
he
ought
to
perform
to
such
a
Superiour
,
tell
him
,
what
for
the
time
he
was
in
case
to
perform
,
so
as
to
reap
any
Advantage
thereby
,
which
would
be
,
as
the
Proverb
goes
,
falcem
pro
ligone
dare
.
5.
He
quietly
slideth
over
,
without
so
much
as
naming
these
words
of
Furley
▪
(
viz.
)
yea
it
is
the
greatest
error
of
the
World
,
that
ever
was
invented
,
and
the
Ground
of
all
error
,
to
affirm
,
that
the
Scriptures
ought
to
be
a
Rule
to
Christians
:
which
Doctrine
,
as
it
rendereth
any
Lover
of
God
,
and
his
Word
secure
from
being
tainted
with
Quakerisme
,
so
that
the
palpableness
of
the
Blasphemy
is
an
Antidote
to
the
Poison
;
in
like
manner
,
it
hath
rendered
our
Vindicator
speechless
,
denuding
him
of
his
Shifts
of
Primary
and
Secondary
Rule
,
under
the
Protection
of
which
distinction
the
Quakers
would
fain
shroud
themselves
:
For
in
these
words
of
Furley
there
is
no
mention
of
a
Primary
,
or
Secondary
Rule
,
which
without
doubt
Furley
had
made
,
if
he
had
believed
the
Scripture
to
be
a
secondary
Rule
,
seing
certainly
he
was
not
ignorant
that
the
Quakers
were
branded
,
with
the
name
of
being
Enemies
to
Scripture
.
6.
In
the
last
place
our
Vindicator
declareth
,
that
all
he
hath
hitherto
said
,
in
D●fence
of
Furley
,
was
,
but
the
patrociny
of
a
very
bad
and
indefendible
Cause
,
in
that
he
would
fasten
upon
his
Adversary
,
the
Falsification
of
Furleys
Words
:
For
if
they
were
falsified
,
why
attempted
he
to
defend
them
as
they
were
,
while
the
sense
was
quite
altered
and
perverted
,
as
he
insinuateth
;
Moreover
,
if
those
words
of
Furley
were
falsified
,
he
was
bound
to
have
vindicated
,
and
delivered
them
,
as
they
were
written
by
Furley
,
which
doubtlesse
he
was
in
case
to
do
,
if
there
had
been
any
such
thing
,
seing
he
professeth
that
he
hath
Knowledge
of
the
Matter
,
which
he
doth
not
professe
concerning
any
Quaker
,
mentioned
in
his
Adversaries
Book
:
Hence
it
is
evident
that
his
Adversary
is
not
at
all
guilty
of
the
ignominious
Epithets
of
Fool
and
Calumniator
,
but
whether
or
not
they
light
upon
the
Author
,
I
leave
it
unto
men
of
Judgment
to
consider
.
4.
From
what
is
said
,
it
is
most
evident
,
that
the
Scriptures
according
to
the
Judgment
of
Quakers
are
in
no
sense
,
to
be
counted
a
Rule
,
and
lay
no
obligation
upon
any
to
believe
,
and
walk
according
to
them
.
Hence
William
Pen
sayeth
,
that
the
Spirit
of
God
,
who
is
God
,
is
the
alone
Rule
of
a
Spiritual
Christian
;
(
viz.
)
of
Faith
and
Life
;
for
of
that
he
is
handling
Rejoin
.
Pag.
76.
And
this
the
most
of
their
Arguments
,
if
they
prove
any
thing
,
intend
.
As
for
Example
,
that
common
Topick
of
the
Quakers
(
viz.
)
That
which
was
the
Rule
of
the
Patriarchs
Faith
,
before
the
Scriptures
were
written
,
is
the
Rule
of
ours
now
:
But
I
subsume
that
the
Scriptures
of
the
old
,
and
New
Testament
were
in
no
respect
the
Rule
of
the
Patriarchs
Faith.
Ergo
according
to
the
Quakers
,
the
Scriptures
in
no
respect
can
be
called
the
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
:
but
finding
that
the
grossnesse
of
this
Doctrine
bewrayeth
it self
,
and
too
palpably
unmasketh
its
abettors
,
they
have
invented
several
distinctions
,
under
the
Covert
of
which
they
might
shroud
themselves
,
and
elude
all
the
Arguments
whereby
the
Scriptures
are
proved
to
be
the
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
:
As
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
Verbal
and
Histicorical
Rule
of
Faith
,
which
is
the
Devils
Faith
,
but
not
of
saving
Faith.
Thus
speaketh
William
Pen
Rejoin
.
Pag.
71.
But
that
wherein
they
place
their
Sacred
Anchor
,
or
main
strength
is
that
of
Adequate
and
Primary
,
inadequate
or
secondary
Rule
,
asserting
that
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
adequate
or
compleat
,
and
Principal
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
,
but
only
an
inadequate
,
in-compleat
and
secondary
Rule
,
That
is
,
that
the
Scriptures
contain
not
all
that
we
are
bound
to
believe
,
or
do
,
and
that
we
ought
to
believe
or
practise
nothing
,
tho
never
so
clearly
holden
forth
,
or
commanded
in
the
Scriptures
,
as
for
example
,
that
God
sent
his
Son
into
the
World
,
or
that
we
ought
to
love
God
or
our
Neighbour
,
except
by
a
miraculous
Revelation
from
Heaven
,
(
as
Hubberthorn
in
his
Reply
to
Sherlock
speaketh
)
we
be
told
the
same
thing
over
again
:
By
which
Revelation
we
ought
,
say
they
,
to
examine
the
Scriptures
:
And
because
we
deny
this
Doctrine
,
and
abhorre
it
as
the
Flood-gate
of
all
errors
,
They
cry
out
,
that
we
are
carnal
,
Enemies
to
the
Spirit
,
void
of
Light
;
upon
this
ground
also
,
the
Ministers
that
make
the
Scriptures
the
Rule
of
their
Doctrine
they
call
by
the
Names
of
Baals
Priests
,
Thieves
,
Devils
,
Enemies
of
God
,
with
a
thousand
of
the
like
denominations
,
wherefore
that
the
State
of
the
Controversy
may
appear
,
and
our
Adversaries
be
deprived
of
their
lurking
places
,
I
premit
this
assertion
,
in
order
to
the
production
of
true
and
saving
Faith
two
Principles
are
required
,
First
,
The
Declaration
of
the
Object
,
or
thing
to
be
believed
or
practised
,
which
is
commonly
called
in
the
Schools
Objective
Revelation
.
This
may
be
either
immediate
,
as
it
was
of
old
to
the
Patriarchs
,
Prophets
,
and
Apostles
:
To
whom
God
himself
immediatly
did
speak
,
and
dictate
his
will
without
the
Intervention
of
any
thing
;
as
a
medium
,
or
mids
,
Declaring
that
Revelation
to
the
Patriarchs
,
Prophets
,
and
Apostles
,
or
it
may
be
mediat
,
as
it
was
in
respect
of
those
,
to
whom
the
Patriarchs
,
Prophets
,
and
Apostles
delivered
it
,
and
as
it
is
in
respect
of
us
,
for
whose
sake
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
wrote
it
.
Rom.
15.4
.
The
other
thing
necessary
for
the
Production
of
Saving
Faith
,
is
the
operation
or
influence
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
whereby
the
vail
of
natural
blindnesse
is
removed
,
and
the
eyes
of
the
soul
,
or
the
understanding
are
opened
to
know
,
and
believe
the
wonderful
things
contained
in
Gods
written
Law
,
and
to
see
these
divine
Characters
that
are
imprinted
upon
the
Scriptures
,
and
to
understand
the
Scriptures
from
the
Scriptures
themselves
:
so
that
the
Person
thus
savingly
illuminated
,
attendeth
to
,
and
heartily
closeth
with
what
is
delivered
in
the
Scriptures
:
And
this
is
ordinarly
called
Subjective
Revelation
,
or
more
properly
,
Illumination
,
or
an
application
of
the
Revelation
made
already
,
hactenus
factae
,
as
Dr.
Baron
.
speaketh
.
This
Doctrine
is
clear
and
most
intelligible
to
all
that
will
not
close
their
eyes
:
The
Truth
of
which
is
proven
by
the
following
Scriptures
.
Psal.
119.
18.
Luk.
24
:
46.
2
Cor.
3.15
,
16.
Rev.
3.18
.
Act.
16.14
,
15.
Ezek.
36.26
,
27.
This
Distinction
is
very
requisite
for
clearing
of
our
purpose
,
and
liberateth
our
Doctrine
from
the
Circle
,
which
is
falsly
objected
unto
us
by
both
Papists
,
and
Quakers
.
A
DIGRESSION
,
In
which
the
Doctrine
of
the
Reformed
Churches
,
anent
the
necessity
of
the
Spirits
Operation
,
in
order
to
firm
,
and
saving
Knowledge
,
and
belief
of
the
Holy
Scriptures
is
Explained
,
and
Vindicated
from
the
Exceptions
of
Papists
and
Quakers
.
FIrst
,
all
the
Reformed
Churches
do
with
〈◊〉
Consent
assert
,
that
in
order
to
a
firm
and
saving
knowledge
,
and
Divine
Faith
or
believing
of
the
Scriptures
the
illumi●nation
,
and
operation
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
illumi●nating
,
and
preparing
the
Soul
is
absolutly
necess●●ry
,
this
all
the
Confessions
witnesse
,
and
our
D●●vines
,
such
as
Calvin
in
his
Institution
,
Polan●
in
his
Syntagma
,
demonstratively
evince
.
Th●
Doctrine
is
impugned
on
the
one
hand
by
the
P●pists
,
who
object
first
,
that
we
commit
a
Ci●●cle
.
2.
That
we
are
guilty
of
Enthusiastick
dottages
,
of
which
we
justly
accuse
the
Anabaptists
,
and
Quakers
,
and
the
like
Enthusiasts
;
with
these
the
Socinians
,
and
other
Enemies
of
the
grace
of
God
,
joyn
forces
accusing
us
of
the
same
Crimes
.
On
the
other
hand
,
the
Quakers
perceiving
themselves
unextricably
in
the
briers
,
and
unwilling
to
be
alone
,
affirm
confidently
that
we
cannot
separat
our selves
from
them
;
as
to
this
matter
.
3.
In
order
to
the
silencing
of
both
these
parties
,
who
like
Samsons
Foxes
,
when
they
appear
most
opposite
one
to
another
,
even
then
conspire
most
firmly
the
ruine
of
the
Church
of
God
:
I
premit
;
that
in
order
to
the
production
of
true
Faith
,
in
God's
ordinary
way
,
and
method
,
two
things
are
necessary
as
the
principles
thereof
,
the
Word
and
the
Spirit
.
The
Word
they
call
principium
objectivum
,
an
objective
principle
,
or
an
objective
revelation
,
because
the
Scriptures
concur
objectively
declaring
truths
to
be
believed
,
even
,
as
the
Sun
objectively
demonstrateth
,
and
sheweth
things
that
may
be
seen
,
though
no
eyes
were
open
to
see
them
:
so
the
Scriptures
hold
forth
clearly
all
that
we
ought
to
believe
and
do
,
even
though
the
understanding
of
none
were
opened
to
behold
the
wonders
contained
in
Gods
written
Law.
And
again
as
the
Scriptures
hold
forth
other
Truths
,
so
they
evidently
declare
,
and
manifest
the
Characters
of
their
Divinity
;
Even
as
the
Sun
proveth
himself
to
be
the
Sun
,
by
his
own
irradiant
,
and
illustrious
Beams
of
Light.
And
as
the
Sun
must
be
supposed
to
be
an
objective
light
declaring
himself
,
and
other
things
:
The
same
we
say
of
the
Scriptures
,
that
in
themselves
they
contain
,
and
hold
forth
these
heavenly
Rays
,
and
glorious
Beams
,
and
Characters
of
Divinity
,
prior
to
the
Spirits
opening
of
the
understanding
,
and
enclining
the
will
for
pe●ception
,
and
embracing
thereof
.
Now
no●withstanding
of
al●
this
,
poor
mankind
blind
by
na●ure
,
should
be
in
perpetual
darknesse
,
if
his
eyes
were
not
opened
.
Hence
another
Principle
is
necessary
viz.
The
Spirits
gracious
operations
enlightening
,
and
●weetly
enclining
,
fi●ting
,
and
disposing
the
Soul
;
which
is
the
subject
,
or
recipient
of
this
light
,
to
understand
,
and
believe
the
things
contained
in
these
heavenly
Oracles
.
And
all
these
the
Spirit
doth
;
not
by
dictating
or
telling
into
the
ear
,
or
mind
that
such
and
such
excellent
things
are
contained
in
these
Writings
;
as
a
man
making
an
oration
,
to
commend
such
or
such
a
thing
,
but
(
as
we
said
already
)
by
removing
the
natural
mist
,
and
darkness
,
modo
efficientis
,
aut
D●vini
instrumenti
;
by
way
of
Efficient
or
d●vine
●nstrument
in
the
Hand
of
God
:
For
the
Divin●
B●auty
,
and
Celestial
Glory
of
the
Scriptures
is
so
transcendent
,
that
the
removal
of
the
natural
blindnes●
,
and
pravity
of
the
will
,
is
enough
for
ravishing
of
the
hearts
into
ardent
Love
,
obsequious
Obedience
,
and
(
in
a
word
)
a
most
en●ire
,
and
total
captivity
unto
them
.
This
working
of
the
Spirit
upon
the
soul
,
is
commonly
called
Subjective
Revelation
,
because
it
terminateth
up●n
the
soul
,
which
is
the
subject
,
or
recipient
of
the
light
contained
in
the
Word
,
and
may
be
more
properly
called
an
application
of
Divine
Revelation
,
than
Revelation
it self
.
This
subjective
working
of
the
Spirit
,
both
the
Scriptures
themselves
,
and
all
sound
Divines
illustrat
,
according
to
them
,
by
the
opening
of
the
eyes
,
Ps.
119.18
.
Eye-salve
,
Rev
,
3.18
.
Which
Examples
both
illustrate
,
and
prove
the
purpose
,
yea
it
is
observable
,
that
in
all
the
Scriptures
the
Holy
Ghost
mentioneth
no
other
kind
of
Revelation
as
necessary
to
Salvation
;
but
only
objective
,
which
indeed
was
sometimes
immediat
,
but
not
necessarily
so
,
but
other
some
times
mediat
,
and
this
subjective
Revelation
,
or
illumination
of
the
Spirit
:
In
a
word
for
any
thing
we
can
find
is
all
one
,
whether
the
objective
Revelation
be
mediat
,
or
immediat
,
providing
it
be
Divine
,
see
among
other
Scriptures
Ps.
119.18
.
Luk.
24
,
46
,
Act.
16
,
14
,
31
,
32
,
33
,
34.
2.
Cor.
3
,
15
,
16.
Rev.
3.18
.
4.
Having
premised
,
and
illustrated
this
distinction
,
I
come
in
the
next
place
directly
to
remove
the
Objections
.
And
first
that
of
the
Circle
,
in
which
the
Papists
endeavour
to
entangle
us
.
For
they
object
;
that
we
being
demanded
,
how
we
know
the
Scriptures
to
be
the
Word
of
God
?
we
answer
,
by
the
Testimony
and
Opertaion
of
the
Spirit
:
And
again
being
demanded
,
how
we
know
the
Spirit
of
Truth
,
and
discern
it
from
the
Spirit
of
Error
?
We
answer
by
the
Scriptures
.
Hence
they
conclude
that
we
run
the
round
,
and
answer
the
same
by
the
same
,
and
so
make
a
compleat
Circle
.
To
which
I
answer
that
there
is
here
no
Circle
,
for
a
Circle
is
progressus
ab
eodem
ad
idem
eodem
modo
cognitum
.
A
Progress
from
the
same
,
to
the
s●me
thing
,
by
the
same
kind
of
Argumentation
.
But
so
it
is
not
here
.
For
there
is
not
the
same
way
of
Argumentation
.
For
the
Word
concurreth
objectiv●ly
,
declaring
,
and
holding
forth
what
are
the
true
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
Characters
of
the
Spirit
of
God
argumenta●ively
:
so
that
we
can
reason
,
because
such
a
Spirit
,
v.
g.
He
that
confesseth
Jesus
Christ
hath
come
in
the
Fl●sh
,
is
said
by
the
Scripture
to
be
of
God
;
therefore
I
know
,
and
believe
that
this
is
true
Doctrine
,
and
that
this
Spirit
is
of
God.
But
on
the
other
hand
we
make
no
such
use
of
the
Spirits
inward
Testimony
,
or
Operations
.
We
do
not
with
the
phanatical
Enthusiasts
reason
thus
,
the
Spirit
,
or
a
strong
impulse
,
which
they
call
the
Spirit
,
bids
me
believe
that
such
and
such
Books
,
are
the
Scriptures
,
therefore
I
believe
them
to
be
so
.
We
say
,
no
such
thing
.
We
only
say
,
that
the
Spirits
operations
,
are
necessary
for
disposing
the
Soul
,
to
perceive
,
and
understand
the
things
contained
in
the
Scriptures
themselves
,
and
apply
the
same
,
so
that
either
for
his
own
satisfaction
,
or
redarguing
of
others
,
he
still
rationally
deduceth
all
his
Arguments
from
the
Scriptures
,
making
them
,
or
(
which
is
all
one
)
God
speaking
in
them
,
the
formal
Object
,
and
ultimat
ground
wherein
to
resolve
his
Faith.
Two
Examples
I
will
give
to
illustrat
my
answer
,
and
then
I
have
done
.
The
first
is
that
known
Example
of
the
Eye-salve
,
and
the
Sun
:
For
one
by
the
Eye-salve
,
or
some
efficacious
Medicament
of
this
nature
removing
the
Tunicle
,
may
come
to
the
sight
and
knowledge
of
the
Sun
:
So
that
he
may
say
,
by
means
of
the
Salve
,
or
its
opening
of
the
Eyes
he
seeth
,
and
knowe●h
the
Sun
,
and
again
by
the
Suns
light
he
may
perceive
what
is
Eye-salve
,
and
what
not
.
This
egregiously
illustrateth
the
purpose
,
and
yet
is
many
stages
from
a
Circle
.
The
second
Example
is
of
a
Log●cian
,
his
Reason
,
and
his
Systeme
of
Logick
,
which
containeth
Rules
,
to
discern
sound
reason
from
fallacy
and
sophistry
.
For
the
Logician
knoweth
by
his
own
reason
,
that
such
a
Book
is
sound
,
containing
true
Reason
,
and
not
fallacies
.
This
he
can
demonstrat
by
his
own
Reason
,
as
the
mean
,
and
yet
doth
not
thus
argument
,
my
own
reason
teacheth
me
so
,
therefore
it
is
so
,
but
from
reason
in
actu
exercito
,
and
the
nature
of
the
things
contained
in
the
Book
,
which
by
means
of
his
own
reason
he
seeth
to
be
clear
Truths
.
And
again
by
the
Book
he
knoweth
what
is
sound
reason
,
and
what
not
.
By
this
time
,
I
hope
we
are
fully
freed
of
the
Circle
;
in
which
the
Romanists
would
fain
have
us
entangled
;
being
covetous
of
company
:
for
I
could
requit
them
with
two
unextricable
Circles
,
if
time
did
permit
.
5.
I
come
to
the
Removal
of
the
second
Objection
,
viz
that
we
cannot
distinguish
our selves
in
this
point
from
Quakers
,
and
the
like
Enthusiasts
.
This
Objection
not
only
the
Papists
,
but
also
the
Quakers
urge
what
they
can
,
to
the
end
,
that
they
may
make
the
Reformed
Churches
symbolize
with
themselves
.
To
this
purpose
Robert
Barclay
in
his
Apology
attempted
to
make
Calvin
,
the
French
,
and
Dutch
Confessions
,
and
the
Westminster
Divines
Patronisers
of
their
Doctrine
;
because
they
said
,
that
we
cannot
firmly
know
,
and
savingly
believe
the
Divinity
of
the
Scriptures
,
without
the
inward
Testimony
,
or
Operation
of
the
Spirit
of
God.
But
he
calleth
the
Divines
of
Westminster
dark
,
dishonest
,
and
confused
,
because
they
did
not
separat
the
Word
from
the
Spirit
:
but
said
,
that
this
Testimony
,
or
Operation
of
the
Spirit
was
in
and
with
the
Word
,
but
neglecteth
the
consideration
of
,
Isai.
59.21
,
the
Scripture
upon
which
they
build
this
their
saying
.
And
again
Vind.
pag.
33.
Where
he
abridging
his
Apology
bringeth
up
again
these
things
,
ut
respondeant
ultimae
primis
,
he
neglecteth
the
special
,
and
chief
Reasons
,
whereby
his
adversary
pag.
61.
shewed
that
there
was
no
discord
between
Calvin
,
French
,
and
Dutch
Confessions
,
and
our
Divines
.
Add
hereto
that
it
is
well
known
that
there
was
never
the
least
controversy
between
the
Brittish
,
and
Transmarine
Protestants
on
this
head
,
but
contrariwise
a
most
entire
harmony
.
Having
therefore
discovered
this
none-such
weakness
,
and
extream
disingenuity
,
I
come
directly
to
the
objection
,
and
answer
both
Papists
,
and
Quakers
together
,
we
distinguish
our selves
from
these
Enthusiasts
;
for
,
first
the
Work
of
the
Spirit
,
the
necessity
of
which
we
maintain
is
only
subjective
,
being
rather
,
if
we
will
speak
properly
,
an
application
of
the
things
revealed
in
Scripture
,
than
a
Revelation
,
or
Testimony
strickly
so
taken
;
whereas
the
Revelation
to
which
the
Quakers
pretend
,
is
altogether
objective
,
like
that
of
the
Prophets
.
2.
We
assert
,
the
sufficiency
of
the
Scriptures
as
a
Rule
,
containing
all
things
necessary
to
be
believed
,
or
done
:
Which
they
deny
.
3.
We
assert
the
Scriptures
to
be
the
principal
,
and
ultimate
rule
into
which
our
Faith
is
lastly
to
be
resolved
.
Hence
we
examine
all
Doctrines
of
men
,
all
internal
Suggestions
by
the
Scriptures
▪
as
the
infallible
Test
,
or
Touchstone
;
hence
we
maintain
that
the
Spirit
's
Testimonie
is
still
in
,
and
with
the
Word
,
so
that
it
may
be
known
,
what
is
the
true
,
and
what
is
the
false
Spirit
by
the
Word
,
so
that
the
work
of
the
Spirit
is
;
to
enlighten
the
understanding
,
and
dispose
the
soul
to
perceive
the
Characters
of
Divinity
,
naturally
ingraffed
in
the
Scriptures
.
All
which
the
Quakers
deny
,
and
assert
the
quite
contrary
.
Now
this
our
Doctrine
is
by
a
full
,
and
most
harmonious
consent
delivered
,
and
asserted
by
the
reformed
Churches
,
and
most
eminent
,
and
shining
lights
therein
.
Luthers
words
are
,
that
if
any
thing
should
deliver
any
Doctrine
,
which
it
could
not
prove
by
Scripture
,
he
would
spit
in
its
face
,
knowing
certainly
that
it
were
the
Devil
.
Sinopsis
Pur.
Theol
,
Disp.
2
Pag.
20.
But
the
Holy
Ghost
by
these
Divine
Characters
of
the
Scripture
,
begetteth
Divine
,
and
saving
Faith
in
our
hearts
.
Maccov
.
Loc●
.
Com:
pag.
28.
The
Testimony
of
the
Spirit
is
a
light
,
so
enlightening
our
understanding
,
that
it
followeth
it
sweetly
,
and
sheweth
the
arguments
in
the
things
themselves
,
impressed
in
the
things
which
are
to
be
believed
,
but
before
unknown
.
Woleb
.
Comp.
Theol:
pag.
4.
The
Spirit
of
God
perswadeth
the
hearts
of
Believers
internally
of
the
Divinity
of
the
Scriptures
,
in
so
much
as
he
openeth
the
eyes
,
and
illuminateth
the
heart
of
him
,
who
after
previous
invocation
of
the
Spirit
of
God
readeth
the
Scriptures
,
so
that
by
this
illumination
the
man
shal
behold
the
wonderful
things
of
God
,
and
acknowledge
Gods
Voice
speaking
in
the
Scriptures
.
The
like
Doctrine
hath
Wallet
,
in
his
Sinopsis
Papi●migener
.
Contr.
in
many
places
,
where
he
asserreth
in
terminis
,
that
this
Testimony
of
the
Spirit
is
〈◊〉
,
and
with
the
Scriptures
.
The
Words
of
godly
,
and
learned
Whitaker
are
clear
as
they
are
cited
by
Mr.
Crawford
in
a
short
but
learned
trac●at
de
Princ.
fi●
.
obj.
et
effect
:
Whereas
ye
say
that
we
reject
the
Testimony
of
the
Church
,
and
judge
our selves
taught
by
the
alone
internal
perswasion
of
the
Spirit
,
we
hold
the
Ministry
of
the
Church
in
honour
:
internal
perswasions
without
the
external
word
we
shun
,
as
sanatical
impostures
;
we
judge
out
of
the
scriptures
,
we
believe
with
the
scriptures
,
or
because
of
their
Testimony
,
and
therefore
Hereticks
,
i.
e.
Enthusiasts
we
neither
are
,
nor
can
be
.
But
of
all
men
must
clearly
Calv.
Inst.
L.
1
,
C.
9.
asserteth
our
Doctrine
,
and
strongly
refuteth
these
Enthusiasts
,
for
Sect
1.
he
thus
speaketh
,
furthermore
these
who
having
rejected
the
scriptures
,
imagine
to
themselves
a
way
,
I
know
not
what
of
approaching
to
God
,
are
to
be
judged
not
so
much
poss●ssed
with
error
,
as
acted
with
madness
,
there
have
arisen
of
late
some
giddy
heady
persons
,
who
disdainfully
pretending
the
rule
of
the
spirit
cast
off
all
reading
,
and
deride
the
simplicity
of
these
who
follow
the
dead
,
and
killing
Letter
(
as
they
term
it
)
But
I
would
know
of
them
what
spirit
that
is
,
by
whose
breathing
they
are
so
lifted
up
,
as
to
be
bold
to
despise
the
Doctrine
of
the
scriptures
as
abject
,
and
childish
;
if
they
answer
,
it
is
the
spirit
of
Christ
,
that
security
must
be
very
ridiculous
,
for
I
believe
they
will
grant
the
Apostles
of
Christ
,
and
others
faithful
in
the
primitive
Church
to
have
been
illuminat
by
no
other
Spirit
;
but
none
of
these
learned
from
it
to
contemn
the
word
of
God
,
but
every
one
of
them
had
them
rather
in
greater
reverence
;
as
their
writings
plainly
testify
.
And
indeed
so
it
was
foretold
by
Isaiah
,
for
when
he
sayeth
,
my
spirit
which
is
in
thee
,
and
my
words
which
I
have
put
in
thy
mouth
,
shal
not
depart
out
of
thy
mouth
,
nor
out
of
the
mouth
of
thy
seed
for
ever
;
he
doth
not
tie
the
people
of
the
Iews
to
an
outward
Doctrine
,
as
if
he
taught
them
the
first
principles
,
but
rather
,
that
it
will
be
the
true
,
and
ful
felicity
of
the
Church
in
Christs
Kingdom
,
to
be
ruled
no
less
by
the
voice
,
than
spirit
of
God.
From
whence
we
collect
,
that
what
are
inviolably
conjoyned
by
the
Prophet
,
are
most
sacrilegiously
separat
by
these
Villans
.
And
again
Sect.
2.
If
any
spirit
neglecting
the
Wisdom
of
God
,
bring
any
other
Doctrine
he
is
justly
to
be
suspected
of
vanity
and
of
a
lie
.
What
when
satan
transfigureth
himself
into
an
angel
of
light
,
what
Authority
shall
the
spirit
have
with
us
except
it
be
discerned
by
some
sure
Character
?
and
he
is
clearly
demonstrat
to
us
by
the
Voice
of
God
,
except
these
miserable
men
desire
willingly
to
run
into
their
own
Destruction
,
when
they
rather
seek
the
spirit
from
themselves
,
than
from
the
spirit
of
God.
But
they
pretend
that
it
is
unworthy
that
the
spirit
of
God
,
to
whom
all
things
are
to
be
subjected
,
should
be
subjected
to
the
scriptures
,
as
if
it
were
ignominious
to
the
Holy
Ghost
to
be
every
where
alike
,
and
conform
to
himself
,
and
never
diverse
,
indeed
if
it
were
tryed
by
a
humane
,
angelick
or
any
other
Rule
,
he
were
to
be
corrected
,
or
chastised
(
if
ye
will
)
but
while
it
is
compared
with
it self
,
while
it
is
considered
in
it self
,
who
will
then
say
that
there
is
injury
done
to
it
,
and
so
it
is
brought
to
a
Tryal
I
confesse
,
but
such
a
one
,
as
that
thereby
he
would
manifest
to
us
his
Majesty
,
it
ought
to
be
sufficient
to
us
,
as
soon
as
the
spirit
manifesteth
it self
to
us
,
but
lest
the
delusions
of
satan
should
creep
in
under
the
notion
of
the
spirit
of
God
,
he
would
have
us
know
him
in
his
image
imprinted
in
the
scripture
,
he
is
the
Author
of
the
scriptures
,
he
cannot
be
unlike
,
and
diverse
from
himself
,
whatever
therefore
he
sheweth
himself
to
be
in
the
scriptures
,
such
he
must
be
forever
.
That
is
no
con●umely
to
him
,
except
we
judge
it
honour
worthy
to
forsake
,
and
degenerat
from
it self
.
Much
more
to
this
purpose
hath
the
Reverend
and
Judicious
Author
,
with
which
he
confoundeth
these
spiritual
Antichristians
,
as
well
these
of
our
time
,
as
of
his
own
,
and
indeed
if
one
should
read
this
Chapter
,
and
not
know
the
Author
,
he
would
presently
conclude
that
it
had
been
written
of
direct
purpose
against
the
Quakers
.
Judge
therefore
,
Reader
,
if
Robert
Barclay
had
any
ground
to
alledge
him
as
the
Patroniser
of
his
Doctrine
.
The
fourth
Difference
betwixt
us
and
the
Quakers
consists
in
this
that
we
as●err
,
if
there
be
a
God
in
Heaven
,
the
Books
of
the
Old
and
New
Testament
may
be
evinced
to
have
proceeded
from
him
even
to
the
silencing
the
most
profligat
,
though
sharp
witted
Atheists
;
if
any
such
merit
this
epithet
,
whereas
on
the
other
hand
They
deny
any
Characters
of
Divinity
ingraffed
in
the
Word
,
as
hath
already
and
shal
yet
more
appear
,
and
thus
they
expose
the
jugular
Vein
of
Christianity
to
the
Heathens
,
and
indeed
the
whole
tendency
of
all
their
writings
,
and
discourse
,
is
to
decry
,
and
vilify
these
sacred
Oracles
,
and
though
they
deny
this
,
to
the
end
they
may
the
better
cheat
silly
Souls
,
I
care
not
,
for
out
of
their
own
mouths
and
Books
they
shal
be
judged
,
and
found
guilty
.
These
abominations
are
not
committed
in
a
Corner
.
It
can
be
made
out
by
the
unanimous
consent
of
all
the
reformed
Churches
,
which
is
certainly
sufficient
in
the
case
.
But
many
other
differences
I
could
give
,
but
these
may
suffice
for
answer
to
the
second
Objection
.
From
all
which
I
conclude
,
that
between
the
extreams
of
the
Papists
Church
,
and
the
Quakers
Spirit
,
medius
tutissimus
ibit
,
the
midway
by
resolving
our
faith
ultimately
in
the
Scriptures
,
or
in
God
speaking
in
them
,
is
the
safest
way
:
And
as
two
extream
Vices
never
agree
more
in
the
nature
of
Vice
,
than
when
they
reced
most
from
Virtue
lying
in
the
middle
,
and
therefore
seemingly
or
physically
reced
from
one
another
;
so
the
greater
odds
that
seem
to
be
between
Papists
and
Quakers
they
are
the
more
nearly
relyed
in
error
:
for
the
Papists
have
gone
too
low
,
resolving
their
faith
ultimately
in
men
;
the
Quakers
on
the
other
hand
,
attempting
to
go
too
high
,
have
contracted
a
Vertigo
,
hence
they
Ixion-like
thinking
to
find
the
fair
Iuno
of
divine
Revelation
,
but
lighting
upon
a
cloud
of
their
own
brain
,
in
stead
thereof
have
procreat
the
strange
Hippocentaurs
of
their
monstrous
Doctrines
;
at
which
the
World
now
admires
,
and
is
amazed
.
5.
Our
Assertion
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
adequate
,
compleat
,
and
primary
,
or
principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Manners
,
we
build
on
these
following
Arguments
and
first
,
That
which
was
dictate
,
or
given
out
by
the
●●fallible
God
,
and
containeth
the
whole
Counsel
of
God
,
may
well
serve
to
be
our
compleat
,
and
principal
Rule
;
but
the
Scriptures
were
given
out
,
and
dictate
by
the
infallible
God
,
and
contain
the
whole
Counsel
of
God
,
ergo
,
they
may
well
serve
to
be
a
compleat
,
and
principal
Rule
.
The
Major
is
most
evident
,
for
what
further
certainty
either
ought
we
,
need
we
,
or
can
we
seek
,
for
what
we
believe
or
do
,
then
the
words
of
the
most
veracious
,
and
unerring
God
?
and
no
other
thing
can
be
understood
by
a
compleat
Rule
,
but
that
which
containeth
all
things
to
be
believed
,
or
done
.
The
Minor
I
prove
by
parts
,
and
first
,
that
the
Scriptures
were
given
out
,
and
dictat
by
God
,
is
clear
from
2
Tim
,
3.16
.
All
Scriptures
are
given
by
inspiration
of
God.
2
Pet.
1.21
.
Prophecy
came
not
of
old
time
,
by
the
will
of
man
,
but
holy
men
of
God
spake
,
as
they
were
moved
by
the
Holy
Ghost
.
Moreover
our
Adversaries
,
at
least
the
more
learned
,
and
cautious
of
them
have
not
yet
adventured
to
deny
it
,
but
in
words
at
least
grant
it
.
The
second
part
is
no
lesse
evident
from
Act.
20.27
.
Where
Paul
sayeth
,
that
he
had
not
shunned
to
declare
to
his
hearers
all
the
Counsel
of
God
,
compared
with
Chap.
26.22
.
where
the
same
Apostle
sayeth
,
that
he
taught
no
other
things
than
those
that
were
in
Moses
,
and
the
Prophets
:
Hence
it
is
clear
,
that
even
a
part
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
by
a
good
consequence
,
all
the
Scriptures
contain
all
that
God
hath
willed
us
to
believe
,
or
do
.
The
second
Argument
is
,
That
which
was
the
principal
Rule
to
the
Jews
,
is
the
principal
Rule
to
us
.
But
the
Scriptures
were
the
principal
Rule
to
them
.
Therefore
,
they
must
be
the
same
to
us
.
The
Major
is
Robert
Barclay's
;
for
which
he
pleadeth
at
large
Apol.
Cap.
2.
The
Minor
I
prove
thus
,
That
from
which
the
Jews
might
not
swerve
,
to
the
right
hand
,
or
to
the
left
,
and
to
the
decision
of
which
they
were
ultimately
bound
to
stand
,
in
all
Doubts
and
Controversies
,
and
that
upon
highest
pains
,
was
the
principal
Rule
.
But
from
Gods
written
Law
,
they
were
commanded
not
to
swerve
,
or
stray
to
the
Right
hand
,
or
left
,
and
were
bound
ultimately
to
stand
to
its
Decision
in
all
doubts
,
and
Controversies
,
and
that
under
highest
paines
:
Therefore
to
them
it
was
the
primary
Rule
;
the
Major
Proposition
is
incontrovertible
,
The
Minor
is
proved
from
two
most
pregnant
places
of
Scripture
,
Deut.
5.31
,
32.
and
17
,
9
,
10
,
11.
In
both
which
places
by
the
Law
is
to
be
understood
,
that
which
God
gave
unto
the
Iews
by
Moses
in
writing
,
as
is
evident
to
any
,
that
read
the
Texts
.
Which
Texts
have
been
egregiously
vindicat
by
our
Divines
writing
against
Bellarmin
,
and
the
rest
of
the
asserters
of
papal
infallibility
:
with
whose
shifts
I
am
certain
all
that
the
Quakers
can
say
will
be
found
to
co-incide
.
2.
This
Minor
Proposition
is
clear
from
Is.
8.20
.
To
the
Law
and
to
the
Testimony
:
If
they
speak
not
according
to
these
,
it
is
because
there
is
no
light
in
them
.
The
first
Shift
that
the
Quakers
use
to
elude
the
force
of
this
Scripture
with
,
is
,
that
by
Law
&
Testimony
,
is
meaned
the
light
within
.
So
sayeth
Robert
Barclay
in
both
Apology
,
and
Vindication
:
but
for
this
exposition
we
must
take
their
word
,
for
none
of
them
giveth
the
least
colour
of
Reason
for
it
:
But
that
by
this
Law
the
Scriptures
are
to
be
understood
these
following
Texts
evince
,
Exod.
32.15
.
and
34.29
.
Deut.
31.24
,
26.
2
King.
22.8
.
Nehem
,
8.
v.
3
,
8.
Psal.
78.5
.
Again
God
commanded
,
that
even
the
King
himself
(
and
consequently
the
rest
of
the
people
)
Deut.
17.18
,
19.
Should
live
according
to
this
written
Law
,
to
the
end
,
be
might
fear
the
Lord
;
under
which
all
the
Duties
of
Religion
are
ordinarly
comprehended
.
Now
shal
any
be
so
stupid
as
to
believe
,
when
a
doubt
arose
,
that
the
King
was
not
bound
to
apply
himself
,
to
this
written
Law
,
for
the
discussing
thereof
?
or
that
,
tho
the
Kings
doubt
had
been
most
clearly
discussed
by
the
Law
,
he
was
bound
to
wait
for
a
miraculous
Revelation
from
Heaven
to
determine
him
?
I
say
,
who
in
his
wit
will
believe
this
?
yea
,
to
think
so
,
is
to
deny
the
immutability
of
God.
Moreover
this
is
by
far
the
more
frequent
acceptation
of
the
Word
,
Law
or
Testimony
.
Hence
when
the
saving
Work
of
Grace
is
understood
by
the
Word
Law
,
there
is
something
added
,
whereby
we
may
understand
that
the
Word
Law
is
to
be
taken
in
a
more
unusual
acceptation
,
as
Rom.
7.23
.
and
8.2
.
But
we
need
say
no
more
,
for
they
sufficiently
overthrow
this
their
Exposition
,
in
that
they
give
nothing
for
the
proof
thereof
,
except
it
be
their
own
most
absurd
Hypothesis
.
But
Robert
Barclay
hath
yet
another
shift
:
he
granteth
that
this
place
may
be
understood
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
asserteth
that
this
is
only
spoken
to
the
Jews
,
and
therefore
that
to
them
the
Scriptures
were
a
more
principal
Rule
,
than
to
us
;
and
that
as
they
were
to
try
all
things
by
the
outward
Law
,
so
we
are
to
try
all
in
the
first
place
by
the
word
within
,
and
accuseth
his
Antagonist
of
base
disingenuity
,
for
leaving
out
these
words
in
the
first
place
:
And
granteth
only
that
the
Scriptures
were
a
more
principal
Rule
to
the
Iews
,
but
denyeth
that
they
were
the
primary
Rule
.
Ans.
Whatever
be
understood
by
Law
and
Testimony
in
that
place
,
whether
it
be
the
Scriptures
,
or
Spirit
it
must
be
the
primary
Rule
,
for
to
this
Law
they
were
ultimately
bound
:
for
the
Law
and
Testimony
spoken
of
here
,
was
the
ultimate
,
and
Principal
Rule
,
because
whatever
was
spoken
not
according
to
these
was
to
be
rejected
,
as
the
product
of
darkness
.
2.
It
is
evident
that
this
Law
and
Testimony
,
here
spoken
of
is
the
absolutely
principal
,
and
ultimate
Rule
,
because
to
seek
to
it
,
is
all
one
with
seeking
unto
God
:
The
Text
is
,
Let
a
people
seek
unto
their
God
,
viz.
speaking
in
the
Law
and
Testimony
,
which
is
put
for
one
and
the
same
thing
.
Hence
we
see
that
this
Law
and
Testimony
,
here
spoken
of
,
was
the
absolutely
principal
Rule
to
the
Jews
.
In
the
third
place
,
the
Charge
of
disingenuity
,
that
he
layeth
to
his
Adversary
,
is
altogether
groundlesse
:
for
certainly
he
,
or
any
man
else
of
Sense
,
and
Reason
,
was
bound
to
understand
those
words
,
In
the
first
place
,
in
the
one
branch
of
the
Parallel
,
as
well
as
in
the
other
,
otherwise
his
Parallel
will
not
only
hault
,
but
prove
wholly
lame
,
and
without
sense
;
now
seing
as
I
think
,
he
will
not
deny
that
his
Adversary
ought
to
suppose
,
he
had
to
do
with
a
Man
of
sens●
and
Reason
,
who
dealt
but
rationally
in
understanding
both
Branches
of
the
Parallel
to
run
alike
He
ought
not
thus
to
accuse
him
,
but
sein●
he
will
have
himself
to
be
thus
understood
,
to
th●
end
that
he
may
evite
a
self
Contradiction
,
let
u●
see
if
he
have
any
advantage
hereby
:
Now
the
〈◊〉
why
he
maketh
his
Parallel
so
manked
,
is
that
〈◊〉
may
not
be
compelled
to
grant
the
Scriptures
,
〈◊〉
have
been
the
primary
Rule
to
the
Jews
;
and
so
this
he
earnestly
pleadeth
:
but
if
they
were
not
a
primary
and
principal
Rule
to
them
,
and
so
but
a
secondary
Rule
only
,
and
yet
have
not
such
a
high
,
and
principal
place
under
the
New
Testament
,
as
under
the
old
,
then
they
shal
not
be
so
much
as
a
secondary
Rule
to
us
,
and
therefore
but
a
tertiary
only
.
And
if
this
be
not
beside
a
Contradiction
to
the
Quakers
own
concessions
,
who
grant
the
Scriptures
to
be
a
secondary
Rule
,
a
complex
of
most
horrible
impiety
,
most
wild
and
absurd
nonsense
that
can
readily
be
imagined
,
I
leave
to
the
whole
Christian
World
to
judge
:
from
which
many
other
wild
dottages
clearly
flow
,
such
as
,
The
Spirit
it self
is
but
a
secondary
Rule
,
even
altho
it
be
a
Rule
;
or
else
,
that
although
the
Church
have
a
tertiary
,
yet
it
wants
a
secondary
Rule
:
with
these
and
many
other
such
horrid
,
and
most
nonsensical
Consequences
is
this
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
inseparably
attended
.
And
whereas
in
the
last
place
he
requireth
proof
,
wherefore
Mr.
Brown
rejecteth
the
version
of
the
Septuagint
,
we
shal
only
referre
him
to
solid
Baillie
in
his
Chronology
,
and
acute
Voglesange
in
his
Theological
exerci●rations
,
where
he
will
find
the
Septuagint
rejected
with
Reason
enough
.
Thus
far
Robert
Barclay
.
George
Keith
,
the
other
Champion
of
the
Quakers
,
in
hi●
Book
against
Mr.
Iohn
Alexander
(
falsly
called
Truth
Defended
,
its
true
name
being
Truth
depraved
)
Pag
,
80
,
Shewet●
his
cause
to
be
mortally
wounded
,
with
the
force
of
this
Scripture
Argument
,
for
he
dare
not
expresly
deny
,
that
by
Law
and
Testimony
the
Scriptures
are
to
be
understood
,
&
indeed
he
really
granteth
it
,
in
that
he
adventureth
not
to
handle
any
of
the
places
of
Scripture
brought
by
Mr.
Alexander
.
for
the
proof
thereof
,
and
yet
he
detaineth
the
Truth
captive
,
and
wi●l
not
confesse
,
that
which
he
dare
not
deny
.
The
shift
which
he
useth
is
the
same
with
Robert
Barclays
second
shift
,
vi●
.
That
tho
the
Scriptures
are
in
this
place
to
be
understood
by
Law
and
Testimony
,
yet
it
will
not
follow
that
they
are
the
principal
Rule
,
especially
in
Gospel
times
:
which
shift
is
the
same
way
removed
,
that
Robert
Barclays
was
.
And
here
he
essayeth
to
prove
,
that
people
are
sent
to
the
Dictate
,
Word
,
or
Light
within
,
from
2
Pet.
1.19
Deut.
30.14
.
Rom.
10.8
.
Ioh.
3.20
,
21.
Iohn
.
12.36
.
Which
places
make
not
a
whi●
for
his
purpose
,
yea
diverse
of
them
cut
the
Jugular
Vein
of
Quakerism
,
as
shal
be
evinced
in
due
time
,
He
hath
moreover
here
a
harangue
,
by
which
he
would
prove
,
as
it
seemeth
,
that
God
and
Christ
dwell
personally
in
Believers
,
as
God
dwelleth
in
the
humane
Nature
of
Christ
,
which
is
most
abominable
and
false
,
and
tho
it
were
true
,
yet
should
make
nothing
for
him
;
for
God
and
Christ
,
can
only
be
said
to
dwell
in
Believers
,
whose
Temples
they
only
are
.
But
if
he
meaneth
that
God
dwelleth
in
Believers
,
only
in
respect
of
the
habits
of
Grace
,
implanted
in
their
Souls
,
whereby
they
are
enlightned
,
quickened
,
and
upstirred
to
believe
,
and
practise
the
Doctrine
contained
in
the
Scriptures
,
then
he
sayeth
nothing
▪
for
this
indwelling
,
or
God
thus
indwelling
is
not
our
principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Manners
,
but
the
chief
Leader
and
efficient
Cause
of
Grace
in
the
Soul.
And
thus
this
hodge-podge
of
most
impertinent
Words
,
resolves
at
length
into
a
direct
begging
of
the
Question
.
Argument
,
3d.
Christ
and
his
Apostles
proved
their
Doctrine
from
the
Scriptures
,
referred
their
hearers
unto
them
;
for
the
final
Decision
of
the
most
grave
,
and
weighty
controversies
,
that
ever
arose
in
the
world
,
and
sent
all
people
unto
them
,
as
unto
a
sure
and
undeceiving
Light
,
by
the
guidance
of
which
,
we
may
passe
through
this
dark
World
,
and
be
kept
from
Hell
in
the
●lose
;
Ergo
the
Scriptures
are
the
primary
Rule
.
The
Consequence
is
clear
,
if
we
attend
unto
the
Description
of
a
primary
Rule
laid
down
above
.
The
Antecedent
I
prove
from
Math.
22.29
,
31
,
32.
Ioh.
5.39
.
Act.
17.11
.
and
13
▪
from
the
14.
to
42.
2
Pet.
1.19
,
20.
Luk.
16.31
.
Our
Adversaries
like
bats
,
hateing
,
and
striking
at
the
Light
,
assault
most
of
these
Scriptures
.
And
first
they
endeavour
to
deprave
,
Matth.
22.29
.
by
telling
us
,
that
it
will
no
more
follow
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Manners
than
the
Power
of
God
:
yea
the
Power
of
God
,
say
they
,
is
rather
the
Rule
,
being
that
which
quickneth
the
Soul
and
Body
;
without
which
none
can
truly
know
the
Scriptures
,
thus
talketh
George
Keith
,
in
Truth
Defended
Pag.
68.
But
this
is
only
a
roving
at
pleasure
without
consideration
,
what
be
said
,
providing
that
the
name
of
the
last
speaker
be
obtained
;
for
here
he
confoundeth
the
Rule
with
the
power
,
whereby
we
walk
according
to
the
Rule
:
Hence
,
as
I
admonished
above
,
he
fighteth
not
against
our
Doctrine
,
but
against
the
fiction
of
his
confounding
brain
;
for
whoever
said
,
that
Euclide
cannot
be
a
Rule
,
for
Geometricians
to
walk
by
,
because
it
cannot
instill
a
faculty
of
reason
in
an
Idiot
▪
without
which
it
cannot
be
understood
?
surely
,
he
that
should
thus
Reason
,
would
be
accounted
of
all
men
most
ridiculous
.
And
yet
no
lesse
ridiculous
is
this
silly
sophister
;
for
he
reasoneth
the
same
way
.
But
that
I
may
fully
declare
either
the
profound
stupidity
or
willful
prejudice
of
this
Quaker
.
I
suppose
that
a
man
in
discourse
with
another
about
the
Kings
Power
,
ignorantly
denyeth
that
the
King
can
do
something
,
which
by
the
Laws
of
the
land
he
is
allowed
to
do
;
the
other
checks
him
thus
,
you
erre
,
not
knowing
the
Laws
of
the
Land
,
and
the
power
of
the
King
;
And
then
proveth
from
the
said
Laws
,
that
the
King
hath
●ower
to
effect
that
which
the
other
denyed
.
Now
should
not
any
man
,
that
concluded
from
this
mans
discourse
,
that
the
power
of
the
King
is
all
one
with
the
Laws
of
the
Land
,
or
that
the
power
of
the
King
is
our
Rule
in
C●vils
,
no
less
than
the
Laws
of
the
Land
are
,
expose
himself
to
the
scorn
of
all
knowing
persons
:
And
yet
he
inference
of
thi●
Quaker
differeth
not
a
whit
from
such
a
blockish
Conclusion
.
Hence
we
may
see
,
that
these
Mens
design
i●
not
to
speak
well
,
but
to
speak
last
.
The
next
place
is
,
Ioh.
5
39.
To
which
Robert
Barclay
Vind.
Pag.
43.
attempting
to
make
answer
,
to
the
end
that
he
may
put
it
beyond
all
doubt
,
that
he
is
a
devout
Servant
to
his
Holinesse
,
and
a
true
Roman
Catholick
,
stifly
asserteth
,
that
the
Word
is
to
be
taken
in
the
indicative
mode
,
superciliously
rejecting
not
only
all
the
reformed
,
and
Body
of
primitive
Interpreters
,
but
also
the
very
Iesuits
themselves
,
in
whom
there
is
any
spark
of
Conscience
,
or
Candour
,
who
all
understand
it
in
the
imperative
moode
,
and
good
Reason
they
have
so
to
do
,
seing
the
reading
of
the
Scriptures
is
all
along
through
the
whole
Scriptures
both
commanded
.
Deut.
17
,
18
,
19.
Deut.
29.29
.
Exod.
13.9
:
Ios.
22.5
.
Deut.
6.8
.
and
11.18
.
Isa.
8.20
.
1
Tim.
4.13
.
with
many
others
,
and
commended
Deut.
33.10
.
Neh.
8.2
,
3.
Act.
17.11
.
and
18.24
.
2
Tim.
3.15
.
2
Pet.
1.19
,
20.
Rev.
1.3
.
Besides
many
more
,
which
are
sufficient
to
convince
these
men
of
palpable
falshood
,
and
blasphemy
.
Moreover
there
is
sufficient
ground
from
the
Context
,
abundantly
to
make
out
our
exposition
;
for
Christ
appeals
to
the
Scriptures
,
as
sufficient
to
decide
the
then
present
controversy
betwixt
him
and
the
Iews
,
saying
,
These
are
they
that
testifie
of
me
.
Where
he
willeth
them
to
give
heed
to
Moses
writings
in
order
to
the
decision
of
the
Controversy
.
v.
46.
Had
ye
believed
Moses
,
ye
would
have
believed
me
.
But
this
subterfuge
failing
him
,
he
hath
yet
some
others
,
which
we
must
also
remove
:
he
asketh
therefore
in
the
next
place
,
whether
the
words
that
Christ
spake
to
the
Iews
,
which
are
recorded
in
Scripture
,
were
less
binding
to
them
than
the
words
spoken
by
Moses
and
the
Prophets
?
If
they
were
lesse
binding
,
(
saith
he
)
then
he
overturneth
his
own
tedious
Reasonings
,
by
which
he
laboureth
to
prove
that
they
are
obligative
,
and
also
he
must
show
how
they
are
binding
now
upon
us
;
and
if
he
say
,
they
were
binding
to
the
Jews
,
because
spoken
by
Christ
,
his
proof
falleth
to
the
ground
.
Ans.
1.
Perhaps
he
pleased
himself
with
this
Argument
,
having
racked
his
wit
to
invent
sophistry
,
tho
blunt
(
as
shal
appear
presently
)
whereby
the
more
to
delude
his
already
deluded
admirers
;
But
I
am
sure
,
to
any
rational
man
that
is
in
earnest
,
it
will
not
have
the
weight
of
a
Walnut
:
Nor
trouble
him
much
,
even
tho
he
were
not
in
case
to
answer
it
,
seing
if
this
word
be
to
be
taken
in
the
imperative
mood
,
as
we
have
even
now
demonstrat
,
then
it
is
as
clear
as
the
noon-sun
,
that
Christ
sendeth
the
Jews
to
the
Scriptures
,
for
the
ultimate
decision
of
the
greatest
Controversy
in
the
World
,
upon
which
their
one
thing
depended
:
Otherwise
the
Jews
might
still
have
with
good
Reason
replyed
,
that
this
would
not
do
the
turn
,
seing
the
Scriptures
themselves
were
but
a
secondary
Rule
,
to
be
subjected
unto
another
,
without
the
Determination
of
which
,
they
could
never
acq●iesce
in
the
Scriptures
decision
,
how
clearly
soever
they
speak
for
the
one
party
,
and
against
●he
o●●er
.
I
answer
2dly
,
that
the
words
of
Christ
spoken
both
before
and
at
that
time
,
were
binding
on
the
Jews
,
he
having
given
sufficient
proofs
of
his
Deity
;
Notwithstanding
of
which
Christ
referreth
them
to
those
Writings
about
the
divinity
of
which
they
were
beyond
all
doubting
▪
and
had
abundance
of
subjective
,
as
well
as
objective
certainty
:
To
these
,
I
say
,
he
referreth
them
as
the
Principal
Rule
,
and
Test
,
whereby
to
determine
the
great
Controversy
then
in
agitation
:
I
say
,
in
a
Word
that
the
words
,
Christ
and
his
Apostles
spake
,
and
now
recorded
in
Scriptures
,
were
of
themselves
no
lesse
binding
on
the
Iews
,
than
these
spoken
by
Moses
and
the
Prophets
,
tho
the
Iews
,
throw
their
wilfull
ignorance
,
and
prejudice
,
which
was
their
own
great
fault
[
the
great
Cause
of
which
,
was
the
neglect
of
the
Scriptures
,
which
testifie
of
Christ
]
did
not
believe
the
Divinity
of
the
one
,
as
they
did
that
of
the
other
;
hence
one
of
the
horns
of
this
Dilemma
is
broken
,
and
his
consequence
a
meer
non
sequitur
.
He
here
grants
,
that
if
Christs
Doctrine
ought
to
be
tried
by
the
Scriptures
,
then
much
more
private
Enthusiasms
:
But
denyeth
,
that
it
will
hence
follow
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
primary
Rule
,
which
I
prove
;
for
if
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
be
subject
to
the
Scriptures
trial
,
then
no
man
can
deny
,
that
even
these
things
,
which
are
divine
immediat
Revelations
,
may
be
brought
to
the
Scripture
trial
,
that
we
may
know
,
whether
they
be
divine
or
not
,
as
well
as
the
Jews
ought
to
bring
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
to
the
Scriptures
,
that
they
might
clearly
see
,
whether
it
was
divine
or
not
,
seing
whatever
can
be
said
for
exemption
of
these
Revelations
from
trial
,
with
good
ground
;
might
be
said
for
exeeming
of
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
.
Moreover
by
granting
,
that
privat
Enthusiasms
ought
to
be
tryed
by
the
Scripture
,
he
yieldeth
all
he
was
this
whole
time
pleading
for
,
which
was
,
that
,
it
might
be
lawful
to
embrace
any
impulse
,
or
suggestion
,
which
he
thought
was
the
Spirit
of
God
,
without
further
examination
thereof
.
The
third
Scripture
▪
viz.
Act.
17.11
.
is
so
clear
,
that
our
Adversaries
can
find
nothing
wherewith
to
darken
and
deprave
it
.
It
is
true
,
that
Robert
Barclay
,
Vind.
pag.
44.
sayeth
,
It
is
the
same
way
answered
as
Iohn
5.39
.
Therefore
I
say
,
our
meaning
is
the
same
way
vin●icate
.
N●xt
all
his
verbal
shif●s
are
wholly
excluded
here
,
seing
such
an
high
commendation
given
by
the
Spirit
of
God
to
these
Bereans
,
ought
to
have
no
lesse
weight
with
us
than
a
Command
.
The
next
place
assaulted
by
them
is
2
Pet.
1.19
.
We
have
a
more
sure
word
of
prophecy
&c.
which
place
th●y
will
have
to
be
understood
of
the
Spirit
,
not
●f
the
Scriptures
;
of
which
assertion
,
Robert
Barclay
pag.
26.
giveth
this
Reason
,
that
the
Description
or
Narration
of
a
thing
,
is
not
more
sure
than
the
hearing
or
seeing
of
the
same
,
and
therefore
the
Scriptures
,
which
are
but
a
Narration
,
and
Description
of
such
and
such
things
,
cannot
be
more
sure
than
the
sight
or
hearing
of
the
same
.
Hence
he
would
infer
,
that
the
discoverie
,
the
Apostles
had
made
to
them
upon
the
mount
were
really
surer
,
than
the
Scriptures
,
but
not
so
sure
as
the
Spirit
.
George
Keith
,
Truth
Defended
pag.
63.
hath
a
long
discourse
,
which
resolves
in
this
,
that
the
Apostle
is
making
a
Comparison
between
Gods
outward
Word
to
the
Ear
,
and
inw●rd
to
the
Heart
,
which
he
sayeth
,
is
more
sure
to
a
man
,
than
Gods
immediat
speaking
,
if
it
be
heard
with
the
outward
ear
.
But
such
reasoning
as
this
is
as
easily
everthrown
as
invented
:
for
it
presupposeth
that
there
cannot
be
immediat
Revelation
,
where
the
Testimony
of
the
senses
goes
along
;
And
so
their
spirit
is
an
enemy
to
sense
:
Otherwise
why
should
this
glorious
vision
made
to
the
Apostles
,
of
the
Truth
of
which
they
had
divine
,
and
infallible
evidence
,
to
whom
God
spake
as
immediatly
as
to
Moses
on
the
Mount
,
be
accounted
uncertain
,
and
suspected
in
respect
of
the
Spirit
?
2.
To
talk
at
this
rate
is
to
presuppose
,
that
wherever
God
revealeth
himself
unto
any
person
,
some
other
way
,
than
by
speaking
into
his
ear
;
that
this
Revelation
bringeth
along
with
it
its
own
evidence
,
and
perswadeth
the
soul
to
embrace
,
and
close
with
it
,
as
divine
,
which
is
both
groundlesse
,
and
therefore
false
and
contrary
to
their
own
principles
,
who
assert
,
that
unlesse
the
understanding
be
well
disposed
,
Revelation
,
tho
immediat
is
not
evident
.
3.
It
insinuateth
,
that
the
Apostle
in
this
comparison
,
gave
out
that
one
of
the
things
compared
,
was
in
it self
really
more
uncertain
than
the
other
,
which
is
most
false
,
seing
considered
in
themselves
,
both
real
immediat
Revelation
,
and
the
Scriptures
,
have
all
certainty
possible
,
therefore
this
is
only
to
be
understood
in
respect
of
us
,
to
whom
the
Scriptures
are
more
sure
,
in
that
they
are
lesse
subject
to
be
counterfeited
,
or
wrested
by
either
the
Devil
,
or
our
own
sancy
,
than
immediat
Revelations
are
.
The
Apostle
hath
also
his
eye
upon
his
Countrey-men
the
Iews
,
to
whom
he
speaketh
,
who
tho
they
were
now
Christians
,
gave
in
special
manner
credit
to
the
old
Testament
,
as
Act
17.11
.
and
else
where
.
4.
Tho
by
this
more
sure
word
of
Prophecy
were
understood
immediat
Revelations
,
the
advantage
that
the
Quakers
could
reap
thereby
could
not
be
great
:
For
this
Word
of
Prophecy
being
studied
and
attended
to
,
is
recommended
to
us
by
the
Apostle
,
as
that
whereby
we
may
come
to
the
genuine
interpretation
of
the
Scriptures
:
Hence
it
will
follow
,
even
according
to
the
Quakers
exposition
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
principal
Rule
of
our
Faith
▪
seing
that
if
any
of
the
two
be
it
,
the
Text
to
be
explained
,
much
rather
than
the
means
or
helps
,
whereby
it
is
to
be
explained
,
ought
to
have
this
Denomination
;
we
have
seen
the
invalidity
of
his
Reason
,
as
also
the
small
advantage
,
tho
it
had
been
valid
.
We
shal
in
the
next
place
shew
,
why
by
this
more
sure
word
of
Prophecy
,
we
understand
the
Scriptures
:
And
first
,
because
any
phrase
of
the
like
import
(
as
for
this
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
a
prophetick
Word
,
or
Word
of
Prophecy
,
it
is
not
in
all
the
Scripture
beside
,
for
any
thing
I
know
,
in
so
many
syllables
)
such
as
the
Prophets
Luk.
16.29
.
Apostles
&
Prophets
,
Eph.
2.20
.
The
Law
and
the
Prophets
Math.
7.12
.
Are
always
taken
for
the
Scriptures
,
so
that
when
any
did
utter
such
expressions
,
but
especially
,
while
they
discoursed
of
a
guide
in
Faith
and
Manners
,
they
were
still
understood
,
as
speaking
of
the
Scriptures
,
who
(
I
pray
)
ever
understood
that
phrase
Luk.
16.31
.
Moses
and
the
Prophets
any
other
way
than
that
Joh.
6.45
.
It
is
written
in
the
Prophets
.
And
indeed
,
if
our
Adversaries
were
not
e●●ronted
and
impudently
bold
,
they
would
not
adventure
to
cause
a
phrase
of
Scripture
to
speak
that
,
the
contrare
of
which
,
at
the
first
view
it
proclaimeth
.
2.
Who
but
one
that
would
adventure
upon
any
thing
,
would
make
this
phrase
,
Word
of
Prophecy
in
the
19
v.
to
speak
any
other
thing
,
than
the
Prophecy
of
the
Scriptures
in
the
20
verse
,
or
simple
Prophecy
in
the
21
verse
,
seing
to
do
this
,
destroyeth
the
whole
Connexion
of
the
Context
.
3.
The
same
is
evinced
by
the
connexion
of
this
with
the
following
Words
,
for
the
Apostle
giveth
his
Reason
in
the
20
Verse
,
why
in
the
19
he
had
admonished
to
study
the
Scriptures
,
viz.
that
unlesse
they
diligently
search
,
and
study
them
,
they
would
be
ready
to
miss
the
genuine
,
and
fall
into
a
private
meaning
of
the
Scriptures
,
that
is
one
which
the
Scriptures
,
if
well
attended
to
,
would
not
yield
.
4.
The
same
is
evinced
from
the
general
commendation
given
by
the
Spirit
of
God
to
the
searchers
of
,
or
attenders
to
the
Scriptures
.
as
Isa.
8.20
.
Ioh.
5.39
.
Act.
17.11
.
With
many
other
places
,
which
are
sufficient
Commentaries
to
this
Text
:
Whereas
on
the
other
hand
,
these
our
Adversaries
,
no
lesse
void
of
Reason
,
then
fraughted
with
audacity
,
cannot
bring
one
Text
commanding
us
to
search
or
take
heed
to
the
Light
within
:
Add
to
all
this
,
that
these
our
Antagonists
contradict
the
stream
of
Orthodox
Writers
;
upon
this
place
,
who
all
give
their
joint
suffrage
unto
our
exposition
,
as
Luther
,
Calvin
,
Bullinger
,
Christophorus
Imlerus
,
Beza
,
the
Dutch
Divines
,
who
give
the
same
glosse
with
us
,
yea
I
dare
averr
with
Confidence
,
that
if
we
except
some
old
Montanists
,
Cataphrygians
,
or
the
like
antient
Enthusiasts
,
or
of
later
times
,
the
Munserians
,
or
such
Libertines
,
none
hitherto
expone
this
place
as
the
Quakers
do
;
But
we
must
yield
to
them
,
for
,
Hi
soli
sapiunt
,
alii
velut
umbra
vagantur
;
Doubtless
they
are
the
Men
,
and
Wisdom
shall
die
with
them
:
But
I
leave
them
to
grapple
with
their
Brother
,
William
Pen
,
who
in
his
Rejoynder
before
cited
,
pag.
334.
yieldeth
unto
us
that
which
they
so
stifly
deny
.
viz.
that
by
the
More
sure
word
of
Prophesie
the
Scriptures
are
to
be
understood
,
and
I
passe
on
to
the
vindication
of
Luk.
16.31
.
If
they
hear
not
Moses
and
the
Prophets
,
neither
will
they
be
perswaded
,
though
one
rose
from
the
dead
.
Rob:
Barclay
in
opposition
to
Mr:
Broun
,
Vind.
pag.
39.40
.
reasoning
from
this
place
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
sayeth
,
first
,
That
it
will
not
follow
from
the
Scriptures
being
more
sure
,
than
the
Testimony
of
one
risen
from
the
dead
,
that
therefore
they
are
more
sure
than
the
Testimony
of
the
Spirit
.
I
Ans.
Let
him
once
prove
,
that
every
Man
hath
such
a
Spirit
,
as
Quakers
do
alledge
,
and
then
let
the
Spirit
go
hand
in
hand
with
the
Scriptures
;
but
this
he
shall
never
be
able
to
do
.
2.
This
will
follow
,
that
Moses
and
the
Prophets
were
a
Rule
to
the
Church
at
that
time
,
Yea
even
the
primarie
Rule
,
otherways
might
not
Abraham
have
said
,
The
Spirit
of
God
directeth
every
man
immediatly
,
If
they
hear
not
him
,
they
will
hear
none
else
,
but
this
he
said
not
:
Therefore
Abraham
(
or
rather
Christ
in
the
Parable
)
judged
the
Scriptures
the
principal
Rule
on
Earth
.
As
for
what
he
says
concerning
the
Scriptures
,
being
a
principal
Rule
to
the
Iews
only
,
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
unless
he
prove
that
they
are
not
so
to
us
,
which
if
he
hath
done
,
we
have
seen
above
,
3.
Certainly
the
voice
of
one
of
the
glorified
Spirits
,
coming
from
Heaven
,
where
they
behold
the
face
of
God
,
is
no
less
to
be
accounted
immediat
Revelation
,
than
the
voice
of
the
High-Priest
unto
the
People
,
when
he
came
out
from
the
Holy
of
Holies
,
which
in
the
Quakers
account
was
immediate
Revelation
:
But
the
Quakers
can
make
what
they
will
to
be
Divine
Revelation
.
To
the
end
that
this
may
more
fully
appear
,
we
shall
consider
a
passage
in
his
Apologie
,
pag.
4.
where
he
maketh
an
Objection
,
viz.
That
after
the
Dispensation
of
the
Law
,
Gods
Method
of
Speaking
was
altered
.
To
which
he
answereth
,
that
Gods
speaking
was
immediate
alwayes
to
the
Iews
,
in
that
it
was
immediat
alwayes
to
the
High.
Priest
,
from
between
the
Cherubims
.
To
which
I
Reply
,
This
Answer
is
strange
,
In
that
he
sayes
,
The
mind
of
God
revealed
by
the
High-priest
unto
the
People
,
was
to
them
immediate
Revelation
,
for
certainly
a
thing
delivered
from
one
person
to
another
,
by
the
hand
of
a
third
,
cometh
unto
that
person
by
the
hand
of
another
,
which
other
must
either
be
a
Mediu●
or
Midss
,
or
else
,
he
must
say
that
three
make
but
two
,
which
is
a
ridiculous
Contradiction
.
2.
We
say
that
even
according
to
the
Quakers
principles
Gods
way
of
revealing
himself
to
us
now
is
as
immediate
as
it
was
to
the
Jews
,
because
we
have
these
that
were
inspired
by
God
speaking
unto
us
,
though
dead
:
hence
they
have
no
reason
to
go
about
to
prove
the
Scriptures
,
not
to
be
the
principal
Rule
of
Faith
on
this
account
,
that
they
are
not
immediate
Revelation
,
for
that
which
they
contend
to
have
been
immediat
Revelation
,
was
no
more
immediat
than
the
Scriptures
.
My
fourth
Argument
I
draw
from
.
2
Tim.
3.15
.
And
that
from
a
Child
thou
hast
known
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
which
are
able
to
make
thee
wise
through
Faith
unto
Salvation
.
From
which
place
,
I
thus
Reason
.
That
which
is
able
to
make
such
an
one
as
Timothy
,
called
the
Man
of
God
v
17.
Wise
through
Faith
unto
Salvation
,
must
be
a
sufficient
Rule
of
Direction
,
to
guide
us
in
our
Christian
Course
.
But
the
Scriptures
are
able
to
make
Timothy
,
or
the
Man
of
God
wise
unto
Salvation
;
Therefore
they
are
a
sufficient
Rule
,
or
Directory
to
guide
u●
in
our
Christian
Course
:
And
here
it
may
be
observed
,
that
R.
B.
Vind
,
pag.
40
,
41.
is
so
pressed
with
the
force
of
this
Argument
,
that
he
can
find
no
better
off-come
,
but
to
challenge
his
Adversary
as
guilty
of
perversion
of
Scriptures
,
because
he
compared
the
15
and
17
verse●
together
,
saying
,
that
the
Scriptures
were
abl●
to
make
the
man
of
God
perfect
.
But
to
challenge
a
man
for
perversion
,
upon
such
a
ground
as
this
,
is
an
evident
token
of
too
much
perversness
;
for
if
he
had
but
looked
unto
the
15
verse
,
he
might
have
seen
,
they
are
said
to
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
able
to
make
Timothy
,
which
was
a
Man
of
God
,
wise
through
Faith
unto
Salvation
,
where
there
is
an
ability
or
sufficiency
in
some
kind
of
Cause
ascribed
to
the
Scriptures
.
Now
no
other
sort
of
ability
or
sufficiency
can
be
imagined
,
if
it
be
not
that
of
a
Rule
,
or
causae
Exemplaris
seu
directivae
,
for
Faith
is
added
as
the
instrumental
Cause
;
or
as
the
apprehender
;
Hence
I
evidently
infer
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
the
adequate
and
primary
Rule
,
for
if
there
were
some
things
to
be
believed
and
practised
,
not
contained
in
the
Scripture
,
or
if
the
Scriptures
were
subject
to
another
Test
or
Rule
to
be
examined
thereby
,
without
which
other
Tests
or
Rules
,
we
might
be
deceived
and
misled
,
then
the
Scriptures
could
not
in
truth
be
called
able
to
make
the
Man
of
God
wise
through
Faith
unto
Salvation
.
But
we
need
not
insist
,
for
how
clear
soever
the
matter
be
,
little
Justice
,
Truth
,
or
fair
dealing
is
to
be
expected
at
the
hands
of
those
who
call
Scriptures
compared
,
Scriptures
perverted
,
and
deny
that
as
false
,
the
Truth
of
which
themselves
cannot
but
see
:
for
I
query
,
what
difference
can
be
imagined
between
these
two
phrases
,
able
to
make
Timothy
,
which
was
a
man
of
God
,
wise
unto
Salvation
,
and
able
to
make
the
Man
of
God
perfect
:
To
abuse
the
Scriptures
at
this
rate
,
I
think
is
gross
and
impious
enough
,
and
yet
no
better
all
along
doth
this
Author
treat
them
:
Of
which
a
pregnant
Example
followeth
,
for
Vind.
pag.
41.
in
opposition
to
Mr.
Brown
,
proving
the
sufficiency
,
and
perfection
of
the
Scriptures
from
Ioh.
20.31
.
2
Cor.
3
,
14.
Psal.
119.70
.
He
saith
,
that
from
this
Doctrine
,
it
would
follow
,
that
all
Bo●ks
written
after
such
a
time
were
superfluous
.
If
this
answer
be
sufficient
,
many
a
superfluity
there
shal
be
in
Scripture
,
for
if
the
writing
of
a
Book
after
there
are
so
many
written
as
contain
all
things
necessary
for
Faith
and
practise
,
(
if
we
say
)
the
writing
of
another
Book
,
which
may
be
either
explicative
of
the
Books
before
written
,
or
contain
many
things
for
the
bene
esse
of
a
Christian
,
be
superfluous
,
how
much
more
then
shall
the
repetition
of
the
same
things
,
in
the
same
words
,
and
the
same
method
be
superfluous
?
but
according
to
him
the
former
is
true
:
well
then
the
Quakers
Conclusions
are
,
that
the
scriptures
are
Battologies
.
Lastly
,
(
for
we
love
rather
to
plead
by
the
weight
,
than
by
the
multitude
of
Arguments
)
we
evince
that
the
Scriptures
are
a
compleat
,
adequate
,
and
primary
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
manners
;
by
the
Testimony
of
our
Adversaries
themselves
:
And
first
,
that
they
are
an
adequat
and
compleat
Rule
is
granted
by
R.
B.
who
Vind.
pag.
36.
speaketh
thus
,
next
he
carps
at
my
saying
,
the
chief
Doctrines
of
Christianity
,
are
contained
in
the
Scriptures
,
asking
where
we
may
find
the
whole
Doctrine
of
the
Christian
Faith
?
I
answer
freely
,
In
the
Scripture
.
And
again
R.
B
▪
and
George
Keith
with
joint
suffrages
grant
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
a
full
enough
Declaration
of
all
Doctrines
,
and
principles
both
essential
and
integral
of
the
Christian
Religion
.
Quak.
confirm
:
(
or
rather
self
confuted
)
pag.
38.
Behold
,
Reader
,
thou
hast
our
Adversaries
granting
to
their
own
Contradiction
all
we
plead
for
.
The
other
Branch
(
viz.
)
that
they
are
the
Primary
Rule
,
our
Adversaries
themselves
also
at
unawares
grant
,
for
Rob:
Barclay
,
in
his
second
These
,
sayeth
,
that
the
Spirit
is
not
to
be
subiected
to
the
outward
Testimony
of
the
Scriptures
as
a
more
noble
Rule
,
where
it
is
clear
that
according
to
him
the
Spirit
may
be
subjected
to
the
Scriptures
,
tho
not
as
to
a
more
noble
and
certain
Rule
.
Now
this
being
granted
,
the
Cause
is
yielded
,
for
it
is
certain
that
a
primary
rule
is
in
no
case
to
be
subjected
unto
its
secondary
,
or
the
Rule
which
is
ruled
by
it
.
For
I
think
the
Acts
of
Parliament
are
not
at
all
to
be
subjected
to
these
of
an
inferiour
Court.
Now
if
the
Quakers
would
hold
by
this
,
and
grant
that
a
man
swerveth
not
from
his
duty
,
tho
he
subject
all
suggestions
,
and
motions
to
the
Scriptures
as
a
sure
Tryal
,
and
Test
thereof
,
let
them
call
it
a
more
noble
Rule
,
or
what
they
will
,
they
might
the
more
easily
be
born
with
.
But
it
is
evident
,
by
their
pleading
for
the
Spirit
as
their
primarie
Rule
,
that
they
will
in
no
Case
subject
their
impulses
and
Motions
to
the
Scriptures
.
Our
Adversaries
grant
also
,
That
the
Scriptures
have
proceeded
from
God
,
and
therefore
infallible
.
Now
I
hope
that
which
is
infallible
,
needs
not
be
subjected
unto
,
and
tryed
by
a
more
sure
Rule
;
for
more
sure
than
infallible
,
is
impossible
.
I
know
nothing
they
can
say
,
except
that
which
G.
K.
said
on
the
stage
at
Aberdeen
,
That
we
may
beguile
our selves
with
them
,
(
viz.
)
by
interpretation
thereof
.
To
which
I
answer
,
That
the
effective
illumination
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
is
sufficient
to
secure
us
from
this
hazard
,
which
is
no
more
objective
Revelation
than
the
Eye-salve
is
the
Sun.
6.
But
our
Adversaries
soon
repenting
of
their
Liberality
,
endeavour
to
overthrow
all
their
own
Concessions
,
and
to
prove
that
the
Scriptures
are
neither
an
Adequate
,
nor
Primarie
Rule
▪
some
of
their
Objections
we
shall
name
,
that
the
Reader
may
Judge
of
the
rest
:
And
first
they
Object
out
of
Bellarmine
,
de
Certitudine
Iust.
That
the
Scriptures
cannot
shew
unto
a
man
,
that
he
hath
true
Faith
;
for
,
(
say
they
as
the
Jesuite
did
before
them
)
Such
a
mans
Name
is
not
in
all
the
Word
of
God
:
For
altho
the
Scriptures
contain
the
true
marks
of
Faith
;
who
shall
perswade
me
that
I
have
these
Marks
?
that
I
believe
?
that
I
obey
?
Thus
R.
B.
reasoned
in
his
Apologie
;
To
which
his
Antagonist
answereth
,
'
That
it
is
no
less
absurd
to
say
,
that
this
is
the
work
of
a
Rule
,
than
for
R.
B.
Supposing
that
he
had
killed
a
man
,
to
deny
that
the
Law
could
put
him
to
death
,
because
no
Law
saith
,
that
R.
B.
hath
killed
a
man
;
or
to
deny
that
he
is
a
Quaker
,
because
the
Law
sayeth
no
such
thing
of
him
in
particular
.
To
which
he
replyeth
,
Vind.
pag.
45.46
.
That
such
examples
are
poor
Arguments
,
and
miserably
halt
,
for
R.
B.
saith
he
,
his
Confessing
himself
to
be
a
Quaker
,
&
acknowledging
every
one
of
their
Doctrines
,
is
enough
to
prove
him
one
in
the
sense
of
the
Law
of
the
Land
,
and
the
Judge
is
to
condemn
him
as
a
Murderer
,
if
convict
by
witnesses
,
that
he
really
did
the
dead
,
and
both
these
relate
to
outward
things
,
which
can
be
proven
by
outward
Testimonies
;
for
without
the
certainty
of
the
evidence
,
the
Judge
cannot
pronounce
his
Sentence
:
But
is
a
mans
own
confessing
or
affirming
that
he
hath
the
true
Ma●ks
of
Faith
,
enough
to
prove
he
has
them
?
and
what
are
the
Witnesses
,
(
to
apply
the
examples
of
committing
of
Murder
)
by
which
a
man
shall
know
he
has
these
Marks
?
and
who
shall
examine
the
witnesses
?
and
judge
of
the
certainty
,
and
clearness
of
their
Evidence
?
must
it
be
the
man
that
is
accused
?
who
useth
that
method
?
Ans.
1.
Both
Doctrine
and
proof
he
hath
learned
from
his
old
friend
Bellarmin
,
who
de
Cert.
Iust.
calleth
the
same
Sophism
a
Theological
demonstration
,
contradicting
not
only
the
Scriptures
,
but
divers
of
the
Papists
themselves
,
as
Amesius
sheweth
:
Bellarmin
also
accounteth
this
Inspiration
of
the
Quakers
,
the
only
way
whereby
a
man
can
be
firmlie
assured
of
his
having
Faith
,
or
that
he
shall
have
Salvation
.
And
therefore
appropriateth
it
to
St.
Francis
,
and
St.
Galla
,
and
the
like
,
which
dottage
is
sufficiently
refuted
,
exploded
,
and
derided
by
Ames
,
and
others
,
who
have
undertaken
the
Refutation
of
Bellarmin
.
Hence
we
may
see
,
that
if
there
be
a
Iesuit
more
opposite
to
the
Reformed
than
another
,
with
him
he
joyneth
hands
,
He
is
therefore
to
be
accounted
amongst
the
grossest
of
Iesuits
,
and
these
his
Romish
Cavills
are
to
be
neglected
,
being
an
hundred
times
sufficiently
enervate
by
our
Divines
in
their
Writings
against
Papists
,
especially
in
their
answers
to
Bellarmin
,
out
of
whose
Quiver
he
hath
stollen
this
long
ago
blunted
weapon
.
2.
The
task
incumbent
to
him
was
to
evince
,
that
it
belongeth
properly
to
the
Rule
of
Faith
;
to
tell
a
Man
.
v.
c.
Iohn
or
Iames
in
particular
,
that
he
hath
true
faith
,
whatever
therefore
he
sayeth
besides
this
,
is
besides
the
purpose
.
But
3.
ex
abundanti
,
The
bare
and
simple
Profession
of
Quakerism
will
no
more
prove
one
to
be
a
Quaker
in
earnest
,
than
the
simple
Profession
that
one
hath
Faith
,
will
prove
him
to
have
it
indeed
;
Seeing
a
man
may
profess
himself
to
be
a
Quaker
,
and
yet
be
a
Iesuit
,
providing
there
be
any
difference
between
them
:
there
is
therefore
more
required
,
viz
,
that
for
any
thing
Men
can
know
,
such
a
man
liveth
according
to
the
principle
of
the
partie
,
and
no
more
is
necessary
for
the
begetting
a
Judgment
of
Charity
,
than
that
a
man
profess
the
principles
of
Christianity
,
&
Seriously
,
for
any
thing
Men
can
know
,
practise
accordingly
;
but
no
infallible
Evidences
that
another
hath
true
Faith
,
are
any
wayes
necessarie
;
but
only
Moral
Rational
Grounds
of
certainty
,
those
may
be
had
;
As
for
the
other
viz.
infallible
Evidences
,
those
are
only
necessar
to
ones
self
,
and
these
they
may
h●ve
by
the
Scripture
applyed
in
Christian
prudence
and
Spiritual
Wisdom
,
the
Scriptures
themselves
being
the
Rule
whereby
to
make
the
Examen
,
or
Search
.
Is.
8.20
.
Ioh.
5.39
.
Act.
17.11
.
2.
Tim.
3.15
.
16
,
17.2
Pet.
1.19
,
20.
And
the
enlightned
Conscience
,
the
Judge
,
the
Spirit
of
Adoption
,
or
a
filial
Disposition
,
inclining
the
Believer
to
come
to
God
;
as
a
Child
unto
a
Father
,
with
both
great
Confidence
,
and
Reverence
,
together
with
the
renewed
Spirit
of
the
Believer
himself
.
Rom.
8.15
,
16
,
the
witnesses
.
Hence
his
ant●-christian
Cavills
fall
to
the
ground
,
and
the
similies
no
more
halt
;
the
other
Examples
brought
for
the
illustration
of
any
Matter
,
for
all
similes
halt
in
some
respect
,
otherwayes
they
should
not
be
similies
,
but
the
same
;
and
to
think
the
similies
here
used
cannot
hold
,
because
both
Judge
,
&
witnesses
,
are
inward
in
the
matter
,
illustrated
by
these
Similies
,
is
not
only
without
,
but
against
Reason
;
For
even
as
the
one
thing
being
outward
,
and
to
be
proved
to
others
,
not
to
the
Murderer
himself
,
who
knoweth
it
well
enough
,
requireth
an
outward
Judge
,
and
outward
witnesses
;
So
the
other
thing
being
inward
,
the
infallible
Testimony
of
which
,
the
Person
himself
standeth
only
in
need
of
,
requireth
inward
Judge
,
and
inward
Witnesses
.
7.
The
same
Author
hath
another
Objection
prosecuted
at
large
in
his
Apologie
,
and
abbreviated
in
his
Abridgement
;
falsly
called
his
Vindication
▪
Pag.
44.45
.
which
is
,
that
there
are
many
things
that
the
Scriptures
cannot
determine
,
as
particular
individual
Actions
;
to
which
Mr:
Broun
had
answered
,
that
general
Rules
were
enough
,
leaving
the
rest
to
Christian
prudence
,
and
Wisdom
,
and
also
that
there
should
be
need
of
a
particular
Rev●lalation
for
every
particular
Action
,
as
Eating
,
Drinking
,
&c.
Yea
every
particular
Word
.
This
Consequence
he
denyeth
,
saying
,
that
from
Spiritual
to
Natural
Actions
,
the
necessity
of
this
Revelation
will
not
follow
.
I
answer
first
,
The
Consequence
which
he
denyed
he
proveth
himself
,
for
the
Reason
why
Spiritual
Actions
need
particular
inspirations
,
is
because
of
their
being
either
Sin
,
or
Duty
,
that
they
may
know
how
to
give
Spiritual
Worship
,
and
leave
Carnal
Worship
,
but
this
Reason
he
grants
to
stretch
it self
to
natural
Actions
,
saying
,
if
he
say
,
those
natural
Acts
under
some
Circumstances
may
be
sin
,
or
duty
,
I
confess
then
the
Revelation
of
the
Spirit
is
needful
.
Therefore
if
particular
Immediate
Revelations
be
necessary
for
the
performances
of
Spiritual
Actions
,
they
are
also
necessary
for
the
performance
of
Civil
,
or
Natural
Actions
,
seeing
there
is
nothing
more
sure
,
than
that
every
individual
Action
is
so
Circumstantiat
as
to
become
either
Sin
or
Duty
.
2.
Who
was
ever
so
absurd
,
and
ridiculous
as
to
deny
that
any
System
,
as
for
example
,
of
Mathematicks
,
or
Military
Discipline
,
is
a
perfect
Rule
to
guide
any
Mathematician
,
or
Souldier
,
upon
this
account
,
that
those
Books
comprehend
not
the
Names
of
all
Mathematicians
,
and
Souldiers
,
that
ever
should
exist
,
with
all
their
particular
Actions
,
and
the
Circumstances
thereof
?
I
am
sure
that
such
a
one
should
be
esteemed
by
all
Men
to
have
lost
his
Wits
:
and
yet
no
better
than
such
are
the
Quakers
Achillean
Arguments
.
Next
he
pleaseth
himself
in
reckoning
up
some
differences
amongst
Ministers
:
As
for
example
,
those
called
Remonstrants
,
and
publick
Resolutioners
,
and
hence
would
infer
the
Insufficiency
of
the
Scriptures
,
for
decision
of
Controversies
,
and
this
he
thinketh
so
strong
,
that
he
requireth
a
particular
answer
to
it
,
least
(
Sayeth
he
)
he
,
viz.
Mr.
Brown
be
said
to
leap
where
he
cannot
step
.
Ans.
If
this
do
any
thing
it
will
overdo
,
seeing
he
dare
not
deny
,
that
both
Paul
&
Barnabas
had
immediat
Objective
Revelations
,
who
notwithstanding
grew
so
hot
in
their
Contention
.
Act.
15.
that
they
parted
one
from
another
,
of
whose
meeting
again
we
hear
not
in
all
the
Scriptures
.
But
he
labours
so
to
fix
that
upon
the
Scriptures
,
with
which
the
Corruption
of
men
is
only
to
be
Charged
,
that
he
woundeth
himself
while
he
thrusteth
at
his
Adversary
,
seing
if
this
Reason
be
Valid
,
Objective
Revelation
is
no
more
a
sufficient
Rule
than
the
Scriptures
:
as
this
Instance
of
the
division
of
Paul
&
Barnabas
evinceth
.
Beside
these
,
the
Quakers
have
a
heap
of
Topicks
,
to
prove
the
Scriptures
not
a
perfect
Rule
,
such
as
,
they
cannot
be
a
Rule
to
deaf
persons
,
therefore
they
cannot
be
a
rule
to
those
that
hear
;
and
most
men
know
not
the
Original
Tongues
.
Ergo
say
they
,
the
Scriptures
cannot
be
a
compleat
Rule
.
They
object
also
,
the
variety
of
Readings
,
Interpretations
,
and
the
like
,
which
they
have
scraped
out
of
Bellarmin
and
his
brethren
,
and
therefore
deserve
no
more
answer
than
what
hath
been
given
to
them
.
William
Pen
in
his
Rejoynder
,
Part
1.
Chap.
5.
hath
this
Objection
,
the
Scriptures
cannot
try
,
and
examine
particular
Motions
,
and
Prophesies
,
saying
,
that
Paul
Act.
16.
reproved
not
the
Spirit
of
Divination
,
which
possessed
that
〈…〉
Philippi
,
from
the
Scriptures
;
therefore
they
cannot
be
a
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Life
.
But
I
deny
the
Antecedent
,
for
had
Iames
Nailor
but
brought
that
particular
Motion
,
whereby
he
was
prompted
to
receive
Divine
Worship
,
to
Scripture
trial
,
he
might
have
found
his
Spirit
to
have
been
the
father
of
〈◊〉
,
and
Arch-deceiver
of
Mankind
:
but
as
the
Papists
to
cover
the
rest
of
their
abominations
,
have
invented
one
greater
,
and
more
dangerous
than
them
all
,
that
is
their
Churches
infallibility
,
So
this
Spirit
of
the
Quakers
,
knowing
that
upon
Tryal
,
he
will
be
found
a
Counterfeit
,
hath
taken
the
Councel
given
by
Alcibiades
to
Pericles
,
that
is
,
to
study
how
he
may
secure
himself
from
the
hazard
of
a
Trial.
Hence
these
men
are
in
all
probability
beyond
the
reach
of
a
Conviction
,
but
the
many
Instances
,
not
only
of
other
Antiscript●rians
,
but
even
of
themselves
,
who
have
been
most
pitifully
and
palpably
acted
by
the
Devil
,
whom
they
notwithstanding
took
for
God
,
might
teach
them
at
length
,
to
suspect
their
Spirit
,
and
try
before
they
trust
.
As
for
the
Prophesies
of
future
Events
,
they
may
well
be
brought
to
the
Scripture
Test
,
to
the
end
we
may
know
whether
the
thing
Prophesied
may
be
expected
,
without
contradicting
the
Scriptures
,
as
for
Pauls
reproof
of
the
Spirit
of
Divination
,
it
is
most
irrationally
Objected
,
Seeing
Paul
was
immediatly
Inspired
,
and
a
Writer
of
Scripture
himself
.
2●y
.
This
Action
was
most
Consonant
to
Scripture
,
being
abundantly
warranted
by
that
promise
of
Christ
Matth
:
10
,
to
his
Apostles
,
that
they
should
cast
out
Devils
.
They
use
also
many
Arguments
against
the
Scriptures
being
the
principal
Rule
,
of
which
the
Chief
and
Ground
of
almost
all
the
rest
(
with
which
they
stand
and
fall
,
and
therefore
meriteth
particular
Consideration
)
is
this
,
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Fountain
it self
,
but
a
declaration
of
the
Fountain
;
therefore
they
are
not
to
be
accounted
the
principal
Original
of
all
Truth
,
and
Knowledge
,
nor
the
adequat
Primary
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
,
thus
reasoned
Rob:
Barclay
in
his
Appology
.
This
consequence
is
by
his
adversary
judged
a
Demonstration
of
the
Authors
folly
,
pag.
57.
as
being
altogether
ridiculous
,
saying
,
who
ever
dreamed
that
the
Scriptures
were
God
,
or
the
Spirit
of
God
?
To
which
〈◊〉
Barclay
,
Vind.
pag.
37.
thus
Replyeth
,
he
sayeth
,
I
come
nearer
to
the
Core
of
my
design
,
which
is
to
set
up
Enthusiasms
,
in
affirming
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Fountain
,
but
a
Declaration
of
the
Fountain
,
and
yet
the
Man
,
within
three
or
four
lines
,
confesseth
it
himself
,
ascribing
it
to
my
folly
,
to
dream
any
man
thinks
so
;
(
thus
●e
goeth
backward
and
forward
)
which
he
illustrateth
by
the
Example
of
Laws
,
But
if
it
be
so
,
are
not
they
to
be
blamed
,
that
account
them
the
principal
Original
of
all
Truth
and
Knowledge
?
whither
the
other
branch
of
my
deduction
followeth
from
this
:
That
they
are
not
to
be
accounted
the
primary
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
,
will
appear
when
the
Arguments
and
Objections
relating
to
that
,
come
particularly
to
be
mentioned
;
and
whereas
he
thinks
this
is
absurd
,
and
not
making
for
my
Design
,
because
God
Himself
is
the
Fountain
,
and
yet
not
the
Rule
,
he
mistakes
the
matter
as
urged
by
me
:
For
I
argue
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Original
Ground
of
Knowledge
,
but
God
,
not
simply
considered
,
but
as
manifesting
himself
in
divine
immediat
Revelations
in
the
hearts
of
his
children
,
which
being
the
new
Covenants
Dispensation
,
is
the
primary
and
adequate
Rule
of
Christians
:
For
I
was
never
so
absurd
as
to
call
God
simply
considered
,
or
the
Spirit
of
God
,
(
in
abstracto
)
not
as
imprinting
Truths
to
be
believed
,
and
obeyed
in
mens
hearts
,
not
contrary
but
according
to
Scripture
(
for
he
cannot
contradict
himself
)
the
Rule
of
Christians
,
and
this
may
serve
to
answer
all
his
Cavills
upon
this
Theam
.
Thus
he
.
Answer
,
in
his
Apol.
he
thus
reasoned
,
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Fountain
,
but
a
Declaration
of
the
Fountain
,
therefore
they
are
not
the
principal
original
of
all
Truth
,
nor
the
adequate
or
primary
Rule
of
Faith.
Now
this
Argumentation
,
which
is
all
one
with
,
fallacia
plurium
interrogationum
,
hath
a
consequent
made
up
of
two
parts
,
and
therefore
there
are
to
be
considered
here
two
consequences
,
of
which
the
first
,
or
the
consequence
as
to
the
first
part
of
the
inference
his
adversarie
calleth
a
demonstration
of
the
Authors
folly
,
as
proving
that
which
never
man
denyed
,
viz.
that
the
Scriptures
are
not
God
himself
:
I
add
that
this
is
also
a
demonstration
of
his
Malice
,
for
in
this
his
ridiculous
argumentation
he
would
perswade
the
world
,
that
the
Reformed
Churches
(
for
against
them
in
that
place
he
bendeth
his
weapons
)
assert
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
God
himself
:
Upon
this
account
I
say
his
Adversary
accuseth
him
of
folly
;
now
in
stead
of
a
better
off-coming
,
he
giveth
out
that
his
adversary
first
denyed
his
Antecedent
,
and
then
again
presently
confessed
it
;
whereas
he
never
impugned
the
Antecedent
,
but
blameth
him
for
his
consequence
,
of
which
(
as
we
have
already
said
)
the
first
part
is
very
ridiculous
,
proving
the
thing
that
never
one
denyed
;
and
malicious
,
belieing
the
whole
Reformed
Churches
,
and
the
second
part
,
viz.
Because
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
Fountain
,
therefore
they
are
not
the
adequat
and
primary
Rule
of
Faith
,
a
Rope
of
sand
.
The
coherence
of
which
will
be
made
out
ad
Calendas
Graecas
.
He
sayeth
,
that
the
second
Branch
of
his
Deduction
will
appear
,
when
the
Arguments
,
and
objections
relating
to
that
,
come
particularly
to
be
mentioned
,
which
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
in
hand
;
for
unless
he
prove
,
that
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
primary
and
adequate
Rule
of
Faith
from
this
one
Topick
,
that
they
are
not
the
Fountain
,
but
a
Declaration
thereof
,
the
argument
is
gone
.
Hence
all
this
wrangling
is
but
a
further
proof
of
his
Weakness
and
Malice
.
In
his
following
Words
,
he
confoundeth
the
Principal
Rule
,
and
the
Original
Ground
together
,
which
are
things
most
distinct
;
and
therefore
these
words
are
altogether
void
of
good
sense
,
or
at
best
they
are
ridiculous
,
in
that
they
speak
nothing
to
the
purpose
:
For
he
might
well
have
known
,
if
he
had
pleased
,
that
by
the
Primary
Rule
,
is
understood
that
which
is
now
among
the
hands
of
Christians
,
according
to
which
they
ought
to
examine
ultimately
all
sort
of
Doctrines
,
and
opinions
of
men
,
or
yet
suggestions
from
within
concerning
divine
things
,
and
reject
,
or
receive
as
they
disagree
,
or
agree
with
this
Rule
.
If
in
this
sense
,
he
had
understood
the
primary
Rule
,
he
had
not
given
such
mysterious
Niceties
.
But
the
Question
is
not
,
if
God
be
greater
than
the
Scriptures
?
for
as
man
is
above
the
word
of
a
man
,
so
is
he
above
them
;
But
the
Question
is
,
whether
or
not
the
Scriptures
contain
all
things
necessary
in
order
to
Faith
,
and
practise
,
and
whether
or
not
we
ought
to
see
that
every
Doctrine
we
embrace
be
according
to
them
?
and
if
swerving
from
them
we
ought
to
reject
it
,
tho
an
Angel
from
Heaven
should
teach
it
?
Thus
we
understand
the
primary
Rule
;
and
while
he
doth
not
so
,
he
but
mistaketh
the
Question
.
2.
This
Acyrology
,
or
improper
speech
,
to
call
a
person
a
Rule
,
is
a
grand
inductive
of
Confusion
,
for
who
ever
called
a
teacher
a
Rule
,
for
only
the
dictats
taught
are
the
Rule
.
Here
we
see
that
these
new
Teachers
are
contrary
to
all
men
,
in
their
acceptations
of
Words
as
well
as
in
Doctrines
.
But
whereas
he
sayeth
,
that
he
was
never
so
absurd
as
to
call
the
Spirit
of
God
,
simply
,
or
in
abstracto
a
Rule
,
but
as
he
imprints
Truths
in
the
hearts
of
Believers
,
he
doth
not
answer
these
things
which
he
calls
Cavills
;
for
these
Rules
imprinted
in
the
Soul
,
are
not
God
,
under
what
notion
soever
he
be
taken
:
a
Declaration
of
the
Fountain
,
is
not
the
fountain
it self
.
Hence
the
Quakers
grand
principle
that
immediat
objective
Revelations
,
are
the
primary
Rule
of
their
Faith
,
falleth
to
the
Ground
,
and
these
imprinted
Rules
are
but
only
secondary
:
Ergo
even
according
to
what
is
here
gained
from
the
Quakers
,
the
Scriptures
are
equal
even
in
their
primariness
,
to
immediat
Revelations
,
for
the
one
can
no
more
be
called
the
primary
Rule
,
than
the
other
,
and
that
by
the
Quaker
his
own
Concession
.
Moreover
seing
these
immediat
Revelations
,
imprinted
on
the
Soul
,
are
not
the
primary
but
secondary
Rule
,
then
certainly
they
ought
to
be
examined
according
to
the
primary
Rule
.
Now
to
assert
this
is
most
impious
:
Seing
these
Revelations
must
be
supposed
to
be
self
evident
,
and
their
Divinity
already
undoubtedly
apparent
.
For
this
is
to
maintain
that
we
ought
to
doubt
whether
or
not
there
is
veracity
in
God
,
and
(
horresco
referens
)
Judge
,
that
the
God
of
Truth
may
prove
the
lyar
,
and
deceive
us
.
But
once
more
,
how
shal
these
imprinted
secondary
Rules
be
examined
!
not
by
other
words
or
dictats
of
whatsoever
kind
,
for
to
do
this
will
cost
the
examiner
a
journey
to
in
finitum
,
to
which
he
will
not
come
in
haste
,
seing
these
other
Dictats
or
Revelations
are
not
the
Fountain
,
but
a
Declaration
of
the
Fountain
,
more
than
the
first
;
and
to
assert
,
that
these
Revelations
may
be
examined
according
to
God
himself
,
and
not
by
the
Word
of
God
,
is
to
go
some
stages
beyond
the
wildest
of
nonsense
,
and
again
there
is
very
good
Reason
to
wonder
,
why
any
Revelation
should
be
more
primary
than
the
Scriptures
,
both
being
given
by
the
same
Spirit
,
seing
the
primarinesse
is
not
the
immediatness
,
but
the
chief
binding
power
,
&
the
prerogative
to
be
the
touch-stone
of
all
Doctrines
.
Now
this
notion
of
a
primary
Rule
being
had
,
there
is
very
good
Reason
to
wonder
,
why
the
Dictats
of
the
Spirit
should
be
preferred
before
the
Scriptures
,
seing
God
hath
told
,
(
whether
mediatly
or
immediatly
,
it
's
all
one
:
the
Quakers
themselves
dare
not
deny
that
God
hath
indeed
said
it
)
that
they
are
able
to
make
the
Man
of
God
wise
unto
salvation
2
Tim.
3.16
,
17.
And
hath
commanded
,
and
commended
the
perusal
of
them
,
as
the
Book
in
the
determination
of
which
we
ought
finally
,
and
surely
to
rest
,
in
the
matters
of
greatest
import
,
Isai.
8.20
.
Ioh.
5.39
.
Act.
17.11
.
2
Pet.
1.19
,
20.
With
many
other
places
.
But
on
the
other
hand
in
all
the
Scriptures
there
is
not
so
much
as
the
least
intimation
that
all
persons
within
the
Church
,
and
fa●
less
all
men
,
have
divine
immediat
,
Objective
Revelations
,
by
which
they
may
examine
,
and
discern
good
from
evil
,
and
here
he
is
very
angry
with
his
adversary
,
because
he
accused
him
of
confounding
in
his
Apology
,
the
principal
Rule
,
and
the
principal
Leader
,
and
yet
as
though
he
had
not
confounded
them
compleatly
enough
in
his
Apology
,
he
here
again
in
his
Vindication
in
one
and
the
same
page
viz.
38.
both
calleth
the
Spirit
,
as
imprinting
Truths
into
the
Soul
,
the
primary
Rule
,
as
was
even
now
cited
:
and
also
the
same
Spirit
the
principal
Leader
,
as
imprinting
Rules
into
the
Soul
,
to
walk
by
,
by
which
Rules
must
be
understood
the
Truths
he
spake
of
just
now
above
here
the
Reader
may
see
,
that
not
only
the
same
thing
is
both
Principal
Leader
,
and
principal
Rule
,
but
also
that
there
is
not
so
much
as
a
Metaphysical
formality
betwixt
them
,
for
both
of
them
is
God
under
the
notion
of
imprinting
Rules
or
Truths
,
into
the
soul
,
yet
the
confidence
(
I
shal
not
say
the
impudence
)
hath
he
to
deny
that
he
confounded
them
.
8.
But
the
Quakers
well
knowing
,
that
if
God
speaking
in
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
be
admitted
Judge
of
the
present
Debates
between
us
and
them
,
Or
if
the
Holy
Scriptures
be
not
Esteemed
False
,
Ambiguous
,
and
Nonsensical
,
then
their
cause
is
lost
,
and
their
great
Diana
of
Immediat
Revelations
,
and
the
rest
of
their
Monstruous
,
and
Impious
Doctrine
falls
to
the
ground
,
they
assert
with
the
Papists
,
that
the
Spirit
of
God
Speaking
in
the
Scriptures
is
not
his
own
Interpreter
,
and
so
bereave
the
Scriptures
of
that
which
is
the
Soul
,
Sense
,
and
Marrow
thereof
,
denying
all
Scripture
Interpretation
,
though
never
so
Genuine
and
Clear
,
except
they
have
Immediat
Objective
Revelation
,
to
tell
them
that
such
a
Meaning
is
true
:
Hence
they
say
,
they
may
very
well
reject
all
our
Interpretations
,
and
Consequences
of
Scripture
,
seeing
we
do
not
pretend
to
the
Spirit
that
gave
forth
the
Scripture
,
but
declare
our selves
Enemies
to
it
:
Thus
replyeth
George
Keith
to
Mr.
Iohn
Alexander
.
Truths
Def.
Chap.
8.
Behold
,
Reader
,
the
grossest
of
Popish
Shift●●
to
defend
the
grossest
of
Popish
Doctrine
;
for
the
Papists
still
say
,
that
we
can
know
nothing
Certainly
,
because
we
reject
their
Doctrine
of
Infallibility
,
&
just
so
do
the
Quakers
,
maliciously
belying
the
whole
Reformed
Churches
,
Impiously
crying
out
that
they
are
Enemies
to
the
Spirit
of
God
,
and
that
because
we
examine
all
Doctrines
and
Practices
by
the
written
Word
of
God.
Hence
we
find
that
the
Spirit
the
Quakers
pretend
to
,
is
Diametrically
opposite
to
the
Scriptures
,
and
therefore
the
Spirit
of
Lies
,
and
Delusion
;
at
this
they
are
enraged
,
and
cannot
away
with
it
,
Nam
trepidant
immisso
lumine
manes
.
Hence
William
Pen
thus
speaketh
,
Rej.
Pag.
72.
Let
them
shew
me
that
Scripture
,
that
plainly
and
uninterpretatly
tells
me
such
a
proposition
is
true
,
and
such
a
One
is
false
,
that
only
consists
of
their
additional
Meanings
;
such
a
new
Nick-named
People
Right
,
and
such
wrong
,
and
they
do
their
busines
;
If
they
cannot
,
as
it
is
impossible
they
should
,
they
must
have
recourse
to
some
thing
else
to
Rule
,
and
Determine
,
and
what
can
that
be
besides
that
Eternal
Spirit
.
Thou
seest
,
Judicious
Reader
,
that
according
to
the
Quakers
,
God
speaking
in
the
Scriptures
cannot
tell
us
what
is
true
,
or
what
is
false
,
who
are
Right
,
or
who
are
Wrong
;
of
the
same
Nature
is
that
which
the
Quakers
have
in
their
Queries
to
Mr.
Iohn
Alexander
,
in
which
they
often
require
an
Answer
to
be
given
in
plain
words
of
Scripture
,
and
in
particular
Querie
10.
They
have
these
Words
.
We
(
say
they
)
expect
plain
Scriptures
from
you
for
this
,
without
any
Shuffling
,
Meanings
,
Consequences
,
or
else
never
pretend
Scripture
Rule
more
;
but
acknowledge
that
it
hath
been
your
Meanings
,
&
Consequences
which
have
been
your
Rule
;
Hence
according
to
this
Doctrine
our
Saviour
laboured
but
in
vain
,
when
he
proved
the
resurrection
of
the
Dead
from
the
Scriptures
;
Matth.
22.31
,
32.
for
the
Sadducees
might
have
answered
,
that
such
express
words
were
not
in
the
Pentateuch
,
viz.
That
the
dead
should
rise
again
,
and
therefore
they
were
not
bound
to
believe
it
,
tho
the
inference
were
never
so
clear
,
except
they
had
a
new
immediate
Revelation
,
which
they
might
have
said
we
have
not
,
and
who
could
have
proved
the
contrary
;
yea
,
if
this
Doctrine
be
true
,
a
man
doth
not
sin
,
tho
he
worship
the
Crocodile
,
Ibis
,
Dog
or
Cat
with
the
old
Egyptians
;
yea
,
a
man
may
believe
,
or
do
whatever
cometh
into
his
brain
,
for
no
where
in
the
Scripture
is
any
man
in
particular
,
as
for
Example
,
Robert
,
Anthonie
,
or
Christopher
forbidden
,
or
commanded
to
do
any
thing
.
According
to
this
principle
also
,
they
deny
all
Means
,
and
helps
for
expounding
of
the
Scriptures
,
all
Commentaries
and
Expositions
,
witness
amongst
others
these
words
of
Geo
:
Fox
in
his
Primmar
to
Europe
.
Pag.
37.
What
are
the
Means
of
searching
out
the
meaning
of
the
Scriptures
?
one
whereof
you
say
is
a
Logical
Analysis
,
and
what
is
a
Logical
Analysis
of
the
Scriptures
?
and
Robert
B.
Vind.
Pag.
29.
Impiously
denyeth
,
that
the
Holy
Ghost
is
a
Distinct
Person
of
the
Trinity
,
and
that
upon
this
ground
,
because
as
he
sayeth
,
these
Words
are
not
found
expresly
in
Scripture
;
The
same
way
Rob:
B.
in
his
Apology
understandeth
that
place
1
Iohn
.
2.27
.
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
or
as
the
words
at
the
first
sound
,
and
without
any
explication
,
or
clearing
of
them
,
argumenteth
from
them
;
He
that
hath
an
Anointing
abiding
in
him
,
teaching
him
all
things
,
so
that
he
needs
no
man
to
teach
him
,
hath
an
inward
and
immediat
Teacher
,
and
hath
some
things
inwardly
,
and
immediatly
revealed
unto
him
.
The
same
way
also
he
understandeth
and
expoundeth
Jer.
31.34
.
So
that
whatever
they
say
,
or
can
say
,
to
liberate
their
Doctrine
of
this
most
weightie
,
but
just
Charge
,
they
shall
only
twist
Contradictions
the
faster
.
And
suitable
to
this
Doctrine
i●
the
Practice
of
Quakers
,
who
notwithstanding
that
they
Endeavour
to
perswade
the
World
,
that
they
are
Illuminat
,
as
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
were
,
yes
,
if
not
more
;
have
never
yet
,
for
any
thing
I
can
learn
,
benefited
the
Church
by
commenting
upon
any
one
Book
of
Scripture
,
but
account
all
Commentaries
and
such
Treaties
useless
,
and
unworthy
,
except
by
detorting
of
them
,
to
find
out
some
thing
opposite
to
the
Doctrine
of
the
Reformed
Churches
.
Now
certainly
if
these
men
be
so
Illuminat
,
as
they
would
bear
us
in
hand
,
there
can
be
no
reason
Alledged
,
whey
they
benefit
not
the
World
,
by
illustrating
the
Scriptures
,
with
clear
Commentaries
,
and
such
Helps
as
may
be
most
〈◊〉
for
understanding
thereof
,
if
it
be
not
that
they
either
Envy
the
World
of
such
a
Good
,
which
I
think
they
will
not
say
,
Or
else
that
all
such
Help
;
are
superfluous
.
And
indeed
this
they
stick
not
to
say
,
publishing
to
the
World
in
Print
,
that
all
Catechetical
Doctrine
&
●nstruction
is
the
Doctrine
of
Antichrist
,
&
learned
from
Papists
;
yea
the
very
Scriptures
themselve●
they
call
by
way
of
De●raction
the
Letter
in
by
Divinity
,
&
worse
.
Add
to
all
this
,
their
Doctrine
of
silent
waiting
,
their
railing
against
studied
Sermons
,
and
explications
of
Scripture
.
And
that
in
all
their
Pamphlets
they
use
not
to
exhort
men
to
search
the
Scriptures
,
according
to
the
Example
of
Christ
Jesus
;
but
in
stead
thereof
,
the
Light
within
.
These
and
many
other
things
which
might
be
said
,
sufficiently
evince
,
that
this
their
Revelation
or
new
Light
,
is
unto
them
in
place
of
Commentaries
,
Catechism●
,
or
any
other
Helps
for
understanding
the
Scriptures
;
yea
and
the
Scriptures
themselves
:
So
that
this
one
Darling
of
theirs
,
renders
all
others
needless
:
Moreover
,
they
deny
with
the
old
Manichees
,
that
any
part
of
the
old
Testament
is
binding
upon
us
,
and
as
for
the
N.
T.
William
Pen
saith
,
that
the
far
greater
part
thereof
is
altogether
lost
,
and
sticketh
not
to
say
,
that
without
their
Spirit
,
we
have
no
more
certainty
of
the
Scriptures
than
of
the
Popish
Legends
.
Add
to
all
this
,
that
this
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
,
viz.
That
the
Scriptures
are
not
the
principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
manners
,
or
chief
Judge
of
Controversies
,
is
downright
Popish
,
and
(
as
good
reason
they
should
be
)
both
their
Arguments
to
prove
it
,
and
their
Answers
to
our
Arguments
against
it
,
altogether
Coincide
with
those
of
the
Romanists
,
which
might
easily
be
illustrat
in
every
particular
;
Some
Examples
we
have
given
already
,
to
those
we
may
ad
one
other
viz.
Rev.
22.18
.
From
which
place
we
usually
reason
,
that
the
Canon
of
the
Scriptures
is
compleated
;
to
which
place
the
Papists
answer
,
that
this
prohibition
is
only
to
be
understood
of
the
book
of
the
Revelation
alone
,
and
that
it
will
no
more
follow
from
this
place
,
that
Traditions
ought
not
to
be
added
to
the
Scriptures
,
as
a
part
of
the
rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
,
then
it
will
follow
from
Deut.
4.2
.
That
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
were
to
write
no
Scriptures
afterward
;
To
this
purpose
may
Bellarmin
answer
and
the
rest
of
the
Jesuites
.
The
same
way
directly
answereth
Robert
Barclay
(
as
these
may
do
with
the
like
support
of
their
cause
)
both
in
his
Apologie
,
and
Vindication
;
and
when
Mr.
Broun
telleth
him
▪
that
this
as
all
the
rest
is
a
Popish
shift
;
He
replies
Vind.
pag.
35.
in
these
words
,
what
then
,
I
could
tell
him
an
hundred
Arguments
used
by
him
,
which
the
Papists
also
use
against
us
;
will
he
say
it
follows
they
are
invalid
.
But
how
pitiful
and
shameful
this
shift
is
,
none
see
not
;
for
can
he
say
,
that
his
Adversary
had
an
hundred
Arguments
common
to
him
with
Papists
,
tending
to
the
overthrow
of
the
Doctrine
of
the
reformed
Churches
,
which
they
hold
in
opposition
to
papists
,
either
this
he
must
say
,
otherwayes
he
only
discovereth
a
desperate
Cause
,
and
an
Effronted
Defender
;
For
certainly
there
are
Arguments
common
to
both
us
and
the
Papists
,
by
which
we
defend
the
Truth
of
the
Christian
Religion
in
opposition
to
Heathens
,
and
Iews
,
yet
none
except
he
that
is
altogether
careless
of
what
he
says
,
or
that
mindeth
to
infer
Quidlibet
ex
quolibet
(
as
they
say
)
will
affirm
,
that
Protestants
are
Papists
,
or
Papists
Protestants
upon
that
account
.
Hence
it
is
clear
,
that
as
there
is
not
the
least
shadow
of
a
Difference
between
Papists
and
Quakers
in
this
point
,
so
this
Quaker
is
conscious
of
it
,
seeing
,
he
could
not
but
know
that
if
this
shift
did
him
any
Service
,
to
distinguish
him
from
a
Papist
,
It
will
no
less
distinguish
a
Papist
from
himself
,
and
prove
him
to
be
no
Papist
;
So
we
see
that
the
very
shifts
that
these
men
use
,
under
the
covert
of
which
they
may
Lu●k
,
contribut
only
to
the
more
clear
Detection
and
Discovery
of
their
wickedness
,
in
promoting
what
they
can
this
downright
Popish
Doctrine
,
and
gross
Hypocrisie
,
in
refusing
the
Name
,
when
they
cannot
but
know
that
they
are
guilty
of
the
thing
.
CHAP.
II.
Of
Immediate
Revelation
.
AS
the
Quakers
have
rejected
the
guidance
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
speaking
in
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
which
are
able
to
make
the
Man
of
God
wise
unto
Salvation
;
so
they
have
most
impiously
and
self-deceivingly
given
up
themselves
to
the
guidance
of
something
,
which
they
call
the
Spirit
of
God
,
as
we
have
heard
:
and
again
in
contradiction
to
this
,
the
Soul
of
Christ
extended
and
dilated
,
of
which
,
say
they
,
every
man
is
a
partaker
.
But
most
frequently
they
call
it
,
the
Light
within
,
or
simply
,
the
Spirit
,
which
they
make
the
chief
and
principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
manners
,
to
which
Spirit
God
himself
speaking
in
the
Holy
Scripture
must
do
obeisance
.
Which
Doctrine
although
we
have
already
everted
in
the
former
chapter
,
we
shal
notwithstanding
here
propose
and
vindicate
a
few
Arguments
for
the
further
overthrow
thereof
,
and
detection
of
the
grosse
abomination
and
horrid
delusion
attending
their
principles
,
And
first
I
will
propose
and
vindicate
an
Argument
proposed
by
Mr.
Brown
;
Quakerism
the
plain
way
to
Paganism
pag.
46.
Which
Argument
Robert
Barclay
attempteth
to
solve
Vind:
pag.
17.
which
is
this
,
If
since
the
Apostles
fell
asleep
,
and
the
Canon
of
the
Scriptures
was
closed
,
all
that
have
pretended
to
immediate
Revelation
,
as
a
primary
Rule
,
have
been
led
by
a
Spirit
of
error
,
then
it
is
not
the
way
of
Christ
But
the
former
is
true
.
Ergo.
&c.
To
this
he
answers
1.
that
Mr.
Brown
begs
the
Question
,
in
his
presupposing
,
that
there
are
no
Apostles
now
,
and
that
the
Canon
of
the
Scriptures
is
closed
;
against
which
exception
I
reassume
the
Argument
thus
.
If
since
the
Apostles
,
whose
Names
are
mentioned
in
Scripture
,
fell
asleep
,
and
Iohn
wrote
the
Revelation
,
all
that
pretended
to
this
kind
of
Revelation
have
been
led
by
a
Spirit
of
error
,
then
this
is
not
the
way
of
Christ
;
But
the
former
is
true
.
Ergo
,
&c.
There
can
now
no
exception
be
made
against
the
M●j●r
,
for
none
will
deny
,
that
the
Apostles
whose
names
are
mentioned
in
Scripture
are
dead
,
and
that
Iohn
hath
written
the
Revelation
,
and
well
enough
he
knew
that
Mr.
Brown
understood
no
other
thing
than
what
we
have
now
said
,
and
yet
so
covetous
hath
he
been
of
shifting
,
that
he
behoved
to
have
one
,
though
he
could
not
but
know
that
it
would
serve
no
longer
than
it
met
with
an
impugner
.
I
now
come
to
his
answer
to
the
Minor
,
which
Mr.
Brown
makes
evident
by
an
induction
of
many
Sects
,
and
Hereticks
,
pretending
to
immediate
Revelation
,
all
which
are
known
and
not
denyed
by
Quakers
,
to
have
been
led
by
a
Spirit
of
error
,
to
which
we
may
add
many
of
the
Quakers
themselves
,
such
as
I●
:
Nailor
,
Susanna
Parsons
;
who
as
P●get
relateth
,
being
moved
by
this
lying
Spirit
,
fruitlesly
attempted
to
raise
from
the
dead
,
another
of
the
Quakers
,
one
William
Pool
by
name
,
who
had
murdered
himself
,
and
Gilpins
,
of
whose
lying
Spirit
see
at
large
in
Clerks
Examples
;
also
Iohn
Toldervy
,
of
whom
see
a
little
Book
called
,
foot
out
of
snare
;
Robert
Church-man
and
many
others
,
of
whom
you
may
read
at
large
in
Mr.
Increase
Maithers
Book
.
And
he
requireth
an
instance
of
the
contrary
,
which
is
the
only
way
to
answer
an
Induction
;
In
stead
of
which
he
sayeth
,
that
he
is
bound
to
prove
,
that
there
was
never
one
pretending
to
immediate
Revelation
,
but
he
was
also
led
of
the
Spirit
of
error
,
which
he
hath
done
unt●l
he
give
an
instance
to
the
contrary
:
or
else
shew
another
way
of
answering
an
induction
,
which
will
be
new
logick
;
which
perhaps
he
may
do
,
for
he
and
his
Brethren
are
very
displeased
with
the
old
.
2
ly
.
That
he
may
not
be
alone
in
this
sore
stresse
,
he
saith
that
Mr
Menzies
doth
thus
answer
Dempster
the
Jesuite
:
which
is
an
impudent
falshood
,
for
neither
the
Jesuits
medium
nor
probation
of
his
Minor
,
is
in
the
least
like
the
Argument
which
we
now
vindicate
;
for
the
Jesuits
Argument
was
this
,
That
Religion
cannot
be
true
Religion
which
hath
no
peculiar
ground
,
or
principle
to
prove
that
it
is
a
Religion
,
and
conform
to
the
true
sense
and
letter
of
the
Scripture
,
or
Word
of
God
;
and
he
subsumes
,
But
the
Protestant
Religion
hath
no
peculiar
ground
,
&c.
Ergo
it
cannot
be
a
true
Religion
.
Hence
it
is
evident
that
these
two
Argumentations
have
nothing
of
consanguinity
;
For
if
these
two
Argumentations
had
stricken
alike
at
the
two
parties
,
against
which
they
were
framed
,
then
the
Jesuits
Argument
should
have
run
thus
;
Whosoever
since
the
Apostles
fell
asleep
have
pretended
to
,
or
pleaded
for
the
Scriptures
as
their
principal
Rule
,
have
fallen
into
palpable
errors
and
open
blasphemy
,
so
that
they
became
marks
of
Gods
heavy
judgment
.
Now
where
should
the
Jesuite
have
found
such
a
long
Catalogue
of
these
,
as
Mr.
Brown
hath
found
of
deluded
Enthusiasts
.
But
which
is
the
main
thing
and
quite
refutes
the
most
falsly
and
impiously
alledged
coincidence
of
these
Arguments
,
how
easy
should
it
have
been
to
have
adduced
not
only
one
instance
to
the
contrary
,
but
whole
volums
thereof
,
ye●
not
only
the
whole
primitive
Church
for
diverse
Centuries
after
Christ
,
and
all
the
Reformed
Churches
,
both
these
whom
men
are
pleased
to
call
Calvinists
,
and
Lutherans
,
together
with
the
Greek
,
and
Abassine
Churches
;
But
likewise
the
most
grave
,
wise
and
learned
of
the
Romanists
themselves
.
By
this
time
I
hope
this
arch-falshood
of
the
Quaker
,
whereby
he
would
hide
the
shame
of
his
desperat
cause
,
already
appeareth
;
again
I
answer
directly
to
the
Jesuit
,
and
the
Quaker
his
patron
,
that
if
we
may
believe
the
ablest
,
and
fiercest
of
our
Adversaries
,
such
as
Bellarmin
,
Contaren
,
Salmeron
,
the
chief
of
the
Doctrines
,
which
we
hold
in
opposition
to
pope●y
are
most
agreeable
to
the
true
Sense
of
Scripture
.
His
third
answer
is
,
that
some
of
the
primitive
Protestants
,
such
as
George
Wishart
and
Iohn
Huss
had
immediat
Revelation
,
But
,
nequisquam
Ajacem
possit
super
are
nisi
Ajax
,
that
he
might
be
sure
no
other
should
refute
him
,
he
refuteth
himself
,
and
rendereth
his
instance
altogether
unserviceable
,
by
granting
they
did
not
pretend
to
it
as
the
ground
of
their
Faith
,
and
obedience
in
all
matters
of
doctrine
and
worship
?
Lastly
to
the
instance
of
Ia
:
Naylor
,
they
answer
,
that
he
repented
again
;
which
answer
is
an
evident
confirmation
of
what
we
plead
for
,
viz·
that
the
Quakers
Spirit
is
ready
to
give
them
the
cheat
,
and
deceive
them
,
for
I
believe
Ia
:
Naylor
acted
but
according
to
his
light
when
he
received
Divine
Worship
.
From
this
argument
we
may
observe
these
things
first
,
if
it
hold
as
cogent
,
this
is
a
serious
Truth
which
he
sayeth
.
Vindic.
page
.
25.
is
absurdly
affirmed
by
Iames
Durham
(
as
he
speaks
)
viz.
that
Christ
spake
his
last
words
to
the
Church
,
that
is
,
put
a
close
to
these
writings
which
were
to
be
a
Rule
to
the
whole
Church
;
for
if
all
that
pretend
the
like
commission
,
or
such
immediate
Revelation
of
the
rule
of
their
Faith
(
about
which
the
question
is
)
were
led
by
a
Spirit
of
error
,
then
the
Revelation
was
the
last
Scripture
written
,
and
sure
,
for
any
thing
he
knoweth
,
ought
to
be
written
,
there
is
no
reason
to
believe
that
there
is
any
more
to
be
written
.
2
ly
.
Observe
,
that
this
Argument
is
demonstrative
,
for
such
are
all
inductions
which
have
no
instance
to
the
contrary
.
3
ly
.
It
destroyes
wholly
the
Quakers
cause
;
for
this
kind
of
Revelation
being
disproved
,
the
very
proprium
quarti
mod●
of
the
Quakers
is
destroyed
.
2dly
.
Moses
and
the
Prophets
,
Christ
and
the
Apostles
,
and
all
the
holy
men
that
were
inspired
by
God
,
to
compile
a
rule
of
Faith
,
and
Life
,
could
by
Infallible
Evidence
,
and
infallible
proofs
,
even
to
the
Conviction
,
and
self
Condemnation
of
the
greatest
Opposers
,
demonstrat
,
that
they
were
sent
of
God
,
but
nothing
of
this
kind
the
Quakers
can
do
;
yea
,
they
are
so
far
from
it
,
that
they
can
bring
no
more
Evidence
,
or
Credentials
for
their
Rule
of
Faith
,
or
pretended
Revelation
,
than
the
most
wicked
Enthusiasts
,
as
for
Example
Iohn
of
Leyden
and
his
followers
,
whom
the
Quakers
themselves
dare
not
deny
to
have
him
Acted
by
a
most
wicked
Spirit
of
Delusion
;
seeing
therefore
,
they
will
not
subject
their
Revelations
to
the
infallible
test
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
but
contrarywise
will
Impiously
make
the
Scriptures
stoup
to
their
Revelations
,
they
can
be
no
more
certain
,
that
they
are
not
acted
by
the
Devil
,
or
at
least
by
their
own
giddy-brain
,
and
erroneous
fancie
,
when
they
bear
us
in
hand
,
that
they
are
inspired
by
the
Spirit
of
God
,
than
they
of
Manster
were
.
To
this
Argument
they
decline
so
far
as
they
can
a
direct
answer
;
Therefore
,
Robert
Barclay
Replyeth
to
Mr.
Broun
.
Vind.
pag.
21.
How
cometh
it
that
others
pretending
to
be
led
by
the
Scripture
as
their
Rule
,
as
much
as
John
Broun
have
been
deceived
,
since
the
Scripture
declares
nothing
but
Truth
;
But
how
silly
this
is
I
have
shown
above
and
more
largely
in
my
Apology
in
these
paragraphs
which
I
observed
he
most
foully
omitted
.
And
indeed
this
is
a
fine
Argument
,
he
has
provided
for
Atheists
,
and
Scepticks
,
for
it
renders
all
Faith
,
even
that
of
the
Patriarchs
uncertain
:
For
since
their
ground
,
and
warrant
of
Writing
the
Scripture
,
was
in
his
own
account
Inward
,
Immediat
and
Extraordinary
Revelations
,
and
if
such
be
,
as
he
affirms
,
uncertain
,
then
the
truth
of
the
Scriptures
which
depends
upon
such
,
must
necessarily
be
uncertain
,
since
the
Stream
cannot
be
more
pure
than
the
Fountain
.
Thus
he
;
This
Reply
resolveth
into
two
Hypothetick
Propositions
(
as
for
the
Paragraphs
of
which
he
here
boasteth
as
unanswered
,
which
take
up
six
pages
in
his
Apology
,
filled
with
Railing
and
Gall
,
against
all
the
reformed
Churches
,
they
prove
only
that
the
Scriptures
through
men
corruption
are
subject
to
abuse
,
which
never
man
denyed
.
)
The
first
is
,
if
the
Scriptures
through
the
Corruption
of
men
,
may
be
wrested
and
abused
to
the
Patrociny
of
Errors
and
corrupt
Practices
,
then
altho
men
clearly
understand
,
and
firmly
believe
them
,
and
square
their
Practice
exactly
according
to
them
;
Yet
they
are
no
more
able
to
be
a
Rule
unto
them
,
than
these
Revelations
can
be
which
Iohn
of
Leyden
held
.
The
second
is
,
He
that
will
not
admit
of
such
Revelations
as
cannot
be
distinguished
from
these
which
led
their
followers
into
the
most
Blasphemous
Opinions
,
and
most
wicked
Practices
imaginable
,
He
(
I
say
)
that
will
not
admit
of
these
for
his
principal
Rule
,
but
preferreth
unto
them
the
Scriptures
,
which
can
both
be
invincibly
demonstrated
to
have
proceeded
from
God
,
and
also
call
themselves
sufficient
to
make
one
wise
unto
Salvation
,
provideth
an
Argument
for
Atheists
and
Scepti●ks
:
But
thus
doth
Mr.
Broun
reason
against
the
Quakers
,
and
except
this
&
the
like
other
grounds
,
the
Quakers
have
none
for
this
heavy
Charge
.
For
that
his
Adversary
called
the
Revelations
of
the
Apostles
&
Prophets
uncertain
;
Is
a
most
palpable
Untruth
,
the
least
shadow
of
which
cannot
be
found
in
all
his
Writings
,
except
they
deduce
it
by
such
unreasonable
Inferences
as
these
.
And
now
,
Reader
,
speak
thy
mind
in
good
earnest
;
Thinkest
thou
that
this
man
was
in
his
wit
,
or
to
be
numbred
amongst
Rationals
,
when
he
made
these
Deductions
,
by
which
their
palpable
Impieties
are
indeed
antidots
against
seduction
.
But
these
men
have
an
ordinary
Trick
of
comparing
their
own
Revelations
,
of
the
Divinity
of
which
they
can
give
no
Signs
,
to
these
of
the
Apostles
,
and
Prophets
,
that
were
to
the
conviction
of
all
Opposers
,
proved
to
be
Divine
;
and
thus
give
away
,
and
betray
the
Christian
Cause
;
in
labouring
to
defend
their
own
Dottages
.
In
the
next
place
therefore
,
let
us
take
a
short
view
of
the
Quakers
principal
Rule
,
compared
with
ours
,
that
it
may
more
fully
appear
,
which
of
the
parties
provide
an
argument
for
Atheists
&
Scepticks
;
And
1.
We
cannot
know
whether
they
ha●●
any
Revelations
at
all
,
they
may
be
lying
unto
us
for
any
thing
we
know
,
we
have
only
their
naked
Word
for
it
;
whereas
on
the
other
hand
,
it
is
beyond
denyal
that
we
have
the
Scriptures
.
2ly
.
It
being
given
that
they
have
Revelations
of
some
kind
,
from
whence
are
they
?
from
Heaven
?
their
own
fancy
?
or
from
Hell
?
This
we
cannot
know
,
they
neither
do
,
nor
can
give
any
mark
to
distinguish
them
from
these
Revelations
,
which
all
the
world
are
perswaded
to
have
been
from
Hell
,
or
at
least
from
a
Vertiginous
Fancy
.
Go
to
then
,
let
them
speak
their
mind
,
and
attempt
the
retortion
of
the
argument
(
if
they
dare
)
upon
the
Scriptures
.
They
yet
more
fully
prove
,
that
their
Revelations
are
not
from
Heaven
,
while
they
affirm
that
they
are
common
to
all
men
,
which
(
if
the
experience
of
the
World
,
yea
,
of
the
word
of
God
may
be
judge
)
is
most
●alie
.
3ly
,
Making
a
Supposition
,
which
will
never
come
to
a
solid
Position
,
that
they
have
divine
Revelations
,
we
yet
cannot
know
for
what
end
they
are
given
;
whether
to
be
a
principal
Rule
or
not
,
or
whether
or
not
through
their
own
corruption
,
they
do
not
wrest
and
misunderstand
,
or
tho
they
do
understand
them
,
if
they
walk
according
to
them
(
nothing
of
which
can
be
〈◊〉
of
the
Scriptures
)
we
can
hear
nothing
,
nor
〈◊〉
nothing
,
but
some
men
still
amusing
the
World
,
Crying
a
new
Light
,
without
giving
any
Evidence
or
proof
thereof
,
but
only
their
own
Word
,
&
so
are
always
their
oun
witnesses
in
their
own
cause
,
and
therefore
by
all
rational
men
ought
not
a
little
to
be
suspected
.
4ly
.
This
Spirit
,
inward
Light
,
or
Revelations
of
the
Quakers
,
for
I
take
all
for
one
,
can
never
be
able
to
determine
Controversies
;
Seeing
two
different
parties
may
both
of
them
adduce
these
Revelations
to
prove
contradictory
Assertions
.
Now
Seeing
neither
of
the
parties
,
is
in
case
to
Evince
that
his
Revelations
are
from
God
more
than
the
other
,
the
Controversie
must
remain
for
ever
undetermined
,
Seeing
they
have
no
common
principle
in
which
they
can
concenter
and
meet
.
And
thus
standeth
(
for
Examples
sake
)
the
case
betwixt
Quakers
and
Ranters
,
agreeing
in
this
principle
of
immediat
Revelations
,
and
yet
(
if
their
books
be
to
be
believed
)
bitter
Enemies
to
one
another
in
several
points
,
for
which
both
of
them
alledge
Revelations
as
their
grand
Principle
,
and
neither
of
them
can
evince
their
Revelations
to
have
proceeded
from
God
,
more
than
the
other
.
Hence
we
most
rationally
conclude
that
the
Controversies
betwixt
these
two
parties
are
indeterminable
,
so
long
as
they
stick
to
this
Principle
.
Now
this
Argument
in
no
ways
〈◊〉
be
retorted
on
the
Scriptures
,
for
though
there
have
been
through
the
corruption
of
men
,
wresting
the
Scriptures
,
many
Controversies
,
and
that
even
amongst
these
who
assert
that
the
Scriptures
〈◊〉
the
Principal
Rule
of
Faith
,
and
Manners
;
yet
wh●
can
say
,
that
this
is
through
default
of
the
Scriptures
,
seeing
our
Adversaries
cannot
deny
,
but
that
they
speak
both
Sense
and
Truth
;
and
that
when
there
is
a
real
Contradiction
between
two
,
disputing
cocerning
any
Doctrine
,
or
Sense
,
and
meaning
of
any
text
of
Scripture
,
this
Text
speaks
for
the
one
,
and
against
the
other
,
tho
the
one
of
the
parties
,
either
through
Ignorance
cannot
,
or
through
prejudice
will
nor
see
it
;
and
that
the
sense
thereof
may
be
brought
forth
to
the
light
,
so
that
there
shall
follow
a
mutual
Agreement
between
the
two
dissenting
parties
,
and
consequently
that
the
Scriptures
of
their
own
Nature
,
are
apt
for
the
removal
of
differences
about
things
contained
in
them
.
We
have
heard
their
retortion
,
let
us
now
hear
their
direct
answer
,
which
is
,
that
their
fruits
declare
them
to
have
the
Spirit
of
God
;
Thus
it
s
answered
in
their
Quakerism
confirmed
,
to
the
Students
of
Aberdeen
;
For
which
forsooth
they
bring
Scripture
proof
from
Matth.
7.15
,
16.
where
fruits
are
made
the
Test
for
trying
whether
one
be
a
true
or
false
Prophet
.
But
what
fruits
these
thorny
prickling
Plants
have
brought
,
and
do
daily
bring
forth
,
the
world
is
not
ignorant
.
If
to
deny
the
Holy
Trinitie
,
the
Person
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ
,
the
resurrection
of
the
Body
,
and
to
assert
the
Souls
of
men
,
yea
and
devils
to
,
to
be
God
Almighty
,
(
of
which
abominations
we
shall
ere
we
end
this
Treatise
,
undeniably
prove
the
Quakers
to
be
guilty
)
and
in
a
word
,
to
vomit
out
their
Malice
,
so
as
to
endeavour
the
overthrow
of
whatsoever
God
in
his
Sacred
Word
hath
commanded
us
,
either
to
believe
or
do
.
If
these
(
I
say
)
be
the
fruits
of
the
Spirit
?
then
indeed
the
Quakers
have
them
,
and
abound
in
them
,
and
other
Fruits
we
know
none
,
except
(
which
are
of
little
worth
)
some
Stoicisms
,
and
ridiculous
whimsies
,
in
which
also
some
of
the
M●humetan
and
other
Monks
have
gone
far
beyond
them
;
yea
,
with
these
men
.
Envy
,
Pride
,
Contempt
of
all
others
,
are
so
predominan●
,
that
tho
by
this
Character
o●ly
,
it
is
easi●y
judged
by
what
Spirit
they
are
acted
.
Add
to
all
this
,
their
constant
custome
of
horrible
lying
,
Perverting
,
and
Railing
;
of
which
take
one
or
●wo
Instances
in
the
practise
of
one
o●
their
chief
leaders
Rob:
Barcl
.
for
Vind.
pag.
60
He
sayeth
,
that
his
Adversa●ie
inferred
from
the
Quakers
Doctrine
of
Christs
dying
for
all
,
that
Infants
come
to
heaven
without
Christ
;
But
how
grosse
an
un●ruth
is
〈◊〉
,
will
be
evident
to
any
that
read
Mr.
Broun
,
Cap
6.
Num.
14.
where
he
inferreth
this
horrible
consequence
,
from
their
de●ying
of
Original
Sin
;
and
again
pag
64.65
,
he
saith
,
that
the
Westminster
Confession
saith
,
that
God
did
predestinat
to
everlasting
damnation
the
most
part
of
men
,
without
any
respect
had
to
their
sin
;
But
a
more
palpable
and
horrid
lie
,
hath
scarce
been
hatched
;
for
〈◊〉
that
Confession
chap
3.
§
.
7.
It
is
expresly
said
,
that
God
〈◊〉
●rdain
them
to
Wrath
for
their
sins
.
Of
the
like
nature
,
is
that
which
he
saith
pag.
170
;
That
his
Advers●ry
chap
27.
maketh
a
Preaching
to
the
Devil
,
and
that
a
Minister
at
Lige●wood
,
made
a
Prayer
to
the
Devil
;
whereas
he
only
●nfer●eth
from
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
that
they
may
make
a
Preaching
to
the
Devil
.
And
as
for
Railing
,
their
whole
writings
are
Stuffed
with
it
.
See
for
example
Hubberthorn
against
Sherlock
,
whose
whole
Pamphlet
,
is
nothing
but
an
he●p
of
furious
Railing
,
his
best
Language
being
,
Thief
,
rude
Fellow
,
Enemy
to
God
&c.
See
also
Edward
Burroug●s
in
answer
to
Philip
Bennet
,
whose
best
language
is
Serpent
,
the
lake
is
prepared
for
thee
,
and
such
language
as
this
is
the
marrow
of
the
Quakers
refutation
of
their
adversaries
Books
.
For
in
these
two
now
Named
Discours●s
,
there
is
hardly
the
shadow
of
so
m●ch
as
an
Essay
to
answer
;
But
this
is
the
way
how
they
gain
the
day
,
and
obtain
the
last
word
.
How
fair
an
occasion
is
here
offered
to
shew
to
the
world
by
a
particular
Enumeration
of
their
horrid
&
monstruou●
practices
that
their
frui●s
are
the
Grapes
of
Sodom
,
and
the
wine
of
Gomorrah
;
But
they
are
but
too
too
well
known
already
;
we
forbear
therefore
to
rake
into
this
Dung-hill
,
Certain
it
i●
that
the
works
of
the
Angel
of
the
bottomless
pit
▪
will
as
soon
prove
himself
●o
be
an
angel
of
Light
▪
as
the
Fruits
of
these
High-pretenders
,
will
prove
them
to
be
acted
by
the
Spirit
of
God.
But
more
fully
to
confirm
or
rather
illustrate
this
argument
I
shal
shew
the
Identity
of
their
Spirit
with
that
of
the
old
Anabaptists
in
several
particulars
.
A
short
parallel
between
the
old
Libertine
Anabaptists
,
and
the
new
,
who
are
known
by
the
name
of
Quakers
.
1.
Muncer
and
the
Anabaptists
with
him
denyed
that
the
Scriptures
,
or
external
word
(
for
thus
they
spake
that
they
might
the
better
vili●y
the
Scriptures
were
the
Word
of
God
,
but
only
a
Testimony
thereof
;
and
said
that
the
Word
of
God
was
a
certain
heavenly
thing
distinct
from
the
Scriptures
.
Bullinger
adversus
Anabaptistas
lib.
1.
cap.
1.
The
same
is
the
downright
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
;
only
there
is
this
difference
,
that
the
Quakers
expresse
themselves
in
this
matter
with
more
rage
and
fury
,
than
(
for
ought
I
can
find
)
the
Anabaptists
did
,
as
the
Reader
may
may
see
cap.
1.
§.
1.
of
this
Treatise
.
2dly
.
Muncer
with
his
disciples
preferred
that
which
they
called
immediate
Revelation
and
inspirations
,
(
busked
with
the
specious
Title
of
Fathers
will
,
as
the
Quakers
Revelations
are
now
with
that
of
the
Spirit
)
to
Gods
written
Word
.
Bullinger
Ibid
and
cap.
2.
&
passim
alibi
.
Sleidan
:
comm:
Calvin
:
Instit:
lib
,
1
cap.
9.
In
this
point
also
the
Quakers
are
their
successors
,
or
rather
the
same
,
the
name
being
changed
,
seing
they
with
Robert
Barclay
propos
.
2
,
3.
assert
,
that
not
the
Scriptures
,
but
the
Spirit
,
is
the
principal
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
.
3dly
.
The
old
Anabaptists
asserted
,
that
the
express
Words
and
Phrases
of
the
Scriptures
are
to
be
adhered
to
,
without
any
exposition
,
interpretation
or
deduction
.
Bulling:
lib.
1.
cap.
8.
&
alibi
.
In
this
also
their
genuine
children
the
Quak●rs
follow
them
with
both
feet
,
as
is
evident
in
this
Treatise
cap.
1.
4ly
.
The
Anabaptists
of
old
asserted
that
the
whole
Old
Testament
is
now
abrogate
,
and
pertaineth
not
to
a
Christian
,
nor
hath
any
obligation
or
force
upon
him
,
in
which
wicked
Doctrine
as
they
followed
the
Manichaeans
,
so
at
this
day
the
no
lesse
wicked
Quakers
follow
them
,
asserting
that
nothing
recorded
in
the
old
Testament
is
binding
and
incumbent
to
us
,
but
as
it
is
ratified
by
Christ
in
the
new
,
and
hath
precept
or
Authority
from
it
,
as
is
affirmed
by
Robert
Barclay
Vindic
:
P.
178.
num.
5.
Hence
it
is
evident
that
according
to
them
,
no
part
of
the
Old
Testament
is
more
obligatory
or
binding
upon
u●
,
than
the
words
of
Aratus
,
or
such
heathen
Poets
are
,
and
yet
these
men
will
not
stick
in
contradiction
to
these
their
own
words
to
say
,
we
calumniat
them
.
If
we
draw
from
this
or
the
like
passages
that
they
deny
the
Authority
of
the
Old
Testament
,
Robert
Barclay
Ibidem
.
5ly
.
Both
Anabaptists
and
Quakers
deny
Original
Sin
;
for
proof
of
which
see
cap.
3.
of
this
Treatise
.
6ly
.
The
Anabaptists
,
Muncer
and
the
rest
of
his
sect
taught
,
that
Christ
made
no
Satisfaction
for
sins
:
and
compared
these
who
taught
the
contrary
to
the
rable
of
Scribes
and
Pharisees
.
Bulling.
lib.
1.
cap.
11.
they
taught
also
that
its
damnable
and
dangerous
Doctrine
,
to
assert
that
we
are
justified
by
the
righteousness
of
Christ
,
or
by
Faith
,
and
not
also
by
Works
,
Bulling
lib.
4
,
cap.
1.
&
Sequ.
In
which
Doctrine
the
Quakers
have
not
only
equalized
but
outdone
and
outstript
their
Ancestors
,
as
cap
5.
of
this
Treatise
more
abundantly
evinceth
;
and
here
it
is
to
be
observed
once
for
all
that
all
the
Capital
adversaries
of
the
Christian
Religion
,
how
contrary
soever
they
may
be
or
seem
to
be
one
to
another
:
symbolize
in
this
grand
heresy
,
and
conspire
together
the
overthrow
,
and
subversion
of
the
Doctrine
of
Iustification
by
Faith
,
or
the
imputed
Righteousness
of
Christ
,
which
is
acknowledged
by
all
the
Orthodox
,
to
be
articulus
stantis
&
cadentis
Ecclesiae
,
the
grand
pillar
of
the
Christian
Doctrine
,
without
the
support
of
which
all
must
go
to
ruine
;
Hence
,
(
to
name
no
others
)
Pelagians
the
bulk
of
Papists
,
Socinians
,
and
the
old
Libertine
Anabaptists
,
and
their
successors
now
called
Quakers
,
harmoniously
agree
in
deriding
,
and
abominating
this
Cardinal
and
Fundamental
Doctrine
of
the
imputed
Righteousness
of
Christ
.
7ly
.
These
Anabaptists
asserted
the
possibility
of
fulfilling
the
Law.
Bulling.
lib.
1.
cap.
8.
and
that
they
were
arrived
at
a
perfection
of
degrees
and
without
sin
,
Bulling.
lib.
1.
cap.
11.
From
this
the
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
differeth
nothing
;
yea
the
latter
hath
far
outdone
the
former
;
for
besides
that
they
commonly
assert
,
that
men
may
altogether
fulfil
the
Law
in
this
life
,
and
be
without
sin
;
For
the
denyal
of
which
Robert
Barclay
promised
continually
to
rail
upon
all
the
reformed
;
they
to
the
horror
of
all
men
assert
that
man
is
equal
with
God
;
which
I
evince
from
the
Words
of
Hubberthorn
in
chap.
4.
of
this
Treatise
,
and
that
the
Soul
is
a
part
of
God
,
which
is
made
good
from
the
words
of
the
famous
,
and
leading
Quakers
,
Ibid.
8ly
.
These
Anabaptists
with
blasphemous
Melchoir
Hofman
,
denied
the
perseverance
of
the
Saints
,
Bulling.
lib.
3.
cap.
13.
with
whom
these
Quakers
also
conspire
,
which
any
man
in
reason
may
judge
a
contradiction
to
their
Doctrine
of
perfection
;
however
they
commonly
maintain
it
with
Robert
Barclay
,
Prop
:
9.
with
his
Apology
and
Vindication
thereof
;
contradicting
his
own
express
words
cap.
2.
where
explaining
that
text
1
Iohn
2.27
.
He
had
asserted
that
the
unction
there
spoken
of
doth
remain
for
ever
in
these
to
whom
it
is
given
.
9ly
.
These
wicked
Anabaptists
with
their
abominable
Leader
David
George
,
denied
the
Resurrection
of
the
Flesh
,
or
of
the
same
body
,
talking
much
of
the
Resurrection
of
another
more
spiritual
body
Bulling.
lib.
2.
cap
10.
In
this
also
the
Quakers
are
not
a
whit
short
of
these
,
as
is
made
manifest
chap.
5.
of
this
Treatise
.
10●y
These
abominable
Anabaptists
,
following
their
pernicious
Leader
,
Michael
Servetus
,
denyed
the
Sacred
Trinity
,
and
the
Divinity
of
Christ
;
In
this
blasphemy
also
the
Scholars
excell
the
Masters
,
as
the
Reader
may
find
at
large
made
out
chap.
4.
of
this
Treatise
.
11ly
.
These
Anabaptists
asserted
,
that
the
Ministers
of
the
Gospel
ought
not
to
be
tyed
to
the
explaining
of
Scriptures
;
that
all
in
the
Church
ought
to
speak
by
turns
,
that
which
they
judged
the
Spirit
offered
unto
them
:
that
the
Ministers
ought
to
have
no
certain
Stipend
,
and
many
other
things
of
this
sort
,
Bulling.
lib.
1.
cap.
8.
which
is
at
this
day
the
known
Doctrine
of
Quakers
.
12ly
.
These
Anabaptists
denied
that
a
Christian
ought
to
be
a
Magistrat
,
or
in
any
case
make
war
;
to
take
or
administrate
oaths
,
to
trouble
any
man
upon
the
account
of
his
Religion
,
or
to
prohibite
any
kind
of
Religion
;
In
all
which
points
,
the
Quakers
exactly
jump
with
them
;
for
tho
they
do
not
in
words
deny
the
lawfulness
of
Magistracy
,
yet
seeing
they
expresly
deny
the
lawfulness
of
all
Wars
,
and
Oaths
,
and
maintain
an
unbridled
Liberty
,
to
do
whatsoever
is
right
in
a
mans
own
eyes
,
all
which
is
their
known
Doctrine
,
by
most
clear
consequence
,
they
take
away
all
use
of
Magistracy
and
Magistrates
.
13ly
.
Anabaptists
with
Servetus
and
the
Socinians
spake
contemptibly
of
the
Sacraments
,
and
denied
Infant-Baptism
;
but
the
Quakers
have
gone
a
further
length
,
not
only
denying
,
but
railing
against
both
Sacraments
,
labouring
by
might
and
main
,
to
abolish
these
pledges
of
the
Love
of
God
out
of
the
World
,
I
could
easily
prove
the
sameness
of
the
Doctrine
of
the
Muncerian
Anabaptists
,
with
that
of
the
Quakers
in
many
other
particulars
:
But
at
present
these
may
serve
to
shew
,
that
both
of
them
are
acted
and
guided
by
the
same
Spirit
;
which
is
that
at
present
intended
by
us
.
3ly
.
If
the
Spirit
,
or
the
light
within
every
man
;
were
the
Supreme
,
and
principal
Rule
,
then
those
who
persecuted
to
death
the
Apostles
,
and
Saints
of
God
did
not
sin
in
so
doing
;
but
I
am
sure
the
latter
is
false
,
Ergo
the
former
.
The
Consequence
of
the
Major
is
most
evident
,
for
they
followed
their
light
within
,
thinking
thereby
they
did
God
good
service
,
Iohn
.
16.2
.
neither
can
they
say
,
that
then
the
day
of
all
these
persecutors
visitation
was
past
;
for
Paul
himself
was
one
of
them
,
whose
light
taught
him
,
that
he
according
to
all
that
he
had
for
light
ought
to
do
many
things
against
the
Professors
,
and
Servants
of
Jesus
Christ
,
Acts.
26.9
.
whose
day
of
visitation
I
think
the
Quakers
themselves
will
not
say
was
expired
.
4ly
.
Divine
light
,
or
that
light
which
is
of
God
is
alwayes
consonant
to
it self
;
but
so
is
not
that
which
the
Quakers
call
their
spirit
,
or
the
light
within
every
man
;
for
nothing
is
more
evident
than
that
the
light
within
one
man
,
is
quite
contradictory
and
opposite
,
to
that
within
another
,
and
that
even
in
the
most
weighty
,
necessary
and
soul-concerning
things
in
all
the
world
;
as
the
many
and
great
controversies
in
all
ages
,
do
but
too
too
well
make
out
:
neither
can
it
be
said
that
every
one
of
these
who
oppose
the
truth
,
either
act
against
their
own
judgment
,
or
that
sometime
before
they
knew
and
embraced
the
Truth
in
their
heart
,
and
afterward
did
not
hearken
to
that
light
:
this
we
say
cannot
be
said
;
for
it
is
clear
from
the
earnestness
,
and
zeal
of
both
Hereticks
,
and
Heathens
for
their
own
erroneous
Principles
,
that
they
really
think
as
they
speak
:
yea
have
not
many
sacrificed
their
lives
,
to
their
own
fantastick
and
damnable
Opinions
,
which
Opinions
from
the
very
beginning
of
their
use
of
Reason
,
they
did
still
hold
;
but
not
to
multiply
instances
,
all
this
is
clear
in
the
Person
of
Paul
,
for
certain
it
is
,
that
when
he
persecuted
the
Church
,
he
both
acted
according
to
his
judgment
,
and
that
he
always
was
of
that
judgment
,
and
never
counteracted
his
light
within
,
and
tho
he
confessed
that
he
did
it
out
of
ignorance
,
yet
this
will
not
help
them
,
for
certainly
this
was
all
the
light
he
had
,
if
we
may
believe
himself
,
and
therefore
he
never
had
a
true
light
within
,
until
the
day
of
his
miraculous
conversion
.
5ly
.
This
Principle
viz.
That
if
every
man
follow
his
light
within
,
he
cannot
stray
from
the
Truth
,
overthroweth
the
whole
●a●●ick
of
Quakerism
with
one
blow
;
for
there
are
many
in
the
world
(
of
which
I
am
one
)
who
by
all
the
Light
they
have
attained
unto
,
and
after
the
most
impartial
search
,
firmly
believe
,
without
so
much
as
one
check
from
the
light
within
to
the
contrary
,
that
Quakerism
is
the
path
way
to
utter
destruction
;
It
must
therefore
be
so
,
if
the
Doctrine
,
that
every
one
must
follow
his
light
,
be
true
.
6ly
.
If
God
suffered
the
most
part
of
men
in
the
time
of
the
Old
Testament
to
walk
in
their
own
way●
,
then
all
and
every
one
hath
not
sufficient
Grace
and
Light
whereby
they
may
come
to
Salvation
;
But
the
former
is
true
Acts.
14.16
.
Ergo
the
latter
.
The
evidence
of
the
consequence
strangely
straitneth
Bellarm:
de
grat
.
&
lib.
arbitr
:
for
he
would
●ain
wrett
this
Text
,
telling
us
,
that
its
meaning
is
,
The
Grace
of
God
did
not
so
largely
flow
them
as
afterwards
,
notwithstanding
such
a
measure
of
Grace
sufficient
to
divine
Providence
was
not
wanting
;
but
thus
he
dissembleth
the
question
,
which
was
whether
or
not
it
pleased
divine
providence
to
give
a
sufficient
measure
of
Grace
,
to
every
●ndividual
of
the
Posterity
of
Adam
▪
2ly
.
There
are
many
Nations
in
the
world
,
of
which
I
believe
,
the
Iesuits
,
and
Quakers
will
not
say
,
that
they
have
now
more
than
sufficient
Grace
to
bring
them
to
Salvation
,
Ergo
if
all
Nations
had
lesse
under
the
Old
Testament
,
than
these
nations
have
now
,
they
had
not
sufficient
Grace
▪
3ly
.
The
context
evinceth
our
purpose
,
for
the
witness
of
God
there
spoken
of
,
is
only
the
common
benignity
of
Providence
,
viz.
fruitful
seasons
,
food
and
gladness
,
from
which
indeed
they
might
have
gathered
,
that
there
was
a
God
,
but
was
this
grace
alone
sufficient
to
bring
them
to
Salvation
?
this
,
Quakers
and
Iesuits
must
either
say
,
or
else
that
the
Apostle
had
not
wit
enough
to
speak
to
the
purpose
,
for
he
might
have
mentioned
this
sufficient
Grace
,
and
Light
,
as
a
Testimony
of
God
in
their
hearts
,
and
told
them
that
this
Light
within
would
have
led
them
to
Heaven
,
if
they
had
pleased
,
whereas
contrariwise
,
he
telleth
them
no
such
guide
,
but
that
they
were
permitted
to
walk
in
their
own
wayes
,
and
the
same
Apostle
telleth
the
Gentiles
,
Ephes.
2.12
.
That
they
were
without
Christ
:
And
yet
in
contradiction
to
this
,
the
Quakers
maintain
,
that
these
Gentiles
had
the
Light
of
Christ
,
and
Christ
within
them
.
This
Answer
of
Bellarmin
I
have
set
down
and
refuted
,
because
it
is
all
one
in
substance
with
that
which
the
Quakers
use
to
give
to
this
and
the
like
Texts
.
7ly
.
Our
next
Argument
we
deduce
from
Ephes.
2.12
,
and
4.8
.
Thus
,
These
who
are
without
Christ
,
aliens
from
the
Common-wealth
of
Israel
,
strangers
to
the
Covenants
of
Promise
,
have
no
hope
,
are
without
God
in
the
World
,
have
their
understandings
darkened
through
the
blindness
that
is
in
them
,
being
alienated
from
the
life
of
God
,
and
have
blind
Hearts
,
and
are
past
feeling
;
add
to
these
,
2
Tim.
2.26
.
That
some
are
taken
captive
by
the
Devil
at
his
will
.
Now
these
that
are
in
this
case
,
cannot
have
Grace
and
light
sufficient
to
Salvation
:
But
the
Gentiles
are
said
here
to
be
in
this
sad
condition
;
Ergo
they
had
not
sufficient
Grace
and
Light.
The
Major
,
which
can
be
only
questioned
,
the
Spirit
of
God
hath
in
these
places
invincibly
corroborat
,
by
rejecting
all
the
Shifts
,
and
quibles
that
Iesuits
and
Quakers
are
able
to
feign
.
8ly
.
This
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
is
clearly
overthrown
by
these
Scriptures
.
Amos.
3
:
2
,
You
only
have
I
known
of
all
the
Families
of
the
Earth
,
&c.
Psal.
147.19
,
20.
He
sheweth
his
Word
unto
Iacob
,
his
Statutes
and
Iudgments
to
Israel
,
he
hath
not
dealt
so
with
any
Nation
:
as
for
his
Iudgments
they
have
not
known
them
;
Praise
ye
the
Lord
.
What
can
be
more
clear
,
than
that
these
to
whom
God
did
not
give
his
Word
,
Statutes
and
Judgments
,
never
had
a
light
sufficient
to
guide
them
unto
Salvation
?
&
yet
the
Quakers
,
Quakerism
confirm
:
pag.
2.
who
without
all
shame
or
conscience
,
care
not
what
they
deny
,
or
what
they
affirm
,
providing
they
can
find
words
to
the
purpose
,
or
not
to
the
purpose
,
all
is
one
,
have
the
confidence
to
deny
it
:
Their
reasonlesse
Reason
is
because
in
John
1.5
.
it
s
said
,
that
the
light
shined
in
darkness
:
For
who
but
a
Quaker
will
infer
from
these
words
,
in
which
the
Evangelist
asserteth
,
that
Christ
is
the
true
God
,
who
in
all
ages
manifested
himself
in
some
measure
to
the
world
,
by
which
manifestation
of
God
in
the
Works
of
Creation
and
Providence
,
the
world
might
perceive
indeed
that
there
was
a
God
,
but
could
not
notwithstanding
comprehend
God
,
so
as
to
see
and
perceive
that
God
the
Creator
,
should
in
the
fulness
of
time
,
cloath
himself
with
mans
Flesh
,
and
become
the
Redeemer
,
for
to
this
kind
of
Knowledge
and
Comprehension
,
supernatural
and
divine
Light
was
necessary
;
now
(
I
say
)
who
but
a
Quaker
will
from
this
in●er
that
all
nations
,
in
all
ages
,
had
the
Knowledge
of
the
Word
,
Statutes
and
Judgments
of
God
?
For
,
sure
I
am
,
these
who
are
altogether
ignorant
of
them
,
in
the
Judgment
of
all
men
,
(
who
have
not
with
the
Quakers
renounced
the
Scriptures
)
will
be
esteemed
void
of
a
light
sufficient
to
guide
them
to
Salvation
,
with
the
like
impudence
page
5.
they
deprave
yea
and
really
contradict
Iude
v.
19.
where
the
Apostle
positively
asserteth
,
that
some
men
have
not
the
Spirit
;
for
they
tell
us
that
men
in
one
sense
may
be
said
not
to
have
the
Spirit
,
and
in
another
sense
to
have
it
,
even
as
a
rich
man
who
improveth
not
his
money
▪
both
hath
it
and
hath
it
not
in
diverse
senses
,
according
to
which
Christ
said
,
from
him
that
hath
not
,
shall
be
taken
away
,
that
which
he
hath
:
But
this
perversion
is
too
palpable
,
for
surely
the
Apostle
,
whose
Pen
God
guided
,
intimateth
no
such
thing
,
nor
insinuateth
the
least
respect
wherein
these
●●en
can
be
said
,
to
have
the
Spirit
;
whereas
our
Saviour
,
whose
words
they
groundlesly
add●ce
to
colour
their
contrad●ction
of
the
Apostle
,
p●ainly
telleth
us
that
these
evil
servants
,
really
had
gifts
which
they
abused
,
by
neglecting
to
improve
them
;
But
on
the
other
hand
,
the
Apostle
here
hath
no
such
thing
,
yea
he
telleth
us
that
these
men
were
twice
dead
,
i.
e.
I
think
,
as
dead
as
can
be
,
or
altogether
void
of
the
Spirit
;
yea
it
can
be
no
more
alledged
,
that
these
men
in
any
sense
had
the
Spirit
,
than
that
clouds
only
swelling
with
wind
,
can
be
said
to
be
filled
with
water
;
yea
without
all
exception
,
or
restriction
,
they
are
called
,
sensual
,
&
I
think
few
that
care
what
they
say
,
will
affirm
that
such
have
the
Spirit
of
God
;
where
doth
the
Apostle
in
all
this
Epistle
,
ever
compare
these
men
,
to
these
that
have
money
,
but
do
not
occupy
it
?
as
the
Quakers
groundlesly
,
and
therefore
falsly
give
out
;
and
yet
these
are
the
men
who
cry
out
upon
us
,
for
making
any
Pa●aphrases
upon
,
or
Consequences
from
Scripture
,
though
never
so
clearly
deduced
from
the
Text
,
while
they
themselves
by
more
than
a
poetick
license
,
ob●rude
upon
the
world
flat
contradictions
of
Scripture
,
for
the
meaning
thereof
.
Add
●o
these
,
that
some
things
are
absolutly
necessary
to
be
known
in
order
to
Salvation
;
the
Knowledge
of
which
can
never
be
evinced
that
all
men
had
,
or
have
,
therefore
it
is
most
groundlesse
to
assert
,
that
all
men
have
a
sufficient
light
to
guide
them
to
eternal
life
,
to
which
Robert
Barclay
replyeth
,
that
the
knowledge
of
these
things
is
only
necessary
necessitate
praecepti
,
that
is
,
because
they
are
commanded
us
;
not
necessitate
medii
,
i.
e.
in
plain
English
,
That
Faith
in
Iesus
Christ
,
the
knowledge
of
the
Distinction
of
Father
,
Son
,
and
Holy
Ghost
,
or
that
Christ
is
God
and
Man
&c.
is
not
needful
in
themselves
to
be
known
,
or
believed
in
order
to
Salvation
;
but
how
little
soever
respect
he
hath
to
the
Scriptures
,
he
ought
to
have
had
some
care
and
consideration
of
his
own
Doctrine
,
for
his
first
These
is
,
these
words
John
17.3
.
this
is
eternal
life
&c.
where
it
is
plainly
asserted
without
any
distinction
,
or
limitation
,
that
the
Knowledge
of
the
Father
and
the
Son
,
as
one
sending
,
and
one
that
is
sent
,
and
therefore
distinct
the
one
from
the
other
,
is
called
eternal
life
it self
,
i.
e
,
(
if
any
thing
)
a
mean
so
necessary
to
eternal
life
,
as
that
without
this
knowledge
it
cannot
be
obtained
.
Moreover
,
the
very
Notion
of
Faith
(
without
which
none
can
be
saved
)
implyeth
nothing
lesse
than
a
closing
with
God
through
Christ
,
and
therefore
necessarily
,
and
of
its
own
nature
,
and
not
with
a
respect
to
a
command
only
,
presupposeth
the
knowledge
of
the
distinction
of
Father
and
Son
,
and
of
the
Divine
and
Humane
Nature
of
Christ
,
held
forth
under
the
Old
Testament
:
as
one
to
be
incarnate
in
the
fulness
of
time
;
and
in
the
New
Testament
as
actually
incarnate
,
and
really
and
in
due
Time
come
in
the
Flesh.
9ly
.
Before
I
come
to
the
Quakers
Objections
,
I
will
overthrow
one
other
of
the
Quakers
Principles
,
upon
which
the
whole
Fabrick
of
Quakerism
is
builded
;
which
is
,
That
in
fallen
man
,
there
remain
no
reliques
of
the
Image
of
God
,
and
that
by
the
fall
,
his
understanding
is
so
darkned
,
that
he
cannot
by
all
the
Light
of
Conscience
,
reason
,
and
common
notions
,
perceive
or
gather
,
from
all
or
any
of
the
works
of
creation
and
providence
,
that
there
is
a
Sup●em
being
,
or
a
God
that
created
him
,
and
all
things
b●side
.
In
a
word
they
utterly
deny
,
that
which
is
called
the
natural
knowledge
of
God
,
or
natural
Theology
;
and
deny
moreover
,
that
man
in
his
fallen
state
,
can
think
,
or
do
any
thing
that
is
in
it self
,
or
as
to
the
substance
of
the
action
●ood
;
This
Doctrine
(
which
the
Quakers
have
learned
from
their
dear
Friends
the
Socinians
,
as
they
are
constrained
to
defend
,
so
seeing
they
assert
that
every
Son
,
and
Daughter
of
Adam
have
within
them
a
light
and
guide
sufficient
for
Salvation
;
and
the
World
clearly
perceiveth
that
there
is
no
Light
common
to
all
Mankind
,
except
some
smal
Relicts
of
that
once
bright
shining
Image
of
God
,
like
the
dim
sparkles
of
an
extinguished
Lanthorn
,
which
are
never
able
to
shew
the
wandring
Traveler
in
the
dark
night
,
his
way
homeward
;
They
are
necessitate
to
say
,
that
this
Light
is
supernatural
,
and
a
fruit
of
the
purchase
of
Christ
,
and
consequently
that
man
,
as
to
the
things
of
God
,
hath
no
more
Natural
Light
,
than
an
Ox
or
Asse
:
See
Rob:
Barclay's
fourth
These
and
his
Apology
cap
4.
and
Vindication
sect
5.
10ly
.
The
falshood
of
this
Doctrine
,
we
evince
by
these
following
arguments
;
and
1.
It
is
not
imaginable
how
one
can
be
rational
,
and
yet
not
be
in
case
to
infer
from
all
the
works
of
Creation
,
that
there
is
a
supream
cause
and
beeing
;
we
say
this
is
not
imaginable
except
to
a
Socinian
and
Quaker
,
who
can
imagin
,
at
least
say
,
they
can
imagin
what
they
will
.
Now
the
Quakers
,
Quakerism
confirm
:
pag
3.
Grant
that
Conscience
and
Reason
,
are
distinguished
from
the
saving
Light
of
Christ
,
in
all
men
,
and
the
Revelation
thereof
as
a
natural
and
super-principle
natural
,
are
distinguished
.
Well
then
,
seing
reason
is
natural
,
and
man
is
rational
,
how
can
he
,
if
he
but
contemplat
these
admirable
Works
of
Creation
and
Providence
,
and
exercise
his
reason
in
so
doing
,
not
conclude
that
these
are
the
Product
of
an
Infinit
and
Omnipotent
Creator
,
who
is
to
be
Loved
,
Feared
,
and
Adored
?
which
thoughts
of
themselves
or
as
to
the
substance
of
the
Action
are
certainly
good
,
and
more
Laudable
than
the
Quakers
silent
waiting
,
which
differeth
nothing
from
sleeping
,
although
they
place
a
principal
part
of
their
worship
therein
.
11ly
.
Secondly
,
whatever
is
in
man
,
and
common
to
all
Mankind
,
is
natural
,
but
some
sparks
of
the
knowledge
of
a
Deity
,
as
also
some
thoughts
and
desires
that
are
good
in
themselves
,
as
for
example
,
the
desire
of
self-preservation
,
are
in
man
,
and
common
to
all
mankind
;
Ergo
some
Relicts
of
the
knowledge
of
God
,
and
thoughts
that
are
of
themselves
really
good
,
are
natural
.
The
Major
is
most
evident
,
for
I
defy
all
the
Socinians
and
Quakers
in
the
world
,
to
give
one
Instance
to
the
contrary
:
the
Minor
is
no
lesse
undenyable
,
seing
there
is
no
nation
in
the
world
,
tho
never
so
barbarous
and
inhumane
,
who
hath
not
some
notions
of
a
Deity
,
and
desire
to
preserve
themselves
.
But
I
know
the
Quakers
dare
not
deny
it
,
otherwayes
they
will
overthrow
all
their
universal
Grace
,
and
Light
by
them
pleaded
for
.
12ly
.
Thirdly
,
that
which
is
originally
born
with
every
one
,
and
groweth
up
to
more
and
more
maturity
,
as
he
in
whom
it
is
,
groweth
up
,
is
undoubtedly
natural
;
But
some
remainders
of
the
knowledge
of
God
are
Originally
,
i
e.
in
the
principle
and
inclination
(
as
they
speak
)
born
with
man
,
and
grow
up
to
more
and
more
maturity
,
according
to
the
growth
of
him
,
in
whom
they
are
,
Ergo
they
are
natural
.
The
Major
is
beyond
controversie
:
The
Minor
therefore
they
can
only
deny
,
which
yet
is
no
lesse
clear
than
the
major
;
for
they
grant
that
some
things
that
respect
natural
Sciences
,
and
the
prudent
management
of
the
affairs
of
the
world
,
are
not
supernatural
;
See
the
fore-cited
Vindication
page
52.
But
certain
it
is
,
that
some
sparkles
of
the
knowledge
of
a
Deity
,
are
as
common
and
appear
as
early
as
these
things
which
they
deny
not
to
be
natural
.
13ly
.
Fourthly
,
That
which
is
common
to
Devils
,
is
not
supernatural
;
but
to
know
and
believe
,
that
there
is
a
God
,
which
is
of
it self
a
good
thought
,
is
common
to
devils
.
To
this
Robert
Barclay
Vind
pag
51.
answers
,
That
once
the
Devils
had
this
knowledge
from
a
spiritual
nature
,
and
tho
they
have
fallen
,
yet
they
mey
retain
the
memory
of
it
:
for
that
their
Fall
and
mans
is
every
way
alike
,
none
will
affirm
.
But
surely
if
he
had
not
willfully
closed
his
Eyes
,
that
he
might
not
see
the
Truth
,
he
might
have
clearly
perceived
this
to
be
a
most
pitiful
prevarication
,
for
what
tho
the
fall
of
Angels
,
and
the
fall
of
Man
,
were
not
in
all
respects
alike
,
can
any
man
not
altogether
void
of
reason
,
conclude
thence
;
that
the
thing
which
is
common
to
devils
with
men
,
can
be
supernatural
,
or
Grace
in
the
one
more
than
in
the
other
?
Again
,
Surely
there
is
no
reason
in
the
world
to
say
,
that
the
devils
retain
their
Memory
,
more
than
their
understanding
;
For
certainly
the
understanding
is
altogether
as
essential
,
if
not
more
,
to
the
rational
creature
,
as
the
memory
.
Moreover
,
to
say
that
the
devils
retained
no
knowledge
of
God
,
but
the
bare
remembrance
that
they
had
knowledge
of
God
,
is
compleatly
to
contradict
the
Apostle
Iames
,
asserting
chap
1.19
.
that
the
devils
believe
that
there
is
one
God
and
tremble
;
for
to
believe
a
thing
,
in
the
judgement
of
all
men
,
presupposeth
some
knowledge
thereof
,
and
can
be
no
more
called
an
Act
of
the
memory
,
than
tasting
can
be
called
seeing
,
which
is
performed
by
the
Eye
;
or
Smelling
,
that
which
is
performed
by
the
Ear.
Again
,
presupposing
,
which
is
possible
,
though
not
true
,
that
the
Devils
had
no
memory
of
their
knowledge
of
God
,
It
is
beyond
all
doubt
,
that
these
active
,
Sagacious
,
and
skilful
Spirits
in
the
works
of
Nature
,
can
easily
conclud
from
these
admirable
Effects
,
that
there
is
a
Supream
Cause
,
first
beeing
,
the
Creator
of
all
things
:
Now
to
say
,
that
they
can
know
that
there
is
one
God
,
and
conclud
from
the
works
of
Creation
and
Providence
,
that
this
God
is
most
powerful
,
most
wise
&c.
and
yet
to
say
that
they
have
no
principle
of
knowledge
,
whereby
they
can
know
this
,
is
to
assert
that
there
is
a
Sream
without
a
Source
,
or
a
Tree
without
a
Root
,
or
a
Beam
without
the
Sun.
Lastly
,
If
the
Devils
have
only
the
memory
of
their
knowledge
of
God
,
and
yet
believe
that
there
is
a
God
and
tremble
,
then
we
may
infer
,
that
our
first
Parents
,
before
the
promise
of
the
Messiah
was
made
unto
them
,
had
no
Divine
Light
,
or
Seed
left
in
them
,
contrary
to
Robert
Barclay's
beleif
Vind
pag
49.
Seing
our
first
Parents
might
retain
the
memory
of
the
knowledge
of
God
,
they
had
but
just
now
lost
;
But
it
is
needless
to
dwell
upon
such
nonsensical
absurdities
,
for
the
Quaker
may
as
well
affirm
,
that
●
man
may
pay
his
debt
,
and
sustain
himself
with
the
memory
of
the
money
he
once
had
,
as
that
the
Devils
can
know
so
much
of
God
,
as
without
doubt
they
know
,
by
the
alone
memory
of
the
knowledge
they
once
had
.
14ly
.
Fifthly
.
That
which
will
accompany
the
wicked
to
Hell
,
cannot
be
called
Grace
,
Divine
or
any
thing
Supernatural
;
but
some
relicts
of
the
knowledge
of
God
will
accompany
the
wicked
to
Hell
:
Therefore
these
cannot
be
called
Grace
,
D●●vine
,
or
any
thing
Supernatural
;
The
Major
i●
beyond
all
controversie
;
The
Minor
is
also
mos●
evident
,
for
otherwayes
the
never-dying-worm
could
not
feed
upon
them
,
whose
torment
consists
most
in
the
extremly
bitter
,
and
sad
reflection
upon
,
and
consideration
of
,
the
various
Attributes
of
God
,
with
reference
to
themselves
;
Exem
:
gra
.
from
the
consideration
of
his
immutable
Justice
and
infinite
Power
,
they
conclude
the
impossibility
of
their
releif
.
But
we
need
not
insist
on
this
,
seing
none
that
read
Luk
16.
can
be
ignorant
that
these
Souls
have
some
knowledge
of
God
,
except
either
willfull
prejudice
,
or
some
thing
of
that
kind
,
hath
already
preoccupied
their
minds
.
15ly
.
Sixthly
,
That
men
have
naturally
some
relicts
of
the
Image
of
God
,
and
can
do
some
things
contained
in
the
Law
of
God
,
we
most
firmly
conclude
from
that
express
T●x
.
Rom
2.14
.
the
Gentiles
that
have
not
the
Law
,
do
by
nature
the
things
contained
in
the
Law.
The
Quakers
,
and
amongst
others
,
Rob:
Barclay
in
his
Apology
●lately
contradicting
the
Text
,
Alledgeth
,
that
man
naturally
can
know
,
or
do
nothing
contained
in
the
Law
of
God
,
because
v
15.
these
Gentiles
of
whom
this
is
spoken
,
are
said
to
have
the
Law
written
in
their
hearts
,
which
writing
of
the
Law
in
mens
hearts
,
is
elsewhere
in
Scripture
counted
a
part
of
the
new
Covenant
.
But
this
reason
M●
.
Brown
chap
5.
n.
24.
hath
fully
e●ervat
,
shewing
by
many
demonstrations
,
that
the
writing
of
the
Law
in
the
heart
,
cannot
at
all
be
taken
in
this
place
,
for
any
part
of
the
New
Covenant
,
the
removal
of
which
arguments
,
the
Quaker
not
so
much
as
attempteth
,
&
yet
can
impudently
publish
a
lie
to
the
world
;
that
he
hath
vindicat
his
Apologie
;
Yea
,
in
stead
of
answering
the
Arguments
,
he
confirmeth
what
his
Adversary
sayeth
,
and
contradicteth
himself
:
For
Vind
pag
51.
He
granteth
that
men
by
Nature
,
or
Natural
Light
,
have
knowledge
of
Politicks
and
the
prudent
management
of
worldly
affairs
,
and
other
things
of
that
kind
.
Hence
I
conclude
that
even
according
to
the
Quaker
himself
a
man
may
be
said
to
have
the
Law
of
God
written
in
his
heart
,
and
yet
have
no
new
Covenant
Dispensation
,
Seeing
the
second
table
of
the
Law
,
which
is
a
Rule
,
for
Politicks
,
and
prudent
Administration
of
worldly
affairs
,
is
the
Law
of
God
as
well
as
the
first
.
The
Quaker
added
a
second
reason
in
his
Apologie
to
prove
that
by
NATVRE
in
this
place
,
is
not
to
be
understood
,
the
corrupt
nature
of
man
,
viz
,
because
then
the
Apostle
should
contradict
himself
,
who
saith
1
Cor.
2.14
▪
that
the
natural
man
cannot
know
the
things
of
God
,
amongst
which
things
of
God
,
the
Law
must
be
accounted
,
which
Rom.
7.12
.
Is
called
Holy
,
Iust
and
good
;
which
contradiction
,
Mr.
Broun
utterly
denyed
to
follow
upon
our
exposition
of
this
place
,
shewing
at
large
,
Num.
25.
the
compleat
harmony
of
these
places
,
notwithstanding
of
our
exposition
,
to
which
the
Quaker
thinks
it
enough
to
reply
,
that
the
meaning
given
by
Mr:
Broun
to
the
Text
in
hand
,
cannot
be
reconciled
with
what
the
Apostle
sayeth
1
Cor
2.14
.
unless
upon
some
supposition
(
but
what
that
is
he
telleth
us
not
)
above
by
him
denyed
.
Now
,
Reader
,
had
this
man
a
respect
either
to
Cause
or
Credit
,
who
thought
to
cheat
the
world
with
such
pitiful
nothings
as
these
?
For
this
was
one
of
his
Apologetick
arguments
,
whereby
to
overthrow
the
common
Exposition
of
this
Text
,
&
to
establish
the
gloss
put
upon
it
by
the
Socinians
,
whom
he
never
leaveth
to
follow
;
and
instead
of
urging
this
Argument
,
taketh
the
part
of
the
defendant
,
and
so
giveth
up
the
cause
:
for
his
answer
ridiculously
supposeth
,
that
we
urge
this
place
1
Cor.
2.14
.
as
an
Argument
against
us
,
which
they
urge
as
an
Argument
against
us
:
And
although
his
Adversaries
Exposition
cannot
stand
,
but
upon
a
supposition
denyed
by
the
Quaker
,
it
is
little
matter
,
for
we
know
the
whole
Gospel
cannot
stand
,
but
upon
many
suppositions
denyed
and
cryed
out
against
by
that
blasphemous
party
.
And
here
pag
51.
he
Alledgeth
,
that
he
acknowledgeth
the
fall
of
man
,
more
fully
than
his
adversary
doth
▪
because
according
to
his
adversary
,
fallen
man
retained
some
Relicts
of
the
Image
of
God
,
by
vertue
whereof
he
can
do
something
really
good
;
whereas
on
the
other
hand
,
according
to
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
man
by
the
●all
was
wholly
degenerate
,
retaining
nothing
of
the
Image
of
God
,
in
whom
albeit
there
remained
a
Seed
of
righteousness
,
yet
no
otherwayes
▪
than
as
a
naked
seed
in
barren
ground
,
by
vertue
of
which
he
could
do
nothing
,
until
visited
by
a
new
Visitation
,
which
he
received
by
vertue
of
Christ
as
Mediator
.
Ans.
In
the
judgement
of
all
men
who
are
not
so
effronted
,
as
to
give
such
inconsistances
for
a
sufficient
Refutation
of
their
Adversaries
;
It
will
be
counted
a
compleat
contradiction
,
to
say
,
that
fallen
man
hath
no
Reliques
of
the
Image
of
God
,
and
yet
notwithstanding
,
hath
a
Seed
of
Righteousness
in
him
,
Seing
that
Righteousness
is
one
of
the
chief
parts
of
the
Image
of
God.
Eph.
4.24
.
But
the
truth
is
,
there
is
a
Mystery
latent
under
this
doctrine
,
which
we
must
here
discover
:
The
Mystery
is
this
,
the
Quakers
have
no
other
Christ
than
this
that
was
left
in
Adam
,
and
remaineth
in
man
in
his
fallen
condition
,
to
which
they
give
many
great
names
,
as
Light
,
L●fe
,
Measure
of
God
,
God
himself
,
and
among
others
most
frequently
,
the
Seed
;
for
the
more
full
manifestation
of
which
,
take
these
following
passages
1.
Naylor's
love
to
the
lost
,
pag.
32.
Christ
is
the
Election
,
and
the
Elect
Seed
,
and
George
Foxs
Great
myst
;
pag.
24.
the
promise
of
God
,
is
to
the
seed
that
hath
been
loaded
as
a
Cart
with
sheaves
by
the
S●nner
,
which
seed
is
the
hope
of
Christians
,
or
that
which
was
loaded
as
a
Cart
under
sheaves
.
George
Keith
in
his
way
c●st
up
,
pag
99
,
100
,
108.
Ex●oneth
it
to
be
Christ
or
the
life
of
Christ
;
and
in
his
Immed
.
Revel
:
pag
44
,
45
,
46.
Sayeth
,
when
God
created
Man
,
he
put
his
Image
Christ
,
the
express
Image
of
himself
in
man
,
he
breathed
into
him
the
breath
of
Life
,
he
lived
in
God
;
and
Christ
the
light
of
men
,
was
his
life
and
lived
in
him
,
then
the
Lamb
was
not
sl●in
,
Christ
the
Lamb
,
the
life
of
man.
—
But
when
man
sinned
—
So
the
Lamb
came
to
be
slain
in
him
from
the
Foundation
of
the
world
;
that
holy
meek
—
nature
,
the
Lambs
nature
was
slain
in
him
—
the
bowels
of
the
fathers
Love
stirred
in
compassion
to
the
work
of
his
own
hands
,
that
of
the
Pure
creation
in
man
,
which
though
shut
up
in
death
,
yet
it
remained
and
perished
not
,
as
to
its
being
,
it
did
not
become
a
nothing
,
but
remained
a
beeing
,
and
this
is
the
lost
,
which
God
sent
his
son
into
the
world
to
seek
and
to
save
,
not
to
seek
and
save
the
old
Adam
that
birth
of
the
Serpents
begetting
,
but
to
destroy
it
,
for
it
is
not
capable
of
Gods
Salvation
,
but
that
which
Christ
came
to
save
,
is
that
of
God
which
proceeded
from
him
,
the
seed
of
God
in
man
,
the
seed
of
Abraham
,
whereof
Abrams
old
decayed
body
as
good
as
dead
,
and
Sarahs
barren
womb
was
a
Type
.
Moreover
,
by
this
Light
of
God
,
for
all
is
one
,
they
understand
Christ
,
or
God
himself
,
as
shall
afterward
be
more
fully
made
out
,
by
several
express
Assertions
of
the
Quakers
.
Hence
we
may
see
that
the
Doctrine
of
this
man
is
most
damnable
,
who
acknowledgeth
no
other
Christ
,
but
the
smal
and
dark
Reliques
of
the
Image
of
God
in
mans
soul
,
and
that
his
Hypocrisie
and
dissimulation
is
unparalellably
great
and
hateful
;
in
that
even
while
he
pretends
to
aggredge
the
fall
of
man
most
,
he
then
exalteth
man
even
in
his
lapsed
Condition
;
beyond
which
it
is
hardly
possible
to
elevat
the
nature
of
man
,
for
from
what
is
here
quoted
,
and
shal
be
more
largely
afterward
alledged
out
of
their
writings
,
it
is
evident
that
they
beleive
,
or
at
least
would
perswade
others
to
beleive
,
that
Christ
has
a
Personal
union
with
every
Son
and
Daughter
of
Adam
.
To
all
this
he
addeth
a
most
blasphemous
and
absurd
Intimation
,
that
this
Seed
,
(
which
to
him
is
alone
with
Christ
or
God
,
)
stands
in
need
of
a
new
Visitation
of
Christ
,
to
raise
it
up
and
make
it
active
.
Also
here
because
his
Adversary
saith
from
Rom.
7.14
.
and
1
Cor.
3.1
.
that
the
Apostle
and
all
Beleivers
,
are
in
a
certain
respect
carnal
,
he
thinks
he
hath
gotten
him
in
a
notable
absurdity
,
Saying
,
his
Divinity
will
run
thus
;
the
Devil
and
all
unregenerate
men
,
are
in
a
certain
respect
spitual
,
and
the
Apostle
and
all
regenerate
men
,
are
in
a
certain
respect
Carnal
;
But
if
there
be
any
absurdity
,
in
saying
that
the
Apostle
and
all
Beleivers
,
are
in
a
certain
respect
Carnal
,
it
will
light
upon
the
Scriptures
,
according
to
which
his
Adversary
spake
,
and
thus
the
Quakers
covertly
pursue
their
Design
of
wounding
the
Scriptures
,
through
the
sides
of
their
Adversaries
,
and
altho
he
shall
answer
that
the
Apostle
Rom
7.
did
speak
of
another
in
the
person
of
himself
,
I
care
not
seing
to
all
the
fifteen
Arguments
whereby
Mr:
Broun
proved
the
Apostle
to
be
there
speaking
of
himself
,
and
not
of
another
,
the
Quaker
thinketh
it
enough
to
say
,
He
giveth
us
a
Preachment
upon
this
place
without
a
syllable
more
for
Solution
of
these
arguments
.
As
for
these
words
,
that
the
Devils
are
in
a
certain
respect
Spiritual
,
they
are
none
of
his
Adversaries
;
However
the
devil
may
be
called
Spiritual
,
in
respect
of
his
nature
,
seing
whatever
is
a
Spirit
,
may
be
called
Spiritual
;
as
well
as
what
is
a
Body
,
may
be
called
Corporeal
.
Hence
it
is
Evident
,
that
the
Quaker's
pretended
Absurdities
,
and
Blasphemies
,
which
he
would
fix
upon
his
Adversary
,
resolve
into
meer
fictitious
Ho●goblines
,
fit
only
to
fright
Children
.
16ly
.
Seventhly
,
If
Fallen
Man
retain
no
knowledge
of
God
,
no
Principles
of
common
Honesty
and
Morality
,
then
there
is
no
difference
between
a
Man
and
a
Brute
,
neither
can
it
be
told
in
what
the
wisdom
of
the
Wise
Gentiles
,
of
whom
the
Apostle
speaketh
1
Cor.
2.
who
notwithstanding
could
not
perceive
the
things
of
God
until
they
were
again
revealed
,
consisted
:
but
the
latter
is
false
in
both
its
parts
,
therefore
the
first
;
Robert
Barclay
Vindic.
pag.
52.
answereth
that
the
Wisdom
of
these
Gentiles
did
consist
in
the
wise
and
prudent
Management
of
worldly
Affairs
,
for
it
is
not
yet
proved
,
sayeth
he
,
that
it
is
necessarily
united
to
a
Knowledge
of
God
,
and
things
Spiritual
,
since
it
is
said
of
some
Beasts
,
that
they
have
something
of
this
,
such
as
Bees
and
Ants.
And
that
notwithstanding
Man
differeth
from
a
Brute
in
many
things
,
as
in
the
knowledge
of
numbers
▪
Mathematical
and
Mechanical
Demonstrations
,
Is
the
Knowledge
of
such
natural
Truths
,
(
that
two
and
three
make
five
,
and
the
whole
is
greater
than
the
part
,
and
all
that
is
deduced
therefrom
)
the
Knowledge
of
the
things
of
God
?
but
these
Evasions
are
as
easily
everted
as
invented
,
for
who
can
deny
that
by
the
same
species
or
kind
of
Knowledge
,
and
reason
whereby
man
can
deduce
excellent
politick
,
and
Oeconomick
Conclusions
and
order
a
Common-wealth
,
or
Family
,
he
can
also
conclude
from
the
beautiful
Fabrick
and
comely
order
of
Heaven
and
Earth
,
and
the
admirable
Providence
of
God
apparent
therein
,
that
there
is
a
first
and
supreme
Power
,
from
which
these
things
did
proceed
,
and
by
which
they
are
guided
into
their
proper
ends
:
And
indeed
in
this
did
consist
the
wisdom
of
the
wise
Heathens
,
as
is
evident
to
any
that
have
but
the
least
acquaintance
with
the
writings
of
Plato
,
Aristotle
and
such
other
heathnish
Philosophers
,
to
whom
the
invisible
things
of
God
,
even
his
eternal
Power
and
God-head
,
were
made
manifest
by
the
things
that
are
made
,
being
by
them
ponderated
and
contemplated
Rom.
1.20
.
Certain
it
is
,
that
it
is
as
easy
by
the
same
kind
of
Knowledge
and
Reason
,
to
know
that
every
effect
hath
a
cause
as
to
know
that
the
whole
is
greater
than
a
part
;
But
the
Quaker
granteth
,
that
by
natural
light
only
a
man
may
know
this
latter
Axiom
with
whatsoever
can
be
deduced
from
it
,
Ergo
he
may
as
easily
know
the
former
,
with
whatsoever
may
be
deduced
from
it
;
but
from
this
former
Axiom
the
natural
Philosophers
firmly
conclude
,
that
there
is
a
Supreme
Cause
,
Ergo
a
man
having
natural
Light
only
may
conclude
from
this
Axiom
,
which
is
imprinted
on
the
hearts
of
all
men
,
that
there
is
a
supreme
Cause
,
or
Author
of
all
things
,
which
is
God.
Moreover
it
is
certain
,
that
the
defect
of
the
Wisdom
of
the
Heathens
,
is
every
where
by
Scripture
placed
in
this
,
that
by
it
they
could
not
perceive
Christ
,
and
the
Mysteries
of
the
Gospel
;
which
as
they
were
to
the
Iews
a
stumbling
Block
;
so
they
were
to
the
wise
Greeks
foolishness
;
and
no
where
in
this
,
that
they
could
not
so
much
as
know
that
there
is
an
Omnipotent
and
Just
God
,
which
ought
to
be
reverenced
and
served
,
though
with
what
kind
of
Worship
they
knew
not
;
and
that
we
ought
to
do
unto
another
,
as
we
would
he
should
do
to
us
.
Again
,
that
a
Brute
hath
more
knowledge
in
Politicques
or
Oeconomicks
than
it
hath
in
Mechanicks
,
or
Arithmetick
is
false
and
ridiculous
for
indeed
they
have
alike
in
both
▪
for
if
the
Bee
can
imitate
the
Politician
,
or
the
Governour
of
a
Family
,
she
can
also
be
the
ape
of
the
Mechanick
,
and
prettily
imitate
him
in
making
Cells
to
contain
honey
;
the
hen
also
,
when
she
hatcheth
,
or
hath
brought
forth
,
can
perceive
if
any
be
wanting
of
her
Eggs
or
Birds
.
Hence
I
may
conclude
that
the
Hen
is
as
skilful
in
Arithmetick
as
the
Bee
is
in
policie
;
the
hungry
dog
also
will
be
very
loath
to
part
with
any
piece
of
the
Morsel
he
hath
gotten
into
his
clutches
.
Hence
I
may
as
well
conclude
that
a
dog
understandeth
that
Axiom
viz.
that
the
whole
is
greater
than
the
part
;
as
the
Bee
or
Ant
understand
the
Fundamentals
of
policie
and
Oeconomie
.
But
it
is
needlesse
to
dwell
any
longer
in
the
refu●ation
of
these
things
which
are
no
lesse
unreasonable
than
impious
.
17●y
.
Our
eight
Argument
we
draw
from
Rom.
1.19
,
20.
Because
that
which
may
be
known
of
God
is
,
&c.
from
which
place
our
Divines
have
alwayes
concluded
against
the
Socinians
,
see
Pareus
on
chap.
1.
to
the
Romans
dub.
16.
and
why
may
not
we
with
as
good
Reason
against
the
Quakers
,
infer
.
That
there
are
some
reliques
of
the
Divine
Image
or
Natural
Knowledge
of
God
left
in
man
;
against
which
inference
Robert
Barclay
pag.
52.
saith
that
by
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
that
which
is
to
be
known
of
God
,
is
not
understood
any
thing
which
man
retained
in
the
fall
,
but
a
new
visitation
of
Light
and
Grace
:
And
2
dly
that
tho
this
Knowledge
of
God
be
common
to
all
men
,
yet
they
receive
it
only
by
this
new
visitation
of
Grace
and
Light
:
But
to
answer
at
this
rate
,
is
only
loudly
&
confidently
to
proclaim
that
his
Doctrine
is
pure
Paganism
,
for
who
that
ever
thought
there
was
any
Necessity
of
the
Christian
Religion
in
order
to
Salvation
,
wou●d
dare
to
affirm
,
that
what
was
common
to
the
Heathens
,
yea
&
devils
also
was
as
really
saving
,
&
the
fruit
of
Christs
purchase
as
that
which
is
proper
to
the
godly
:
For
surely
this
kind
of
Knowledge
of
God
,
of
which
the
Apostle
here
speaketh
,
and
sayeth
that
it
is
learned
by
the
contemplation
of
the
Creatures
is
common
,
not
only
to
all
the
Heathens
,
but
even
to
the
Devils
themselves
.
I
hope
we
have
by
this
time
sufficiently
demonstrated
,
that
there
are
some
reliques
of
the
knowledge
of
God
,
and
something
of
the
principles
of
Morality
remaining
in
man
,
even
considered
in
his
lapsed
Condition
.
We
have
also
vindicated
so
many
of
Mr.
Browns
Arguments
as
the
Quaker
thinks
fit
to
take
notice
of
,
many
others
he
hath
left
untouched
,
see
for
Examples
sake
chap.
5.
num.
28
,
29
,
30.
But
indeed
the
Quaker
here
as
he
doth
all
along
playeth
like
the
Dog
in
Nile
,
making
a
mint
and
then
to
his
heels
again
;
for
he
either
leaves
the
Arguments
and
Proofs
of
his
Adversary
,
as
also
his
answers
given
to
his
Arguments
altogether
untouched
,
or
else
opposeth
such
pitiful
Trifles
,
as
being
examined
and
pressed
,
instantly
resolve
in
the
apples
of
Sodom
;
and
yet
certainly
here
,
if
ever
,
the
Quaker
was
concerned
to
have
played
the
man
,
and
given
sufficient
ground
for
this
Doctrine
:
For
with
this
light
all
the
Quakers
Religion
standeth
and
falleth
,
which
indeed
is
nothing
but
the
meer
Remainders
,
and
small
spunks
of
that
sometimes
bright
Image
,
that
shined
in
our
first
Parents
,
which
altho
they
can
never
be
quenched
,
yet
are
never
alike
,
or
sufficient
to
reveal
these
Mysteries
;
The
knowledge
of
which
,
is
absolutly
necessar
to
Salvation
,
or
to
lead
man
through
the
dark
and
dangerous
Wilderness
of
this
World
,
into
the
more
excellent
Canaan
of
eternal
rest
:
And
therefore
there
is
no
Light
common
to
mankind
sufficient
for
Salvation
,
seing
all
men
have
no
other
Light
common
to
them
,
but
this
,
which
we
have
evinced
to
be
altogether
natural
;
and
yet
this
natural
Light
,
is
to
the
Quakers
,
their
God
,
their
Christ
,
their
Grace
,
their
Scriptures
,
and
whatsoever
else
is
necessary
to
Salvation
.
That
it
is
to
them
their
Rule
,
or
in
stead
of
the
Scriptures
,
we
have
seen
already
;
and
that
this
Light
also
is
to
them
in
stead
of
God
and
Christ
,
or
that
in
their
account
,
this
Light
of
reason
and
Conscience
,
for
no
other
is
common
to
all
men
,
is
God
himself
,
these
following
passages
evince
:
In
him
was
Life
,
and
the
Life
was
the
Light
of
men
.
If
the
Life
be
the
Divine
Essence
,
the
Light
must
be
so
also
;
for
such
as
the
Cause
is
,
such
the
Effect
must
be
;
Thus
George
Whitehead
in
a
Manuscript
cited
by
Hicks
Quaker
.
Appeal
answered
pag
4.
and
Will
Pen
to
defend
this
passage
from
the
absurdities
with
which
it
had
been
loaded
by
Hi●ks
,
in
his
first
Dialogue
pag
3
,
4.
such
as
,
that
then
the
Sun
,
Moon
,
Star
,
or
Stone
,
is
God
,
●pe●keth
thus
.
George
Whitehead
inferring
from
Iohn
1.
That
if
the
Life
was
of
the
Divine
Beeing
,
the
Light
must
be
the
same
,
for
as
the
Cause
is
,
so
is
the
Effect
;
it
was
never
George
Whitehead's
principle
or
words
,
that
the
Life
,
which
is
the
Light
of
men
,
is
but
in
it self
a
meer
Effect
;
for
he
owns
it
in
its
own
beeing
to
be
no
other
,
than
God
himself
counterf
:
Christ
:
detect,ed
p●g
56
and
again
Wil.
Pen.
Reason
against
railing
.
pag.
56
We
assert
the
true
Light
,
with
which
every
man
is
enlightned
,
to
be
in
it self
the
Christ
of
God
,
and
the
Saviour
of
the
world
.
The
same
Will●
Pen
,
Quakerism
a
new
Nickname
pag
9
,
10.
All
men
are
enlightned
—
this
Light
is
Divine
,
because
it
is
the
very
Light
of
the
world
,
which
is
God
,
not
any
effect
of
his
power
as
a
created
Light
,
as
some
men
fancy
,
and
George
Whitehead
Dipl
,
p●
:
pag
13.
to
call
the
Light
in
every
man
a
meer
Creature
,
is
con●rary
to
Iohn
1.
In
him
was
Life
,
and
the
Life
was
the
Light
of
men
,
which
Light
,
is
Divine
and
Increated
.
Also
George
Fox
great
Myst
:
pag
10.
Some
c●ll
the
Light
Consci●nce
.
—
which
Light
was
before
Co●sc●ence
was
or
Creature
was
,
or
Created
,
or
made
Light
was
;
He
ma●e
the
Sun
▪
the
Moon
—
and
the
Light
was
before
th●se
were
made
;
and
p●g
23.
some
call
it
a
natural
Light
,
which
Light
was
b●fore
t●e
word
Conscience
was
or
a
na●ural
Light
the
Sun
,
Moon
,
or
Stars
either
;
for
all
things
that
were
made
,
were
made
by
it
,
the
natural
Light
,
or
made
Light
,
are
created
Lights
,
It
made
the
Sun
,
Moon
,
and
Stars
,
they
were
made
,
&
here
it
is
the
natural
Light
to
the
natura●
Eye
,
and
the
light
that
every
man
is
enlig●tne●
with
,
that
cometh
into
the
world
,
was
before
thes●
were
made
,
glorified
with
the
Father
before
the
world
began
,
Idem
pag
185.
The
Light
which
every
man
that
cometh
into
the
World
,
is
enlightned
withal
,
is
Christ
,
by
whom
the
world
was
made
.
And
pag
331.
The
Light
which
every
one
that
cometh
into
the
world
is
enlightned
withal
,
is
not
Conscience
,
for
the
Light
was
bef●re
any
thing
was
made
,
or
Conscience
named
.
George
Fox
younger
,
in
a
Collection
of
his
Works
pag
171.
Thus
speaketh
,
All
mind
that
Gift
of
God
in
your selves
,
which
maketh
you
sensible
of
your
pr●sent
condition
,
you
must
receive
the
living
principle
of
God
,
in
your
own
particular
vessels
,
which
principle
I
call
the
Light
,
it
being
a
proper
Name
for
it
;
But
I
shal
not
desire
to
tye
up
any
of
you
,
to
give
this
principle
of
Truth
only
the
name
of
Light
,
I
shall
not
matter
if
you
call
it
the
Truth
,
or
the
gift
of
God
,
are
a
measure
of
the
eternal
Beeing
.
Now
,
Reader
,
did
ever
the
Sun
shine
upon
such
a
Black
and
Blasphemous
Company
of
men
▪
who
durst
assert
that
that
dim
Light
,
by
which
most
men
have
enough
ado
to
perceive
that
there
is
a
Suprem
Beeing
,
and
notwithstanding
of
which
knowledge
,
they
are
Ignorant
of
the
true
way
of
the
Worship
of
God
,
the
Mystery
of
the
Sacred
Trinity
,
the
Person
of
Christ
Jesus
,
his
Natures
,
and
Offices
,
and
are
at
every
turn
ready
to
deceive
,
and
be
deceived
,
I
say
,
did
ever
a
company
of
Men
outdo
,
yea
,
or
ever
equalize
these
Quakers
,
who
dare
as●e●t
such
a
Light
as
this
to
be
God
?
Notwithstanding
of
this
their
matchless
exaltation
of
this
Light
within
every
man
,
they
again
at
other
times
,
and
when
occasion
serveth
,
depress
and
bring
low
,
the
same
as
much
as
before
they
cryed
it
up
;
For
they
assert
that
the
Light
within
any
particular
person
,
ought
to
yeild
and
stoop
to
the
light
of
their
Church
,
or
constitut
body
,
For
William
Pen
,
Spirit
of
Alex
:
pag
14.
sayeth
,
We
deny
that
to
be
a
Light
,
which
opposeth
the
judgement
of
the
body
.
Ibid
pag
4.5
.
We
as
a
body
have
power
to
determine
,
therefore
we
abhor
,
renounce
,
rebuke
with
all
severity
that
rude
imagination
of
the
Hat-on
in
publick
prayer
;
and
Sp.
of
the
hat
pag
21
,
We
have
the
power
,
and
will
not
such
as
are
in
the
power
do
right
.
Ibid.
the
body
will
have
a
true
sense
,
feeling
,
and
understanding
of
Motions
,
Visions
,
Revelations
,
and
Doctrines
,
therefore
it
is
safest
to
make
her
the
touchstone
in
all
things
relating
to
God.
Behold
,
Reader
as
,
the
Quakers
with
the
Papists
reject
the
Scriptures
from
being
the
Suprem
Rule
,
and
ultimat
Judge
;
So
they
no
less
than
the
grossest
of
the
Romanists
ascribe
an
Infallibility
to
their
Church
,
and
make
this
the
suprem
Rule
,
and
ultimat
Judge
,
to
which
every
mans
Light
within
must
stoop
and
yeild
though
never
so
clear
:
which
is
one
of
the
grossest
Errors
of
Popery
;
But
yet
it
is
infinitly
more
gross
and
impious
in
the
Quakers
,
for
in
so
doing
,
they
proclaim
the
fallibility
of
that
which
they
maintain
to
be
Christ
,
and
God
,
and
subject
it
unto
another
,
as
capable
of
deceiving
,
and
being
deceived
,
which
Impiety
,
I
am
sure
is
scarc●
equalized
.
18ly
.
Although
the
absurdity
of
this
Doctrine
,
may
of
it self
abundantly
secure
us
,
that
we
need
not
b●
much
concerned
,
let
them
use
what
Arguments
they
will
to
prove
it
;
we
being
certain
,
that
whatever
arguments
can
prove
this
,
will
equally
serve
to
prove
whatever
entereth
into
any
mans
fancy
;
yet
I
will
propose
,
and
enervat
these
of
their
arguments
which
seem
to
be
most
strong
,
and
plead
most
for
them
.
One
of
which
is
proposed
by
George
Keith
,
Truth-defend
:
pag
87.
A
Divine
Law
in
all
men
is
an
inward
immediat
Dictat
,
but
there
is
a
Divine
Law
in
all
men
.
Of
this
Argument
singled
out
of
all
that
ever
George
Keith
wrote
,
as
the
choicest
Master-peice
,
to
uphold
Quakerism
,
and
overthrow
the
authority
of
the
Scriptures
,
he
is
so
confident
,
that
by
it
alone
,
he
thinketh
to
strike
the
Cause
dead
;
But
he
is
hugely
mistaken
▪
for
if
by
a
divine
Law
,
he
understand
any
other
thing
beside
Conscience
,
and
Reason
,
which
he
himself
,
together
with
his
Brother
Rob:
Barclay
:
Quakerism
confirm
:
pag
3.
acknowledgeth
,
to
be
only
natural
.
We
deny
his
Minor
,
the
proof
of
which
we
expect
ad
Kalendas
Graecas
;
And
thus
the
great
Argument
of
one
of
the
greatest
Champions
of
the
Quakers
,
evanisheth
into
smoak
at
the
very
first
handling
thereof
.
2ly
.
Rob:
Barclay
.
Vind
pag
39.
thus
reasoneh
,
what
if
I
should
say
,
is
not
God
a
Light
?
And
is
not
he
in
every
man
?
and
is
not
this
Light
within
the
increated
Spirit
?
The
Reader
may
here
observe
,
that
this
Author
is
diffident
of
this
Argument
,
and
fearful
to
bring
it
forth
;
and
good
reason
he
hath
;
for
by
this
reason
he
only
evinceth
,
that
which
he
elsewhere
by
all
means
endeavoureth
to
evite
,
viz
,
that
the
Quakers
Grace
,
and
Light
,
is
common
to
Devils
and
damned
Souls
,
,
for
God
can
no
more
be
said
to
be
in
every
Son
and
Daughter
of
Adam
without
exception
,
than
in
these
wicked
Spirits
,
if
he
think
othewayes
,
let
him
essay
the
proof
of
it
.
3ly
.
For
the
sufficiency
of
their
universal
Light
,
they
thus
argue
:
That
which
we
sin
in
not
obeying
,
is
sufficient
to
Salvation
;
but
in
not
obeying
the
Light
within
,
we
sin
,
therefore
it
is
sufficient
to
Salvation
.
But
this
Sophism
is
too
palpable
,
and
gross
to
take
with
any
that
is
not
altogether
willing
to
be
deceived
;
for
the
Major
proposition
thereof
is
most
false
,
otherwise
the
lawful
commands
of
every
Parent
,
Heathen
,
as
well
as
Christian
,
should
be
a
sufficient
guide
to
Salvation
,
for
disobedience
to
these
,
is
as
really
a
sin
,
as
disobedience
to
our
own
Light.
4ly
.
To
prove
that
there
is
a
Divine
Light
purchased
by
Christ
,
in
every
man
,
they
adduce
Iohn
1.9
.
That
was
the
true
Light
,
which
enlightneth
every
man
that
cometh
into
the
world
:
for
Vindication
of
which
place
it
shall
suffice
to
overthrow
what
Rob:
Barclay
hath
said
in
the
Vindication
of
his
Apology
pag
91.
For
the
confirmation
of
the
Quakers
gloss
on
this
text
:
of
which
Mr:
Broun
,
Quaker
:
path
way
to
Pagan
:
pag
151
,
152
,
153
,
154.
had
given
diverse
expositions
,
as
1.
that
Light
may
be
here
taken
for
the
Light
of
reason
,
2ly
.
That
by
every
man
,
is
not
to
be
understood
every
individual
,
but
only
every
one
which
is
savingly
enlightned
;
these
expositions
with
others
,
he
at
large
evinceth
and
illustrateth
from
Scripture
and
reason
;
and
sheweth
that
the
Quakers
joyn
with
the
Socinians
in
their
exposition
.
Now
whereas
,
if
the
Quaker
had
done
any
thing
to
the
purpose
,
he
ought
to
have
refuted
these
exposi●ions
;
but
in
stead
thereof
he
sayeth
,
his
adversary
must
be
much
puzled
with
this
Scripture
,
for
he
knoweth
not
what
way
to
take
it
:
But
this
I
confess
is
a
strange
inference
,
for
the
Quaker
from
abundance
,
inferreth
penury
,
and
because
his
adversary
gave
diverse
expositions
,
any
of
which
will
serve
the
turn
,
Ergo
(
sayes
he
)
he
knows
not
what
to
answer
.
I
was
wondering
at
this
Consequence
,
but
I
presently
remembred
that
the
Quakers
were
Enemies
to
Logick
.
He
himself
diverse
times
hath
given
several
meanings
of
one
place
,
as
for
Example
,
Isa.
8.20
.
much
therefore
he
hath
been
puzled
to
answer
our
arguments
,
proving
the
Scriptures
to
be
our
principal
Rule
,
which
I
do
really
believe
,
tho
upon
another
account
:
Now
it
is
observable
that
this
Quaker
almost
every
where
endeavoureth
to
turn
Defendent
,
when
he
should
be
impugnant
;
for
the
Scriptures
from
which
he
drew
his
arguments
in
his
Apology
,
fa●ling
him
,
so
that
he
can
prove
nothing
from
them
,
his
Adversary
having
removed
the
vernishing
of
his
Sophistry
,
he
bendeth
his
whole
wit
in
his
Vindication
to
find
out
Evasions
,
and
Distinctions
,
to
defend
his
own
glosse
,
and
this
artifice
he
useth
here
,
which
,
think
of
it
what
he
will
,
will
serve
for
nothing
,
except
to
discover
hi●
Weakness
and
Conviction
of
a
bad
cause
;
and
whereas
he
flouteth
at
his
Adversary
inferring
from
v.
5.
of
this
chapter
,
the
darkness
comprehended
it
not
;
that
by
darkness
is
meant
man
in
his
natural
Estate
,
in
which
Estate
he
can
comprehend
what
is
natural
;
we
say
whereas
he
flouteth
at
him
,
inferring
from
this
,
that
man
while
in
that
Estate
,
is
void
of
all
Spiritual
and
supernatural
light
▪
saying
,
is
not
this
a
learned
Refutation
,
Reader
?
He
●heweth
only
good
will
(
as
they
use
to
say
)
to
have
the
Doctrine
of
the
Reformed
become
a
mocking
stock
,
and
shame
rubbed
upon
it
,
if
he
could
;
for
all
the
expositions
given
by
the
Reformed
Churches
,
on
this
place
,
quite
contradict
that
of
the
Quakers
,
except
he
will
call
Socinus
,
and
the
like
,
Reformed
Protestants
;
But
the
thing
incumbent
to
the
Quaker
was
,
the
urging
and
vindicating
of
his
Reason
,
viz.
that
if
man
in
his
natural
estate
cannot
comprehend
this
Light
,
who
notwithstanding
can
comprehend
the
things
of
Nature
,
Ergo
by
this
enlightning
with
which
every
man
is
said
to
be
enlightned
that
cometh
into
the
world
,
is
not
understood
the
Light
of
Nature
and
Reason
;
which
consequence
he
shal
never
be
able
to
prove
,
for
altho
the
Light
it self
viz.
Christ
,
be
supernatural
,
and
the
incomprehensible
God
of
Nature
,
yet
these
little
Beams
or
Sparks
of
Reason
and
Conscience
which
are
the
Effect
and
Gift
of
this
great
Ligh
,
Christ
the
Son
of
God
,
and
Second
Person
of
the
Trinity
,
no
lesse
than
of
the
Father
and
Holy
Ghost
,
are
altogether
natural
and
comprehensible
.
Many
places
of
Scripture
beside
this
they
detort
and
deprave
,
to
the
end
that
by
the
Scriptures
themselves
they
may
destroy
the
Scriptures
,
and
prove
that
the
light
within
,
(
which
they
being
pitifully
deluded
,
take
for
the
Spirit
of
God
,
)
is
the
Supream
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
;
all
which
glosses
fall
to
the
ground
,
tho
upon
this
one
Account
,
that
they
have
couched
in
them
,
this
most
dangerous
and
blasphemous
falshood
viz.
that
the
dim
and
dark
Light
of
nature
,
is
not
only
sufficient
to
guide
us
to
Salvation
,
but
(
which
ought
to
be
heard
with
horror
)
is
God
himself
.
One
of
which
Scriptures
is
John
14.26
,
27.
and
16.13
.
whence
they
would
infer
that
all
Believers
are
led
by
immediat
objective
Revelation
,
as
the
Apostles
were
,
because
(
say
they
)
the
way
that
the
Apostles
were
taught
,
which
is
by
immediat
Revelation
,
is
there
holden
forth
as
common
to
a●l
Believers
,
and
the
words
to
(
lead
)
and
to
(
teach
)
in
their
proper
and
native
signification
denote
always
an
immediat
objective
leading
or
teaching
.
Thus
Reasoneth
Ro.
Barclay
,
Vind.
pag.
19.20
.
to
which
I
answer
,
that
these
being
two
of
the
main
places
that
he
brought
for
proving
the
Spirit
to
be
the
principal
Rule
of
Faith
and
Manners
,
he
ought
to
have
given
some
other
thing
,
than
bare
assertions
,
if
he
had
in
good
earnest
intended
to
overthrow
what
his
Adversary
chap.
3.
n.
27.
said
against
his
meaning
of
these
places
,
which
he
hath
not
in
the
least
done
,
for
why
may
not
immediat
objective
R●velat●on
be
promised
to
the
Apostles
in
these
places
,
and
yet
not
unto
all
Believers
,
but
subjective
only
,
whereby
they
may
understand
and
apply
these
Truths
that
were
taught
immediatly
to
the
Apostles
and
Prophets
,
upon
whose
Doctrine
the
Faith
of
all
Believers
is
founded
as
its
principal
Rule
,
and
Foundation
Ephes.
2
20.
Even
as
the
like
Ph●ases
hold
forth
an
immediate
objective
Teaching
to
some
,
and
yet
that
only
which
is
meerly
mediate
as
to
others
as
Neh.
9.20
.
comp.
with
v.
30.
1
Kings
8.
36.
Psal.
132.12
.
Deu.
32.12
.
Moreover
that
the
words
to
[
lead
]
and
[
teach
]
hold
forth
a
mediate
objective
Teaching
,
or
a
subjective
Illumination
far
oftner
in
Scripture
than
immediate
objective
Revelation
,
is
manifest
to
any
that
are
acquainted
with
the
Scriptures
,
which
if
the
Quakers
deny
,
seing
they
are
the
opponents
,
they
ought
to
condescend
to
a
collation
of
places
,
and
shew
the
contrary
.
Lastly
,
whatever
the
Quakers
say
,
we
cannot
help
it
,
certain
it
is
that
no
man
of
sound
Judgment
will
deny
,
that
when
one
readeth
the
Scripture●
,
and
hath
his
mind
illuminated
by
the
Spirit
of
God
,
that
he
may
understand
the
wondrous
things
in
Gods
Law
,
but
such
an
one
hath
that
promise
of
which
we
now
speak
fulfilled
unto
him
,
and
thus
the
only
Scripture
argument
which
Robert
Barclay
attempts
to
urge
in
his
Vindication
,
falleth
to
the
ground
,
for
all
the
rest
of
the
Scriptures
from
which
he
deduced
his
Apologetick
Arguments
he
slideth
over
,
without
any
Vindication
thereof
,
Robert
Barclay
Apolog.
pag.
38.
hath
another
Argument
,
which
because
he
complaineth
,
as
if
it
were
not
sufficiently
solved
by
his
adversary
chap.
3.
numb
.
last
.
I
will
set
down
here
,
and
answer
formally
,
that
there
may
be
no
just
ground
of
Complaint
,
The
Argum●nt
thus
runs
;
That
unto
which
all
Professors
of
Christianity
of
whatsoever
kind
,
do
at
last
recurr
,
and
because
of
which
all
other
grounds
,
are
commended
and
accounted
worthy
to
be
believed
,
must
of
necessity
be
the
only
Rule
most
certain
and
immovable
ground
of
all
Christian
Faith
,
but
the
inward
immediat
objective
Revelation
of
the
Spirit
is
that
&c.
Ergo.
Resp.
the
Minor
is
ambiguous
,
and
therefore
most
fallacious
,
for
according
to
this
kind
of
reasoning
,
they
may
conclude
,
that
a
man
just
now
possessing
a
piece
of
land
formerly
enjoyed
by
his
Ancestors
,
by
Virtue
of
a
Right
granted
to
them
by
a
Prince
deceased
many
ages
ago
,
spake
mouth
to
mouth
,
with
that
Prince
dead
ages
out
of
mind
,
Thus
,
that
unto
which
the
present
Possessor
of
such
a
piece
of
Land
when
pressed
to
the
last
,
recurreth
un●o
,
and
for
which
other
Grounds
or
Charters
are
commended
or
valid
,
must
of
necessity
be
the
most
immoveable
ground
of
,
and
Warrand
for
his
possession
of
such
a
piece
of
Ground
;
but
the
Grant
and
Donation
of
such
or
such
a
Prince
given
many
ages
ago
,
first
by
word
of
Mouth
,
tho
again
committted
to
writings
,
is
that
which
the
present
Possessor
being
pressed
to
the
last
recurreth
to
,
Ergo
the
present
Possessor
had
immediat
Discourse
mou●h
to
mouth
with
a
Prince
many
ages
back
ere
the
present
Possessor
was
born
.
Certainly
these
must
be
admirable
Fellows
who
can
conclude
,
and
that
in
modo
&
figura
,
qui●libet
ex
quolibet
,
and
thus
their
strongest
Arguments
,
serve
only
to
prove
the
Authors
to
●e
in
a
paroxism
of
folly
,
moving
laughter
in
a
very
Heraclite
.
But
ex
abundante
I
answer
directly
to
this
their
blunt
Sophism
,
tho
forsooth
the
Quak●rs
Achillean
Argument
;
Thus
,
But
inward
,
immediate
objective
Revelation
is
that
to
which
all
Christians
recur
&c.
this
is
inward
,
immediat
objective
in
Respect
of
the
Apostles
and
Prophets
,
I
grant
;
in
Respect
of
the
present
Professors
of
Christianity
,
I
deny
,
and
let
them
urge
the
membrum
negatum
.
Of
the
like
Nature
is
another
,
and
that
the
chief
of
his
Apologetick
Arguments
,
viz.
Enoch
,
Noah
,
Abraham
,
and
some
others
had
immediate
objective
Revelation
,
therefore
the
whole
Church
had
it
;
the
Consequent
his
Antagonist
chap.
3.
numb
.
11.
denyeth
,
as
not
having
the
least
shadow
of
Reason
,
let
us
therefore
see
how
he
vindicateth
this
Argument
which
is
a
sine
quo
non
to
the
whole
frame
of
Quakerism
,
and
for
this
all
that
he
sayeth
Vindic
:
pag.
24.
is
,
that
then
it
seems
there
was
more
of
Gods
immediat
Revelation
in
those
dark
times
,
even
by
his
Adversaries
Confession
,
than
now
under
the
Gospel
,
where
the
chief
pastors
of
the
Church
according
to
him
,
are
to
expect
no
such
thing
:
neither
is
it
proved
that
others
not
mentioned
,
had
no
immediat
Revelations
.
Answ.
true
it
is
that
even
in
these
dark
times
,
there
was
in
some
respect
viz.
of
immediate
Revelations
,
more
of
God
,
than
there
is
now
,
and
yet
lesse
in
another
sense
,
viz.
in
respect
of
more
large
propagation
of
the
Truth
of
God
,
and
of
the
large
Measure
of
Grace
dispensed
unto
Believers
under
the
New
Test
:
But
what
sayeth
this
to
the
probation
of
the
Quakers
tremulous
consequence
?
how
doth
it
prove
,
that
because
some
few
had
these
Revelations
,
all
and
every
one
within
the
Church
had
them
?
this
is
a
baculo
ad
angulum
,
neither
are
we
bound
to
prove
the
contrary
affirmanti
enim
incumbit
probatio
:
It
is
enough
for
us
to
tell
him
,
that
it
is
a
groundless
fancy
to
assert
it
,
for
how
will
he
prove
;
ex
.
gr.
that
ever
Abel
had
immediate
objective
Revelation
?
and
thus
the
third
Proposition
of
his
second
These
,
that
God
did
alwayes
reveal
himself
by
his
Spirit
,
i.
e.
by
immediate
objective
Revelation
to
every
one
of
the
Church
,
falleth
to
the
Ground
;
and
with
it
,
the
fourth
viz.
that
these
Revelations
were
,
the
formal
object
of
the
Faith
of
the
Saints
,
for
if
it
be
altogether
groundless
to
say
,
that
every
Saint
had
them
,
as
we
have
now
seen
:
it
is
no
lesse
groundlesse
to
say
,
that
they
were
the
formal
Object
of
their
Faith
,
and
with
these
also
his
fifth
Proposition
,
viz.
that
the
same
i.
e
:
immediat
Revelation
,
continueth
to
be
the
formal
object
of
the
Saints
Faith.
—
ea
lapsa
repente
ruinam
Cum
sonitu
trabit
,
&
Tremulum
super
agmina
late
Incidit
.
Like
the
Trojan
Tower
,
its
couplings
being
cutt
,
the
whole
Fabrick
of
Quakerism
,
tumbleth
down
about
the
ears
of
its
Authors
,
and
builders
,
CHAP.
III.
Concerning
Original
Sin.
HAving
canvassed
the
grand
principle
of
the
universal
Light
,
and
spirit
of
the
Quakers
,
I
shall
consider
some
of
the
chief
points
of
their
Religion
,
and
lay
open
the
absurdity
and
blasphemy
thereof
,
that
the
Reader
may
the
better
judge
of
the
root
,
having
seen
the
Fruit
,
and
of
the
B●sis
by
the
Superstructure
.
The
first
of
these
shall
be
the
doctrine
of
Original
Sin
,
which
they
joyntly
deny
▪
asserting
that
Adams
Sin
,
can
be
imputed
to
none
but
himself
,
and
therefore
none
are
guilty
of
the
transgression
of
our
first
Parents
,
an●
so
lyable
to
punishment
until
by
their
evil
walking
▪
or
actual
sins
,
they
become
transgressors
.
This
Doctrine
,
although
not
so
an
〈◊〉
as
the
Ap●stles
and
Prophets
,
yet
is
as
old
as
the
Doctrine
of
pestif●rous
Pelag●us
,
the
first
open
asserter
thereof
,
with
Celestius
his
Disciple
.
Hence
all
who
denyed
the
Doctrine
which
now
the
reformed
Churches
hold
●●ent
Original
sin
,
were
esteemed
guilty
of
Pelagi●nism
;
which
notwithstanding
Robert
Barclay
:
Vin●
:
sect
5.
Numb
5.
would
fain
deny
but
to
●o
purpose
,
except
to
contradict
what
he
himself
said
in
his
Apology
chap
4.
where
he
granteth
,
that
Augustin
with
whom
all
the
Orthodox
whollie
agree
in
this
point
,
did
hold
the
same
Doctrine
with
the
Westminster
Confession
,
in
opposition
to
the
Pelagians
,
to
which
Confession
of
his
,
tho
now
by
himself
retracted
,
or
rather
contradicted
,
I
will
add
the
words
of
Vincentius
Lyrenensis
chap
35.
adversus
haeret
:
cited
by
the
Author
of
Melius
inquirendum
,
who
before
Caelestius
the
monstrous
Scholar
of
Pelagius
,
ever
denyed
that
all
mankind
stood
guilty
of
Adams
apostacy
from
God
?
Moreover
,
whosoever
will
be
at
the
pains
to
read
the
Magdeburgick
History
,
centur.
5.
colum.
577
,
588
,
589
,
590.
And
compare
it
with
the
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
in
this
point
,
he
will
find
an
exact
harmony
,
between
them
and
the
Pelagians
,
both
in
Doctrine
,
and
Probation
thereof
.
But
we
need
add
no
more
,
seing
Robert
Barclay
,
in
the
place
just
now
cited
,
after
several
serpentine
windings
and
turnings
,
to
the
end
he
may
(
tho
he
retain
the
thing
yet
)
evite
the
Name
,
wholly
rejecteth
Augustin
,
and
therefore
give●h
up
the
Cause
,
ridiculously
enquiring
at
his
Adversary
,
if
he
will
assert
every
thing
that
Augustin
said
,
ridiculously
(
I
say
)
seing
the
question
is
,
if
Augustin
did
not
hold
our
Doctrine
anent
Original
Sin
,
as
the
Antithesis
to
that
of
the
Pelagians
in
this
point
,
which
Pelagians
have
had
many
successors
,
tho
known
by
other
Names
,
as
Socinus
,
and
his
School
,
and
holy
and
pure
Anabaptists
(
as
they
called
themselves
)
and
were
by
contrariety
of
speech
,
called
by
others
,
the
Fry
of
a
deluded
Enthusiast
,
Thomas
Muncer
;
The
horrid
abominations
of
which
Sect
,
and
this
their
Doctrine
of
Original
Sin
among
the
rest
,
that
famous
reformer
Bullinger
,
hath
by
Scriptures
and
Reason
,
so
hammered
,
that
one
in
reason
should
have
thought
,
that
it
should
never
have
had
a
Resurrection
,
as
may
be
seen
Lib:
1.
cap
11.
adversus
Anabaptistas
,
where
he
also
to
purpose
vindicateth
Zuinglius
from
the
calumny
of
the
denyal
of
Original
Sin
,
wherewith
first
the
Council
of
Trent
,
although
contrary
to
their
own
Light
,
as
judicious
Soave
observeth
,
and
of
late
Rob:
Barclay
,
both
in
his
Apology
and
Vindication
,
hath
traduced
him
.
Secondly
,
Altho
this
Doctrine
hath
by
many
Ages
been
assaulted
most
fiercely
,
by
corrupt
men
,
both
of
subtile
wit
and
earnestness
of
Intention
,
yet
the
providence
of
God
hath
sufficiently
pre-occupied
,
what
they
have
said
or
can
say
,
and
fortified
all
who
truly
believe
what
God
hath
said
in
His
Word
,
where
there
is
good
Store
both
of
Sword
and
Buckler
,
for
managing
of
this
War
;
and
of
these
many
I
shall
here
excerpt
and
vindicate
a
few
.
And
First
,
Gen.
2.17
.
For
in
the
Day
thou
Eatest
thou
shall
surely
Die
,
or
Dying
thou
shalt
Die
,
where
is
a
clear
proof
of
our
Doctrine
,
whence
we
reason
,
as
well
against
Pelagians
,
Anabaptists
,
Socinians
and
Quakers
,
as
against
the
Papists
,
who
deny
Original
sin
in
Infants
after
Baptism
;
Thus
:
Infants
Die
,
Ergo
they
are
guilty
of
Original
Sin
,
seeing
according
to
this
present
Text
▪
Death
is
the
punishment
due
to
the
breach
of
the
Command
.
To
this
the
Pelagians
,
as
Augustin
in
several
places
,
and
particularlie
Quest.
3.
C.
899-tom
4.
colum.
666.
And
the
Socinians
,
as
Pareus
on
the
place
sheweth
,
with
other
Enemies
of
the
Christian
Religion
,
and
at
this
day
the
Quakers
answer
,
that
Bodily
death
is
not
included
in
this
Threatning
;
But
besides
that
the
Pelagians
were
anathematized
for
this
doctrine
by
one
Council
of
Carthage
,
consisting
of
224
Bishops
Photius
Biblioth.
Colum.
42.
This
answer
is
evidently
false
,
seeing
that
by
this
word
(
Death
)
frequently
in
Scripture
,
Bodily
as
well
as
Spiritual
,
is
understood
,
and
by
the
Phrase
,
to
die
the
Death
,
the
separation
of
Soul
and
Body
is
frequently
holden
forth
:
Moreover
none
can
deny
that
Bodily
Death
of
it self
is
an
evil
,
and
no
evil
could
have
befallen
Mankind
persevering
in
the
State
of
Innocency
;
But
Chap.
3.19
.
Will
aabundantly
dissolve
all
doubts
about
the
meaning
of
the
text
to
any
unbyassed
Men
:
Where
God
himself
,
describing
the
punishment
of
Adams
transgression
,
denounce●h
and
foretelleth
his
return
to
the
dust
,
as
not
the
least
part
thereof
.
But
we
need
not
multiply
reasons
for
the
vindication
of
this
text
,
seeing
none
,
except
Socinians
and
Pelagians
,
oppose
our
meaning
thereof
,
and
the
reason
adduced
by
our
present
adversaries
,
common
to
them
with
the
Socinians
,
and
in
particular
Crellius
,
for
it
s
overthrown
,
in
strength
excelleth
not
a
cobweb
,
although
they
pitched
upon
it
,
as
the
only
weapon
,
which
had
any
Teeth
or
keenness
therein
▪
The
reason
is
,
Adam
died
not
that
day
that
he
did
eat
,
therefore
(
say
they
)
Bodily
death
is
not
Comprehended
in
the
threatning
:
Neither
hath
this
reason
any
stronger
nerves
than
the
rest
used
by
Pelagians
&
Socinians
,
which
yet
for
ought
any
thing
I
can
find
,
the
Quakers
do
not
use
,
judging
them
(
as
it
seems
)
unfit
to
serve
their
turn
;
Therefore
Robert
Barclay
tho
he
had
Apolog:
chap
4.
Fought
with
this
Reason
as
the
only
prop
of
his
cause
;
his
adversary
chap.
5.
num.
8.
Having
hewed
it
in
pieces
)
in
his
Vindication
essayeth
not
the
reinforcement
thereof
,
only
Sect.
5.
num.
3.
In
stead
of
a
Vindication
hath
its
repetition
,
adding
,
that
death
as
it
is
now
circumstantiated
with
Sickness
and
the
like
miseries
,
is
a
consequence
,
but
not
a
punishment
of
Sin
,
which
distinction
is
most
Blasphemou●
,
as
here
it
is
made
use
of
,
seing
it
insinuateth
that
God
Transgresseth
his
own
Law
,
by
inflicting
more
miserie
on
fallen
man
,
than
was
denounced
in
the
Threatning
.
Either
this
he
must
say
,
or
else
that
Sickness
,
and
Death
,
as
they
are
now
circumstantiated
,
are
not
inflicted
by
God
,
which
I
am
sure
is
little
better
than
the
former
.
But
to
shut
up
all
,
he
sayeth
,
that
his
Adversarie
hath
not
said
enough
,
to
proselyte
him
to
his
Opinion
,
notwithstanding
that
he
had
so
d●shed
his
reason
,
upon
which
it
was
builded
,
that
the
Quaker
attempteth
not
the
Restauration
thereof
:
He
addeth
further
as
a
reason
why
his
Adversary
had
not
said
enough
to
proselyte
him
,
that
death
to
Adam
in
the
state
of
Innocency
should
have
been
a
pleasure
&
not
a
pain
;
which
reason
is
altogether
reasonlesse
,
seeing
the
reason
why
death
is
pleasant
to
any
,
is
its
being
the
port
to
free
Men
from
all
evil
,
&
especially
from
Sin
,
without
which
Adam
should
have
wholly
remained
,
if
he
had
persevered
in
his
integrity
;
but
it
is
too
evident
,
that
the
Quaker
is
of
Bellarmins
mind
who
de
Statu
primi
Hominis
,
alledgeth
that
man
during
his
Integrity
was
not
free
of
concupiscence
and
evil
inclinations
;
which
doctrine
maketh
God
the
Author
of
sin
.
But
I
leave
this
matter
,
only
I
cannot
but
here
observe
,
which
I
might
do
in
most
places
and
weightiest
points
of
Robert
Barclay's
Vindication
;
that
per
fas
aut
nefas
(
as
they
say
)
the
Quakers
must
have
the
last
words
▪
for
who
will
think
it
requisite
to
write
after
one
,
who
can
tell
his
Adversary
that
he
hath
not
said
enough
to
proselyte
him
,
and
yet
never
so
much
as
essay
to
vindicate
his
own
,
or
remove
his
adversaries
reasons
,
as
Robert
Barclay
doth
here
,
and
yet
publishes
his
book
to
the
world
,
as
a
sufficient
answer
or
refutation
of
what
his
adversarie
had
said
,
living
in
the
mean
time
without
so
much
as
an
attempted
vindication
,
these
points
with
which
the
whole
frame
of
Quakerism
standeth
and
falleth
;
for
if
Bodily
death
was
included
in
the
threatning
,
then
our
doctrine
of
Original
sin
is
proved
,
which
doctrine
once
being
evinced
,
all
the
pretended
absurdities
and
blasphemies
,
which
Socinians
,
Quakers
and
others
infer
from
our
Doctrine
of
Original
sin
and
Reprobation
,
fall
to
the
Ground
,
and
they
are
,
if
they
be
Christians
,
obliged
to
remove
these
themselves
.
Further
its
clear
from
Rom.
6.23
.
The
wages
of
sin
is
Death
,
where
death
without
exception
of
any
kind
of
death
is
called
the
wages
,
not
the
consequence
only
of
sin
,
as
the
Quaker
both
in
his
Apology
and
Vindication
Sect.
5.
num.
8.
in
contradict●on
to
the
express
Text
,
expoundeth
it
;
neither
is
his
reason
more
weightie
,
than
his
exposition
is
sound
,
which
is
,
that
the
whole
Creation
received
a
decay
by
Adams
fall
,
and
yet
Herbs
and
Trees
are
not
to
be
called
sinners
,
seeing
the
Apostle
is
not
here
speaking
of
herbs
and
trees
,
but
of
Men
Women
who
are
capable
of
receiving
the
wages
of
sin
,
as
being
the
workers
thereof
,
and
certainly
one
may
with
the
like
reason
,
say
that
H●rbs
and
Trees
are
capable
of
eternal
life
as
that
they
may
be
capable
of
the
wages
of
Sin.
His
other
shift
which
he
hath
Ibid
:
by
which
also
he
destroyes
the
former
,
viz.
that
by
death
is
not
to
be
understood
Bodily
Death
,
because
Eternal
Life
is
put
as
the
Opposite
of
the
death
here
spoken
of
,
and
obtained
by
Christ
Iesus
,
and
yet
natural
death
is
not
avoided
,
is
not
much
better
then
the
former
,
seeing
that
after
the
resurrection
,
the
Bodies
of
the
Godlie
,
shall
live
as
well
as
their
souls
,
and
the
re-union
of
both
doth
belong
to
Eternal
Life
,
and
so
natural
Life
is
comprehended
in
Eternal
Life
,
as
well
as
Spiritual
Life
;
and
tho
believers
die
a
Bodily
Death
,
yet
it
is
not
a
punishment
to
them
,
on
this
account
that
the
Sting
and
Bitterness
thereof
is
removed
by
Christ
,
who
did
bear
the
same
,
otherwise
death
is
in
it self
a
punishment
,
being
the
separation
of
Soul
and
Body
,
the
most
strictly
united
friends
and
companions
in
the
World.
3ly
.
Our
Doctrine
of
Original
Sin
is
clearlie
evinced
from
Rom.
5.12
.
As
by
one
Man
,
Sin
entered
into
the
World
and
Death
by
Sin
,
&c.
together
with
the
following
verses
;
whence
diverse
strong
arguments
may
easily
be
collected
,
for
1.
The
Apostle
that
he
may
prove
justification
not
to
be
by
works
but
by
Faith
,
or
the
imputed
righteeousness
of
Christ
;
maketh
a
comparison
betwixt
the
two
common
Heads
or
Representatives
,
Adam
and
Christ
,
in
this
,
that
both
of
them
represented
the
parties
related
to
them
,
the
same
way
,
so
that
Adam
was
a
Type
of
Christ
in
his
standing
in
the
room
of
one
partie
as
Christ
did
in
the
Room
of
another
,
by
bearing
of
their
Iniquities
Isa
▪
53.11
.
By
being
made
sin
for
them
,
2
Cor.
5.21
.
(
i.
e.
)
by
Imputation
thereof
unto
him
,
for
no
otherwise
this
text
can
be
understood
without
Blasphemie
;
that
they
may
be
made
the
Righteousness
of
God
in
Him
,
i.
e.
by
imputation
of
it
to
them
,
as
their
Sin
was
imputed
to
him
;
Therefore
Adam
the
Type
,
stood
in
the
name
and
Room
of
Mankind
,
so
as
his
doings
or
failings
were
imputed
to
them
.
Robert
Barclay
Vindication
,
Sect.
5.
numb
.
7.
Alledgeth
that
this
comparison
spoileth
all
our
doctrine
,
because
if
the
Righteousness
of
Christ
is
not
to
be
imputed
to
men
for
Iustification
,
untill
they
actually
joyn
with
it
apprehended
by
Faith
,
so
neither
is
the
unrighteousness
and
disobedience
of
Adam
,
imputed
to
Men
for
Condemnation
,
untill
they
actually
joyn
with
it
.
But
I
wonder
not
to
see
a
man
intending
by
right
or
wrong
to
Stick
to
his
preconceived
opinions
,
make
use
of
Fig-leaf
defences
,
when
he
can
find
no
other
:
For
may
not
Children
before
they
come
to
the
use
of
Reason
,
be
justified
and
Saved
by
the
Righteousness
of
Christ
imputed
unto
them
,
and
by
consequence
,
others
before
the
use
of
reason
stand
guilty
of
Adams
sin
imputed
to
them
,
which
is
the
Conclusion
he
fain
would
evite
.
Moreover
he
may
as
well
say
,
that
Adams
Sin
doth
not
at
all
hurt
any
of
his
posterity
,
untill
they
having
the
use
of
reason
,
actually
joyn
with
it
,
which
yet
he
no
where
sayeth
,
but
granteth
the
contrary
in
several
places
of
this
Section
.
3ly
.
Omne
simile
claudicat
,
this
parallel
ought
not
necessarily
,
to
be
stretched
to
every
particular
mode
and
circumstance
,
but
only
to
the
particular
which
is
intended
here
,
viz.
the
Imputation
of
what
the
two
common
representatives
did
or
suffered
,
unto
the
parties
represented
by
them
;
but
the
Quakers
have
Learned
Bellarmin's
Art
,
who
by
racking
of
this
Parallel
thought
to
overthrow
our
Doctrine
of
Justification
by
faith
.
2.
The
Sin
of
Adam
is
such
,
that
if
this
Text
have
any
sense
at
all
,
by
this
Sin
of
his
,
all
have
sinned
,
and
by
it
Death
without
exception
is
brought
upon
all
Mankind
.
3.
It
is
such
a
sin
of
which
they
are
guilty
who
have
not
sinned
after
the
similitude
of
Adam
,
seeing
death
reigned
over
them
,
for
death
can
reign
over
none
but
Guilty
persons
,
but
Infants
are
subject
to
Death
,
tho
they
have
not
sinned
after
the
similitude
of
Adam
,
i.
e.
by
actual
transgression
,
Ergo
Infants
are
guilty
of
Adams
sin
.
4.
This
Offence
of
Adams
was
of
such
a
nature
,
that
the
Guilt
of
it
,
or
judgement
flowing
therefrom
,
came
upon
all
the
partie
represented
by
him
,
to
the
condemnation
thereof
,
i.
e.
(
if
it
be
any
thing
)
so
that
this
party
stood
really
condemned
thereby
.
v.
18.
But
all
Mankind
were
represented
by
Adam
,
Ergo
all
Men
are
condemned
by
the
sin
of
Adam
imputed
to
them
:
To
this
Robert
Barclay
answereth
Vind.
pag
,
101.
That
Iudgment
or
Guilt
is
not
expressed
in
the
Original
,
which
is
true
,
but
while
he
sayeth
,
it
ought
not
to
be
supplied
,
one
would
expect
that
he
should
give
a
better
answer
,
which
I
looked
for
;
but
all
that
he
giveth
,
is
an
individuum
vagum
[
Something
]
which
supplement
denudeth
the
Text
offense
,
making
a
Welshmans
hose
thereof
;
therefore
certainly
there
can
be
no
other
thing
understood
,
but
either
Iudgement
,
as
our
Translation
hath
it
,
or
Condemnation
,
as
the
version
of
Tremellius
out
of
the
Syriak
,
or
Guilt
,
as
Beza
:
Seeing
the
effect
thereof
was
the
condemnation
of
the
whole
party
represented
by
Adam
,
as
the
Text
clearlie
sheweth
.
But
to
declare
his
Harmonie
with
Rome
he
followeth
the
Versio
Vulgata
,
which
in
this
place
hath
non-sense
supplying
nothing
.
From
all
that
is
said
,
I
argue
thus
,
that
sin
which
is
described
to
us
by
the
Apostle
,
that
he
saith
brought
death
upon
all
Men
,
that
men
Sinned
by
it
,
and
were
made
Sinners
,
even
they
who
could
not
as
yet
actually
sin
,
that
they
all
became
Guilty
of
Death
and
condemnation
;
that
Sin
by
imputation
is
the
sin
of
the
whole
Nature
,
included
in
Adam
,
and
rendreth
the
whole
nature
obnoxious
to
death
and
condemnation
;
but
the
first
Sin
of
Adam
is
thus
described
to
us
by
the
Apostles
,
&c.
Ergo
,
that
sin
is
the
sin
of
Nature
,
&c.
Robert
Barclay
denyeth
the
Major
of
this
argument
,
and
that
to
the
admiration
of
all
Logicians
,
seeing
no
connexion
can
be
clearer
in
the
World
,
as
might
easily
appear
to
any
that
consider
it
;
for
who
can
deny
(
not
to
mention
other
Members
of
this
Argument
)
that
if
these
who
had
not
actually
sinned
,
are
made
sinners
by
this
Transgression
of
Adam
,
then
this
is
the
Sin
of
the
whole
Nature
,
or
imputed
to
it
,
which
is
our
Doctrine
of
Original
Sin
;
who
I
say
will
deny
this
?
Seeing
there
is
no
other
thing
in
the
consequence
then
in
the
antecedent
,
except
a
variation
of
words
and
Phrases
holding
forth
the
same
thing
,
which
yet
cannot
be
counted
a
Tautology
in
strict
Syllogistical
a●g●mentation
,
the
scope
of
which
is
to
evince
the
same
sense
by
a
clearer
phrasiology
or
way
of
speaking
.
2.
He
sayeth
that
in
this
argumentation
,
words
not
in
the
Text
are
foisted
in
,
viz.
they
who
have
not
actually
sinned
:
But
in
this
he
only
bewrayeth
his
Own
and
his
Brethrens
capital
error
▪
that
the
Scriptures
ought
not
to
be
interpreted
or
reasoned
from
;
for
his
adversary
used
only
this
argument
as
a
clear
deduction
from
the
Text
,
&
yet
because
it
is
not
in
so
many
words
in
the
Text
,
he
rejecteth
it
;
yea
he
saith
Ibid.
let
him
shew
me
the
place
of
Scripture
that
saith
that
Infants
are
guilty
of
Adams
sin
.
Behold
,
Reader
,
how
the
Quakers
new
light
hath
extinguished
the
light
of
sound
reason
,
and
provided
for
their
ancestors
the
Sadducees
a
shield
,
such
as
it
is
,
toward
off
the
argument
of
our
Saviour
,
whereby
He
to
purpose
proved
the
Resurection
from
the
dead
;
but
had
Robert
Barclay
been
there
,
he
had
given
him
more
ado
,
by
saying
,
shew
me
the
plain
Scripture
that
sayeth
the
dead
shall
rise
again
:
Moreover
we
say
that
this
followeth
clearly
from
these
words
,
in
whom
all
have
sinned
.
To
this
he
answereth
,
that
it
is
to
be
understood
of
all
that
could
sin
,
i.
e.
actuallie
having
come
to
the
use
of
reason
▪
but
this
answer
hath
in
its
bosom
a
blasphemous
falshood
that
the
righteousness
of
Christ
,
cannot
be
imputed
to
Infants
,
and
therefore
that
they
are
not
saved
by
him
only
,
and
come
to
Heaven
throw
his
Righteousness
,
for
whatever
he
say
for
the
defence
of
this
h●●●nswer
,
doth
of
its
own
accord
tend
to
the
protection
of
this
Blasphemy
;
for
altogether
with
the
like
reason
,
it
might
be
replyed
to
any
pleading
from
this
Chapter
that
the
Justification
and
Salvation
of
Infants
is
to
be
ascribed
to
the
Righteousness
of
Christ
;
that
these
are
only
righteous
for
the
Righteousness
of
Christ
,
who
could
be
righteous
,
i.
e.
After
the
use
of
reason
actually
joyned
themselves
to
that
Righteousness
.
2.
He
may
as
well
say
,
that
these
received
hurt
and
damage
by
the
sin
of
Adam
,
who
could
receive
it
,
i.
e.
actually
join
themselves
to
it
,
for
there
is
alike
reason
for
both
.
His
reason
why
Infants
cannot
sin
is
,
because
they
are
under
no
Law
,
for
the
proof
whereof
,
he
refers
me
to
what
he
has
said
above
,
whither
with
him
I
will
return
,
which
is
num.
4.
where
he
requireth
in
what
Countries
they
use
to
kill
all
the
Children
whose
Fathers
are
put
to
death
for
their
crimes
?
To
which
I
reply
,
1.
That
it
is
enough
to
prove
Children
to
be
under
a
Law
,
that
tho
in
non-age
or
unborn
,
they
undergo
forfeiture
and
deprivation
of
Goods
and
priviledges
,
for
no
evil
of
their
own
,
but
their
Fathers
misdemeanors
only
.
2.
Both
in
divine
and
humane
writing
,
Children
are
recorded
to
have
suffered
dea●h
,
who
had
committed
no
actual
sin
,
and
yet
suffered
the
same
punishment
with
their
Fathers
who
had
actually
sinned
:
In
divine
story
,
the
Sodomites
▪
I
am
sure
were
put
to
death
for
their
crimes
,
all
whose
Children
were
killed
with
them
Gen.
19.
Behold
,
reader
,
how
easily
his
most
perplexing
questions
are
resolved
.
The
like
fell
out
to
the
Children
of
Core
Numb
.
16.
The
Children
of
Achan
Jos.
7.
and
to
the
Canaanitish
Infants
;
the
Children
of
Benjamin
;
the
inhabitants
of
Iabesh-Gilead
:
of
the
like
examples
humane
Histories
are
full
,
of
which
the
reader
may
see
good
store
collected
by
that
excellent
divine
Turret
.
in
vol.
1.
loco
.
9.
Quest
9.
pag.
671.
I
am
sure
there
is
nothing
more
common
than
for
Kings
or
Common-wealths
to
sack
the
Cities
and
Countries
of
Obstinate
rebells
,
and
thus
to
destroy
the
Children
with
the
Fathers
,
and
to
kill
the
hostages
of
Covenant-breakers
,
without
respect
&
regard
to
their
age
,
examples
of
which
see
in
Livie
decade
tertia
.
3.
If
in
any
point
of
Religion
and
Faith
,
the
admirable
depth
of
the
judgm●nt
and
Secret
Counsel
of
God
,
be
to
be
seen
,
certainly
it
is
be
observed
here
;
for
I
am
sure
Mans
luxuriant
reason
,
can
find
so
much
to
object
against
even
the
very
inherent
corruption
of
Man
,
his
miseries
tho
in
non-age
,
and
his
deprivation
of
the
image
of
God
,
as
being
the
effects
or
sure
consequence
of
Adams
eating
of
the
forbidden
fruit
,
as
may
send
the
answerer
to
Pauls
Sanctuarie
Rom.
9.20
.
Who
art
thou
&c.
We
answer
therefore
,
1.
That
Adam
was
a
publick
person
,
standing
and
falling
in
the
Room
of
his
posterity
,
in
whose
name
and
behalf
,
the
Covenant
of
works
was
made
with
him
as
their
representative
,
so
that
his
first
sin
was
not
personal
,
but
the
sin
of
the
whole
Nature
:
To
this
Robert
Barclay
replyeth
num
▪
6.
requiring
Mr.
Brown
to
prove
by
plain
Scriptures
,
that
Adam
ceased
to
be
a
publick
person
after
he
had
committed
his
first
sin
.
Answer
,
he
denyeth
not
,
if
this
be
proved
,
but
that
our
Doctrine
of
Original
sin
will
stand
,
for
so
much
he
here
insinuateth
;
I
therefore
with
the
more
chearfulness
prove
,
that
Adam
did
cease
to
be
a
publick
person
,
which
is
evident
from
this
,
that
he
died
in
that
day
he
did
eat
,
and
therefore
made
the
Covenant
void
and
null
,
now
certainly
no
Man
with
reason
can
say
,
that
a
Man
dead
in
Law
,
as
Adam
was
after
the
breach
of
the
Covenant
by
eating
,
can
in
his
future
actions
be
a
publick
person
,
in
respect
of
the
same
Law
broken
by
eating
;
Therefore
seing
the
day
he
did
eat
,
did
put
a
term
to
this
Covenant
of
Life
(
as
no
man
with
reason
can
deny
it
)
and
a
period
to
this
common
headship
,
for
the
one
of
these
standeth
and
falleth
reciprocallie
with
the
other
;
it
is
clear
and
manifest
to
all
,
that
Adam
after
his
fall
was
no
more
a
publick
person
.
Moreover
the
sin
of
Adam
whereby
we
were
damnified
,
is
still
holden
forth
as
one
,
and
not
as
many
sins
;
as
for
example
Rom.
5.
All
along
in
the
comparison
betwixt
Christ
,
and
Adam
.
Robert
Barclay
replyeth
,
that
we
may
as
well
hence
conclude
;
that
we
are
only
justified
by
the
first
act
of
Christs
obedience
,
and
so
have
nothing
to
do
with
Christs
death
and
sufferings
.
But
by
his
favour
Bonum
oritur
ex
integra
causa
,
Malum
autem
ex
defectu
q●ovis
.
The
Scriptures
every
where
,
and
in
particular
Isa.
53.
throughout
express
a
long
series
of
doings
and
sufferings
agreed
upon
in
the
Covenant
of
Redemption
,
none
of
which
could
be
wanting
for
the
fulfilling
of
the
bargain
and
accomplishment
of
our
Salvation
:
Whereas
on
the
other
hand
,
one
defect
in
Adam
was
enough
to
compleat
(
so
to
speak
)
his
fall
,
and
make
the
breach
of
the
Covenant
,
it
being
an
evil
thing
,
for
the
makeing
of
which
one
defect
is
enough
.
And
thus
his
Gordian
,
and
insoluble
knot
(
for
so
he
accounteth
it
)
is
with
all
easiness
untyed
.
But
we
need
not
insist
on
this
,
seing
he
endeavoureth
to
Shre●d
himself
,
under
the
covert
of
his
accustomed
antiscriptural
dottage
,
calling
for
plain
Scripture
;
that
is
,
That
Adam
was
a
publick
person
before
his
fall
,
in
so
many
Letters
,
and
Syllables
,
knowing
well
that
unless
underproped
with
such
damnable
hypotheses
his
Doctrine
cannot
stand
;
but
he
buyeth
bad
Wares
at
a
full
dear
price
,
for
with
the
same
breath
he
overthroweth
both
his
own
Apology
,
and
Vindication
,
with
whatsoever
beside
he
has
written
in
the
defence
of
his
principles
;
seeing
these
are
not
found
in
the
Scriptures
in
so
many
Letters
,
&
Syllables
:
But
I
again
return
to
his
seventh
number
,
and
in
it
next
he
alleadgeth
Augustin
as
the
Patron
of
his
opinion
,
in
contradiction
to
his
own
Apology
Chap.
4.
Where
he
granted
Augustin
to
be
of
the
same
Opinion
with
his
Adversary
,
acknowledging
that
according
to
the
mind
of
Augustin
,
Infants
even
before
their
birth
are
Guilty
of
Eternal
Death
,
and
the
pains
of
Hell.
Thus
he
either
speaketh
self
contradictions
,
or
would
make
Augustin
to
do
it
.
2.
The
words
of
Augustin
,
from
which
he
would
conclude
this
self
contradiction
are
these
Serm.
7.
Ex
verb.
Apostoli
,
what
do
ye
think
to
say
?
And
whose
eares
can
hear
it
?
Did
they
sin
themselves
?
Where
I
pray
you
did
they
sin
?
When
and
how
did
they
sin
?
They
know
neither
good
nor
evil
.
Shall
they
sin
that
are
under
no
Command
?
Prove
that
Infants
are
sinners
,
prove
what
is
their
Sin
,
is
it
because
they
weep
,
that
they
sin
?
Do
they
Sin
,
because
they
take
pleasure
,
or
repell
trouble
by
motion
,
as
dumb
Animals
?
If
these
motions
be
sin
,
they
become
greater
sinners
in
Baptism
,
for
they
resist
most
vehemently
.
But
I
say
another
thing
.
You
think
they
have
sinned
;
otherwise
they
had
not
dyed
,
but
what
say
ye
of
such
as
die
in
there
Mothers
womb
?
Will
you
say
they
have
sinned
also
?
You
Lye
,
or
are
deceived
.
&c.
Thus
Augustin
in
opposition
to
the
Pelagians
,
who
to
evite
the
force
of
the
arguments
of
the
Orthodox
proving
Original
sin
,
did
assert
,
that
Children
presently
after
their
birth
become
actual
Sinners
.
And
yet
from
this
the
Quaker
will
conclude
that
Augustin
in
these
words
contradicteth
his
own
doctrine
of
Infants
being
guilty
of
Original
Sin
;
of
which
there
is
not
the
least
appearance
,
seing
this
will
be
admirable
Logick
to
inferr
from
Augustin
his
proving
of
Infants
not
to
be
guilty
of
actual
sin
,
therefore
he
denyed
them
to
be
guilty
of
Original
sin
:
Now
what
wou●d
not
these
Men
adventure
to
say
in
the
dark
,
when
they
are
so
audacious
,
as
to
publish
to
the
world
in
print
,
that
Augustin
denyed
Infants
to
be
guilty
of
Original
sin
,
when
his
own
works
do
every
where
,
and
the
World
proclaim
the
contrary
:
yea
and
the
Quaker
himself
also
confessed
it
.
Here
he
alledgeth
that
the
Apostle
no
where
sayeth
that
Children
,
are
under
any
Law
;
which
is
true
,
if
he
understand
it
in
so
many
words
,
which
yet
notwithstanding
may
be
gathered
from
the
13.
and
14.
verses
of
this
Chapter
,
where
the
Apostle
having
said
,
That
there
is
no
Sin
,
where
there
is
no
Law
,
subjoyneth
that
nevertheless
Death
,
(
which
I
have
in
my
former
Section
,
proved
to
be
a
punishment
)
reigned
even
over
these
who
had
not
sinned
after
the
Similitude
of
Adam
:
Which
holdeth
true
of
Children
who
never
sinned
actually
as
Adam
did
.
When
he
seeth
that
it
cannot
be
denyed
,
that
in
this
place
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
of
the
same
meaning
with
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
he
would
have
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
to
repeat
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
making
the
words
to
run
thus
,
In
which
,
or
by
occasion
of
which
,
death
,
all
have
sinned
.
A
Pelagian
exposition
,
makeing
men
sin
by
imitation
only
,
and
the
righteousness
of
Christ
to
be
the
occasion
,
and
patern
only
;
and
not
the
price
of
our
acceptation
,
and
Salvation
.
And
altho
he
say
,
that
this
is
resolved
by
a
serious
consideration
of
the
comparison
between
Christ
and
Adam
,
as
stated
by
him
in
his
Apology
.
This
is
not
to
be
regarded
,
seing
after
an
impartial
search
,
nothing
of
this
resolution
can
be
perceived
:
He
ought
therefore
to
have
shewed
u●
,
how
in
particular
he
had
in
his
Apology
preoccupied
our
argument
,
whereby
they
are
proved
to
be
amongst
the
grossest
of
Socinians
,
who
make
the
death
and
sufferings
of
Christ
an
occasion
,
or
example
only
whereby
to
walk
,
and
so
to
be
saved
:
But
not
at
all
the
procuring
cause
of
Salvation
,
but
Vltra
posse
non
datur
esse
.
But
indeed
this
is
a
fine
way
of
Vindicating
ones
Doctrine
,
to
say
in
opposition
to
their
Adversaries
argument
how
pressing
soever
,
in
the
general
only
,
you
do
not
understand
our
doctrine
aright
,
or
consider
what
we
say
.
And
upon
this
answer
only
erect
his
Triumphal
Arches
,
and
Cry
Victoria
.
4.
Our
Doctrine
is
to
the
conviction
of
all
,
except
of
the
Old
and
New
Pelagians
,
evicted
from
Eph
2
,
3.
and
yet
Rob:
Barclay
(
following
Bellarmin
,
who
played
the
like
audacious
pranks
with
Rom.
4.
whereby
we
evince
against
the
Papists
,
Justification
to
be
by
Faith
)
would
turn
our
weapons
against
our selves
,
and
overthrow
from
this
place
our
Doctrine
of
Original
Sin
,
alledging
that
Mens
evil
walking
,
is
the
cause
why
they
are
counted
the
children
of
Wrath
:
But
if
the
Apostle
had
so
meaned
,
in
all
likelyhood
,
he
should
not
have
spoken
so
generally
as
he
did
;
but
had
made
some
Intimation
,
that
Children
were
excepted
,
which
he
neither
here
,
nor
any
where
else
doeth
▪
2.
This
Phrase
by
Nature
,
is
still
taken
in
Scripture
,
for
,
so
soon
as
a
thing
hath
a
beeing
,
or
for
its
very
rising
,
or
Original
:
which
these
Scriptures
confirm
.
Rom.
2.27
.
and
11
,
24.
Gal
,
2.5
.
and
4.8
.
1
Cor.
15.44
,
46.
Hence
we
thus
with
Calvin
,
in
opposition
to
the
Pelagians
,
on
the
place
reason
What
is
naturally
in
every
one
,
is
in
them
from
their
very
Original
;
and
therefore
if
all
be
the
Children
of
Wrath
,
or
〈◊〉
to
wrath
by
Nature
▪
they
are
so
〈◊〉
their
very
Original
.
These
Scriptures
,
and
this
Argument
of
Calvin
used
by
his
Adversary
Robert
Barclay
in
his
Vind●
▪
Is
so
far
from
attempting
to
answer
;
that
he
maketh
not
the
least
mention
thereof
.
From
which
one
Omission
,
though
there
were
no
more
,
any
may
easily
see
,
that
his
book
deserveth
nothing
less
than
the
name
of
a
Vindica●tion
.
3.
We
add
as
a
good
secondary
Confirmation
,
that
the
primitive
Ch●rch
used
still
this
place
to
prove
the
same
Doctrine
,
which
we
hold
of
Original
sin
,
in
opposition
to
the
Pelagians
,
denying
it
;
and
in
particular
Augustin
de
Fide
ad
Petram
diaconum
Cap.
26.
who
sayeth
firmissime
tene
,
hold
most
constantly
,
and
without
so
much
a●
once
wavering
,
that
every
one
who
is
conceived
by
the
conjunction
of
man
and
woman
,
is
born
with
Original
sin
,
under
the
power
of
ungodliness
,
subject
to
death
▪
(
which
he
explaineth
of
eternal
,
as
well
as
bodily
death
,
Ibid
)
and
upon
the
same
very
account
a
Child
of
wrath
,
concerning
which
the
Apostle
saith
,
and
we
were
by
nature
the
Children
of
wrath
.
And
the
like
Doctrine
,
did
Fulgentius
,
and
fourteen
bishops
with
him
assert
,
as
also
Theodoretus
,
Primasius
and
Haimo
on
the
place
,
taking
by
nature
&c.
to
import
all
carnally
born
,
and
partaking
of
the
nature
of
Adam
,
and
so
to
be
verified
of
all
brought
forth
by
the
conjunction
of
man
and
woman
.
To
this
argument
drawn
from
Orthodox
antiquity
,
Rob.
〈◊〉
Vind.
Sect.
2.
N
5.
replyeth
,
what
then
▪
●oth
that
render
our
doctrine
null
?
Answer
,
Not
indeed
to
a
Pelagian
;
which
every
where
,
and
in
special
here
by
his
open
Patrociny
of
this
Here●y
,
he
fully
demonstrateth
himself
to
be
,
notw●thstanding
that
at
other
times
he
would
fain
deny
himself
to
be
one
,
studying
to
evite
the
name
,
tho
he
hug
their
●lasphemy
.
Their
answer
to
our
Argument
drawn
from
Psal.
51.5
.
I
was
shapen
in
iniquity
&c.
Which
by
all
the
Orthodox
,
both
primitive
writers
,
as
Augustin
passim
,
and
the
Reformers
,
as
Luther
,
in
his
Confession
is
understood
of
Original
sin
,
is
most
strange
,
viz
That
David
speaketh
of
the
sin
of
his
Mother
,
and
not
of
his
own
.
To
which
it
is
replyed
that
thus
the
marriage
duty
shall
de
condemned
.
To
this
Rob.
Barclay
,
Vind:
Sect
5
N
7.
returneth
a
denyal
of
the
inference
;
which
yet
is
clear
;
seing
wherever
in
all
the
Scriptures
,
any
did
bewail
the
sins
of
their
progenitors
,
they
still
specified
and
pointed
at
the
sin
in
particular
,
as
Neh.
9.
with
many
other
places
;
but
here
if
any
particular
fact
be
specified
,
it
must
needs
be
that
of
the
Marriage
duty
,
therefore
the
inference
holdeth
good
,
&
here
I
cannot
but
take
notice
of
one
of
his
pungent
answers
,
or
rather
questions
(
if
ye
will
)
Which
he
proposeth
ubi
modo
in
these
words
,
And
I
desire
yet
to
be
informed
of
him
in
what
Scripture
he
reads
of
Original
sin
,
and
whether
,
if
the
Scripture
be
the
only
Rule
,
he
cannot
find
words
fit
enough
to
express
his
Faith
?
or
must
he
shift
for
them
else
where
?
Thus
he
,
but
in
Lieu
of
these
,
I
return
him
another
question
,
and
desire
to
be
informed
of
him
,
whether
or
not
he
readeth
of
Actual
sin
,
or
findeth
this
in
so
many
words
?
Behold
then
Reader
▪
the
desperate
tendency
of
Quakerism
,
which
is
to
make
men
beleive
that
there
is
no
sin
at
a●
m●ntioned
in
the
Scriptures
,
and
therefore
,
not
at
all
prohibited
:
For
seing
on
the
account
that
the
phrase
Original
sin
,
is
not
found
in
Scriptures
,
he
denyeth
our
Doctrine
how
clear
so
ever
it
be
proved
,
by
Scriptural
deductions
:
he
giveth
good
ground
to
another
▪
for
inferring
ad
hominem
,
that
there
is
not
such
a
thing
as
Actual
sin
,
seing
the
phrase
Actual
sin
,
is
no
where
in
Scripture
to
be
●ound
,
more
than
that
phrase
Original
sin
.
T●e
same
Truth
may
be
yet
further
demonstrated
by
several
other
pregnant
arguments
.
As
first
,
Infants
for
the
sin
of
Adam
,
are
deprived
of
the
Image
of
God
therefore
there
is
no
reason
to
deny
,
that
they
can
be
accounted
guilty
of
his
sin
.
The
Antecedent
is
denyed
by
none
of
our
present
Adversaries
.
The
Consequence
is
also
firm
,
for
its
a
punishment
,
yea
,
the
greatest
of
punishments
,
equal
with
,
if
not
greater
than
the
torments
of
hell
,
to
be
deprived
of
the
Image
of
God
,
and
therefore
of
his
comfortable
presence
,
Communion
,
Love
,
and
Favour
.
2.
The
Scripture
is
ignorant
of
any
persons
that
go
to
Heaven
,
except
these
that
were
guilty
persons
,
these
whose
sin
Christ
did
bear
:
Er
:
Children
who
have
never
committed
Actual
sin
,
are
guilty
before
God.
The
Consequence
is
beyond
all
●xceptions
.
Th●
Antecedent
also
remaineth
firm
,
until
our
Ad●ersaries
adduce
some
place
of
Scripture
,
shewing
that
some
persons
who
never
were
guilty
go
to
Heaven
,
or
are
saved
without
the
merits
of
Christ
.
Moreover
,
it
is
clear
from
the
whole
tenor
of
the
Scriptures
,
that
none
are
saved
but
sinners
;
which
was
Christs
errand
to
the
Earth
;
〈◊〉
the
Scripture
no
where
maketh
any
distinction
,
betwixt
guilty
persons
,
and
sinners
:
and
no
where
sayeth
,
that
any
are
saved
,
but
these
whose
sins
Ch●ist
did
bear
,
and
one
would
in
reason
think
,
that
this
can
least
of
all
men
,
be
denyed
by
our
Adversaries
,
who
assert
that
Christ
died
for
all
men
without
exception
:
Therefore
if
Infants
be
not
guilty
,
there
is
no
reason
to
say
,
that
Christ
●ied
for
them
,
or
did
bear
their
sins
,
therefore
we
with
all
reason
enquire
,
which
our
Adversaries
according
to
their
principles
can
never
be
able
to
answer
,
how
Infants
,
if
not
guilty
come
to
heaven
,
without
the
Death
,
and
Merits
of
Christ
?
They
are
altogether
void
of
reason
,
while
they
with
Rob:
Barcl
.
for
want
of
a
better
answer
enquire
,
How
these
whom
we
account
Elect
Infants
come
to
Heaven
?
Seing
our
reply
is
at
hand
,
viz:
that
they
are
acquited
before
God
,
by
the
imputed
righteousness
of
Christ
.
3.
Certain
it
is
from
the
whole
tenor
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
in
special
Rev
▪
22.15
.
That
these
who
in
the
sight
of
God
are
dog●
,
are
guilty
persons
,
and
to
be
excluded
from
Heaven
,
and
therefore
to
be
thrust
into
Hell
,
but
whole
Nations
without
any
exception
are
such
.
Matth.
15.26
.
Therefore
Infants
being
a
part
of
these
Nations
,
deserve
to
be
excluded
from
Heaven
,
and
sent
to
Hell.
Add
to
this
,
that
some
Children
are
said
by
the
Apostle
,
1
Cor.
7.14
.
To
be
altogether
destitut
of
Holiness
,
which
persons
,
Heb.
12.14
.
So
long
as
they
are
so
,
cannot
see
God.
Some
of
the
Fathers
in
order
to
prove
the
Guilt
of
Infants
,
flowing
from
Adams
transgression
,
made
use
of
Gen.
17.14
.
The
man-child
that
is
uncircumcised
,
shall
be
cut
off
.
This
Deduction
of
some
of
the
Ancients
Mr:
Broun
mentioneth
pag
132.
But
expresly
telling
,
that
he
will
not
urge
it
,
but
inferreth
notwithstanding
from
this
place
,
that
Children
may
be
in
some
sense
capable
of
breach
of
Covenant
;
and
therefore
under
a
Law
,
desiring
his
Adversary
to
chew
his
cud
upon
this
inference
,
which
if
true
,
overthroweth
all
this
Socinian
Doctrine
anent
Original
sin
,
which
still
presupposeth
,
that
Children
are
under
no
Law.
For
reply
to
which
Rob:
Barcl
.
Vind
▪
pag
▪
62.
introduceth
Mr.
Broun
as
if
he
had
willed
him
,
to
chew
his
●ud
on
this
first
deduction
,
viz.
that
,
of
some
of
the
Fathers
;
passing
by
the
second
,
viz
Mr.
Broun's
own
inference
,
without
so
much
as
mentioning
thereof
;
whereby
he
declareth
that
it
hath
broken
his
Jaws
,
or
at
best
,
is
not
yet
digested
.
4
,
None
can
enter
into
the
Kingdom
of
Heaven
except
they
be
born
again
.
Ioh.
3.7
.
But
surely
this
new-birth
,
or
to
be
born
again
,
is
the
gift
of
God
,
and
a
priviledge
which
he
may
withhold
from
whom
he
will
,
and
therefore
without
prejudice
to
his
justice
may
exclude
whosoever
hath
it
not
,
from
the
Kingdom
of
Heaven
,
but
none
are
excluded
from
it
,
but
guilty
persons
,
which
I
believe
none
will
deny
,
therefore
Infants
may
well
be
accounted
guilty
persons
.
6.
The
main
Objection
,
and
that
for
any
thing
I
know
,
upon
which
the
bulk
of
all
their
Objections
dependeth
,
against
our
Doctrine
of
Original
sin
▪
the
Socinians
and
Quakers
draw
from
Ezek
18.20
.
The
Son
shall
not
bear
the
Fathers
iniquity
&c.
Hence
they
infer
,
That
no
sin
can
be
imputed
.
To
which
it
is
answered
,
that
this
will
not
follow
seing
the
Lord
is
there
stopping
the
mouth
of
the
wicked
,
but
yet
que●●lous
Iews
,
as
tho
they
had
been
altogether
guiltless
themselves
,
and
punished
for
their
Fathers
transgressions
only
;
To
whom
the
Lord
asserteth
that
they
had
sin
enough
themselves
;
for
which
they
might
be
punished
&
doth
not
at
all
say
,
that
no
sin
can
be
imputed
to
another
,
this
meaning
we
say
,
beside
that
it
is
evident
from
the
Context
,
must
of
necessity
be
admitted
,
otherwise
there
shall
be
a
flat
contradiction
between
this
,
and
many
other
texts
.
As
for
example
the
second
Command
▪
This
text
Mr.
Broun
pag
119.
cleared
,
and
everted
what
the
Quakers
had
said
from
this
place
;
therefore
he
in
his
Vindication
pag
55.
not
being
in
case
to
force
the
tex●
,
to
speak
for
him
again
,
saith
the
words
are
plain
.
The
Son
shall
not
die
for
the
Fathers
iniquity
.
And
therefore
they
must
stand
to
the
overthrow
of
his
Adversaries
Doctrine
.
Such
a
Comb●t●nt
as
this
is
not
fit
for
a
second
essay
.
CHAP.
IV.
Of
GOD.
IN
this
Chapter
,
I
shall
prove
the
Quakers
guilty
of
three
things
,
each
of
which
,
is
enough
to
Unchristian
the
maintainer
thereof
.
1.
That
they
deny
the
holy
Trinity
with
Arrius
and
Sabellius
.
2
That
their
Doctrine
maketh
God
the
Author
of
in
.
3.
That
they
hold
the
Soul
of
Man
to
be
God.
First
,
we
shall
evince
,
that
this
Sect
really
denyeth
the
Trinity
of
persons
in
the
God-head
;
and
is
as
abominable
,
if
not
more
,
as
the
old
Arrians
,
Sabellians
,
Macedonians
,
or
the
latter
Arrians
,
as
the
Socinians
.
And
in
the
first
place
,
we
shall
give
you
the
words
of
George
Fox
,
a
Quaker
of
great
note
,
in
his
●rimer
to
Europe
,
pag
37.
What
is
the
Trinity
in
Unity
?
and
whether
all
these
words
be
●ot
of
mens
Wisdom
and
Teaching
?
Ans.
To
every
particular
Query
&
word
that
is
queried
of
you
here
,
and
what
was
their
first
ground
and
root
,
and
●o
the
light
bring
it
out
,
and
the
fi●st
●uthor
of
●hem
,
and
whether
or
no
all
this
body
hath
not
gotten
up
since
the
Apostacy
,
in
the
transgression
,
where
mens
wisdom
teacheth
words
,
and
the
words
the
Holy
Ghost
teacheth
,
is
foolishness
to
them
.
Whether
or
not
this
is
so
?
Answer
me
,
yea
,
or
no
:
What
are
the
three
Persons
in
the
Trinity
?
How
are
the
three
Persons
,
subsistences
of
the
Diety
?
How
is
the
Trinity
not
the
number
numbering
,
but
the
number
numbered
?
How
is
the
opinion
of
the
Trinity
not
only
a
Church
Tradition
,
but
a
Doctrine
expressed
in
the
Scriptures
?
How
is
the
word
Hypostasis
,
which
you
acknowledge
any
singular
Substance
,
used
Metaleptically
?
or
by
taking
one
thing
for
another
,
for
a
person
.
Heb
,
1.2
.
Since
ye
say
,
a
person
is
a
singular
,
●ational
,
and
compleat
Substance
,
and
differing
from
another
by
an
incommunicable
property
?
Answer
me
this
,
and
all
the
Terms
,
and
Words
,
and
Queries
,
and
things
before
mentioned
.
What
be
the
Wisdom
that
hath
taught
them
,
and
Ground
,
and
Root
they
are
come
from
?
And
whether
or
not
they
have
all
come
up
amongst
Christians
,
since
the
days
of
the
Apostles
?
And
learned
of
the
Heathens
that
knew
not
G●d
,
that
transgressed
the
life
,
that
had
nothing
but
their
own
Wisdom
to
teach
them
,
who
was
taught
by
their
own
Wisdom
,
and
whether
that
is
not
pleasing
to
a
carnal
man
that
knows
not
the
things
of
God
How
are
the
Words
,
Persons
,
Trinity
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
ye
grant
,
are
not
found
in
so
many
Syllables
in
the
Scriptures
,
yet
agree
thereto
?
And
George
Keith
in
his
Quak
:
No
Popery
pag
47.104
.
Sayeth
,
that
,
To
speak
of
Persons
in
the
God-head
,
is
an
uncertain
,
unscriptural
Notion
,
and
a
barbarous
heathnish
Terme
.
The
Doctrine
and
Principles
of
the
Priests
in
Scotland
,
pag
19
,
20.
It
is
a
lie
that
the
Scripture
doth
declare
of
the
three
persons
,
or
of
the
Trinity
.
Add
to
all
this
,
that
in
all
thei●
Treatises
,
there
i●
nothing
found
concerning
the
Holy
Trinity
,
except
enough
of
this
kind
of
Doctrine
,
of
which
we
have
given
the
Reader
a
taste
.
I
will
in
the
second
place
shew
,
that
thi●
Doctrine
is
all
one
,
if
not
worse
,
with
the
Doctrine
of
the
execrable
Arrians
:
For
their
Doctrine
was
,
That
the
Son
is
separated
,
or
divided
from
the
Eternal
,
and
Ineffable
Substance
of
God
the
Father
.
In
opposition●
o
which
,
The
Council
of
Nice
,
sayes
,
chap·
I.
in
their
Symbol
,
That
the
Son
is
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
i.
e.
of
the
same
individual
Substance
with
the
Father
,
Rufin
.
lib.
1.
Now
it
is
to
be
observed
,
whoever
hitherto
contradicted
the
Doctrine
of
this
Nicen
Symbol
,
were
accounted
by
all
Christians
,
Arrians
.
And
upon
this
ground
,
abominated
by
the
whole
Church
Cane
pejus
et
angue
,
as
they
speak
Next
,
I
assert
,
that
whosoever
denyed
that
the
Son
was
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Patri
,
that
is
,
of
the
same
individual
Substance
with
the
Father
,
were
by
all
the
Orthodox
counted
Arrians
,
So
that
in
that
unhappy
Council
of
Ariminum
,
when
the
Arrian
Bishops
had
deceived
some
of
the
simpler
sort
,
through
their
Sophistry
,
and
made
them
through
their
own
simplici●y
and
ignorance
of
the
Greek-tongue
,
to
grant
that
the
Son
was
not
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Patri
,
they
were
judged
to
involve
them
in
the
profession
of
Arrianism
;
which
is
clear
from
Ruf.
Hist.
Eccl.
Lib.
1
Cap.
2●
.
The
Argument
wherewith
they
endeavour
to
prove
,
that
the
Son
was
not
Consubstantial
with
the
Father
,
was
,
that
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
is
not
found
in
Scripture
,
which
appears
from
this
last
cited
Author
.
They
used
also
this
Argument
at
a
Convention
at
Carthage
in
the
time
of
Hunnericus
,
with
such
impudent
clamours
,
that
they
deafned
their
hearers
.
Christianus
Matthias
in
his
Theat.
Hist.
pag
744.
So
the
Reader
may
se●
here
,
that
the
Quakers
have
learned
both
their
Doctrine
and
Proofs
thereof
,
from
the
Arrians
:
They
ought
therefore
to
have
the
Name
,
seing
they
have
the
thing
.
I
will
here
subjoin
the
words
of
a
late
Arrian
,
in
a
Pamphlet
of
his
called
Antith
:
Christ
et
Antichristi
,
which
the
Reader
may
find
inserted
and
refuted
in
the
7
Tom.
of
Zinchius
his
Works
,
which
Words
are
his
20
Antith
.
to
be
found
in
Za●ch
.
Col.
872.
2.
Tim.
1.
Hold
fast
the
Form
of
sound
Words
,
which
thou
hast
learned
of
me
▪
The
Apostle
enjoined
this
to
Timothy
,
and
a●●
t●e
Ministers
of
the
Church
,
to
the
end
that
they
may
flee
strange
Words
and
Phrases
in
speaking
concerning
God
and
the
Mysteries
of
Faith
,
that
they
may
be
content
with
these
,
which
he
himself
used
in
delivering
the
Doctrine
of
Religion
,
these
words
,
Trinity
,
Essence
,
three
persons
●n
one
e●●●nce
:
altho
they
be
neither
used
by
Christ
nor
Paul
,
but
invented
by
the
Councils
and
Fathers
:
yet
say
the
Orthodox
,
they
are
necessarily
to
be
keeped
in
the
Church
;
therefore
let
them
confess
as
the
matter
is
,
that
they
are
not
the
disciples
of
Christ
and
the
Apostles
,
seing
so
rashly
they
strive
against
their
precepts
,
and
the
divine
similitude
,
wherewith
the
Prophets
and
Apostles
did
holily
expresse
the
Mystery
of
the
knowledge
of
God
,
and
Christ
,
being
laid
aside
,
they
study
new
Forms
,
and
in
teaching
the
Church
,
they
have
the
same
oftentimes
in
their
Mouth
,
not
without
vile
Ignominy
bo●h
to
the
doctrine
,
and
Church
of
Christ
.
Behold
now
reader
the
identity
of
the
doctrine
of
Quakers
with
that
of
Arrians
,
from
whom
they
have
learned
it
.
But
some
perhaps
may
object
,
saying
,
that
this
identity
is
only
in
words
,
to
whom
I
answer
,
Either
the
things
impor●ed
by
these
words
and
phrases
,
and
given
by
Christians
Generally
as
the
meaning
thereof
,
and
contained
in
Scripture
or
not
:
now
if
the
first
be
true
,
then
to
stir
up
strife
about
these
words
,
proves
only
the
raisers
thereof
ridiculous
.
But
2.
Supposing
that
the
thing●
themselves
,
which
Christians
understand
by
these
words
,
or
phrases
are
holden
forth
in
Scripture
,
then
to
deny
that
we
may
use
them
,
is
founded
on
this
Hypothesis
viz.
that
in
Explication
of
Scriptures
or
disputs
about
the
meaning
the●eof
it
is
impious
,
and
unlawful
to
use
any
words
or
phrases
except
they
be
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
in
the
same
Letters
and
syllables
in
Scripture
,
tho
we
be
never
so
sure
,
that
as
to
the
sense
and
meaning
thereof
,
they
be
found
in
the
Scrip●ures
,
but
this
Hypothesis
,
if
true
,
overthroweth
all
Scripture
consequences
,
interpretation
of
Scripture
,
blasts
the
hope
of
ever
getting
Hereticks
refuted
,
which
none
will
deny
except
●n
Arrian
,
or
the
like
Hereticks
,
and
while
these
deny
it
they
only
oppose
their
own
practice
to
their
own
opinion
,
seeing
they
themselves
as
other
d●sputant●
,
endeavour
to
draw
Consequen●es
from
Scripture
,
and
paraphrase
upon
it
to
make
it
peak
for
themselves
:
Now
that
this
absurd
and
blasphemous
consequence
sticks
fast
to
this
their
Hypothesis
,
appears
from
no
few
places
of
Scripture
,
and
among
others
Math.
22.31
,
32.
For
if
our
Saviour
had
stuck
to
the
meer
Letters
and
Syllabl●s
of
Exod.
3.6
.
I
am
the
God
of
Abraham
,
&c.
without
deduction
of
a
consequence
from
them
,
and
so
an
exposition
of
them
,
he
should
never
from
these
words
have
evinced
against
the
Sa●ducees
,
the
Resurrection
of
the
dead
.
But
I
need
not
stay
longer
to
evince
this
,
for
certain
it
is
,
and
already
proved
,
not
only
from
the
Quakers
obstinate
denyall
of
a
free
and
positive
Con●ession
of
their
Faith
,
anent
this
matter
,
but
also
from
their
useing
of
the
same
weapons
with
which
the
Arrians
attempted
the
subversion
of
this
trulie
Catholick
Doctrine
,
as
also
sufficiently
by
the
express
words
of
Fox
and
these
of
the
Principles
of
the
Priests
;
but
this
Arrian
Self Contradicting
shift
they
are
forced
●o
us●
,
being
conscious
to
themselves
as
the
Arrians
before
●hem
,
that
their
Doctrine
cannot
be
proof
against
the
firm
and
demonstrative
deductions
,
which
the
Orthodox
bring
from
Scripture
,
with
which
as
so
many
Battering-Rams
they
with
ease
overthrow
this
Antirripitarian
Impietie
.
Therefore
the
other
Branch
of
the
Dilemma
viz.
That
the
sense
of
these
words
,
i.
e.
That
which
all
Christians
understand
,
as
the
Me●ning
thereof
according
to
the
Quakers
,
is
not
in
Scripture
.
And
indeed
this
is
the
Truth
:
And
so
the
Quakers
are
Arrians
,
the
evicting
of
which
is
the
intent
of
this
present
discourse
.
But
yet
farther
that
this
is
Truth
,
viz.
That
the
Quakers
are
Arrians
▪
if
not
worse
,
and
deny
that
fundamental
Doctrine
of
the
persons
of
the
●oly
Trinity
,
and
that
the
Son
of
God
,
and
the
Holy
Ghost
also
are
of
the
same
substance
with
the
Father
,
and
distinct
persons
from
him
,
is
most
evident
from
their
perpetual
hellish
raisings
at
the
Doctrine
of
the
Holy
Trinitie
,
calling
it
an
Abominable
and
stinking
Doctrine
,
as
these
that
heard
them
told
me
,
and
when
they
were
reproved
,
their
reply
was
,
thou
knowest
not
the
Truth
.
Again
they
demonstrate
to
the
world
,
that
they
are
the
Frye
of
Arrius
,
while
they
reject
the
Common
Translation
and
Exposition
of
Heb.
1.
●
.
Admitted
by
all
except
the
Arrians
and
their
Brethren
:
For
if
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
ought
not
to
be
rendred
Person
or
Subsistence
,
as
all
the
Lexicographers
,
and
in
particular
Scapula
,
Pasor
,
Scrivelius
upon
the
word
,
and
all
the
Interpreters
both
ancient
(
as
Pareus
,
in
locum
sheweth
,
and
modern
,
Dutch
Divines
,
and
English
Translation
render
it
)
but
,
Substance
(
for
certainly
thus
it
must
be
rendred
,
●f
the
word
Person
,
or
Subsistence
be
rejected
)
then
it
shall
irresisti●ly
follow
that
the
Father
and
the
Son
are
divided
in
substance
,
which
was
the
Doctrine
of
Arrius
,
both
in
Ma●ter
and
Term●
;
hence
it
is
clear●r
than
day-light
,
that
these
men
are
his
Disciples
,
yea
it
is
to
be
observed
that
if
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
in
this
place
ought
to
be
rendered
Subsistentia
or
Persona
,
then
if
a
man
believe
the
Scriptures
,
and
that
words
are
the
true
Symbols
of
things
,
it
is
not
possible
that
he
be
in
Judgment
an
Arrian
:
A●
contrariwise
if
a
Man
believe
,
that
the
word
ought
to
●e
rendered
Substance
,
presupposing
the
Truth
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
that
words
are
the
true
Idea's
of
things
,
he
cannot
but
be
an
Arrian
.
Hence
that
for
named
Arrian
Antithesi
4
ta
apud
Zanchium
,
pag
854
of
his
forecited
book
,
sayes
He●
,
1.
Christ
is
the
splendor
of
the
Glorie
of
God
,
and
figure
of
His
Substance
,
Christ
is
the
invisible
God
Himself
,
says
the
Church
of
Rome
:
For
this
Arrian
still
calleth
all
the
oppose●s
of
Arrianism
,
members
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
as
the
Quakers
do
now
.
But
it
may
be
here
objected
,
that
several
very
Orthodox
Writers
have
in
this
place
,
translated
●he
Greek
Word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
by
that
of
Substantia
;
to
which
I
answer
,
that
all
the
Orthodox
,
both
Ancient
and
Modern
while
they
thus
spake
,
did
take
the
word
Substantia
,
in
the
sense
that
both
they
,
and
we
do
the
word
Persona
or
Subsistentia
.
This
our
Ass●rtion
may
be
most
evident
to
any
,
though
but
a
little
acquainted
with
the
ancient
and
Modern
Orthodox
(
i.
e.
the
opposers
of
Arrians
and
Socinians
)
writers
.
For
Augustin
who
in
several
places
,
and
in
particular
lib.
5.
and
7.
De
Trinitate
ascribeth
to
God
three
Substances
,
or
three
Subsistences
indifferently
,
yet
notwithstanding
elswhere
,
carefully
distinguisheth
them
▪
and
in
particular
;
de
fide
ad
Petrum
Diaconum
●ap
.
1.
where
he
sayeth
,
for
if
,
as
the
substance
of
the
Father
and
the
Son
is
one
,
so
also
they
were
〈◊〉
one
person
,
then
there
should
be
nothing
a●
all
which
truly
could
be
called
a
Trinitie
.
Hence
we
se●
that
this
word
Substantia
did
bea●
a
twofold
Signification
▪
in
the
first
of
which
it
may
be
well
put
into
the
re●t
as
Equivalent
with
,
or
the
Synonymum
of
the
word
Persona
without
the
least
shadow
of
prejudice
to
our
Doctrine
;
it
were
easie
to
shew
the
like
ou●
o●
Hilarius
,
and
others
of
the
Antients
.
I
shall
content
my self
to
set
down
the
words
of
Photius
Patriarch
of
Constantinople
in
his
Bibliotheca
Col.
299.
Giving
his
Judgment
concerning
a
book
of
Pierius
an
ancient
Pastor
,
saying
,
as
touching
the
Father
,
and
the
Son
he
believeth
piously
,
except
that
he
sayeth
that
they
are
two
Substances
,
and
as
many
Natures
,
howbeit
not
so
as
he
adhereth
to
Arrius
;
for
as
may
be
gathered
from
what
goes
before
and
followeth
,
he
useth
the
word
,
Substantia
,
for
,
or
in
the
same
signification
with
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
persona
:
See
the
same
Author
Col.
783
,
De
Libris
Ephremi
Pariarchae
Theopolitani
,
where
he
confirmeth
at
large
this
our
assertion
.
Now
observe
,
serious
Reader
,
of
how
great
a
consequence
in
the
Judgement
of
those
who
are
in
this
great
point
most
Orthodox
,
the
right
or
wrong
use
of
these
words
,
about
which
we
now
treat
,
was
esteemed
,
and
also
that
they
took
them
in
the
same
sense
,
for
which
we
now
plead
.
But
I
forbear
to
add
more
out
of
the
an●ients
.
For
Calvin
Inst.
lib.
1.
cap.
13.
Sect.
2.
affirmeth
this
our
proposition
of
all
the
Ancient
Orthodox
without
exception
,
and
Socinus
ingenuously
confesseth
it
.
Of
the
Modern
writers
,
I
affirm
the
same
,
as
is
clear
from
Calvin
ibid.
and
Tremellius
in
His
version
of
the
Text
out
of
the
Syriak
,
Pome●ranus
on
the
place
and
others
.
It
is
clear
then
th●●
we
have
both
name
and
thing
in
Scripture
,
and
indeed
this
Text
doth
so
clearly
hold
forth
this
trulie
Catholick
Doctrine
,
that
George
Keith
is
forced
to
discover
that
which
he
by
all
means
endeavoureth
to
palliat
:
For
Truth
Defended
p.
76.79
.
He
sayeth
that
this
Text
is
to
be
understood
speaking
of
Christ
as
Man
only
.
Now
I
am
sure
,
if
he
could
make
out
this
,
he
should
do
a
piece
of
non
such
service
unto
the
Arrians
and
Socinians
,
for
this
is
one
of
the
Texts
that
they
with
greatest
Care
endeavour
to
pervert
,
and
wrest
,
and
the
Orthodox
to
vindicate
,
inferring
alwayes
from
it
the
Divinity
of
Christ
;
but
this
he
shall
never
be
able
to
make
out
,
for
there
is
nothing
more
clear
than
that
the
whole
Context
and
Scope
of
the
Apostle
doth
evince
,
that
this
place
speaketh
of
Christ
as
God
;
and
again
who
d●re
say
,
except
the
Arrians
and
Socinians
,
with
George
Keith
,
that
Christ
as
Man
can
be
called
the
Brightness
of
the
Fathers
Glory
,
or
the
express
Image
,
or
Character
of
the
Father
:
Man
indeed
was
made
according
to
the
Image
of
God
,
but
certain
it
is
,
that
no
Creature
in
Scripture
is
called
the
Image
of
the
Father
,
hence
when
Christ
Col:
1.15
.
Is
called
the
Image
of
the
invisible
God
;
Divines
take
the
the
word
(
GOD
)
for
the
person
of
the
Father
,
neither
at
all
can
it
be
otherwise
understood
,
for
Christ
is
there
called
the
first
born
of
every
Creature
,
and
he
by
whom
all
things
were
Created
,
and
Consist
:
Hence
Christ
must
be
called
the
Image
of
the
invisible
God
according
to
his
God-head
,
and
by
●
good
Consequence
by
(
God
)
must
be
understood
the
Person
of
the
Father
as
a
distinct
Subs●st●nc●
from
that
of
the
Son.
From
all
which
I
conclude
,
that
so
firm
is
the
Truth
of
our
Doctrine
,
that
the
very
things
that
seem
to
infringe
and
weaken
it
,
resolve
only
into
a
fair
Occasion
of
,
and
making
way
for
its
clearer
Evidence
and
stronger
Corroboration
.
Add
to
all
this
,
that
the
primitive
Church
carefully
retained
these
Words
,
and
Phrases
,
as
either
being
in
Scripture
,
in
Terminis
,
or
bottomed
thereon
,
and
as
being
the
true
Symbols
of
these
Divine
Things
,
whereby
the
Church
might
most
fitly
express
her
mind
,
and
repel
the
Sophistry
of
Hereticks
,
both
before
,
but
esp●cially
after
the
rise
of
the
Arrian
Heresie
:
H●nce
Iustin
Martyr
hath
a
book
intituled
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
and
describes
a
Person
of
the
Holy
●rinit●
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
,
&c.
And
Damas●●●e
Orth.
fide
,
and
others
follow
him
in
this
Description
.
These
and
the
like
Phrases
are
generally
found
in
the
works
of
the
Fathers
,
as
Irenaeus
,
Tertullian
,
and
others
before
the
rise
of
Arrianism
,
but
especially
after
it
,
as
Augustin
,
Athanasius
,
Hilarius
,
Cyrillus
Alexandrinus
,
Eusebius
,
Rufinus
,
Sozomenes
,
and
many
others
,
divers
of
which
,
as
Augustin
,
&
Athanasius
,
hath
books
with
Titles
expresly
concerning
the
Holy
Trinity
:
But
as
I
sa●d
before
,
after
the
rise
of
the
Arrian
and
Sabellian
Heresies
,
the
Church
with
greater
Care
and
Acuracy
,
distinguished
the
words
,
Substance
,
and
Subsistence
,
as
he
that
pleases
may
see
in
Ruf.
l.
i.
Cap.
29
and
in
the
History
of
Sozomenes
,
writing
of
the
Council
of
Alexandria
.
Notable
also
to
th●●
purpose
,
and
never
to
be
forgotten
are
the
words
of
Athanasius
,
who
in
his
Symbol
thus
speaketh
,
Whosoever
will
be
saved
;
before
all
thing●
,
it
is
necessary
,
that
he
hold
the
Catholick
Faith
,
which
Faith
,
except
every
man
keep
wholly
,
and
inviolat
,
without
doubt
he
shall
eternally
p●rish
;
this
truly
is
the
right
Catho●ick
Faith
,
that
we
worship
one
God
in
Trinity
,
and
the
Trinity
in
Vnity
,
without
confounding
the
Persons
,
neither
separating
the
Substance
,
&c.
From
which
Time
,
to
this
day
,
the
Church
hath
Religiously
Observed
these
Words
,
and
Phrases
,
whereby
She
might
express
the
Truth
,
and
distinguish
her self
from
that
Porphyrian
sect
of
the
Arrians
,
(
as
C●●stantin
the
great
called
●hem
)
and
other
Here●ick●
.
By
this
Time.
I
am
confident
that
he
that
will
not
close
his
Eyes
,
may
perceive
that
the
Doctrine
of
Quakers
,
is
all
one
with
that
of
Arrians
,
Macedonians
,
Sabellians
,
which
is
the
purpose
of
this
Discourse
.
But
yet
ex
abundanti
,
I
will
transcrib
a
Passage
or
two
further
,
The
first
of
which
is
in
Truth
Def.
This
compleat
Arrian
,
and
self
contradicter
,
having
said
pag
75.
That
,
It
is
only
the
●●scriptural
Terms
of
Trinity
,
and
Persons
,
which
he
denyeth
,
and
not
the
Mystery
,
pag
77.
He
giveth
himself
the
lie
,
and
palpably
bewrayeth
his
Arrianism
,
in
these
words
.
And
if
Io:
Alexander
●ir
definition
of
a
Person
be
received
,
that
it
is
an
Intelligent
Beeing
,
subsisting
incommunicably
or
distinctly
,
one
from
another
,
I
do
not
see
,
for
my
part
but
that
three
Persons
,
at
this
●ate
;
shall
infer
〈◊〉
Intelligent
Beeings
,
subsisting
incommunicably
,
and
consequently
three
Gods.
Behold
,
Reader
,
the
the
Arrian
dashing
against
the
same
stumbling-stone
,
upon
which
Arrians
,
and
Socinians
have
alwayes
broken
their
necks
.
For
upon
this
very
Account
,
that
it
seemed
to
them
to
infer
three
Gods
,
the
Arrians
and
Sabellians
of
old
,
and
the
Socinians
at
this
day
always
malign
,
and
endeavour
what
they
can
,
to
render
odious
that
most
necessary
Doctrine
of
the
Holy
Trinity
.
With
this
passage
of
George
Keith
,
well
agreeth
what
Hubberthorn
in
his
Reply
to
Sherlock
impiously
belloweh
forth
pag
19.
That
there
is
no
Scripture
for
the
Catholick
Faith
,
and
Trinity
,
and
three
Persons
.
Before
I
passe
this
Matter
,
I
cannot
but
take
Notice
of
the
strange
dealing
of
George
Keith
,
attempting
to
make
Augustin
a
Patroniser
of
his
Arrian
Doctrine
;
For
in
Truths
Def:
Cap
5.
The
Quaker
h●th
these
Words
.
And
indeed
Augustin
in
his
5
and
7
Books
of
the
Trinity
,
not
only
sayeth
,
the
Words
(
three
Persons
)
are
improper
,
but
disputeth
against
them
,
as
I
suppose
.
Io.
Alexander
for
all
his
School
Logick
,
and
Philosophy
shall
hardly
be
able
t●
answer
his
Argument
,
the
substance
of
which
,
〈◊〉
my
best
remembrance
,
is
this
,
The
word
Person
,
either
it
signifieth
somewhat
absolute
and
simple
,
or
relative
;
to
say
the
first
is
absurd
,
otherways
ther●
shall
be
three
absolute
Beeings
,
or
Essence's
in
God
,
which
is
absurd
;
If
somewhat
Relative
,
which
is
referred
or
relative
to
another
,
as
Father
is
relativ●
to
a
Son
(
and
therefore
a
Father
is
Father
of
a●nother
,
and
no
man
is
his
own
Father
)
the●
to
say
,
the
Father
is
a
person
,
is
to
say
,
the
Fathe●
is
the
Person
of
some
other
,
and
so
of
the
rest
,
which
is
absurd
,
to
the
which
Argument
,
not
as
mine
,
but
really
Augustin's
,
I
leave
Joh.
Alexander
to
answer
.
Thus
George
Keith
.
Ans.
It
seemeth
that
the
Intent
of
the
Quaker
is
,
to
fasten
a
false
Contradiction
on
Augustin
;
for
none
ever
used
the
word
Person
,
in
Application
to
the
Holy
Trinity
,
more
frequently
than
Augustin
hath
done
,
as
is
obvious
to
any
,
that
hath
but
a
little
acquaintance
with
his
Works
.
And
de
Trinit.
Lib.
5.
Cap
8.
He
asserteth
that
the
Latine
Fathers
,
yea
,
and
these
of
greatest
Authority
among
them
,
still
used
the
word
Person
,
as
the
most
fit
that
could
be
imagined
,
for
the
expressing
of
this
Holy
Mystery
.
To
whom
he
assenteth
both
in
this
place
,
and
else
where
,
in
the
same
Books
,
Cited
by
George
Keith
.
We
may
hence
see
,
what
the
drift
of
the
Quaker
is
,
even
to
render
both
the
Persons
and
Doctrine
of
the
choicest
Champions
of
Christ
,
odious
and
contemptable
,
by
making
them
speak
self-contradictions
,
and
that
in
these
very
points
,
anent
which
,
if
the
Body
of
the
Christian
World
be
not
grosly
deceived
,
they
were
of
all
men
,
most
Orthodox
.
2.
This
same
Father
,
de
Doctrina
Christi
.
Lib
1.
Cap
5.
Alledgeth
,
that
the
word
Causa
,
cannot
sufficiently
enough
agree
to
God.
And
Cap
6.
That
the
word
Deus
,
is
not
fit
enough
,
whereby
God
can
be
expressed
.
Sure
I
am
,
that
in
both
these
Books
,
mentioned
by
the
Quaker
,
he
saith
nothing
whereby
we
may
conclude
,
that
he
is
more
disliking
the
word
Person
,
than
the
word
Causa
,
or
Deus
.
But
shall
I
think
,
that
George
Keith
judgeth
,
that
according
to
the
mind
of
Augustin
,
God
is
not
the
Creator
,
or
first
cause
of
all
things
?
And
that
we
sin
in
expressing
him
by
the
Name
of
God
?
I
do
not
think
that
the
Quaker
will
assent
to
this
,
and
yet
no
more
Reason
hath
he
to
say
,
that
according
to
Augustin
,
it
is
dangerous
to
say
,
that
there
are
three
Persons
in
the
Trinity
.
For
the
main
Reason
why
he
thinketh
that
there
is
some
inconsistency
in
the
word
(
Person
)
for
the
full
expressing
of
that
inexpressible
Mystery
,
he
giveth
de
Trinit.
Lib
7.
Cap
4
In
these
words
,
When
they
enquire
of
us
,
what
Three
?
or
how
these
Three
shall
be
called
?
we
set
our selves
to
find
some
special
or
general
Name
,
neither
can
we
find
it
,
because
the
supereminency
of
the
Dei●y
exceeds
the
strength
of
our
Eloquence
,
and
God
is
more
truely
Comprehended
by
the
Mind
,
than
expressed
by
the
Tongue
,
and
more
truly
existeth
,
than
comprehended
in
the
Mind
.
This
I
say
,
is
the
Reason
,
why
Augustin
thinketh
the
word
(
Person
)
not
sufficient
enough
,
for
the
Declaration
of
this
incomprehensible
Mystery
:
But
the
same
is
the
Reason
why
,
de
Doctrina
Christ
.
Lib
1.
Cap
5.
He
thinketh
that
the
word
Cause
cannot
agree
to
God
:
Hence
it
is
apparent
,
That
an
Atheist
might
as
well
,
and
with
as
good
ground
alledge
,
that
Augustin
in
the
forecited
places
did
patronize
his
Atheism
,
and
publish
to
the
world
that
God
is
not
the
Supream
cause
of
all
things
,
or
that
there
is
not
a
God.
3.
I
have
with
care
perused
these
Books
of
Augustin
,
but
could
not
at
all
find
this
Argument
which
George
Keith
fathereth
upon
him
:
I
Answer
therefore
the
Argument
not
as
Augustin's
,
but
as
a
sinnowless
Argument
of
George
Keith
,
drawn
from
a
simily
of
natural
things
,
which
hath
little
or
no
proportion
to
that
which
is
Infinit
.
Hence
I
say
,
that
it
can
have
little
or
no
weight
.
But
again
the
Argument
is
false
,
and
Ridiculous
,
on
this
Account
,
that
the
Quakers
make
every
Father
,
the
Person
of
his
Son
,
which
I
am
sure
is
absurd
enough
.
For
as
a
Father
is
the
Father
of
another
,
and
yet
a
distinct
Person
from
another
,
so
God
the
Father
,
is
the
Father
of
God
the
Son
,
and
yet
a
distinct
Person
from
God
the
Son.
Hence
the
similie
●rought
,
not
by
Augustin
,
but
by
the
Quaker
,
for
the
overth●ow
of
the
Truth
,
tendeth
to
the
Illustration
,
and
clearing
thereof
.
From
all
this
Lea●n
how
disingenuous
Dealers
these
men
are
,
that
can
find
no
better
Means
for
the
defence
,
and
propagation
of
their
Doctrine
,
than
to
deceive
the
Simple
,
by
borrowing
the
Names
of
the
Antient
Wort●ies
,
whereby
to
cover
their
blasphemous
Doctrine
.
Thus
their
best
refuge
is
to
broach
Lies
,
in
Hypocrisies
.
2.
I
shall
prove
that
according
to
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
God
is
the
Author
of
sin
,
which
I
thus
Evince
.
God
is
the
Author
of
every
Substance
,
but
according
to
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
Sin
is
a
Substance
.
The
Minor
I
prove
,
Grace
is
a
Substance
,
which
is
their
Common
Doctrine
,
therefore
sin
is
a
Substance
also
.
The
consequence
Rob:
Barclay
Vind:
pag
49.
denyeth
,
which
I
thus
prove
,
the
Antecedent
viz.
that
Grace
is
a
Substance
,
they
endeavour
to
prove
by
these
Reasons
.
First
because
it
is
in
and
by
this
inward
,
and
substantial
Seed
in
their
hearts
,
as
it
cometh
to
receive
nourishment
,
and
to
have
a
Birth
,
and
Geniture
in
them
,
they
come
to
have
these
Spiritual
Senses
raised
,
by
which
they
are
made
capable
of
Tasting
,
Smelling
,
Seeing
,
and
Handling
the
things
of
God.
Thus
reasoned
Robert
Barclay
In
his
Apology
pag
95.
This
is
also
the
Doctrine
of
George
Keith
in
his
Immed
.
Rev.
That
this
Light
,
or
Seed
,
or
Grace
,
is
a
Substance
,
because
it
may
feel
,
hear
&c.
Robert
Barclays
second
Reason
is
,
because
it
subsists
in
the
hearts
of
wicked
men
,
even
while
they
are
in
their
wickedness
.
Now
if
Sin
may
hear
,
feel
,
and
perceive
,
as
well
as
Grace
and
Light
,
and
if
it
may
feel
,
or
perceive
the
things
of
Satan
,
as
really
as
Grace
feels
,
or
perceiveth
the
things
of
God
,
and
if
sin
may
be
in
the.
heart
of
a
real
godly
person
,
then
sin
is
a
Substance
,
according
to
the
Quakers
;
Otherwise
these
Reasons
are
reasonlesse
:
But
the
former
is
true
,
therefore
the
la●ter
.
The
Consequence
of
the
Major
is
most
firm
.
For
sin
in
the
heart
of
one
that
is
truly
godly
,
is
the
same
way
to
be
considered
,
as
Grace
,
and
Light
in
the
heart
of
the
ungodly
in
this
point
.
For
I
judge
this
be
the
Reason
,
why
the
Quakers
Judge
that
this
is
the
Reason
,
that
the
Beeing
of
Grace
in
the
Heart
of
a
wicked
Man
,
while
in
his
wickedness
proveth
it
to
be
a
substance
viz.
Because
it
can
be
where
its
contrary
is
,
and
strive
,
and
wrestle
with
it
,
which
is
as
evident
concerning
sin
in
the
heart
of
a
godly
man
,
as
is
clear
from
Rom.
7.
Gal.
5
,
17
,
and
also
from
Experience
,
which
I
believe
our
Adversaries
themselves
would
hardly
deny
,
seing
they
grant
that
all
Persons
,
that
have
real
Grace
are
not
at
all
times
,
after
Conversion
free
of
sin
,
and
wrestling
with
it
.
Hence
the
Charge
that
they
most
maliciously
lay
to
the
Reformed
Churches
viz.
that
they
make
God
the
Author
of
Sin
,
is
justly
returned
upon
themselves
,
seing
God
is
the
Author
of
every
Substance
.
Which
is
yet
more
clear
from
the
twelfth
Query
,
sent
to
Mr
Iohn
Alexander
viz.
What
is
Original
Sin
?
Whether
it
be
not
the
Devil
?
yea
or
nay
?
For
doth
not
the
Original
signifie
the
Beginning
?
What
did
Christ
come
to
destroy
?
Was
it
not
the
Devil
and
his
Works
?
What
is
more
clear
,
than
that
in
those
Queries
of
the
Quakers
,
God
is
made
the
Author
of
Sin
?
seing
that
unlesse
they
professe
,
and
avow
Manicheism
,
God
created
the
Devil
,
and
this
is
yet
more
clear
,
if
clearer
can
be
,
by
George
Keiths
Defence
of
this
Querie
Truth
defend
:
pag.
177.
Where
he
can
find
no
better
Defence
of
this
blasphemy
,
than
to
call
it
in
effect
a
purposeless
heap
of
words
without
all
scope
,
saying
,
that
the
Devil
may
be
called
sin
,
in
a
certain
sense
by
a
Metonymy
,
as
Christ
is
called
Righteousness
,
or
sin
,
called
the
old
Man
.
And
thus
George
Keith
acteth
like
himself
,
that
is
playeth
the
ridiculous
babler
,
for
pag.
59.
in
Defence
of
that
Query
viz.
If
every
Title
in
the
Bible
be
the
word
of
God
?
he
sayeth
,
that
to
query
a
thing
,
will
not
conclude
,
that
the
questionist
doth
positively
affirm
,
or
deny
what
is
queried
.
The
same
way
he
dealeth
here
with
his
Antagonist
.
For
if
the
Quakers
understood
no
other
thing
,
then
the
Devil
may
get
the
Name
of
sin
,
as
any
cause
may
get
the
name
of
its
effect
:
Then
both
they
,
and
he
in
their
Defence
,
prove
themselves
to
be
pitiful
,
purposeless
wranglers
,
making
a
stur
in
the
World
about
nothing
:
And
of
set
purpose
involving
their
Discourse●
in
such
non●ensical
Nice●ies
,
that
none
shal
know
the
meaning
thereof
:
Hence
we
may
see
,
that
it
is
but
vain
Labour
to
give
any
Answer
to
the
Quakers
.
For
whatever
they
have
said
,
you
cannot
fix
upon
them
,
be
as
clear
as
it
will
;
they
will
in
their
next
Essay
explain
it
to
you
in
a
sense
,
as
opposite
to
that
,
which
in
the
Judgment
of
all
rational
men
,
their
words
carry
;
as
Black
is
opposite
to
White
,
or
Light
to
Darkness
.
For
what
is
more
clear
from
the
Words
of
the
Query
than
that
the
Devil
is
sin
it self
?
seing
I
think
no
Man
,
except
George
Keith
,
will
desire
us
to
believe
that
all
these
Questions
are
given
out
for
needless
amusements
of
the
World
,
importing
only
these
things
;
about
which
there
is
not
the
least
shadow
of
a
question
,
or
doubt
,
for
who
ever
doubted
that
the
Devil
was
the
cause
of
Sin
?
Neither
is
his
abuse
of
Scripture
more
to●lerable
:
seing
the
Apostle
useth
a
figurative
Speech
,
which
in
a
matter
known
,
and
about
which
there
is
no
debate
;
as
the
Matter
was
,
about
which
the
Apostle
speaketh
,
may
contribute
much
to
the
illustration
,
and
clearing
of
the
purpose
:
but
far
otherwise
was
it
,
wheresoever
Christ
,
or
the
Apostles
en●red
int●
any
direct
D●sputation
,
or
reasoning
,
where
they
always
so
spake
,
as
these
with
whom
they
Reasoned
might
have
easily
understood
what
these
Questions
,
and
Reasonings
tended
to
.
In
a
word
he
that
of
set
purpose
involveth
,
and
rendereth
unintelligible
his
Discourse
about
Matters
of
such
moment
,
in
the
Judgment
of
all
Rationals
proveth
himself
either
a
Fool
,
or
a
Knave
:
Therefore
whether
George
Keith
will
,
or
not
,
we
must
do
these
Questionists
right
,
and
believe
that
they
thought
as
they
spake
,
that
is
,
that
the
Devil
is
sin
it self
.
And
therefore
God
is
the
Author
of
sin
.
3.
I
come
now
to
the
third
thing
,
of
which
I
promised
to
prove
the
Quakers
guilty
,
viz.
That
the
Soul
is
God
,
or
as
they
with
the
like
blasphemy
speak
a
part
of
God.
And
first
to
clear
the
way
for
the
Souls
Divinity
,
they
deny
its
Humanity
;
For
Hubberthorn
in
his
reply
to
Mr.
Sherlok
pag.
29.
sayeth
,
there
is
no
Scripture
which
speaketh
of
a
Humane
Soul.
And
again
pag.
31.
to
Mr.
Sherlok
saying
that
God
is
not
a
Spirit
,
as
Angels
,
and
the
Souls
of
men
are
;
he
replyeth
,
saying
this
is
confusion
:
For
Christ
sayeth
,
God
is
a
Spirit
,
and
they
that
worship
him
;
must
worship
him
in
Spirit
,
and
Truth
.
And
there
thou
art
raced
without
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
.
And
pag.
30.
in
opposition
to
Mr.
Sherlock
,
who
had
accused
the
Quakers
of
professing
,
and
blasphemously
boasting
of
their
Equality
with
God
,
he
thus
replyeth
▪
Thy
boasting
is
excluded
without
,
in
thy
Generation
.
And
thou
art
excluded
from
the
life
,
and
mind
of
the
Apostle
,
who
said
,
Let
the
same
Mind
be
in
you
that
was
also
in
Christ
Jesus
,
who
being
in
the
Form
of
God
,
thought
it
no
Robbery
to
be
equal
with
God.
Phil.
2.5
,
6.
And
this
thou
calleth
blasphemy
,
and
so
thou
hast
shewed
what
Spirit
thou
art
of
;
contrary
to
the
Apostle
,
here
we
have
Blasphemy
in
its
highest
Degree
,
and
an
Equality
with
God
pro●essed
,
and
boasted
of
;
For
the
Effectation
of
which
being
prompted
thereunto
by
the
grand
Enemy
of
Mankind
,
Our
first
Parents
fell
from
their
Excellency
,
and
most
happy
Condition
:
And
except
Christ
had
interposed
,
had
forever
lien
together
,
with
all
their
Posterity
into
that
whirle
pool
,
and
gulf
of
Incomprehensible
Misery
,
only
for
the
desire
of
aspiring
unto
●his
,
of
which
these
Heaven
dar●ing
blasphemer
▪
boast
themselves
:
so
that
what
the
Poets
feigned
of
the
Gyants
contending
with
the
gods
,
for
an
Equal
Right
to
Heaven
with
them
,
the
Quakers
act
in
Reality
.
But
the
following
discourse
will
evince
,
that
an
Equality
with
God
will
not
please
them
,
except
they
have
also
an
Identity
:
For
George
Fox
the
great
Prophet
,
and
King
of
the
Quakers
in
his
great
Myst.
pag.
90.
In
answer
to
one
,
that
said
there
is
a
kind
of
infinitness
in
the
Soul
,
yet
it
cannot
be
infinitness
in
it self
,
speaketh
thus
,
Is
not
the
Soul
without
beginning
▪
coming
from
God
,
returning
to
God
again
▪
who
hath
it
in
his
hand
,
and
Christ
the
Power
of
God
,
the
Bishop
of
the
Soul
,
which
bringeth
it
up
to
God
,
which
came
out
from
him
?
hath
this
a
beginning
,
or
ending
?
and
is
not
this
infinite
in
it self
?
again
George
Fox
telleth
us
in
the
forecited
book
pag.
29.
that
Magnus
Byne
sayeth
that
the
Soul
is
not
infinite
in
it self
,
but
a
Creature
,
and
R.
Baxter
sayeth
it
is
a
Spiritual
Substance
,
wher●unto
George
Fox
Replyeth
,
Consider
what
a
Condition
these
called
Ministers
are
in
:
they
say
that
which
is
a
spiritual
Substance
,
is
not
infinit
in
it self
,
but
a
Creature
:
that
which
came
out
of
the
Creator
,
and
is
in
the
Hand
of
the
Creator
,
which
bringeth
it
up
unto
the
Creator
again
,
that
is
infinite
in
it self
.
Again
Great
Myst.
p.
100.
The
Quakers
are
accused
for
saying
,
there
is
no
Scripture
that
speaketh
of
a
Humane
Soul
:
And
for
affirming
that
the
Soul
is
taken
up
unto
God
;
Hereunto
George
Fox
thus
answereth
,
God
breathed
into
Man
the
Breath
of
Life
,
and
he
became
a
Living
Soul.
And
is
not
this
that
which
cometh
out
from
God
?
is
in
Gods
hand
?
part
of
God
?
from
God
?
and
to
God
again
?
from
these
passages
it
is
most
evident
,
that
both
the
Soul
of
man
;
yea
and
the
Devils
themselves
(
which
I
tremble
to
think
)
must
be
God
over
all
;
Seing
according
to
these
monsters
of
men
,
that
which
is
a
spiritual
Substance
,
is
infinit
of
it self
,
and
not
a
Creature
,
and
therefore
God
himself
:
For
none
will
deny
that
both
the
Souls
of
men
,
and
the
Devils
themselves
are
spiritual
substances
.
Hence
it
will
follow
,
that
God
,
or
a
part
of
God
(
as
they
most
blasphemously
speak
)
committeth
sin
,
which
confirmeth
that
which
we
said
before
viz.
that
according
to
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
God
is
the
Author
of
sin
.
From
this
Monstruous
Doctrine
it
also
followeth
that
God
,
or
a
part
of
God
is
condemned
,
and
is
,
and
shall
be
tormented
in
Hell
for
ever
.
It
followeth
also
from
this
Doctrine
,
that
God
is
divided
in
parts
,
and
that
one
part
of
him
is
Bishop
,
and
Ruler
over
another
.
These
and
a
thousand
other
such
hellish
Blasphemies
follow
upon
this
Doctrine
,
in
which
it
is
needless
to
insist
.
For
as
Calvin
said
,
Fatuitas
dogmatis
me
securum
reddit
.
The
very
Poison
it self
being
so
black
,
and
hellish
,
at
its
very
first
appearance
carrieth
along
with
it
a
sufficient
Antidot
.
For
we
may
well
Cry
out
with
Photius
Col
403.
of
the
wicked
Maniehean
,
and
Heathnish
●a●er
of
Christ
,
Agapius
,
who
was
the
Quakers
Ancestor
in
this
Blasphemy
,
O
hudge
madness
!
and
indeed
(
if
such
a
sad
matter
did
permit
any
Jesting
)
One
might
readily
phansie
,
that
the
Devil
were
now
doting
through
old
Age
,
for
certainly
he
seemeth
to
be
deprived
of
his
ordinarie
Slight
and
Subtility
,
that
could
find
no
gilding
,
or
Varnishing
,
whereby
to
cover
the
Superlative
Impiety
of
this
Doctrine
:
but
what
he
wanteth
in
Deceit
,
he
hath
requited
in
Strength
,
who
could
thus
Captivat
,
and
Impose
upon
the
Judgement
of
Rational
Animals
,
so
that
they
drunk
down
this
Potion
so
manifestly
pestiferous
.
Several
of
these
passages
were
cited
by
Mr.
Broun
.
The
palpable
abominableness
of
which
,
wholly
rendred
them
incapable
of
any
Defence
,
or
shew
of
any
honest
meaning
:
And
the
manifest
Evidence
thereof
from
the
Quakers
own
Books
,
made
them
altogether
unden●able
:
Therefore
Robert
Barclay
(
as
he
dealeth
with
all
the
rest
)
passeth
them
over
with
Silence
.
And
yet
,
as
if
a
Sport
could
have
diverted
any
serious
Man
;
from
the
abhorrency
of
Quakerism
,
in
the
last
Section
of
his
Vindication
,
he
maketh
himself
ridiculous
,
saying
,
that
Mr.
Hicks
,
who
cited
some
of
these
passages
;
Succumbed
in
a
Disput
against
the
Quakers
,
and
from
this
,
giveth
out
that
Hicks
,
and
such
others
,
are
not
to
be
believed
,
say
what
they
will
of
the
Quakers
,
notwithstanding
that
Robert
Barclay
adventureth
not
to
challenge
either
Mr.
B.
or
Hicks
of
any
particular
miscarriage
,
in
their
particular
Citations
of
the
Quakers
Books
.
This
was
therefore
a
strange
Influence
and
more
admirable
,
than
that
of
the
Remora
upon
a
Ship
,
that
Hicks
his
supposed
failing
had
on
this
multitude
of
blasph●mous
passages
,
that
it
loosed
R
:
Bar
:
and
his
Brethren
,
from
any
Obligation
to
answer
for
them
,
though
they
be
to
be
found
exactly
as
they
are
cited
.
He
here
mentioneth
several
Books
written
by
Quakers
,
as
answers
to
what
Hicks
and
Faldo
hath
said
,
and
among
thers
,
Pen's
Invalidity
of
Faldo's
Vindication
.
In
which
book
Pen
sometimes
proclaimeth
himself
a
Sadducee
,
as
in
the
point
of
Resurrection
:
sometimes
a
Papist
,
as
in
the
point
of
Justification
.
At
other
times
,
more
Antichristian
than
most
of
Pagans
;
Endeavouring
with
might
and
main
,
not
only
to
robb
the
Holy
Scriptures
of
their
Divinity
,
but
also
of
common
Sense
:
Of
which
Doctrine
the
Reader
hath
gotten
a
taste
above
.
And
O
that
it
might
be
the
lot
of
all
the
obstinate
Opposers
of
the
Truths
of
God
,
thus
to
bewray
at
once
,
both
Weakness
,
and
wickedness
,
even
when
they
think
to
appear
like
so
many
Goliahs
for
strength
,
and
to
Justifie
their
Adversaries
Charge
,
even
while
they
attempt
the
removal
thereof
!
as
William
Pen
hath
done
.
This
horrible
Impiety
,
these
men
following
the
Manicheans
,
(
whom
Augustin
de
Civ
:
Dei.
Lib.
7
Cap
2
,
8.
de
Genesi
ad
Lit.
refuteth
both
in
principles
,
and
Probation
)
father
upon
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
viz.
Gen
2
,
7.
where
it
is
said
,
That
God
breathed
into
mans
nostrils
,
the
Breath
of
Life
,
or
Lives
.
On
this
place
also
Ro●
Bar.
Vind
Sect
5
,
par.
1
,
foundeth
,
(
or
at
least
seemeth
to
found
)
his
opinion
of
a
Substantial
Light
,
and
Seed
distinct
from
the
Soul
,
that
remained
with
Adam
after
his
fall
.
But
these
Opinions
though
contrary
to
one
another
,
are
both
contrary
to
the
Truth
:
For
there
is
nothing
either
in
the
Words
,
and
Phrases
,
or
Scope
,
and
Context
that
favoureth
either
of
them
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
doth
not
in
the
least
favour
either
of
them
,
which
according
to
the
consent
of
the
best
Hebreans
,
is
to
be
taken
Metaphorically
,
and
efficiently
,
not
properly
,
sive
instar
Causae
materialis
,
materially
.
Neither
doth
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
help
them
any
more
,
which
according
to
the
mind
of
all
sound
Interpreters
,
as
Pareus
on
the
place
sheweth
,
and
Lexicographers
,
as
Buxtorf
,
Lewsden
,
Bithner
,
Leigh
,
signifieth
only
,
the
rational
Soul
of
man
.
Hence
the
Opinion
of
Rob:
Bar.
is
overthrown
.
Moreover
,
this
word
is
used
Isa.
2.22
.
where
the
holy
Ghost
sayeth
,
that
Mans
breath
is
in
his
nostrils
;
to
the
end
that
he
may
demonstrate
the
frailty
of
man
.
Hence
we
may
conclude
,
that
nothing
of
God
,
or
of
his
Divine
Nature
can
by
the
force
,
or
significancy
of
this
word
be
necessarily
imported
,
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
sometimes
signifieth
Beasts
,
as
well
as
Men
;
All
the
forecited
Authors
understand
by
it
,
the
Soul
of
man
:
And
tell
us
that
these
who
are
no
more
critical
considering
it
is
in
the
plural
number
,
take
Sensitive
,
as
well
as
Rational
,
here
to
be
meaned
.
Others
judge
this
Criticism
to
be
neglected
,
because
that
oftentimes
in
the
Hebrew
a
word
is
Voce
pluralis
,
&
significatu
singularis
Vide
Leigh
Critica
Sacra
pag
72.
The
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
yet
further
confirmeth
,
that
no
other
thing
is
to
be
understood
in
this
place
,
but
the
soul
of
man
.
For
the
Dust
of
the
Earth
formed
by
God
into
the
Body
of
man
,
and
this
breath
of
Life
,
became
a
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
or
a
living
Soul
,
as
also
that
the
Soul
of
man
is
nothing
Divine
properly
so
called
;
Seing
this
word
sometimes
signifieth
the
body
of
man
.
As
Psal.
16.10
.
and
elsewhere
signifieth
any
living
creature
.
Moreover
,
the
scope
of
the
place
,
which
is
to
repeat
more
fully
the
Creation
of
man
,
which
in
the
former
Chapter
was
more
shortly
hinted
at
,
evinceth
that
there
is
nothing
here
to
be
understood
,
but
the
creation
of
the
Soul
,
and
Body
of
man
.
But
we
need
not
insist
to
prove
our
negative
from
this
place
,
seing
this
is
the
only
place
,
on
which
our
Adversaries
build
their
Affirmatives
.
It
is
enough
for
us
,
to
challenge
them
to
bring
forth
the
least
appearance
of
reason
for
them
,
which
as
they
have
not
done
hitherto
,
so
shall
never
be
able
to
do
.
Again
as
they
to
the
horrour
of
all
men
elevat
the
Creature
,
not
only
to
an
equality
,
but
an
Identity
with
the
Creator
,
and
so
make
that
which
is
lesse
than
nothing
all
in
all
,
and
God
over
all
blessed
for
ever
,
so
with
equal
Impiety
they
bring
down
the
glorious
God
,
levelling
him
with
the
dust
,
and
subject
that
most
pure
and
Impassible
beeing
,
to
the
weakest
frailties
of
Mankind
,
Alledging
that
Christ
weeped
as
God
,
and
not
as
man
over
Ierusalem
,
but
that
they
may
want
all
ground
of
Complaint
;
Let
us
hear
themselves
,
who
in
the
principles
of
the
Priests
of
Scotland
pag
33.
say
It
was
asked
of
him
viz.
Henry
Foreside
,
of
a
fore
ordained
number
to
destruction
,
and
for
what
Christ
wept
over
Ierusalem
.
He
answered
,
as
he
was
Human
,
he
mourned
and
his
god-head
decreed
them
to
hell
,
this
is
a
lying
Doctrine
of
the
devil
,
for
after
,
many
of
them
of
Ierusalem
came
to
be
converted
,
as
ye
may
read
in
Acts
2.
And
many
of
the
Priests
came
to
be
obedient
to
the
Faith
,
for
all
being
gone
astray
both
Iews
,
and
Gentiles
,
Rom
2.9
.
concluded
under
sin
,
the
pure
,
the
Eternal
tendered
over
them
;
who
had
stopped
their
ears
,
and
closed
their
eyes
to
that
which
was
pure
of
God
in
them
,
that
they
might
have
come
to
that
which
is
pure
,
and
have
been
gathered
under
Christs
wings
,
Mat.
23
,
37.
Who
is
pure
,
and
so
have
been
converted
,
and
healed
,
and
have
heard
with
their
ears
,
and
seen
with
their
Eyes
.
And
as
for
the
word
(
Humane
)
that
is
not
Scripture
Language
,
it
speaketh
not
that
Language
.
CHAP.
V.
Of
Christ
,
and
of
his
Benefits
.
THE
Quakers
in
words
,
commonly
acknowledge
that
Christ
is
God
and
Man
,
and
account
it
a
wrong
,
when
they
are
accused
of
the
denyal
thereof
:
But
beside
these
two
Natures
they
really
maintain
a
third
,
viz.
a
Spiritual
and
Heavenly
nature
in
Christ
,
which
they
call
the
Heavenly
man
,
Christ
Jesus
,
which
heavenly
man
,
they
say
,
did
exist
before
the
incarnation
of
Christ
Jesus
,
and
assert
,
that
on
the
Flesh
and
Blood
of
this
man
,
the
Church
in
all
Ages
did
feed
.
For
George
Keith
in
his
way
cast
up
,
pag
38
,
93
,
96.
Sayeth
,
Christ
as
Man
,
was
and
is
before
all
,
the
first
and
the
last
,
Id
:
pag
90.
The
Man
Christ
influenceth
all
Men
by
his
life
,
and
is
in
them
;
and
pag
93.
The
word
made
flesh
created
all
things
,
and
the
word
only
is
is
not
properly
the
Christ
.
And
George
Keith
in
that
Book
contendeth
at
large
,
that
Christ
before
his
Incarnation
was
as
properly
the
Christ
as
he
is
now
.
And
in
the
same
book
pag.
94
he
sayeth
Christ
as
man
came
down
from
Heaven
Idem
ibid.
Christs
Flesh
and
Blood
came
down
from
Heaven
.
pag.
94
,
95
,
Thus
Christ
hath
Spiritual
Flesh
and
Blood
,
pag
95.
Of
his
Spiritual
flesh
and
blood
did
the
Saints
of
old
eat
&
drink
.
pag
97.98
.
He
saith
,
The
Man
Christ
is
to
be
understood
prov.
8.23
,
I
was
set
up
from
everlasting
from
the
beginning
,
or
ever
the
earth
was
.
And
Ps.
110.1
,
2
,
3.
and
pag
99
,
100
,
108.
It
was
this
life
of
Christ
as
Man
,
that
was
pressed
as
a
Cart
&c.
Amos
2.13
.
pag
100.108
,
109.
Thus
(
saith
he
)
Apostats
crucifie
to
themselves
again
the
Son
of
God.
Heb.
6.6
.
pag.
100.
Thus
hath
Christ
been
crucified
by
the
wicked
from
the
beginning
.
Ibid.
Christ
the
Heavenly
man
lived
in
Abraham
and
Moses
.
pag
102.
Christ
was
true
,
and
real
Man
before
he
was
born
of
Mary
,
pag
103.
The
word
was
made
flesh
from
the
beginning
and
dwelt
in
us
.
pag
104.
According
to
his
Heavenly
Nature
,
even
as
Man
,
He
(
Christ
)
was
the
son
of
God.
pag.
123.
The
Man
Christ
is
every
where
,
That
is
,
his
Soul
is
extended
into
all
,
in
his
divine
seed
and
body
,
which
is
his
Heavenly
Flesh
and
Blood.
From
all
which
,
beside
other
most
horrid
absurdities
and
blasphemies
which
follow
upon
this
their
Doctrine
,
this
is
a
clear
consequent
,
That
Christ
hath
three
Natures
.
To
this
they
answer
Quak.
Confir
:
p.
33
▪
That
it
will
no
more
follow
from
their
Doctrine
,
that
Christ
hath
three
natures
,
than
it
will
follow
from
ours
,
who
assert
that
Christ
assumed
into
Vnion
with
the
Divine
nature
,
a
Body
,
and
a
Soul.
But
this
answer
is
easily
repelled
,
for
a
Body
&
a
Soul
considered
both
together
make
up
but
one
humane
nature
:
Whereas
according
to
their
Doctrine
,
he
was
Man
before
his
incarnation
,
and
again
man
by
incarnation
,
seing
every
incarnation
bringeth
a
man
to
the
World
:
Which
incarnation
they
have
not
yet
denyed
(
at
least
in
words
)
And
therefore
Christ
hath
two
entire
humane
Natures
,
and
yet
these
strictly
conjoyned
together
in
one
man
.
Which
doctrine
maketh
our
blessed
Lord
a
down-right
Monster
.
2.
The
Quakers
doctrine
,
as
it
rendereth
the
Humanitie
of
Christ
altogether
Monstruous
,
so
it
quite
annihilateth
,
and
destroyeth
his
Divinity
.
For
Christopher
Atkinson
a
known
Quaker
in
a
book
of
his
entituled
The
Sword
of
the
Lord
in
oposition
to
the
sixth
of
the
propositions
(
which
Philip
Nye
,
Thomas
Godwine
,
and
Sidrah
Simson
drew
up
at
the
appointment
of
Cromwel
,
whereby
he
might
regulate
himself
in
the
tolleration
of
Sectaries
)
viz.
Christ
is
God
,
said
,
Hear
Sotish
minds
your
imagined
God
beyond
the
Stars
,
and
your
carnal
Christ
which
ye
would
make
appear
through
your
Heathnish
Philosophy
,
is
utterly
denyed
,
and
testified
against
by
the
light
.
In
these
words
the
God-head
of
Christ
is
so
evidently
denyed
,
ye●
,
and
his
manhood
too
,
that
the
Quakers
are
able
to
put
no
Commentarie
,
or
glosse
upon
them
(
which
is
their
usual
custom
,
whereby
to
varnish
,
and
make
any
thing
speak
what
they
will
)
And
therefore
to
the
Students
of
Aberdeen
who
Quak.
Canvass
.
pag.
82.
Have
objected
this
passage
unto
them
,
they
answer
Quak.
Conf.
pag
36
that
they
cannot
light
upon
Aitkinsons
book
.
But
it
is
not
to
be
believed
that
such
active
,
and
bussie
Spirits
for
the
promotion
of
Quakerisme
,
as
Robert
Barclay
and
George
Keith
are
,
men
of
so
great
acquaintance
;
and
correspondence
with
the
Quakers
in
England
could
not
obtain
the
sight
of
a
book
,
which
certainly
is
frequent
enough
there
.
But
it
mattereth
not
much
what
they
say
,
for
they
stick
not
to
deny
passages
that
are
verbatim
in
their
own
books
.
Of
which
kind
of
dealing
take
one
place
of
many
which
might
easily
be
given
Will
:
Pen
,
Sand
:
Found
:
pag
26
sayeth
,
that
Christ
fulfilled
the
Law
only
as
our
pattern
or
example
.
And
yet
Rea●
:
against
Rail
.
pag
78
counteth
his
adversary
Hicks
a
forger
for
repeating
these
words
,
and
stif●y
denyeth
that
there
is
such
a
passage
there
,
saying
,
I
am
very
certain
that
the
word
(
only
)
was
not
there
.
See
Hicks
Dial.
3.
pag
74
,
75
,
76.
Where
you
shall
find
a
large
bundle
of
the
like
impudent
,
and
inexcusable
lies
.
They
say
also
,
they
can
prove
,
that
Christopher
Aitkinson
was
not
a
Quaker
,
which
they
may
easily
say
;
but
they
ought
to
have
proved
it
,
not
said
it
only
,
otherwise
these
words
serve
only
to
testifie
their
dissatisfaction
,
with
the
ingenuous
plainness
of
Aitkinson
,
in
which
he
unma●keth
,
and
●ayeth
open
to
the
World
,
what
the
rest
of
the
Quakers
involve
in
Clouds
of
strange
and
mysterious
Language
,
equivocal
,
and
hardly
intelligible
terms
;
being
the
only
covert
,
that
they
can
find
under
which
to
shreud
their
abominable
Doctrine
.
Lastly
,
say
they
,
If
he
deny
Christ
〈◊〉
be
Man
,
we
disown
him
,
who
do
say
that
Christ
is
both
God
,
and
M●n
.
This
is
a
good
confession
▪
And
a
man
that
knew
them
not
,
might
easily
thin●
that
we
wronged
them
,
by
charging
them
wit●
the
denyal
of
the
Divinity
of
Christ
.
But
notwithstanding
hereof
,
this
confession
serveth
only
to
prove
these
Men
guilty
,
of
most
wicked
hypocrisie
,
lying
,
and
self
Contradiction
to
put
a
cheat
upon
the
World
,
and
cover
their
abominations
:
For
whosoever
taketh
but
an
overly
veiw
of
the
passages
above
cited
of
George
Keiths
way
cast
up
;
he
may
clearly
see
,
that
if
these
passages
be
true
Doctrine
,
the
greatest
arguments
,
for
establishing
the
Divinity
of
Christ
are
for
ever
gone
.
For
I
appeal
to
the
writings
of
all
who
have
refu●ed
the
Doctrine
of
Arrius
and
Socinus
,
if
prov.
8.23
.
Be
not
brought
as
one
of
the
main
texts
to
prove
the
Eternity
,
and
Divinity
of
Christ
;
as
also
Psal.
110
by
which
Christ
himself
silenced
,
and
for
ever
stopped
the
mouths
of
the
Pharisees
,
who
denyed
his
God-head
,
Matth.
22
,
43
,
44
,
45
,
46.
Neither
is
there
a
greater
argument
,
than
that
by
him
all
things
were
Created
:
And
yet
if
these
forecited
passages
be
true
,
the
denyers
of
Christs
Divinity
have
an
easie
answer
,
that
all
these
things
are
verified
of
Christ
as
man
only
;
And
so
the
greatest
arguments
for
the
Divinitie
of
Christ
fall
to
the
Ground
.
Now
let
any
man
judge
if
the
Quakers
do
not
what
in
them
lye
to
overthrow
the
Divinity
of
Christ
,
seeing
they
endeavour
to
undermine
,
and
destroy
all
the
arguments
by
which
it
is
underpropped
.
Moreover
this
Doctrine
robbeth
God
of
his
incommunicable
attributs
,
in
ascribing
Omnipresence
,
or
Ubiquitie
to
a
Man
.
But
before
I
leave
this
point
,
I
propose
this
dilemma
to
the
Quakers
.
If
all
things
were
created
by
Christ
as
Man
,
then
either
the
Manhood
of
Christ
is
created
or
not
;
if
created
,
then
it
is
created
by
it self
,
than
which
there
is
nothing
more
absurd
;
If
uncreated
,
then
there
is
an
uncreated
man
,
and
a
man
that
is
coeternal
with
God.
Which
Blasphemie
it
s
hardly
able
to
equalize
,
far
lesse
to
outdo
.
From
all
which
it
is
most
evident
,
that
the
Quakers
doe
what
in
them
lyeth
,
to
evert
the
fundamental
Doctrines
and
basis
of
the
Christian
Religion
viz.
the
Godhead
of
Christ
.
And
in
this
they
are
more
wicked
,
than
the
professed
Arrians
,
or
Socinians
,
that
they
add
deep
dissimulation
,
and
hypocrisie
to
their
horrid
impiety
,
whereas
the
Arrians
and
Socinians
more
ingenuous
than
they
,
profess
in
words
what
they
really
believe
.
It
is
also
clear
that
in
stead
of
their
Christ
,
they
embrace
a
meer
chimerical
non
▪
entity
:
seing
there
is
nothing
more
contradictiorie
,
than
that
either
the
Soul
or
the
Body
of
a
man
,
which
is
a
meer
creature
,
can
be
every
where
,
or
from
Eternitie
.
Lastly
observe
that
the
Quakers
put
no
distinction
betwixt
their
Christ
,
and
their
light
within
,
and
that
the
light
within
is
nothing
but
the
smal
dark
Relicts
of
the
Image
of
God
,
or
the
dimm
light
of
nature
,
as
we
have
already
evinced
.
And
so
their
Christ
,
their
God
,
and
all
that
is
dear
unto
them
,
resolve
at
length
into
this
almost
quenched
spunk
,
in
which
,
all
who
have
trusted
,
in
stead
of
finding
the
safe
port
of
Eternal
happiness
,
have
alwayes
met
with
certain
Shipwrack
.
In
favours
of
this
Spiritual
AntiChrist
,
or
Antichristian
figment
,
which
they
account
for
their
Christ
,
they
decry
,
vilifie
,
and
do
what
they
can
to
overthrow
whatever
ought
to
be
precious
and
dear
to
a
Christian
(
for
what
will
they
not
deny
,
seing
they
deny
the
Godhead
of
Christ
)
they
therefore
with
open
mouth
blaspheme
,
and
deny
Jesus
Christ
as
a
person
without
them
,
or
as
any
thing
distinct
from
their
Imaginary
Christ
,
or
light
within
,
of
many
which
we
could
cite
,
take
a
few
passages
for
proof
hereof
;
&
first
Geo
:
Whith
:
Dip.
Pl.
pag
13.
Jesus
Christ
a
person
without
us
,
is
not
Scripture
Language
,
but
the
Anthropomorphits
,
and
Mugletonians
.
And
in
his
Appen
:
to
Reas
▪
against
Rail
:
pag
21.
The
Socinian
telleth
us
of
a
personal
Christ
,
and
that
the
man
Christ
Jesus
our
Lord
hath
in
Heaven
a
place
remote
from
Earth
,
a
humane
body
,
but
doth
he
believe
him
to
be
the
eternal
God
,
while
he
imagineth
him
to
be
a
personal
Christ
,
a
humane
Body
so
Limited
,
and
confined
to
a
remotness
?
And
William
Pen
counterfit
christian
pag
77
▪
78.
Give
me
one
place
,
that
mentioneth
Christ
to
be
a
distinct
person
without
us
,
art
thou
destitute
of
common
Sense
▪
as
to
think
of
proving
the
Quaker
no
christian
,
because
he
denyeth
,
that
Doctrine
not
expressed
in
the
Scripture
?
George
Fox
Great
Myst
:
206
If
there
be
any
other
Christ
,
but
he
that
was
crucified
within
,
he
is
the
false
Christ
,
and
he
that
hath
not
this
Christ
that
was
risen
,
and
crucified
within
,
is
a
reprobate
▪
Though
Devils
and
reprobats
may
make
a
talk
of
him
without
.
And
Great
Myst
:
pag
207
God's
Christ
is
not
distinct
from
his
Saints
▪
nor
his
Body
,
for
he
is
within
them
,
not
distinct
from
their
Spirits
.
Ib.
pag
16.
Such
are
deceived
that
say
,
Christ
is
distinct
from
His
Saints
.
Moreover
the
Quakers
Doctrins
&
Principles
of
the
Priests
in
Scotland
pag
33
in
opposition
to
Mr.
Henry
Foreside
,
who
said
,
that
Christ
mourned
over
Jerusalem
as
He
was
Humane
;
answer
,
as
for
the
Word
(
Humane
)
it
is
not
Scripture
Language
,
it
speaketh
not
that
Language
.
Certainly
by
this
speech
of
these
Quakers
no
other
thing
can
be
understood
,
but
that
Christ
hath
no
Humane
Nature
:
For
though
the
word
(
Humane
)
were
not
found
in
the
Scripture
,
if
the
thing
imported
by
it
be
found
in
Scripture
▪
then
they
must
confesse
themselves
to
have
been
ridiculous
,
and
purposeless
pratlers
,
which
I
believe
they
will
not
do
:
and
therefore
its
evident
that
they
deny
the
Humane
Nature
of
Christ
.
Again
the
Quakers
speak
,
as
contemptibly
of
the
Body
and
blood
of
our
Lord
Jesus
Christ
,
as
if
he
were
the
basest
of
Men
,
as
these
words
of
Isaac
Peningtoun
witnesse
,
can
outward
blood
cleanse
?
We
must
enquire
therefore
,
saith
he
,
whether
it
was
the
blood
of
the
Vail
?
Or
of
that
Spiritual
Man
,
viz.
of
Flesh
,
Blood
,
and
bones
which
took
on
Him
the
Vail
,
or
Humane
Nature
?
And
the
Mystery
of
iniquitie
Lyeth
in
the
Blood
of
Christ
,
sayeth
Edward
Billings
:
And
Hubberthorn
in
his
reply
to
Mr.
Sherlock
who
had
said
,
that
Christ
was
not
capable
of
Faith
and
Repentance
,
saith
,
here
I
charge
thee
to
be
a
lyar
,
and
Slanderer
;
for
he
was
capable
of
Faith
,
and
Repentance
.
What
then
is
clearer
than
that
according
to
these
Mens
Doctrin●
,
the
Spotless
Lamb
of
God
was
really
defiled
with
sin
and
stood
in
need
of
another
Saviour
to
believe
in
?
Moreover
(
as
we
have
already
heard
)
they
still
distinguish
between
the
outward
&
inward
body
of
Christ
,
wickedly
&
absurdly
ascribing
to
their
imaginarie
inward
body
of
Christ
,
all
that
the
Scripture
attributeth
to
the
Blessed
Body
of
Christ
,
that
dyed
at
Ierusalem
,
such
as
sufferings
,
Death
,
Resurrection
,
and
●he
like
,
by
which
distinction
they
render
as
much
as
in
them
lyeth
,
the
passion
,
Death
and
Resurrection
of
our
Lord
Jesus
at
Ierusalem
,
altogether
vain
and
idle
actions
.
And
in
favours
of
this
their
inward
body
,
they
call
the
body
that
our
Lord
took
of
the
Virgin
Mary
,
only
a
garment
:
and
that
it
's
no
constituent
of
Christ
;
and
that
Luke
2.26
.
Where
it
s
said
,
that
it
was
revealed
to
Simeon
,
that
he
should
not
dye
,
till
he
should
see
the
Lord
's
Christ
,
is
to
be
understood
of
a
Spiritual
sight
,
or
of
seeing
the
Christ
within
,
Will
.
Pen.
Rej.
to
Iohn
Faldo
part
2th
:
c.
9.
4.
As
these
men
deny
Christ
himself
,
so
they
deny
consequently
all
the
benefits
purchased
by
him
:
For
they
say
that
Christ
dyed
only
to
be
a
pattern
and
example
to
Believers
;
hence
Will
.
Pen
▪
sandy
found
:
pag.
26
sayeth
,
unless
we
become
doers
of
that
Law
,
which
Christ
came
not
to
destroy
,
but
as
our
example
to
fulfill
,
we
can
never
be
Iustified
before
God
:
Nor
let
any
fancy
that
Christ
hath
so
fulfilled
it
for
them
,
as
to
exclude
their
obedience
from
being
requisite
to
their
acceptance
,
but
only
as
their
pattern
.
Thus
it
is
evident
that
the
Quakers
are
altogether
Socinians
in
their
Judgments
of
the
ends
of
the
death
of
Christ
,
and
so
joyn
themselves
closs
with
them
,
and
Papists
in
the
Doctrine
of
Justification
;
yea
,
Rob.
Bar.
denieth
not
but
that
his
Doctrine
of
Justification
is
all
one
with
that
of
the
Counsel
of
Trent
.
For
the
proof
of
which
let
the
reader
compare
Mr.
Brown
Chap.
13.
N.
8.
with
Rob.
Barclay
his
Vindication
Sect.
8.
N.
1.
and
Apol
,
p.
137.139
.
He
accuseth
Luther
,
and
the
Body
of
the
Primitive
protestants
,
as
great
depravers
of
the
Doctrine
of
Iustification
,
&
doers
of
as
great
hurt
by
this
their
doctrine
,
as
ever
they
did
good
,
by
what
they
brok
down
of
Babylon
.
But
I
will
give
you
their
doctrine
yet
more
fully
in
their
own
words
,
&
first
Will
.
Pen
,
serious
Apol
:
pag
148.
Hath
these
words
.
and
indeed
this
we
deny
viz.
Justification
by
the
righteousness
that
Christ
fulfilled
in
his
own
person
for
us
;
wholly
without
us
,
and
boldly
affirm
in
the
Name
of
the
Lord
to
be
a
doctrine
of
Devils
,
and
an
arm
of
the
Sea
of
Corruption
,
which
now
doth
deludge
the
World.
And
again
Edward
Burrows
p.
33.
To
that
query
of
Philip
Binnet
viz.
Whether
none
be
accounted
righteous
in
the
sight
of
God
,
in
whom
is
any
Corruption
,
or
failing
,
or
who
do
not
fulfill
the
Law
,
and
answer
every
demand
of
Justice
?
Answereth
thus
,
Here
thou
polluted
Beast
makes
it
manifest
what
thou
hast
been
driving
at
all
this
while
;
which
is
that
thou
would
have
thy
corruption
,
and
filthiness
to
be
accounted
righteousness
in
Gods
sight
.
that
so
thou
mayest
wallow
in
filthiness
;
but
Iohn
sayeth
,
he
that
commits
sin
is
of
the
Devil
,
the
Son
of
God
was
manifested
that
he
might
destroy
the
works
of
the
Devil
,
and
thou
Man
of
Sin
would
have
it
stand
.
God
doeth
not
accept
any
,
where
there
is
any
failing
,
or
who
do
not
fullfill
the
Law
,
and
answer
every
demand
of
Justice
.
And
Will
.
Pen
Reas
:
against
Rail
.
pag
80.
We
must
not
conceive
that
his
,
viz.
Abrahams
personal
offering
,
was
not
a
justifying
righteousness
,
but
that
God
was
pleased
to
count
it
so
;
nor
was
there
any
imputation
of
anothers
Righteousness
to
Abraham
:
but
on
the
contrary
,
his
personal
obedience
,
was
the
ground
of
that
just
imputation
,
therefore
that
any
should
be
justified
by
anothers
righteousness
imputed
,
and
not
inherent
in
him
,
is
both
ridiculous
,
and
dangerous
.
Edward
Burrows
pag
32.
Thou
Beast
to
whom
the
plagues
of
God
are
due
,
and
upon
whom
the
wrath
of
God
must
be
accomplished
,
who
would
have
another
righteousness
than
that
which
Christ
worketh
in
the
Saints
.
Pen.
San
:
Fund
:
pag
25.
Justification
is
not
from
the
imputation
of
anothers
Righteousness
,
but
from
the
actual
performing
,
and
keeping
of
Gods
righteous
statutes
,
Ibid.
pag
25.30
.
It
is
a
great
abomination
to
say
,
God
should
condemn
,
and
punish
his
innocent
Son
,
that
he
having
satisfied
for
our
sins
,
we
might
be
justified
by
the
imputation
of
of
his
perfect
righteousness
.
Why
should
this
horrible
thing
be
contended
for
by
Christians
.
5.
With
the
like
f●cility
I
could
shew
,
that
the
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
is
in
every
point
contrarie
to
the
Doctrine
of
Christ
;
contradicting
,
and
vilifying
all
his
Ordinances
,
and
denying
all
his
benefits
.
I
shall
content
my self
with
one
great
instance
viz.
Of
the
Resurrection
of
the
dead
.
Concerning
which
point
,
the
Quakers
are
downright
Sadducees
:
For
,
in
the
hearing
of
many
witnesses
Geo
:
Whitehead
said
,
This
Body
shall
not
rise
again
.
Hicks
Quak
:
appeal
ans
▪
pag
21.
and
Will
:
pen.
Reas.
against
Rail
.
p.
133.
Such
a
Resurrection
is
inconsistent
with
the
Scripture
Reason
,
and
the
belief
of
all
Men
right
in
their
wits
.
And
Ibid
:
pag
34.
For
shame
,
Let
us
not
make
such
stirr
against
the
Doctrine
of
Transubstantiation
,
for
the
absurdity
of
that
is
rather
outdone
,
than
equaled
by
this
carnal
Resurrection
:
And
the
same
William
Pen
in
his
Invalidity
,
(
I
should
have
said
his
Validitie
,
seeing
he
all
along
Justifieth
his
adversaries
charges
)
of
Mr.
Faldos
Vindication
,
hath
a
Chapter
prolix
enough
to
defend
his
down
right
Sadducism
.
Yea
what
is
more
clear
in
all
the
Scriptures
than
Christs
visible
appearance
to
judgment
:
And
yet
Geo
:
Whith
.
Christ
Ascended
(
so
,
that
according
to
him
he
shall
never
descend
)
pag
22.
Sayeth
,
they
are
like
to
be
deceived
,
who
are
expecting
that
Christs
second
coming
will
be
a
personal
coming
.
And
Ib.
he
denyeth
,
that
he
shall
come
visibly
;
for
although
,
sayeth
he
,
He
shall
come
in
the
like
manner
,
yet
every
like
is
not
the
same
.
And
no
wonder
it
is
,
that
the
Quakers
deny
the
visible
return
of
Christ
to
Judgement
,
seing
they
deny
that
Christ
hath
any
personal
being
without
men
.
Thus
speaketh
the
same
Author
pag
18.
And
again
pag
69.
Christ
in
person
,
remot
in
a
Body
of
Flesh
,
and
not
in
Men
,
is
not
Scripture
Language
;
but
added
.
But
it
is
needless
to
adduce
moe
passages
to
shew
the
detestableness
of
this
Seck
,
enough
being
said
already
to
discover
it
.
I
shall
only
add
the
words
of
a
Leading
Quaker
related
by
Hicks
Quak
:
Appeal
:
Ans.
pag
12.
who
being
asked
what
he
thought
of
Christ
Jesus
born
at
Bethlehem
,
and
dying
at
Ierusalem
?
answered
,
Iesus
Christ
at
Ierusalem
a
Type
,
a
Figure
,
a
shadow
that
is
passed
away
;
what
have
you
to
do
with
Christ
at
Ierusalem
;
have
done
with
him
.
From
all
this
it
is
evident
,
that
according
to
the
Quakers
,
there
is
not
such
a
thing
now
in
beeing
,
as
Christ
Jesus
that
died
at
Jerusalem
.
And
as
they
deny
Christ
the
Son
of
God
,
so
they
arrogat
to
themselves
by
a
most
Diabolical
Sacriledge
,
whatsoever
the
Holy
Ghost
in
the
Scriptures
hath
appropriated
to
Christ
Jesus
;
of
which
Lucifer-like
aspiring
take
a
taste
,
Iosiah
Coal
an
eminent
Quaker
,
thus
writeth
to
Geo
:
Fox
,
Dear
Geo
:
Fox
who
art
the
Father
of
many
Nations
,
whose
life
hath
reached
through
us
thy
Children
,
even
to
the
Isles
afar
off
,
unto
the
begetting
of
many
to
a
lively
hope
,
for
which
generations
to
come
shall
call
thee
blessed
,
whose
beeing
,
and
habitation
is
in
the
power
of
the
highest
,
in
which
thou
rules
,
and
Governs
in
Righteousness
,
and
thy
Kingdom
is
Established
in
peace
,
and
the
increase
thereof
without
end
:
Date
21.
day
of
the
12
Moneth
1658.
See
Tyr
:
detected
pag
19.
CHAP.
VI.
Of
Perfection
.
ALthough
we
have
already
given
several
instances
of
the
damnable
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
,
together
with
their
miserable
defence
thereof
:
We
shall
notwithstanding
for
the
more
abundant
evicting
hereof
,
trace
the
Footsteps
of
one
of
their
cheif
Authors
Robert
Barclay
,
in
his
Vindication
of
one
or
two
of
their
cheif
principles
.
The
first
of
which
shall
be
that
of
Perfection
▪
The
Doctrine
of
the
Quakers
in
this
point
,
is
,
In
whom
this
pure
&
holy
birth
is
fully
brought
forth
,
the
Body
of
death
,
and
sin
,
cometh
to
be
crucified
,
and
removed
,
and
their
hearts
united
,
and
subjected
to
the
truth
,
so
as
not
to
obey
any
Suggestions
,
or
Temptations
of
the
evil
one
,
to
be
free
from
actual
sinning
,
and
Transgressing
of
the
Law
of
God
,
and
in
that
respect
,
perfect
,
Yet
doth
this
perfection
still
admit
of
a
growth
.
And
there
remaineth
alwayes
in
some
part
a
possibility
of
sinning
;
where
the
mind
doeth
not
most
diligently
,
and
watchfully
attend
unto
the
Lord
.
These
are
the
words
of
his
eight
These
;
And
afterward
he
sayeth
,
that
,
there
may
be
a
State
in
this
Life
,
in
which
a
Man
cannot
sin
,
it
is
so
natural
unto
him
to
do
Righteousness
.
Let
us
in
the
next
place
consider
how
he
vindicateth
this
Doctrine
,
which
is
our
main
purpose
.
Having
vind:
Sect
:
9.
Spent
a
while
in
accusing
his
Adversarie
as
guilty
of
railing
,
and
in
rejecting
his
own
Brethrens
books
;
such
as
Sauls
errand
to
Damascus
.
In
which
they
maintain
themselves
to
be
equal
with
God.
Which
is
also
asserted
by
Hubberthorn
against
Sherl
:
pag
30.
I
say
,
rejecting
these
,
or
denying
that
they
have
said
them
(
for
he
still
insinuateth
that
Hicks
only
said
these
things
,
although
it
be
evinced
by
particular
citation
of
book
and
page
,
where
they
are
;
)
In
the
next
place
he
giveth
away
the
cause
wholly
,
by
saying
,
that
he
pleadeth
for
no
more
than
Mr.
Brown
sayeth
N
6.
viz.
That
by
perfection
in
this
life
,
is
understood
a
change
in
the
whole
man
,
so
that
he
yieldeth
impartial
obedience
to
all
the
Commands
of
God
,
though
in
a
small
degree
,
yet
that
he
may
seem
to
say
somewhat
,
he
enquireth
,
How
this
Doctrine
is
reconciled
with
that
of
dayly
breaking
the
Commands
in
thought
,
word
,
&
deed
?
In
answer
to
which
question
,
it
is
enough
to
enquire
how
he
evinceth
them
to
be
contradictory
:
Seing
he
may
know
if
he
will
,
that
the
Law
of
the
Lord
requireth
a
perfection
of
degrees
,
as
well
as
parts
,
and
that
it
is
a
disconformity
to
the
Law
of
God
,
and
consequently
a
sin
,
to
be
deficient
in
the
one
,
as
well
as
in
the
other
.
And
whereas
he
enquireth
;
if
to
break
Gods
Commands
dayly
,
in
thought
,
word
,
and
deed
,
be
the
way
to
grow
in
grace
?
To
put
off
the
Old
Man
,
and
on
the
New.
He
but
only
useth
his
old
Custom
.
viz.
maliciously
to
calumniate
.
For
who
said
such
a
thing
?
Or
from
what
point
of
our
Doctrine
will
he
prove
this
?
We
shall
attend
his
proofs
of
it
.
Which
untill
we
hear
,
we
cannot
but
in
reason
Judge
that
he
delighteth
in
malicious
lies
.
For
though
we
say
according
to
the
Scripture
,
that
even
the
regenerate
carrie
about
a
body
of
death
with
them
until
death
,
which
defileth
all
their
actions
:
Yet
where
did
any
of
the
reformed
teach
,
that
to
endeavour
to
break
Gods
Commands
is
the
way
to
grow
in
grace
,
as
this
Man
insinuateth
they
do
?
What
kind
of
light
is
this
he
has
,
that
teacheth
him
such
a
facultie
of
lying
?
He
goeth
on
saying
,
but
he
addeth
that
this
perfection
,
rendereth
gospel
commands
useless
,
but
are
the
Commands
useless
,
if
men
obey
them
?
But
certainly
He
that
is
above
the
breach
of
the
Law
,
as
the
Quakers
say
,
many
may
be
,
has
no
more
use
of
the
Law
,
or
need
of
it
to
learn
any
thing
from
it
,
in
order
to
the
obedience
thereof
.
And
where
is
his
vain
subter●uge
now
?
But
that
he
may
yet
.
further
contradict
himself
and
his
Brethren
;
He
sayeth
,
He
has
shewn
in
his
Apology
,
that
all
have
▪
need
to
repent
,
and
pray
for
forgiveness
.
For
if
some
be
equal
with
God
,
above
the
breach
of
the
Commands
,
want
a
bodie
of
death
:
The
most
that
they
have
to
do
,
is
to
give
thanks
,
and
not
to
pray
,
or
repent
.
For
I
think
he
will
not
say
,
that
they
pray
,
or
repent
which
are
in
heaven
.
These
duties
presupponing
sorrow
,
of
which
they
are
incapable
,
And
far
lesse
(
Horresco
referens
)
these
that
are
equals
with
God.
In
opposition
to
his
Adversary
shewing
that
this
Doctrine
tendeth
to
the
fomenting
of
pride
,
and
security
he
sayeth
,
but
where
freedom
from
sin
is
,
where
can
Pride
and
Security
have
place
?
Ans.
This
answer
had
been
as
fit
to
the
Apostles
Question
Rom.
3
,
27
,
as
to
this
Argument
.
For
he
inferred
that
boasting
might
follow
upon
Justification
by
works
.
It
might
then
have
been
as
well
replyed
?
If
a
man
be
perfectly
Just
,
and
so
without
sin
,
how
can
he
incur
the
fault
of
boasting
?
2.
How
will
he
shew
,
but
this
Doctrine
of
his
doth
bring
many
under
a
mistake
,
as
if
they
were
secure
from
sinning
,
when
indeed
they
are
not
?
Whereas
he
sayeth
,
that
according
to
our
Doctrine
denying
the
perfection
of
degrees
in
this
Life
,
the
wicked
Villains
do
lesse
make
uselesse
Gods
Commands
than
others
,
because
they
afford
more
matter
,
to
exercise
Repentance
,
and
prayer
for
forgiveness
of
God
:
We
only
refer
him
to
Rom:
3.8
.
where
he
may
have
the
like
Objection
with
a
fit
Answer
.
And
here
he
promiseth
alwayes
to
cry
down
the
Ordinances
of
Christ
Jesus
.
And
why
?
Because
,
sayes
he
,
they
must
be
made
useful
in
breaking
the
Commands
,
in
thought
,
word
,
and
deed
.
His
reason
is
a
Calumnie
,
if
it
have
sense
at
all
.
What
Ordinance
teacheth
,
which
we
maintain
,
that
it
is
ones
duty
daylie
to
break
the
Commands
of
God
,
that
the
Ordinances
may
be
the
more
use●●l
to
us
?
If
this
be
not
of
the
same
nature
with
Cavil
wiped
off
by
the
Apostle
Rom
3.
then
certainly
two
,
and
three
,
are
not
five
.
But
such
malice
the
Church
must
resolve
to
be
the
Butt
of
,
so
long
as
she
is
militant
.
He
goeth
on
,
to
remove
this
Absurdity
from
their
Doctrine
of
Perfection
viz.
that
then
none
that
are
regenerat
,
could
sin
at
all
,
but
would
be
beyond
the
possibility
of
it
.
Which
inference
is
very
clear
,
for
the
ground
which
they
give
for
their
Doctrine
is
Ioh.
3.9
.
He
that
is
born
of
God
,
doeth
not
commit
sin
.
Which
place
they
abuse
,
taking
it
without
restriction
;
not
attending
to
the
context
,
speaking
of
a
Tread
and
Custom
of
sin
,
and
of
a
commission
of
it
from
Malice
,
like
the
devil
,
and
the
wicked
,
his
Children
.
Which
absurdity
,
that
he
may
evite
:
He
assureth
,
that
a
man
is
not
regene
▪
rat
,
and
born
again
at
once
,
or
at
one
instant
of
time
.
His
ground
of
which
we
shall
now
examine
.
And
it
is
those
two
places
of
Scripture
,
viz.
Phil.
1.6
.
He
which
hath
begun
a
good
work
&c.
Gal.
5.7
.
Ye
did
run
well
,
&c.
Now
these
Scriptures
say
nothing
for
him
.
For
the
Philippians
were
Saints
in
Christ
Jesus
,
when
this
Epistle
was
writ
,
V
1.
Now
I
think
,
none
can
deny
that
such
are
born
of
God.
For
the
other
Place
it
saith
as
little
for
him
,
except
for
it
he
would
infer
the
Saints
falling
away
,
which
is
false
.
Next
that
the
new
Birth
of
Regeneration
,
as
such
doeth
not
admit
of
degrees
,
but
that
every
one
of
the
Children
of
God
are
really
converted
,
or
born
again
;
so
that
of
the
Children
of
●rath
,
they
become
the
Children
of
God
,
at
one
time
,
or
Instant
is
clear
.
For
as
soon
as
a
man
hath
true
Faith
,
he
becometh
a
Child
of
God.
But
that
all
that
belongeth
to
the
Essence
of
true
Faith
is
infus●d
in
the
Soul
at
once
,
(
although
some
legal
work
in
order
to
it
necessarily
preceed
)
I
think
none
will
deny
.
And
the
manifold
Examples
in
Scripture
,
shewing
that
men
in
a
most
short
time
,
were
made
to
turn
from
Satan
to
God
,
prove
it
.
I
would
fain
know
if
the
Thief
on
the
Crosse
,
and
Jailor
were
not
born
again
?
And
if
they
were
not
perfectly
born
again
?
But
to
speak
of
any
imperfection
in
his
new
Birth
as
such
,
that
is
to
say
,
that
one
may
be
brought
from
Nature
to
Grace
,
and
yet
but
half
born
again
,
or
not
fully
born
again
;
Because
he
hath
not
attained
unto
the
ful
measure
of
Grace
which
is
attainable
,
is
no
less
absurd
than
to
say
,
that
one
is
not
●ully
born
,
because
he
is
but
a
little
Child
.
Now
this
Absurdity
is
not
a
little
removed
,
because
what
ever
they
can
say
,
the
like
reason
holdeth
for
the
one
,
as
well
as
for
the
other
.
These
to
whom
the
Apostle
writeth
,
were
perfectly
born
of
God
,
and
yet
there
were
some
little
Children
among
them
;
1
Ioh.
2.12
.
Now
they
were
perfectly
born
;
Because
they
had
the
Seed
of
God
,
or
the
Vnction
chap
2.27
.
which
is
all
one
with
the
Seed
.
Now
the
abiding
of
the
Seed
,
is
given
as
a
reason
of
the
perfection
of
the
New-birth
,
so
that
they
cannot
sin
.
Ergo
:
If
little
Children
;
as
well
as
Fathers
,
had
this
unction
,
or
Seed
abiding
in
them
,
they
had
this
New-birth
in
the
highest
perfection
pleaded
for
by
Quakers
.
3
The
Apostle
,
1
Ioh
3.9
.
speaketh
without
distinction
,
(
Whosoever
&c.
)
and
so
taketh
away
the
elusion
of
our
Adversaries
.
Next
,
he
thinketh
here
to
free
himself
of
Pelagianism
,
of
which
he
was
proved
to
be
guilty
,
by
saying
he
alwayes
denyed
that
men
might
keep
the
Commands
by
the
power
of
nature
,
which
groundless
shi●t
is
overthrown
above
.
chap
2.
He
al●ledgeth
also
,
that
because
the
Fathers
say
,
That
none
by
the
strength
of
Grace
did
live
all
their
days
without
sin
;
and
the
perfection
ascribed
to
some
in
Scripture
,
was
not
from
nature
,
but
from
grace
,
therefore
they
thought
men
might
be
free
from
sin
by
Grace
.
What
miserable
mankind
and
clipping
is
this
?
Is
it
not
added
in
the
very
following
words
immediatly
?
That
none
attained
that
measure
of
holiness
in
this
life
,
that
he
could
live
any
long
time
without
sin
,
and
that
this
perfection
was
not
full
,
and
absolute
,
but
which
might
encrease
,
and
was
mixed
with
evil
deeds
,
so
was
a
perfection
of
parts
only
,
not
of
degrees
.
These
are
the
very
words
of
the
Antithesis
of
the
Orthodox
,
in
opposition
to
the
Pelagians
.
Vos
.
Hist.
Pel.
Par.
Prim
:
Thes
,
1.
pag
146.
Now
I
would
desire
any
to
shew
me
,
what
this
Doctrine
differeth
from
that
which
the
reformed
Churches
hold
?
Let
the
Reader
see
Mr.
Broun
himself
pag
333
,
N
12
,
13
,
where
he
may
see
this
matter
handled
at
large
.
I
add
these
words
of
Orosius
Apol.
Cont:
Pel
:
I
do
not
undertake
,
I
presume
not
,
I
dare
not
say
that
I
shall
be
without
sin
,
〈◊〉
long
as
I
shall
be
in
this
Corruption
,
which
we
have
.
And
again
,
The
man
that
can
be
without
sin
is
Christ
.
He
saith
here
,
that
what
his
Adversary
addeth
of
the
Fathers
arguments
against
Pelagians
,
and
Socinians
It
is
not
his
work
to
meddle
with
,
or
to
heed
what
these
Sects
say
.
But
it
is
not
best
to
do
so
.
For
in
so
doing
,
he
should
fight
against
himself
.
For
they
must
divide
him
from
himself
▪
that
divide
him
either
from
a
Pelagian
,
or
a
Socinian
.
I
was
about
to
admonish
the
Reader
,
to
read
especially
this
fourteenth
chapter
of
Mr.
Broun's
Book
:
But
I
need
not
,
seing
he
granteth
all
we
plead
for
,
by
saying
on
the
matter
,
he
doth
not
care
though
he
be
proved
a
Pelagian
,
and
a
Socinian
.
And
whereas
he
sayeth
,
he
considereth
the
matter
as
proposed
in
Scripture
.
The
only
way
to
know
the
truth
of
this
,
is
to
examine
his
Doctrine
,
which
we
have
done
in
part
.
And
through
the
Lords
assistance
,
shall
yet
further
do
it
.
We
value
not
his
Recriminations
,
which
he
hath
here
,
but
nameth
none
,
since
nothing
that
he
can
say
can
be
of
weight
against
us
:
As
these
Charges
of
Pelagianism
,
and
Socinianism
are
against
him
,
except
he
bring
the
fathers
as
much
fighting
against
the
Doctrine
of
the
reformed
churches
,
and
the
reformed
Churches
against
their
Doctrine
;
as
these
fight
against
him
,
and
his
Brethren
.
Again
he
cometh
to
the
Vindication
of
his
Arguments
,
which
are
answered
by
his
Adversary
pag
337
N
,
18
,
19
,
20
,
21
,
22
,
23
,
24.
And
for
urging
of
the
first
,
which
was
,
That
this
Doctrine
is
against
the
wisdom
of
God
,
he
only
insinuateth
that
there
are
means
given
to
the
people
of
God
,
whereby
they
may
be
free
from
all
sin
,
if
they
use
them
well
.
This
I
say
he
insinuateth
,
for
here
he
mumbleth
as
one
in
a
confused
haste
:
But
this
is
with
as
great
facility
denyed
,
as
any
thing
he
hath
hitherto
said
;
For
we
assert
,
that
it
is
the
will
of
God
,
that
perfect
freedom
from
sin
,
be
a
property
of
the
Church
Triumphant
only
.
And
for
probation
of
our
assertion
,
it
is
enough
to
challenge
him
to
give
any
example
of
one
,
thus
freed
from
sin
in
the
world
,
except
Christ
Jesus
,
who
never
had
it
,
but
by
imputation
.
To
me
his
following
words
are
nonsense
.
He
would
fain
insist
over
his
Adversary
,
because
he
sayeth
pag.
339.
N
19.
That
the
heart
,
&
the
renewed
part
of
the
man
being
for
God
and
God
only
,
and
directly
against
Satan
,
and
all
his
wayes
,
doings
,
and
designs
,
there
is
no
formal
service
performed
unto
Satan
,
Saying
,
That
then
there
is
some
material
service
performed
to
the
devil
.
But
this
objection
militateth
as
much
against
the
Apostle
,
saying
,
Rom.
7
,
That
with
his
flesh
he
served
the
Law
of
sin
.
Which
I
think
the
Quakers
will
hardly
distinguish
from
the
Law
of
Satan
▪
2.
If
this
instance
do
any
thing
,
it
will
overdo
.
For
it
tendeth
to
prove
that
no
Action
of
any
that
have
gotten
saith
,
though
in
the
least
degree
,
can
be
at
all
tainted
with
sin
.
We
mean
their
gracious
Actions
:
He
is
angry
because
his
Adversary
saith
;
that
it
is
the
will
of
God
,
that
his
people
be
under
a
warfare
so
long
as
they
are
here
,
saying
,
But
〈◊〉
it
the
will
of
God
,
that
they
alwayes
be
overcome●
Seing
if
their
Actions
still
be
stained
with
sin
,
〈◊〉
that
they
may
be
called
service
to
Satan
,
they
cannot
but
be
said
to
be
overcome
.
Ans.
They
are
not
alwayes
overcome
.
Because
sometimes
the
man
as
Spiritual
,
prevaileth
against
himself
as
carnal
.
And
alwayes
overcometh
at
length
,
and
at
the
end
of
the
War
,
though
oftentimes
foiled
in
particular
Battels
.
The
none
consideration
of
which
distinction
,
is
the
ground
of
this
Cavil
,
his
following
words
stand
,
and
fall
with
this
Doctrine
of
Original
sin
,
and
universal
Grace
,
according
to
his
own
confession
,
we
shall
therefore
passe
them
.
Pag.
123
▪
He
repeateth
his
Argument
,
which
is
that
our
Doctrine
is
injurious
to
the
Sacrifice
of
Christ
.
But
he
forgetteth
to
shew
how
.
Only
he
sayeth
in
opposition
to
his
Adversary
,
saying
,
that
the
Guilt
of
sin
by
by
this
Sacrifice
,
is
taken
away
:
And
also
he
taketh
away
the
stain
thereof
piece
and
piece
,
till
in
end
he
give
full
Victory
.
They
refer
that
to
another
Life
.
The
Question
is
concerning
this
.
Ans.
If
he
were
minded
to
make
a
Difference
betwixt
Heaven
,
and
Earth
,
he
had
not
made
a
Question
about
full
Victory
in
this
life
.
2.
How
profane
a
Heart
must
he
have
,
that
counteth
all
the
attainments
of
a
Child
of
God
in
this
Life
,
as
good
as
nothing
:
For
notwithstanding
of
them
all
,
he
will
still
have
the
Sacrifice
of
Christ
to
be
useless
,
except
a
man
in
this
Life
,
become
as
sinless
as
an
Angel.
He
was
concerned
to
have
proved
this
,
otherwise
not
belied
the
World
,
by
giving
out
that
he
had
fully
answered
his
Adversary
.
But
especially
he
lieth
here
,
in
that
he
sayeth
he
hath
fully
answered
his
eight
Chapter
.
In
which
of
all
places
,
he
most
failed
.
Of
which
I
shal
give
the
Reader
a
touch
in
my
Appendix
.
And
may
be
more
fully
seen
by
these
who
compare
the
Books
themselves
.
He
will
not
be
content
,
that
his
Adversary
sayeth
,
that
the
godly
,
and
the
wicked
differ
;
In
that
the
one
sinneth
with
full
Purpose
of
Heart
,
and
the
other
,
viz.
the
godly
mourneth
over
,
and
repenteth
of
his
sin
,
and
shortcomings
,
but
sayeth
,
seing
he
supposeth
the
godly
to
remain
in
sin
,
all
their
lifetime
the
similitude
remaineth
.
Ans.
And
is
it
so
?
that
there
is
no
difference
in
sinning
,
between
him
that
sinneth
through
Malice
,
and
him
that
sinneth
through
Infirmity
,
let
him
prove
this
.
For
until
he
do
it
,
we
account
it
an
abominable
Assertion
.
For
the
Scripture
maketh
a
clear
difference
,
between
the
shortcomings
of
the
godly
,
and
wicked
departing
from
God.
And
is
it
no
difference
,
that
the
one
repenteth
,
and
the
other
not
?
Next
he
mentioneth
another
of
his
Apologetick
Arguments
viz.
that
our
Doctrine
in
this
Point
,
maketh
the
Ministry
uselesse
.
But
in
stead
of
urging
,
what
his
Adversary
answered
,
which
was
,
that
upon
this
very
head
the
Necessity
of
a
Ministry
appeareth
.
2.
That
it
cannot
be
proved
,
that
this
ultimat
end
of
the
Ministry
mentioned
Eph.
4
,
13.
is
attained
here
,
and
3.
That
there
is
a
Perfection
of
Parts
and
another
of
Degrees
.
I
say
in
stead
of
urging
of
all
this
,
he
only
sayeth
,
"
but
the
Question
is
,
whether
,
or
not
that
perfection
is
attainable
here
?
Ans.
He
ought
to
urge
his
Argument
:
And
not
propone
Questions
,
seing
he
knoweth
well
enough
that
his
Adversary
,
as
alwayes
,
so
here
denyeth
that
a
sinless
perfection
is
attainable
in
this
life
.
Now
let
him
prove
this
from
the
place
,
and
he
may
be
considered
.
But
in
stead
of
this
,
for
as
short
as
his
Book
is
,
he
must
make
a
Digression
to
tell
us
,
that
though
Christ
was
sinlesse
,
yet
he
admitted
of
grouth
,
which
is
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
seing
Christ
is
not
said
to
grow
in
the
Love
of
God
,
and
such
moral
Perfections
,
about
which
the
Question
is
;
but
only
in
that
kind
of
Knowledge
,
the
pura
nescientia
,
or
want
of
which
,
is
no
sin
,
or
culpable
Ignorance
.
Next
he
sayeth
it
will
not
follow
from
Col.
4.12
and
1
Thes.
3
,
12.
that
it
is
impossible
that
men
should
be
free
of
sin
here
,
by
the
Grace
of
God.
These
were
the
Places
,
from
which
he
deduced
an
Argument
,
for
sinless
perfection
in
his
Apology
.
And
now
being
answered
,
he
thinks
it
enough
for
urging
of
them
,
to
bid
us
prove
the
contrary
,
from
the
same
places
.
Judge
Reader
,
if
this
man
be
not
pithy
.
And
yet
he
hath
all
the
pith
,
that
Socinus
,
and
Crellius
had
,
from
whom
he
learned
the
Argument
.
His
following
Quibles
are
already
answered
.
Only
I
must
take
notice
that
in
this
pag.
129.
he
enquireth
,
How
these
can
be
said
,
to
have
renounced
the
Works
of
darkness
,
who
have
need
to
be
washed
from
their
dayly
Defilements
?
Ans.
Let
him
read
the
12
,
and
13.
of
Zechariah
,
and
there
he
may
find
that
these
two
are
consistent
.
And
as
for
his
(
how
's
)
seing
he
will
not
see
from
the
Scripture
,
they
ought
to
have
no
other
Answer
.
And
whereas
he
venteth
his
Malice
here
in
special
,
against
the
Presbyterians
,
we
expect
no
o●her
thing
at
his
hand
.
For
we
know
though
Q●●kers
,
and
Jesuits
have
an
inveterat
Hatred
against
all
Protestants
:
Yet
in
a
special
Manner
thei●
hate
burneth
against
Presbyterians
,
knowing
that
these
are
furthest
off
from
the
Church
of
Rome
.
Some
oth●rs
of
his
Apologetick
Arguments
he
mentioneth
,
in
the
following
page
,
but
doth
not
so
much
,
as
attempt
to
urge
them
.
Next
the
Examples
of
Enoch
,
and
Noah
,
he
also
●entioneth
,
and
again
taketh
his
old
Shift
viz.
the
Defendents
part
;
●aying
,
how
can
we
prove
tha●
they
were
never
without
sin
?
whileas
affirmanti
incumbit
probatio
.
He
doth
not
deny
but
they
had
once
sin
.
Now
,
seing
he
asserteth
that
at
another
time
they
were
free
of
it
altogether
,
he
ought
to
prove
it
:
And
that
by
another
Argument
,
than
saying
If
they
had
not
been
altogether
free
of
sin
,
they
would
not
have
been
called
perfect
.
Seing
that
perfection
is
variously
taken
in
Scripture
,
and
not
only
for
being
free
of
sin
,
as
himself
confessed
above
;
seing
he
did
not
contradict
what
his
Adversary
said
,
about
the
Diversity
of
the
Signification
of
the
Word
.
He
cometh
in
the
next
place
to
remove
our
Arguments
.
The
first
of
them
is
drawn
from
1
Joh.
2.8
.
If
we
say
we
have
no
sin
&c.
and
here
he
sayeth
first
,
that
this
will
no
more
prove
,
that
the
Apostle
Iohn
himself
sinned
dayly
,
than
what
is
said
Iames
3.9.10
.
can
be
affirmed
of
the
Apostle
Iames
himself
.
Ans.
There
is
no
parity
.
For
James
speaketh
of
grosse
outbreakings
,
from
which
the
L●rds
People
are
ordinarly
kept
.
But
here
the
Apostle
speaketh
simply
of
the
Nature
of
sin
.
2.
Certain
it
is
,
that
the
Apostle
John
,
even
in
his
best
frame
,
had
sinful
Actions
,
and
his
own
Errors
.
Which
none
will
deny
that
readeth
Rev.
19.10
,
11
,
and
22
,
8
,
9.
and
I
think
no
Quaker
will
deny
that
John
was
perfectly
born
again
if
any
ever
was
.
Now
let
them
quible
what
they
will
,
these
two
Texts
are
enough
to
refu●e
them
.
He
alledgeth
next
,
that
his
Adversary
only
proveth
from
this
place
,
that
men
may
sin
in
the
present
time
,
not
that
they
do
really
and
actually
sin
in
the
present
time
.
Which
is
false
.
For
he
from
the
Context
fully
refuteth
the
Socinian
Cavil
,
see
among
other
places
;
v.
9.
he
den●eth
here
that
the
Seed
of
sin
,
maketh
its
Subject
sinful
.
But
we
know
no
Seed
of
Sin
,
but
that
which
is
really
Sin
,
neither
doth
the
Scripture
make
any
Mention
of
it
.
But
this
Doctrine
is
all
one
with
the
popish
Doctrine
of
Concupiscence
mutato
nomine
.
He
alledgeth
pag.
126.
That
it
will
not
follow
from
Eccles.
7.20
.
That
men
sin
dayly
,
or
that
all
their
Actions
are
imperfect
through
sinning
.
But
he
forgetteth
to
apply
that
Law
to
himself
,
which
he
would
impose
upon
others
.
For
though
the
Text
speaketh
absolutly
,
without
exception
:
yet
he
will
not
give
a
Reason
of
a
Restriction
.
And
here
again
he
talketh
of
his
absolute
Regeneration
.
But
to
as
little
purpose
as
before
.
He
leaveth
the
Consideration
of
the
Hebrew
Text
,
which
he
thought
made
for
him
,
to
the
Reader
,
therefore
I
considered
it
,
and
found
it
in
the
Indicative
mood
.
And
consequently
nothing
for
him
.
He
cometh
next
to
vindicate
the
meaning
of
the
Socinians
and
Quakers
of
Rom.
7
,
17
,
which
is
,
that
the
Apostle
there
speaketh
of
another
,
in
his
own
person
.
But
he
passeth
all
his
Adversaries
Reasons
of
our
Meaning
,
with
one
blunt
scoffe
,
saying
he
giveth
us
a
Preachment
.
Which
effrontedness
I
Judge
can
hardly
be
parallelled
.
Next
he
sayeth
,
except
he
prove
that
Paul
was
a
Carnal
man
;
in
respect
of
sinning
at
that
time
,
he
sayeth
nothing
.
But
his
Adversary
hath
done
it
,
from
this
present
Text
already
,
so
that
he
durst
not
so
much
as
present
one
of
his
Reasons
,
to
his
Reader
,
though
never
so
manked
,
and
clipped
(
as
his
Custom
is
)
but
thought
it
safest
,
to
pass
by
them
whole
sale
:
Otherwise
perhaps
some
of
the
Vulgar
Quakers
,
who
deluded
by
this
Emissary
of
the
Jesuits
,
might
have
seen
how
absurd
their
Rabbies
are
in
explication
of
the
Scripture
,
and
so
looked
about
them
;
before
they
had
been
further
involved
.
2.
All
this
effronted
,
and
false
dealing
will
not
do
the
turn
;
For
the
Reason
why
they
reject
such
a
plain
meaning
of
the
words
,
and
admit
such
a
strange
figurative
meaning
.
The
reason
I
say
,
moving
them
to
this
,
is
because
they
think
the
Apostle
Paul
was
above
sinning
,
and
that
they
may
have
him
to
be
an
Example
of
sinless
perfection
,
but
this
helpeth
him
not
a
whit
,
For
the
Apostle
Iohn
,
was
one
of
the
chief
Apostles
,
as
well
as
Paul
,
and
yet
his
sinning
in
his
choicest
Frame
,
and
under
the
greatest
outlettings
of
Grace
,
is
so
manifest
,
that
all
the
Sophistry
of
Satan
hath
not
yet
invented
a
Shift
,
for
the
Elusion
thereof
.
The
like
may
be
said
of
Peter
.
Gal.
2.
and
many
others
which
we
passe
.
Next
he
cometh
to
answer
Mr.
Browns
Argument
which
is
this
.
If
we
find
no
instances
in
Scripture
of
such
Persons
,
as
were
so
perfect
,
as
that
they
did
not
sin
,
then
to
imagine
such
a
Perfection
,
is
but
a
groundless
fancy
,
and
dream
.
But
the
Former
is
true
.
The
Consequence
he
denyeth
.
And
consequently
he
denyeth
that
we
ought
to
walk
according
to
the
guidance
of
the
Scripture
.
And
where
is
his
holding
by
the
Scriptures
now
,
which
we
lately
heard
of
?
Let
Quakers
therefore
no
more
cheat
the
World
,
with
saying
,
that
they
walk
according
to
the
Scriptures
,
while
with
open
face
they
assert
,
that
they
ought
not
to
be
a
guide
to
us
,
or
that
we
ought
to
believe
points
of
Faith
not
contained
there
.
2.
He
sayeth
that
the
Argument
concludeth
not
in
the
Terms
of
the
Question
.
But
the
Conclusion
is
,
that
such
a
Perfection
,
as
the
Quakers
maintain
,
is
but
a
fancy
,
and
a
Dream
.
And
if
he
will
admit
this
,
we
are
agreed
.
And
if
he
will
not
,
he
must
deny
some
of
the
proposition●
.
Neither
let
him
object
to
me
,
that
this
is
not
the
Argument
;
which
he
answered
unto
(
for
the
Argument
was
proponed
three
different
wayes
,
the
first
of
which
he
choosed
to
answer
unto
,
)
For
either
it
is
it
,
or
another
;
if
it
be
it
,
it
is
well
:
the
same
Argument
then
is
now
urged
,
if
it
be
not
it
,
then
let
him
confesse
he
skipt
over
,
that
which
did
cut
this
point
of
Quakerism
in
the
jugular
Vein
.
CHAP.
VII
.
Of
the
Quakers
Doctrine
,
of
Silent
Worship
,
and
of
the
Sacraments
.
THis
Author
,
in
the
12
Section
of
his
Vindication
,
of
which
the
first
part
is
opposed
to
Mr.
Broun's
22
Chapter
of
Silent
waiting
,
maketh
a
none
such
clamour
,
as
if
he
were
without
paralel
traduced
.
We
shall
therefore
in
the
first
place
consider
the
chief
of
these
things
,
which
he
calleth
Calumnies
and
Perversions
.
Whereof
the
first
is
,
That
he
would
have
us
to
understand
that
Christ's
Resurrection
was
never
till
now
,
whereas
(
sayes
he
)
I
only
spake
with
reference
to
the
time
since
the
Apostacy
.
Ans.
1.
Any
may
judge
by
his
11
Proposition
,
or
yet
by
his
chapter
annexed
thereto
,
if
this
be
a
Calumny
;
for
whatever
he
there
sayeth
,
may
be
as
well
applyed
,
to
Heathnish
,
as
Popish
superstition
,
especially
if
the
Quakers
salvation
of
Heathens
be
considered
.
2.
He
is
unhappy
in
removing
his
pretended
Calumny
:
For
the
Apostacy
was
working
in
the
Apostles
time
,
and
consequently
he
sayeth
nothing
.
3.
Make
the
best
of
it
ye
will
,
this
is
but
only
what
Munser
,
or
Iohn
of
Leyden
said
,
that
they
might
obscure
these
burning
and
shining
Lights
,
the
reformers
,
and
marr
the
work
in
their
hand
.
4.
Their
direct
opposition
to
the
Orthodox
primitive
Christians
,
in
the
most
weighty
points
of
Religion
;
such
as
the
Doctrine
of
the
Trinity
,
Free-grace
,
the
Sacraments
,
and
the
like
sufficiently
demonstrats
,
that
they
esteem
none
before
themselves
,
except
Arrius
,
or
Pelagius
,
to
have
been
at
all
in
the
way
of
God.
And
therefore
that
hitherto
there
hath
been
no
spiritual
resurrection
.
His
second
Calumny
so
called
,
viz.
that
Quakers
plead
only
for
Enthusiasms
,
and
abstract
from
means
,
we
have
above
evinced
to
be
a
truth
,
in
the
first
and
second
Chapters
.
Moreover
,
he
here
denyeth
,
that
studying
of
Sermons
from
the
Scripture
,
which
implyeth
reading
,
prayer
,
and
Meditations
,
and
the
like
exercise
to
be
means
appointed
by
God.
And
thus
he
only
confirms
what
he
even
now
denyed
,
viz
that
the
Quakers
plead
only
for
Enthusiasms
,
and
abstract
from
means
.
His
third
Calumny
,
viz.
that
the
Quakers
Spiritual
life
is
nothing
but
Nature
▪
w●
proved
above
Cap.
2.
to
be
a
truth
,
where
we
shewed
that
all
the
Quakers
grace
and
light
is
nothing
but
the
small
remainders
of
the
once
bright
shining
Image
of
God
in
man
.
His
fourth
Calumny
is
his
own
,
and
not
his
Adversaries
:
For
his
Adversary
only
inquireth
,
If
this
Life
be
common
at
all
times
to
them
?
Hence
he
inferreth
,
that
he
supposeth
it
to
be
so
,
the
contrary
of
which
,
for
any
thing
I
can
learn
,
he
supposeth
,
as
his
Query
pag
414.
insinuateth
,
His
5
Calumny
.
as
to
what
truth
it
hath
,
dependeth
upon
the
controversie
of
perfection
,
to
which
he
referreth
his
Reader
,
and
I
do
the
like
to
my
survey
of
his
Vindication
.
His
next
nominal
Calumny
is
,
that
his
Adversary
supposeth
it
to
be
their
Doctrine
,
that
there
is
no
setting
about
prayers
,
or
other
duties
,
without
a
previous
motion
of
the
Spirit
.
Now
of
all
things
,
I
wonder
most
,
that
he
calls
this
a
Calumny
,
seing
this
very
thing
is
asserted
by
himself
,
in
his
eleventh
proposition
:
How
he
will
reconcile
himself
with
himself
I
know
not
well
.
Yet
sure
his
following
words
are
so
far
from
mending
the
matter
that
they
make
it
worse
,
which
are
,
That
they
speak
not
of
a
previous
motion
in
order
of
time
,
but
in
order
of
nature
;
Neither
his
proposition
,
nor
any
part
of
his
Doctrine
,
for
any
thing
can
be
learned
,
insinuate●h
any
such
thing
.
2.
This
motion
must
so
far
preceed
the
setting
about
duty
,
as
that
the
persons
perception
of
the
motion
must
be
interjacent
,
according
to
them
.
For
they
teach
that
before
duty
,
we
must
not
only
be
acted
by
the
Spirit
,
but
know
that
we
are
acted
:
Ergo
the
motion
must
be
previous
in
order
of
time
.
And
yet
the
man
is
so
fraughted
with
a
desire
of
altercation
,
that
he
must
say
some
what
,
though
he
have
not
much
advantage
by
it
:
otherwise
he
had
not
challenged
his
Adversary
,
as
a
Calumniator
,
while
by
the
same
very
expression
taxed
by
himself
,
he
is
forced
to
a
distinction
,
unheard
of
heretofore
as
I
think
in
this
matter
;
and
in
reality
a
real
contradiction
of
his
own
Principles
.
And
again
he
alledgeth
he
is
wronged
,
because
his
Antagonist
inferreth
from
his
words
,
in
his
eleventh
Proposition
;
That
according
to
him
Gospel-worship
putteth
away
all
external
Actions
.
But
he
needeth
not
grudge
at
this
,
for
their
practise
helpeth
us
to
expone
their
words
.
Some
other
things
he
hath
which
he
calleth
Calumnies
.
One
thing
he
taketh
very
ill
,
and
that
is
,
that
his
Antagonist
pag
418.
compareth
the
Quakers
to
the
old
Pythonicks
,
because
of
the
strange
and
unusual
motions
among
them
,
Antick
fits
,
and
strange
Pranks
.
I
alwayes
compared
them
in
such
fits
to
the
Cumean
Cybil
,
as
she
is
described
by
Virgil
in
his
6
Eneid
.
To
this
he
retorts
the
extraordinary
working
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
mentioned
in
the
fulfilling
of
the
Scripture
,
called
the
Stwarton
sickness
:
challenging
us
to
assign
a
difference
,
between
this
and
the
strange
influence
of
the
Quakers
spirit
upon
them
,
which
we
can
with
great
facility
do
;
for
beside
that
these
out-lettings
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
made
them
to
cleave
more
closly
to
the
Scriptures
,
as
the
only
Rule
,
and
Star
,
to
guide
them
through
the
sea
of
this
world
,
to
the
safe
port
of
their
eternal
rest
.
And
endeared
more
and
more
unto
the
Ministers
of
Christ
Jesus
,
his
word
,
and
Sacraments
,
we
mean
that
which
the
Quakers
call
Water-Baptism
,
&
the
Communion
of
the
Lords
Body
,
in
Bread
and
Wine
,
as
sure
pledges
of
the
Love
of
Christ
▪
commanded
by
him
to
be
used
until
his
coming
to
Judgment
,
which
are
openly
contemned
and
vilified
by
the
Quakers
;
We
say
beside
this
,
these
outlett●ngs
were
far
from
leading
them
into
such
strange
and
unheard
of
fits
,
as
the
Quakers
are
put
into
:
of
which
I
could
instance
a
Legion
of
sure
Examples
,
see
a
late
piece
written
by
a
new
English
Minister
Mr.
Increase
Meather
.
See
also
Paget's
Heresiography
,
where
he
bringeth
among
other
strange
Pranks
of
theirs
,
to
which
they
were
moved
by
the
Spirit
,
One
Susanna
Parsons
a
zealous
Quaker
,
attempting
to
raise
one
of
their
number
,
who
had
murdered
himself
,
from
the
dead
,
but
in
vain
.
And
this
i●
attested
by
all
the
Magistrats
of
a
considerable
City
in
England
,
viz.
Worster
Anno
1659.
See
also
a
little
piece
called
Foot
out
of
snare
,
of
the
strange
and
antick
influences
of
this
their
Spirit
on
one
Iohn
Toldervei
.
What
shall
we
say
of
Iames
Naylor
,
who
following
the
Light
of
this
Spirit
,
did
arrogat
to
himself
divine
honour
at
Bristol
.
Now
though
they
say
,
he
recanted
this
again
,
it
is
all
one
matter
:
For
this
Antiscriptural
Spirit
,
which
is
their
principal
Rule
,
can
no
doubt
change
it self
,
as
it
seeth
occasion
:
And
having
too
much
bewrayed
it self
with
the
grossness
of
its
Delusion
,
can
easily
turn
it self
to
a
more
subtile
way
of
imposture
.
So
that
we
may
in
a
word
say
,
that
the
difference
between
the
workings
of
the
Spirit
of
God
,
on
his
people
mentioned
in
Scripture
and
these
of
the
fa●her
of
lies
,
and
deceits
on
the
Pythonicks
or
Cybills
,
was
no
more
palpable
,
than
the
difference
between
the
working
upon
these
mentioned
by
him
,
and
that
upon
the
Quakers
.
He
sayeth
moreover
,
that
the
story
of
Gilpin
,
who
as
Paget
sheweth
us
,
was
mad
through
Quakerism
,
is
refuted
long
ago
.
But
forgetteth
to
tell
by
whom
or
where
.
Next
he
cometh
to
wipe
off
the
absurdity
of
their
silent
waiting
,
that
this
their
abstracting
of
their
mind
from
all
thoughts
,
so
that
the
soul
doth
not
at
all
act
upon
any
kind
of
Object
.
Which
posture
they
say
prepareth
them
for
the
Spirits
motion
.
And
this
is
the
result
of
their
asserting
,
that
a
man
ought
to
do
nothing
of
the
Service
,
or
Worship
of
God
,
except
they
know
that
they
are
moved
thereto
by
the
Spirit
.
Now
such
an
inturning
(
for
he
counteth
it
a
great
wrong
in
his
Adversary
to
call
it
introversion
)
is
not
possible
unto
a
man
,
except
he
be
sleeping
,
as
the
experience
of
the
generality
of
men
witnesseth
,
who
still
perceive
their
Souls
acting
upon
some
Object
,
either
good
,
or
evil
,
except
they
be
sleeping
,
or
in
an
extasie
▪
And
so
this
is
a
direct
following
of
the
Heathens
,
who
went
and
sleeped
at
the
Temples
,
or
Groves
of
their
gods
,
that
they
might
have
conference
with
them
in
dreams
.
But
they
used
to
take
sheep-skins
and
ly
upon
,
as
Virg.
in
his
7
Book
,
speaking
of
Latinus
,
which
if
the
Quakers
do
,
or
not
,
I
am
uncertain
.
Now
in
his
defence
of
this
pag:
147
being
challenged
as
guilty
of
this
absurdity
by
his
Antagonist
,
among
other
words
,
he
hath
these
viz.
If
he
would
understand
it
of
the
old
man
,
the
man
of
sin
,
that
is
corrupted
,
we
wil
say
with
the
Apostle
,
that
it
ought
to
be
crucified
,
and
die
.
And
again
he
sayeth
,
that
albeit
in
one
sense
,
they
are
said
to
die
,
yet
they
more
truely
live
,
and
exist
,
citing
Gal.
2
,
20.
And
this
is
the
substance
of
what
he
sayeth
,
on
this
point
.
To
which
I
answer
,
it
is
well
that
at
length
,
they
forsake
their
prime
Opinion
,
or
Characteristical
note
.
Hitherto
he
with
his
brethren
,
were
defending
the
relinquishing
of
all
thoughts
whatsoever
,
in
order
to
the
Spirits
Motion
,
and
our
setting
about
of
duty
,
now
he
only
defendeth
the
leaving
of
Carnal
thoughts
.
But
he
doth
not
consider
,
that
this
Cheat
will
easily
be
perceived
:
For
there
is
a
time
to
be
presupposed
,
in
which
the
Spirit
is
not
moving
:
For
I
hope
he
moveth
when
,
and
where
he
listeth
.
Now
I
say
at
this
time
,
as
man
cannot
Act
,
yea
or
think
warrantably
,
of
the
things
of
God
,
according
to
them
:
Because
the
Spirit
is
the
principal
Rule
to
them
,
therefore
whatever
is
not
done
by
this
inward
Command
,
is
not
of
Faith
,
and
consequently
sin
.
All
which
they
plead
for
.
Therefore
before
this
motion
come
,
a
man
may
not
excercise
his
mind
concerning
religious
ma●ters
and
thoughts
,
●o
endeavour
to
love
,
fear
,
and
walk
with
God
,
now
is
this
only
to
relinquish
carnal
thoughts
,
or
the
thoughts
of
carnal
things
▪
Or
was
the
Apostles
living
,
or
Christ
in
him
by
the
life
of
Mortification
,
and
Faith
a
meer
abstracting
from
all
Exercise
of
the
faculties
of
the
Soul.
This
I
think
none
will
say
,
exercising
reason
:
And
yet
this
he
must
say
,
if
he
speak
according
to
his
Principles
,
otherwise
they
will
be
necessi●●te
to
let
their
reasonings
against
all
worship
,
to
which
we
are
premoved
by
a
sensible
Enthusiasm
,
or
Inspiration
of
the
Spirit
,
fall
to
the
ground
,
which
is
the
substance
of
Skeen's
Queries
,
of
which
he
boasteth
.
2.
We
come
to
the
Vindication
of
some
Arguments
,
which
by
him
are
called
Nibling
quibles
.
The
first
is
,
If
there
be
times
appointed
by
God
,
then
according
to
them
the
Spirit
is
limited
.
To
which
he
answereth
,
that
they
limit
times
of
worship
so
as
not
to
exclude
other
times
.
But
this
answer
presupposeth
,
that
every
duty
doth
not
prerequire
immediat
Inspiration
,
which
is
false
according
to
them
,
as
George
Keith
endeavoureth
to
prove
in
his
book
of
Immed
:
Rev:
and
to
defend
in
his
disput
with
Aberdeen
Students
.
2.
Either
these
times
appointed
by
them
which
recur
weekly
,
are
appointed
by
God
,
or
not
:
If
they
be
not
,
then
how
dare
they
keep
them
,
as
a
thing
inviolable
?
Seing
the
Lord
determineth
the
time
,
as
well
as
the
nature
of
the
worship
to
his
people
.
And
Ieroboam
1
Kings
13.
Is
condemned
for
appointing
an
Anniversary
day
,
not
appointed
by
God
,
as
well
as
for
changing
the
Religion
.
Ergo
they
limit
the
Spirit
in
appointing
a
day
,
perpetually
recurring
,
or
else
they
have
a
previous
motion
,
in
order
to
the
appointing
of
every
meeting
;
which
he
doth
not
assert
,
or
grant
.
Here
he
sayeth
,
he
followeth
Calvin
,
in
denying
the
Sabbaths
morality
,
from
whom
,
as
also
the
generality
of
Protestants
we
differ
in
this
matter
.
But
that
he
may
see
his
mis●ake
herein
,
and
that
we
neither
differ
from
Calvin
in
his
more
deliberat
thoughts
,
nor
from
the
generality
of
Protestants
:
He
may
ready
learned
Crawfords
Apologetical
Exercitation
for
the
morality
of
the
Sabbath
day
,
Cap.
2.
And
there
beside
both
the
Fathers
,
&
generality
of
Protestants
,
he
may
find
that
Calvin
himself
,
in
his
Commentary
on
the
Gen:
written
27
years
after
the
Institutions
,
sayeth
the
same
that
we
do
.
Let
him
see
also
most
Learned
Torretin
on
this
head
,
who
at
large
vindicateth
Calvin
from
this
Imputation
.
Next
he
sayeth
,
That
none
can
be
fitter
for
the
Worship
of
God
,
than
such
as
make
silence
,
and
in
turning
of
the
mind
necessary
to
their
entry
to
Worship
.
And
thus
he
thinketh
he
has
answered
his
Adversaries
Argument
pag
413
,
against
their
Worship
,
drawn
from
the
Quakers
want
of
preparation
.
But
if
this
in
turning
were
an
abstracting
from
worldly
things
only
,
and
looking
unto
God
,
and
considering
our
own
sinful
state
and
frame
,
and
the
necessity
of
holiness
,
in
order
to
approaching
unto
God
,
he
would
say
well
:
But
seing
in
the
same
page
,
and
with
the
same
breath
he
reasoneth
against
this
also
,
ridiculously
saying
,
that
then
there
should
be
a
progressus
in
infinitum
,
he
only
confirmeth
that
which
we
have
proved
before
,
viz.
That
the
Quakers
silent
waiting
is
a
meer
Extasie
,
or
all
one
with
sleeping
:
And
contradicteth
what
he
said
even
now
above
.
Here
he
alledgeth
that
the
Apostles
,
if
they
had
pleased
,
might
have
written
moe
Books
of
Scripture
,
than
they
wrot
:
and
seing
they
wrote
them
not
I
doubt
not
but
the
Apostles
,
if
this
be
true
▪
may
be
taxed
of
neglect
of
their
Duty
.
For
I
think
he
will
not
deny
but
these
Books
had
bee●
very
useful
,
and
that
the
Apostles
were
obliged
to
lay
out
themselves
for
the
Churches
good
,
〈◊〉
much
as
they
could
.
The
Scriptures
brought
i●
his
Apology
for
this
silent
waiting
,
he
forgettet●
to
presse
,
therefore
his
Adversary
answers
to
〈◊〉
inference
from
them
,
must
stand
till
he
find
tim●
to
reinsta●re
his
Arguments
.
He
referreth
us
to
George
Keith
his
way
cast
up
,
insinuating
,
that
he
is
the
man
can
prove
this
Silent
waiting
.
But
he
will
just
prove
it
,
as
he
has
done
,
as
soon
as
any
judgeth
his
Book
worthy
of
an
answer
:
Otherwise
might
he
not
have
borrowed
some
of
his
Brothers
Arguments
,
to
refute
his
Adversaries
Answers
;
as
well
as
throughout
the
whole
of
his
Books
be
a
debter
to
Pelagius
,
Bellarmin
,
Socinus
,
Ostorodius
,
Volkellius
,
and
the
like
,
rather
than
said
stark
nought
.
Here
he
granteth
that
Peter
and
Paul
had
a
natural
man
,
in
which
the
Devil
might
work
,
and
a
Spiritual
man
,
which
can
resist
,
and
so
contradicteth
his
Doct●ine
of
Perfection
,
or
at
least
his
explication
of
the
7
of
the
Rom.
for
if
this
be
true
,
there
is
no
ground
for
explaining
that
place
of
another
then
the
Apostle
himself
.
His
following
words
are
arhapsodie
or
railing
,
in
which
he
all
along
accuseth
his
adversarie
,
calling
him
,
and
his
Brethren
Priests
(
subintellige
,
of
Baal
,
for
so
the
Quakers
speak
)
greedy
Merchants
of
Babylon
,
persecuters
,
with
more
of
such
stuff
.
Next
he
granteth
,
that
ceasing
to
do
evil
is
not
without
all
action
of
the
Minde
;
E.
when
the
Quakers
think
not
at
all
,
nor
exercise
the
faculties
of
their
soul
,
and
consequently
have
no
action
of
the
mind
,
which
is
their
silent
waiting
,
they
never
cease
to
do
evil
.
And
it
's
like
there
be
too
much
truth
in
this
.
Because
his
adversarie
sayeth
pag
424.
That
watching
is
not
a
turning
inward
,
but
a
looking
outward
also
.
Then
sayeth
he
men
shut
up
in
a
Dungeon
could
not
watch
Spiritually
,
the
repeating
of
which
is
more
than
the
refuting
.
For
well
he
knew
that
his
adversary
understood
by
looking
outwardly
,
minding
of
God
,
and
our
distance
from
him
,
and
the
like
.
Whereas
what
the
Quakers
mean
by
watching
,
and
waiting
,
we
heard
above
.
Mr.
Brown
out
of
Doctor
Stillingfleet
of
the
Phanaticism
of
the
Church
of
Rome
,
and
out
of
the
Sermons
of
one
Taulerus
a
Phantastick
Monk
,
applauded
notwithstanding
by
Bellarmin
,
and
others
of
the
chief
Papists
from
pag
429
,
to
the
end
of
that
Chapter
,
evinceth
,
that
the
Quakers
in
this
point
,
not
only
in
substance
,
but
for
the
most
part
in
expressions
,
agree
exactly
with
the
wildest
dottages
of
Popery
.
To
which
he
answereth
that
his
adversary
misseth
his
Aim
;
For
he
cannot
prove
,
sayeth
he
,
that
the
chief
preachers
amongst
the
Quakers
ever
heard
of
Taulerus
.
Ans.
yea
on
the
contrary
he
gaineth
his
design
,
for
thus
it
is
evinced
that
there
is
a
great
sibness
betwixt
their
genious's
,
which
he
confirmeth
the
more
,
while
he
granteth
the
truth
of
the
bulk
of
what
Taulerus
sayeth
.
Section
II.
Of
Baptism
.
The
contempt
the
Quakers
vent
against
the
Sacraments
is
so
well
known
,
that
it
will
be
superfluous
to
tell
the
Reader
in
the
entrie
,
that
they
deny
them
.
See
his
12.
Proposition
,
and
his
Apology
thereto
annexed
.
Vindication
pag
162
He
cometh
to
urge
one
of
his
Apologetick
arguments
against
these
Sacraments
in
general
,
viz.
That
the
many
controversies
among
Christians
about
them
,
prove
them
to
be
a
real
pharisie
.
To
which
when
his
adversary
replyeth
that
if
this
argument
hold
,
it
will
overthrow
all
the
parts
of
the
Christian
Religion
.
He
answereth
that
he
should
not
have
used
this
argument
except
he
had
other
weighty
ones
.
And
then
he
cryeth
out
upon
his
adversary
,
as
shewing
a
malicious
genious
.
Judge
,
Reader
,
if
he
had
reason
so
to
cry
out
,
and
yet
no
better
is
the
ground
of
his
complaints
through
the
whole
of
this
Treatise
.
But
to
the
main
purpose
,
Iulian
,
or
Porphyry
might
as
well
have
used
this
instance
,
as
he
;
for
they
thought
they
had
weighty
Arguments
against
the
Christian
Religion
.
And
he
doeth
but
meerly
think
,
that
he
hath
weighty
arguments
against
the
Sacraments
,
as
in
the
Sequel
shall
appear
.
However
in
the
mean
time
we
may
observe
that
this
argument
,
as
the
most
part
of
the
rest
,
is
borrowed
from
the
Pagans
.
For
this
very
Argument
drawn
from
the
division
of
Christians
,
they
improved
what
they
could
to
overthrow
Christianitie
.
From
them
the
Papists
borrowed
it
,
wherewith
to
impugne
the
Protestants
.
And
lastly
the
Quakers
from
them
,
and
hath
placed
it
where
it
was
again
at
the
first
,
to
be
a
battering
piece
against
Christianitie
in
general
.
So
it
hath
gone
from
hand
to
hand
in
Circulo
.
Next
he
cometh
to
vindi●at
another
argument
borrowed
from
the
Papists
,
in
their
pleadings
for
traditions
against
the
Scriptures
,
viz.
that
the
word
(
Sacrament
)
is
not
to
be
found
in
Scripture
,
(
take
heed
to
the
consequence
,
Reader
,
)
E.
The
thing
is
not
in
them
.
Is
not
this
valid
?
But
this
Argument
in
its
very
defence
,
he
is
forced
to
let
go
,
while
he
sayeth
,
he
denyeth
not
the
thing
truly
imported
by
the
Trinity
.
Very
well
then
he
can
say
no
more
of
the
Sacraments
.
For
the
thing
signified
is
in
the
Scriptures
,
and
the
words
(
Sign
,
or
Seal
)
by
which
(
though
he
denyed
)
we
very
ordinarily
express
that
which
we
mean
by
(
Sacraments
)
is
very
frequent
in
Scripture
.
And
yet
before
he
want
something
to
say
,
he
will
cavil
;
though
he
grant
all
we
plead
for
before
the
close
,
as
here
.
Pag
163
He
cometh
to
vindicate
his
meaning
of
some
places
of
Scripture
,
brought
in
his
Apology
wherewith
to
overthrow
Baptism
,
And
first
Eph.
4.5
.
where
he
taketh
notice
that
his
Adversary
Pag
469
,
sayeth
that
the
Scripture
no
where
sayeth
,
there
is
but
one
only
Baptism
.
To
which
he
replyeth
,
that
it
will
as
well
prove
,
that
there
is
but
one
only
Baptism
,
as
there
is
one
only
God.
Ans:
First
true
it
is
,
that
this
Phrase
(
one
only
Baptism
)
is
not
found
in
Scripture
.
2.
The
one
cannot
be
so
well
proved
as
the
other
.
For
these
(
ones
)
must
be
exponed
,
according
to
the
subject
matter
,
seing
it
is
beyond
debate
,
that
it
cannot
be
proved
from
this
place
,
that
there
is
but
one
only
Faith
,
or
no
kinds
thereof
but
one
.
The
Phrase
therefore
(
One
Baptism
)
will
no
more
prove
,
that
there
are
not
diverse
kinds
thereof
,
than
the
phrase
(
one
Faith
)
can
do
it
in
respect
of
diverse
kinds
of
Faith.
If
he
think
otherwise
he
ought
to
prove
it
,
seing
he
is
the
opponent
.
Next
he
sayeth
That
his
adversary
understandeth
the
extraordinary
gifts
of
Tongues
,
and
the
like
by
Baptism
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
and
of
fire
.
And
hence
saith
he
,
concludeth
,
that
this
Baptism
is
ceased
.
Ans.
This
is
most
true
,
which
to
prove
,
let
him
compare
Act.
1.5
.
with
Chap.
2.
For
he
cannot
deny
,
that
the
Apostles
had
the
Spirit
of
God
before
this
promise
,
which
is
together
with
its
fulfilling
,
chap.
2.
an
explication
of
the
like
phrase
in
Matth
,
3.11
.
For
the
clearing
of
which
I
assert
,
that
Iohns
Baptism
,
was
no
figure
of
the
New
Testament
Baptism
,
in
opposition
to
Papists
and
Quakers
,
who
say
it
was
only
a
figure
of
the
New
Testament
Baptism
.
Otherwise
if
the
sign
,
which
Iohn
could
,
only
administrat
,
be
opposed
to
the
thing
signified
,
we
may
understand
the
Baptism
,
with
the
Holy
Ghost
,
and
with
the
fire
spoken
of
Matth.
3.
of
Sanctification
and
Mortification
.
Next
he
sayeth
,
It
is
a
lie
that
the
Quakers
would
have
none
to
be
baptized
,
with
the
Spirit
,
but
such
as
have
extraordinary
Gifts
.
But
do
they
not
still
boast
of
their
Revelations
,
and
inspirations
,
comparing
themselves
to
the
Apostles
,
calling
themselves
perfect
?
and
I
think
these
are
extraordinary
things
.
And
as
for
others
beside
them
,
they
call
them
only
carnal
,
and
say
,
they
are
in
darkness
,
these
are
the
most
modest
of
their
Expressions
,
and
yet
enough
to
prove
the
thing
denyed
.
When
his
Antagonist
telleth
him
in
Opposition
to
his
saying
,
that
if
this
Water-Baptism
were
to
be
accounted
a
true
Baptism
,
then
there
should
be
two
Baptisms
,
contrary
to
Eph.
4.5
.
I
say
when
he
telleth
him
,
that
it
might
as
wel
be
said
,
that
there
were
two
Circumcisions
under
the
Old
Testament
,
one
in
the
heart
,
another
in
the
flesh
;
he
granteth
the
Consequence
,
and
challengeth
his
Adversary
of
Levity
in
using
such
an
Argument
.
Well
then
with
as
little
absurdity
,
we
grant
his
Consequence
:
viz.
That
in
some
sense
there
are
two
Baptisms
in
the
Church
,
though
in
another
Sense
,
there
be
but
one
;
viz.
considered
complexly
of
the
Sign
,
it
is
understood
in
the
place
in
hand
;
and
indeed
one
might
as
well
have
reasoned
to
presse
Unity
among
the
Jews
,
that
there
was
but
one
Circumcision
,
as
the
Apostle
doth
from
the
one
Baptism
.
And
for
any
thing
I
know
,
the
Word
Circumcision
is
not
used
in
the
plural
Number
in
the
Scriptures
.
And
if
he
say
,
that
it
is
spoken
of
as
twofold
Rom.
2.28
,
29
,
I
answer
:
so
is
Baptism
spoken
of
.
1
Pet.
3.21
.
Another
Reason
of
his
Antagonist
,
against
his
meaning
of
this
place
,
is
,
that
he
may
as
well
conclude
from
this
place
,
that
there
is
but
one
Faith
,
as
that
there
is
but
one
Baptism
.
And
yet
there
are
diverse
kinds
of
Faith
mentioned
in
Scripture
,
as
sometimes
,
for
the
Doctrine
of
Faith
Gal.
1.23
.
And
for
the
outward
Profession
of
Faith.
1
Tim.
1.19
.
The
Faith
of
Miracles
,
or
the
like
.
To
which
he
answereth
,
that
all
these
are
included
in
the
one
Faith
here
spoken
of
.
And
to
say
that
Baptism
with
water
is
included
in
that
one
Baptism
is
a
begging
of
the
Question
.
Ans.
It
is
no
more
a
begging
of
the
Question
,
than
that
all
these
kinds
of
Faith
are
included
in
this
one
Faith.
If
he
think
otherwise
,
let
him
prove
it
.
But
he
thinketh
it
rather
fit
to
shift
,
and
give
naked
assertions
.
For
what
Reason
is
there
why
the
Baptism
with
water
is
not
included
in
this
one
Baptism
,
more
than
that
these
other
kinds
of
Faith
,
are
not
included
?
He
may
shew
this
if
he
please
,
for
this
is
that
which
is
incumbent
to
him
to
prove
:
That
Baptism
with
Water
is
not
included
,
as
well
as
these
various
Kinds
of
Faith.
2.
How
will
he
prove
that
the
Faith
of
Miracles
is
included
in
this
one
Faith
?
I
do
believe
this
will
trouble
him
.
And
when
he
has
done
these
two
,
then
he
may
bring
up
his
Achillean
Argument
,
viz.
that
such
as
were
baptized
with
water
were
not
baptised
;
Therefore
baptism
with
water
is
not
the
baptism
of
Christ
.
Which
Sophism
might
have
been
as
well
made
against
Circumcision
as
Baptism
,
as
we
have
but
even
now
shown
.
He
is
angry
at
his
Antagonist
for
telling
him
,
that
he
hath
stollen
his
Arguments
from
Socinians
,
saying
,
he
never
read
three
lines
of
him
.
Answer
,
neither
did
ever
I
hear
one
line
in
Socinus
his
own
Book
,
yet
I
have
heard
an
hundred
of
Socinus
his
Arguments
.
He
miserably
bewrayeth
his
genious
:
For
if
he
without
reading
of
their
Writings
,
still
fall
upon
the
Socinian
Arguments
,
then
how
near
of
kin
must
he
and
they
be
.
But
this
he
still
doth
,
as
the
whole
Series
of
his
Adversaries
Book
declareth
,
still
citing
the
Book
,
and
page
of
the
Socinian
Writings
,
where
his
Arguments
are
to
be
found
.
Which
he
dare
not
deny
,
whereas
he
should
vindicat
pag.
164.
his
Doctrine
built
upon
1
Pet.
3.21
.
he
sayeth
meer
nothing
.
But
only
that
his
Adversary
giveth
meer
Assertions
.
But
he
doth
not
attempt
to
impugn
them
.
And
is
this
urging
,
and
Vindication
of
his
Arguments
.
How
desperat
must
his
Cause
be
!
When
he
leaveth
the
very
place
,
upon
which
they
found
the
Abrogation
of
Baptism
,
without
attempting
to
prove
his
own
meaning
of
it
.
Next
I
say
that
whatever
I
can
build
upon
this
place
,
against
Baptism
with
Water
,
the
same
Argument
might
have
still
holden
against
Circumcision
in
the
flesh
:
seing
still
it
was
true
,
that
he
is
not
a
Jew
,
that
is
one
outwardly
,
and
that
that
is
not
Circumcision
,
which
is
outward
in
the
flesh
,
but
that
he
is
a
Jew
that
is
one
inwardly
,
and
that
is
Circumcision
that
is
of
the
Heart
,
and
Spirit
,
and
not
of
the
Letter
&c.
Rom.
2.28
,
29.
In
a
word
whatever
they
shal
say
against
Baptism
with
Water
,
from
this
place
of
Peter
,
there
is
still
as
much
to
be
said
against
Circumcision
with
hands
,
even
during
the
Law
,
flowing
from
the
perpetual
Truth
of
this
place
of
Paul
to
the
Rom:
But
I
think
themselves
will
not
say
,
it
militates
any
thing
against
Circumcision
made
with
hands
,
during
the
Law.
Ergo
they
ought
to
conclude
nothing
from
this
place
of
Peter
against
Baptism
with
Water
.
Here
he
sayeth
that
his
Adversaries
answer
to
this
Argument
from
this
place
of
Peter
.
and
Gal.
3
:
27.
Col.
2
▪
12
,
is
built
upon
the
Supposition
,
that
Water-Baptism
goeth
to
the
making
up
of
Christs
Baptism
.
And
then
sayeth
,
he
will
expect
his
proof
of
his
exposition
of
these
places
,
is
not
that
fair
arguing
,
Reader
,
to
frame
an
Argument
from
a
place
of
Scripture
,
and
when
the
Defendent
denyeth
such
a
thing
followeth
from
this
Scripture
,
to
tell
him
he
has
lost
the
Cause
,
unless
that
he
prove
that
it
will
not
follow
?
But
seing
he
is
the
impugner
in
this
place
,
if
he
had
not
intended
to
expose
himself
,
and
his
party
to
scorn
,
he
had
certainly
at
least
attempted
to
prove
his
own
Expositions
of
these
places
,
and
urged
his
two
Arguments
,
which
in
his
Apology
were
in
modo
&
figura
.
But
this
heat
of
dispute
was
soon
allayed
;
For
so
hath
his
Antagonist
combated
with
him
,
that
he
essayeth
not
to
reinforce
them
.
See
pag.
473.479
.
How
seared
must
these
Mens
Consciences
be
!
when
they
endeavour
to
put
a
cheat
upon
the
World
in
so
weighty
a
business
.
2.
It
's
most
groundless
to
say
,
that
there
is
any
petitio
principij
here
,
as
the
Quaker
insinuateth
.
Next
he
cometh
to
reply
to
his
adversaries
9.
Num:
Where
he
had
evinced
that
Iohns
Baptism
was
not
a
figure
of
Christs
.
And
passing
the
marrow
of
what
he
had
said
,
he
only
compendizeth
his
Apologie
,
saying
,
that
Iohns
Baptism
was
a
washing
with
Water
,
&
that
the
Apostle
ascribeth
the
putting
on
Christ
to
the
Baptism
of
Christ
,
as
washing
with
water
Typifieth
or
signifieth
the
washing
of
regeneration
,
so
doth
Iohns
Baptism
that
of
Christ
.
But
all
this
was
obviat
before
,
while
his
adversary
answered
his
Argument
,
wherewith
he
intended
to
prove
his
third
proposition
,
denying
,
that
the
Baptism
of
Christ
is
only
the
Baptism
of
the
Holy
Ghost
,
and
with
fire
:
asserting
also
,
and
that
upon
good
grounds
,
that
the
Baptism
with
water
is
Christs
Baptism
instituted
by
Him
,
see
the
Forecited
Numb
.
Next
I
say
that
Iohns
Baptism
,
as
being
institute
by
Christ
,
and
comprehending
the
thing
signified
,
is
not
only
Baptism
with
water
,
but
Christs
whole
true
Baptism
,
and
so
this
quibling
is
groundless
.
Neither
is
that
which
followeth
any
solider
,
where
he
sayeth
because
his
adversary
denyeth
,
(
he
must
encrease
,
but
I
must
decrease
)
to
be
meaned
of
the
abolition
of
Iohns
Baptism
,
that
then
if
this
be
meaned
of
their
persons
,
Iohn
grew
more
decrepit
,
and
Christ
more
tall
,
Spectatum
admissi
risum
teneatis
?
Was
there
not
another
member
of
the
disjunction
?
I
answer
therefore
to
this
miserable
cavil
,
that
the
meaning
of
the
place
is
,
that
the
person
of
Christ
was
to
grow
more
and
more
in
honour
,
and
glory
,
so
that
within
a
little
the
fame
,
and
repute
of
Iohn
was
to
be
eclipsed
through
the
brightness
and
splendour
of
Christ
.
Next
he
sayeth
,
that
though
Iohn
had
a
command
for
baptism
,
it
will
not
follow
that
it
was
no
legal
rite
.
Ans.
It
will
well
follow
,
for
all
the
legal
Rites
,
such
as
held
forth
Christ
,
and
his
benefits
by
way
of
Type
,
to
the
whole
Church
,
which
each
Member
was
to
practise
,
were
either
institute
by
Moses
,
or
before
him
.
The
design
of
which
was
that
the
people
might
see
Christ
,
though
darklie
as
in
a
Glass
,
untill
the
time
of
his
coming
,
therefore
this
could
not
be
a
legal
Rite
,
which
was
commanded
directly
at
the
coming
of
the
Messias
,
and
at
his
verie
appearance
,
preaching
to
the
world
,
when
there
could
be
no
use
of
legal
Rites
,
but
these
which
were
within
a
little
to
be
abolished
.
2.
All
the
Legal
Rites
are
abrogat
in
the
New
Testament
,
but
no
where
is
the
command
given
to
John
recalled
,
and
his
Baptism
abrogat
:
Otherwise
let
him
show
me
the
place
of
Scripture
,
(
But
not
1
Pet.
3.21
.
which
they
ordinarilie
use
.
)
Either
immediatly
given
by
God
,
or
the
Apostles
contrary
approved
practise
equivalent
to
a
Command
.
3.
That
the
Baptism
of
John
was
a
Gospel
Ordinance
is
clear
from
Mat.
11.12
,
13.
Where
it
is
said
,
that
the
Law
and
the
Prophets
prophesied
until
Ioh.
To
which
place
,
I
know
they
ordinarily
answer
,
that
(
untill
)
doth
not
exclude
John
But
this
is
refuted
abundantly
by
the
former
vers.
For
in
the
time
of
the
Law
the
Kingdom
of
Heaven
cannot
be
said
to
suffer
violence
,
and
yet
it
suffered
Violence
in
the
dayes
of
John.
And
certain
it
is
that
this
particle
,
if
it
be
not
taken
exclusively
here
,
can
be
so
taken
no
where
else
in
Scripture
,
as
the
collation
of
this
with
other
places
will
evince
.
4.
No
legal
thing
,
person
,
or
Rite
was
prophesied
of
in
the
Old
Testament
,
but
John
was
clearly
prophesied
of
,
as
a
sweet
Gospel
Minister
▪
E.
There
is
no
reason
to
Judge
,
that
John
was
a
Legal
Minister
,
or
had
Legal
commands
.
Next
he
cometh
to
vindicate
what
he
deduced
from
1
Cor.
1.17
.
Where
he
only
seeketh
to
shift
,
neglecting
whollie
what
his
adversary
sayeth
,
see
Pag.
476.
N.
12.
The
first
of
these
shiftings
are
,
That
because
his
Antagonist
sayeth
,
why
did
Paul
baptise
,
if
he
had
not
a
Commission
?
He
answereth
,
that
this
a
quarrelling
with
the
Apostle
.
What
strange
disingenuitie
is
this
?
To
say
,
he
quarrelleth
with
the
Apostle
,
when
he
only
quarrelled
with
the
Quakers
exposition
.
And
upon
the
supposed
truth
of
this
inferred
this
absurditie
,
that
the
Apostle
did
that
which
he
ought
not
to
do
,
which
being
false
,
his
exposition
cannot
be
true
.
Thus
a
Man
might
say
still
,
when
one
inferred
an
absurditie
from
his
exposition
of
a
place
of
Scripture
,
that
he
were
fixing
absurdities
upon
the
Spirit
of
God.
For
he
knoweth
that
we
expone
Pauls
words
(
that
he
was
not
sent
●o
baptise
)
for
the
lesse
principal
part
of
his
errand
,
according
to
Hos:
6.6
.
Matth:
9.
Ier:
2.23
.
and
many
other
places
,
even
though
there
be
no
explicative
clause
following
,
as
he
alledgeth
is
in
Hos.
6.6
.
providing
that
there
be
no
absurditie
following
upon
this
gloss
.
And
beside
this
,
there
are
good
reasons
why
we
should
so
expone
the
phrase
here
.
For
first
the
Apostle
insinuateth
clearly
,
that
all
these
Corinthians
were
Baptised
,
without
reproving
them
for
it
.
Whereas
he
still
reproveth
the
Gentiles
for
using
of
,
and
tenaciously
sticking
to
Jewish
Rites
,
or
any
man
that
imposed
them
upon
them
,
either
by
example
,
or
doctrine
,
as
the
body
of
the
Epistle
to
the
Gal.
doth
declare
.
2.
he
doth
not
say
,
that
his
Fellow-Apostles
were
not
sent
to
baptise
,
but
nameth
himself
alone
.
3.
He
still
did
administrat
this
Sacrament
to
the
Gentiles
,
upon
their
embracing
of
Christianity
,
as
his
recorded
practise
doth
declare
,
which
Mr.
Brown
hath
shewed
,
but
the
Quaker
most
disingenuously
passeth
over
;
let
him
not
therefore
object
,
that
to
expone
the
like
phrase
,
where
the
thing
is
said
not
to
be
,
for
to
be
less
principal
would
make
wild
work
:
Seing
we
give
sufficient
reasons
for
our
explication
of
this
place
,
and
do
not
plead
for
the
phrase
to
be
still
so
exponed
,
but
only
where
the
Nature
of
the
subject
matter
will
permit
it
.
3.
He
cometh
pag
166.
to
answer
our
argument
from
Matth:
28
,
19.
And
first
he
denyeth
that
the
Apostles
while
Christ
was
with
them
,
baptised
with
Christs
warrand
;
and
sayeth
,
he
will
wait
his
adversaries
proof
of
it
.
Ans:
He
hath
done
it
▪
already
from
Iohn
3.26
and
,
4
,
3.
Of
which
places
the
Quaker
durst
not
adventure
to
take
notice
.
We
shall
therefore
wait
what
he
sayeth
the
next
time
against
them
.
2.
He
sayeth
the
Apostle
did
eat
the
passover
with
Christs
warrand
,
yet
it
followeth
not
that
we
ought
to
do
it
.
Ans.
There
is
no
paritie
between
these
two
practises
;
will
he
say
that
ever
the
eating
of
the
passover
was
imposed
upon
the
Gentiles
as
they
did
Baptism
,
as
a
necessarie
consequent
of
their
embracing
of
Christianity
,
as
the
whole
Tenor
of
the
Acts
of
the
Apostles
declareth
?
2.
The
Passover
was
a
Legal
Custom
introduced
many
hundreds
of
Years
before
,
whereas
▪
Baptism
was
but
in
its
verie
rise
and
beginning
.
2.
He
sayeth
,
that
though
it
be
joyned
with
Discipline
,
as
Circumcision
was
joyned
with
it
among
the
Iews
,
it
will
no
more
follow
that
Baptism
,
is
to
be
continued
,
then
that
Circumcision
is
to
be
continued
.
Ans:
that
the
Baptism
here
spoken
of
,
is
to
be
continued
,
I
think
himself
will
not
deny
.
We
speak
now
of
the
institution
of
an
ordinance
given
to
the
Christian
Church
.
Therefore
this
his
consequence
of
Circumcision
is
vain
,
and
without
the
least
appearance
of
Reason
.
Lastly
this
Reason
is
wholly
non-sense
,
for
none
can
perceive
what
it
levelleth
at
.
3.
He
denyeth
that
the
Apostles
constant
practice
can
declare
,
that
Baptism
with
water
is
the
meaning
of
the
Command
.
For
,
sayeth
he
,
the
practice
and
testimony
of
the
Apostle
Paul
declareth
this
to
be
false
.
Ans:
1.
That
this
which
he
sayeth
of
the
Apostle
is
false
,
we
have
proved
above
.
2.
All
things
practised
by
the
Apostle
must
be
reduced
to
three
sorts
,
either
commanded
,
permitted
,
or
simply
sinful
.
This
last
I
think
they
will
not
say
their
practice
of
Baptism
was
,
neither
do
they
say
it
,
but
only
that
it
was
an
indifferent
Jewish
Ri●e
,
permitted
for
the
time
,
as
Circumcision
,
or
the
like
.
But
this
is
false
.
For
either
such
Rites
were
not
at
all
imposed
on
the
Gentiles
,
Or
if
they
were
,
they
were
after
abrogated
.
As
for
example
,
abstinence
from
blood
,
and
things
strangled
,
enjoyned
Act
15.
This
I
say
was
again
abrogat
1
Cor:
10.
and
in
the
Epistles
to
the
Gal.
and
Tim.
(
2.
)
That
it
is
not
an
indifferent
Jewish
Rite
,
clearly
appeareth
from
this
,
that
the
reason
why
they
impose
Jewish
Rites
upon
any
Christian
,
whether
Jew
or
Gentile
,
was
to
bear
with
the
Jews
for
a
time
,
and
to
condescend
to
their
weakness
.
But
the
condition
of
baptism
,
was
still
their
embracing
of
Christ
;
and
the
ground
of
it
,
their
receiving
of
them
into
the
Church
.
In
a
word
Condescension
to
the
Jews
weakness
,
is
in
Scripture
ever
holden
forth
to
be
the
ground
of
the
imposition
of
Legal
Rites
upon
Christians
.
So
that
there
is
mention
made
of
this
ground
for
every
particular
Rite
imposed
;
but
this
condescension
is
never
said
to
be
the
ground
of
imposing
Baptism
,
but
a
quite
other
ground
given
,
which
we
named
already
.
3.
If
this
had
been
a
thing
only
permitted
for
a
time
,
and
to
be
abrogat
afterwards
,
then
either
the
Apostles
unrepealed
practice
,
which
they
exercised
toward
all
Christians
indifferently
,
and
that
as
such
were
not
sufficient
to
walk
by
:
Or
else
this
was
abrogat
afterward
,
but
the
last
they
cannot
shew
from
Scripture
?
Therefore
it
is
false
,
and
the
first
absurd
.
From
all
which
it
followeth
,
that
this
was
a
Commanded
practice
.
And
I
desire
any
man
of
Reason
,
to
Judge
whether
all
the
Apostles
perpetual
unrepealed
practice
,
or
these
mens
naked
assertions
,
be
the
best
Commentarie
on
this
place
.
4.
He
denyeth
that
the
word
Baptism
,
as
we
expone
it
,
is
taken
in
its
proper
signification
,
and
sayeth
,
that
it
is
not
necessarie
to
take
it
as
we
do
,
for
Baptism
with
water
,
in
so
many
places
,
as
it
must
be
taken
for
baptism
with
the
spirit
.
Ans.
This
a
meer
assertion
.
In
opposition
to
which
I
say
,
that
he
shall
not
be
able
to
give
one
place
of
Scripture
,
where
this
word
is
undoubtedly
taken
in
their
sense
;
but
I
shall
give
him
two
,
where
the
word
is
taken
in
the
sense
,
which
here
we
plead
for
,
and
that
undoubtedly
.
And
so
there
is
a
double
improprietie
in
the
Quakers
exp●sition
of
the
word
,
fi●st
against
the
Grammatical
,
and
2.
the
Scriptural
propriety
.
We
expect
therefore
according
to
his
own
Postulatum
,
that
he
will
give
some
more
weighty
reasons
the
next
time
of
this
explication
.
Next
I
reason
thus
.
To
Baptise
with
the
Spirit
is
not
in
all
the
Scripture
applyed
to
Men
;
Therefore
it
is
not
safe
without
verie
solid
reasons
,
to
expone
it
so
here
.
Again
,
all
that
they
understand
by
this
Spiritual
Baptism
,
is
sufficiently
expressed
in
the
context
.
Er.
There
is
no
necessity
to
flee
to
this
strange
exposition
.
Lastly
This
exposition
is
the
product
of
the
brain
of
Diabolick
Socinus
,
as
its
first
Author
;
which
I
think
will
make
it
be
suspected
;
and
(
seing
it
wants
all
ground
)
abhorred
of
all
the
Lovers
of
Christ
Jesus
,
seing
this
arch-enemy
of
his
invented
all
the
shifts
and
sophistry
,
the
Devil
and
he
could
,
to
destroy
both
the
God-head
of
Christ
,
and
all
his
Ordinances
.
His
following
words
are
answered
above
.
Next
as
for
what
he
sayeth
in
opposition
to
the
17.
Numb
.
of
this
chap.
in
his
168
pag.
it
is
so
miserable
,
that
I
only
desire
the
Reader
to
compare
these
two
places
together
.
Whereas
he
insinuateth
in
this
page
,
that
Peter
Commanded
expresly
the
Gentiles
to
be
circumcised
,
which
he
buildeth
upon
Gal.
2
,
12.
is
most
false
.
For
the
reason
why
Paul
reproved
him
,
was
his
dissimulation
mentioned
in
that
chapter
,
and
no
expresse
Command
,
if
he
will
give
us
Leave
to
expone
Scripture
by
Scripture
.
He
sayeth
,
as
if
Mr.
Brown
had
denyed
it
,
that
Iosephus
writ
before
the
200
Year
of
Christ
.
Whereas
he
sayeth
,
that
the
first
which
wrot
the
Jewish
Alcoran
,
or
Misanioth
,
with
a
tendencie
to
destroy
Christianitie
,
was
Rabi
Iehuda
Hakkadosh
,
about
the
200
year
of
Christ
.
As
now
the
Quakers
do
.
SECTION
II.
Concerning
the
Lords
Supper
.
IT
is
most
notour
,
that
as
the
Quakers
deny
Baptism
,
so
they
deny
the
Lords
Supper
.
See
his
13
proposition
,
with
his
Apology
annexed
thereto
,
where
he
maketh
this
only
to
be
a
Legal
Institution
.
It
will
be
needless
for
me
to
take
Notice
of
what
he
sayeth
pag
170.
viz.
That
his
Adversary
pag
489
,
maketh
a
Preaching
to
the
Devil
,
whereas
he
only
inferreth
from
their
Doctrine
of
Universal
Salvation
to
every
Creature
,
that
they
may
preach
to
the
Devil
according
to
their
own
Principles
.
Hence
we
may
learn
how
impudent
these
men
are
!
Just
as
if
because
Robert
Barclay
had
challenged
a
man
of
murder
;
he
that
is
challenged
,
should
conclude
that
Robert
Barclay
called
himself
a
Murderer
.
As
false
,
though
not
so
ridiculous
,
is
that
,
of
which
he
challengeth
one
Preaching
near
Lawther
.
viz.
that
he
prayed
to
the
Devil
.
But
he
dare
not
name
the
man
who
did
it
,
neither
these
who
heard
it
;
Therefore
let
him
bear
the
just
censure
of
a
Calumniator
(
to
say
no
more
)
until
he
name
the
man
,
and
prove
it
.
When
he
cometh
to
the
matter
it self
,
he
is
as
weak
,
as
before
he
was
wicked
.
For
in
stead
of
pressing
his
Argument
against
the
Lords
Supper
,
viz.
That
if
there
were
a
relation
between
the
Body
,
and
Blood
of
Christ
,
and
the
Bread
,
and
Wine
in
the
Sacrament
,
then
it
would
either
flow
from
the
nature
of
the
thing
,
or
the
Command
.
And
while
his
Adversary
denyeth
,
that
an
institution
,
and
promise
is
all
one
with
a
Command
.
All
his
probation
is
his
meer
assertion
,
that
they
are
in
all
respects
one
,
neglecting
the
reason
that
his
Adversary
gave
for
his
denyal
.
But
why
should
I
take
notice
of
such
a
shameful
Vindication
,
wanting
the
very
shew
and
appearance
of
reason
.
To
the
rest
of
his
11
paragraph
,
in
which
by
many
weighty
Arguments
,
this
duty
is
proved
from
1
Cor.
11.
he
sayeth
only
,
that
he
speaketh
not
to
the
purpose
,
without
so
much
as
attempting
to
wipe
off
his
reasons
.
He
cometh
to
answer
his
12
number
,
and
first
sayeth
,
that
the
Blessing
,
and
Eating
,
spoken
of
Mat
:
14
,
19.
will
as
much
prove
a
Sacrament
,
as
these
places
of
the
Gospel
,
and
the
Epistle
to
the
Corinthians
ordinarily
brought
,
can
do
it
.
But
this
Adversary
never
inferred
any
thing
of
this
kind
,
from
simple
blessing
:
But
from
other
things
consi●ered
with
blessing
,
such
as
,
This
is
my
Body
,
This
is
my
Blood
,
and
the
unrepealed
Command
and
In●titution
1
Cor.
11
,
and
the
like
.
In
Opposition
to
which
,
he
scarcely
giveth
so
much
as
a
shift
,
and
far
less
any
solid
reason
.
But
we
must
excuse
him
,
seing
he
doth
as
well
as
he
can
.
His
next
words
are
a
meer
Compend
of
what
he
said
against
our
meaning
of
1
Cor:
11.
in
his
Apology
,
without
so
much
as
attempting
to
answer
his
Adversaries
14.
Num
:
to
which
I
referr
the
Reader
.
He
sayeth
indeed
,
which
is
as
good
as
nothing
that
the
Institution
of
the
Sacrament
,
1
Cor.
11.
was
a
Permission
;
and
therefore
the
practise
thereof
was
not
will-worship
.
But
upon
the
same
account
he
may
elude
any
Command
in
Scripture
.
For
that
there
was
a
Command
for
this
practice
,
he
granteth
;
and
that
the
Apostle
correcteth
the
abuse
of
this
practice
,
he
granteth
also
,
without
so
much
as
mentioning
its
indifferency
.
Neither
can
he
shew
in
all
the
Scripture
,
where
this
Command
was
abrogat
,
or
the
practice
prohibited
,
as
other
things
indifferent
were
.
What
Titanian
boldness
must
this
then
be
,
to
say
this
was
by
meer
Permission
!
In
Opposition
to
his
16
Num:
where
his
Adversary
sheweth
the
disparity
,
between
Christs
teaching
his
Apostles
Humility
,
by
his
Example
of
washing
their
feet
,
and
his
Command
and
Institution
of
this
Ordinance
,
he
sayeth
meer
nothing
,
but
calleth
him
a
Pope
.
In
Opposition
to
Num
17.
he
sayeth
he
should
prove
from
Scripture
,
how
they
are
safe
in
practising
the
one
part
(
ridiculously
calling
the
whole
Duty
one
part
)
and
not
the
other
(
meaning
the
occasional
Circumstances
of
time
,
and
place
,
and
the
number
of
twelve
,
and
the
like
,
which
he
as
foolishly
calleth
another
part
of
the
Institution
)
But
his
Adversary
sheweth
from
many
places
of
Scripture
in
the
forecited
Num:
such
as
Act:
26
:
7.
1
Cor.
11
,
18.
and
20.
That
these
Circumstances
are
not
to
be
observed
,
but
left
indifferent
.
But
this
man
still
intendeth
to
cheat
his
Reader
,
by
passing
over
the
Marrow
of
what
his
Adversary
sayeth
.
What
he
sayeth
in
Opposition
to
N
:
18
,
Is
a
meer
denyal
that
Act
2
,
42
,
is
meaned
of
the
Lords
Supper
,
without
so
much
as
the
least
attempt
,
to
answer
his
reasons
,
or
to
Vindicat
what
he
himself
said
in
his
Apology
,
in
opposition
to
our
meaning
of
this
place
,
Neither
is
he
more
happy
in
answering
his
19
Num:
where
he
proved
that
in
Act.
20.7
.
Is
understood
publick
and
Sacramental
Eating
.
For
he
,
according
to
his
Custom
,
slighteth
his
reason
;
as
the
Comparer
may
see
(
what
he
sayeth
in
opposition
to
the
follwing
number
▪
is
of
the
same
Nature
.
viz.
meer
Assertions
,
false
Suppositions
,
such
as
,
that
the
Corinthians
were
superstitious
,
in
that
they
at
all
practised
this
Duty
of
the
Lords
Supper
.
Yet
one
thing
I
will
take
notice
of
,
viz.
how
he
vindicateth
his
Answer
given
to
that
argument
,
drawn
from
1
Cor.
11
,
26.
Ye
shew
forth
the
Lords
death
till
he
come
.
Which
is
,
That
by
Christs
coming
,
is
understood
his
inward
,
Spiritual
coming
.
Which
answer
his
Adversary
so
happily
impugneth
,
that
he
on
the
matter
sayeth
nothing
,
except
ye
will
call
this
something
,
viz.
That
Babes
in
Christ
may
have
these
indulged
unto
them
:
But
his
Answer
still
cutteth
off
Babes
with
the
rest
,
seing
to
them
Christ
is
come
in
the
Spirit
already
.
But
it
is
needless
at
all
to
Impugn
this
distinction
,
it
s
own
groundlesness
sufficiently
doth
it
.
He
cometh
next
to
answer
his
21
and
22
Num:
and
there
he
asserteth
,
That
that
which
the
Christians
were
enjoyned
to
Observe
,
Act
,
15
,
29.
was
no
part
of
the
Ceremonial
Law
,
but
an
Apostolick
Command
and
thinketh
that
whatever
can
plead
for
the
abrogation
of
this
Injunction
,
will
also
plead
for
the
abrogation
of
the
Lords
Supper
.
But
taketh
no
notice
,
that
his
Antagonist
shewed
that
there
is
no
little
Vanity
,
and
impiety
in
his
adducing
Rom.
14.17
.
Col.
2.16
.
To
prove
this
;
and
therefore
he
shamefully
passeth
over
what
he
sayeth
on
these
places
,
and
so
giveth
up
this
his
Socinian
Cause
.
For
he
that
is
a
Socinian
in
this
point
,
he
doeth
not
deny
,
he
sayeth
,
That
this
Command
seing
it
was
given
after
the
out-pouring
of
the
Spirit
,
hath
as
much
of
a
Gospel
Institution
,
as
any
thing
commanded
before
by
Christ
can
have
.
Ans.
Well
then
I
see
,
we
will
be
no
more
troubled
with
quaking
preachers
,
seing
this
Command
Act.
15.
according
to
himself
is
repealed
,
and
yet
hath
as
much
of
a
Gospel
Institution
,
as
preaching
hath
Matth.
10.
and
certainly
it
will
as
well
follow
from
Col.
2.20
.
that
preaching
of
the
Gospel
is
abrogat
,
and
not
allowed
now
by
Christ
,
as
from
v
16
,
and
Rom.
14
,
17.
that
the
Lords
Supper
is
now
abrogat
,
and
not
allowed
by
Christ
.
Now
,
let
both
old
and
new
Socinians
(
I
mean
the
Quakers
)
try
to
infringe
this
if
they
can
.
And
I
shall
still
infer
the
one
upon
as
good
ground
,
as
they
can
do
the
other
.
Which
Consideration
,
and
Parity
of
places
destroyeth
this
Socinian
Conceit
,
say
what
they
will
in
its
defence
.
AN
APPENDIX
.
IN
which
the
Doctrine
of
the
Reformed
Churches
,
and
in
special
of
the
Reverend
assembly
at
Westminster
,
in
their
Confession
of
Faith
,
Chap.
3.
deduced
from
the
Ninth
chap
:
to
the
Romans
defended
,
and
the
Text
Vindicated
from
the
Corrupt
Glosses
and
Depravations
of
William
Parker
,
and
his
pretended
examination
of
the
Westminster
Confession
,
which
Robert
Barclay
hath
made
his
own
by
referring
us
thereunto
,
as
sufficient
solutions
of
all
our
arguments
for
our
Doctrine
of
Election
and
Reprobation
,
deduced
from
that
place
.
AMongst
the
many
and
damnable
Errors
which
the
Quakers
have
raised
out
of
their
Graves
,
that
of
their
denying
Eternal
Election
,
or
at
best
making
it
whollie
conditionall
,
uncertain
,
and
depending
upon
the
will
of
the
Creature
,
so
that
notwithstanding
the
Decree
of
God
to
the
contrary
,
it
might
so
have
fallen
out
,
that
none
should
have
been
saved
,
is
not
the
least
:
In
which
they
conspire
with
the
grossest
of
Pelagians
,
but
the
downright
and
most
palpable
contrariety
of
this
their
Doctrine
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
which
they
sometimes
would
fain
seem
to
follow
,
hath
made
the
more
knowing
among
them
to
conceal
so
far
as
they
are
able
,
their
thoughts
anent
the
Doctrine
of
Election
;
Thus
dealt
Robert
Barclay
,
who
in
all
his
Theses
and
Apology
,
tho
in
his
account
an
entire
System
of
Religion
,
never
delivereth
his
minde
thereanent
.
And
Vindic.
Sect.
6.
In
defence
of
this
non-such
Omission
,
he
sayeth
only
,
that
all
do
at
times
Confess
,
that
it
is
not
safe
,
nor
proper
too
curiously
to
inquire
into
the
Decrees
of
God
,
which
he
prooflesly
alledgeth
his
adversary
to
have
done
:
and
that
it
is
only
needful
to
say
,
God
calleth
every
Man
every
where
to
Repent
,
and
be
saved
through
Faith
in
Jesus
Christ
:
Neither
doth
he
any
where
directly
Impugn
our
Doctrine
of
Election
;
And
yet
he
feircely
falleth
upon
our
Doctrine
of
Reprobation
,
and
thus
declareth
to
the
World
his
self-repugnancy
,
seing
none
can
be
ignorant
,
that
our
Doctrine
of
Reciprobation
is
Reprocally
and
inseparably
linked
to
that
of
Election
.
Moreover
he
thus
publisheth
his
Mind
concerning
Election
,
altho
he
by
all
Means
endeavours
to
conceal
it
;
for
whoever
denyeth
Reprobation
,
by
an
Infallible
Consequence
downright
denyeth
Election
:
And
thus
,
Nill
he
,
will
he
,
we
have
his
mind
positively
anent
Election
,
and
also
Confession
intimated
,
that
his
Judgement
about
Election
cannot
abide
to
be
tryed
by
the
Scripture
Bench.
And
yet
I
think
few
will
say
,
That
his
Doctrine
of
positive
and
dounright
denyal
of
Reprobation
is
much
better
founded
;
seing
he
with
a
Pythagorical
silence
,
passeth
over
all
his
Adversaries
arguments
,
proving
all
our
Doctrine
there
anent
.
chap.
7.
num:
10.11
.
These
Arguments
I
say
,
about
twenty
in
Number
,
he
doth
nor
so
much
as
mention
,
and
far
less
attempt
a
Solution
thereof
,
altho
he
knew
well
enough
,
that
except
these
be
untyed
,
the
whole
frame
of
Quakerism
is
entirely
dissolved
.
But
in
stead
of
Resolution
of
his
adversaries
arguments
,
as
he
doth
all
along
,
he
giveth
the
World
a
meer
Contract
of
his
Apologie
,
under
the
cheating
Title
of
a
Vindication
.
But
when
his
adversarie
saith
,
That
the
Quaker
can
no
more
Impugn
our
Doctrine
,
than
he
can
Impugn
what
the
Apostle
saith
,
Rom.
9
,
19.
The
Quaker
Sect.
6.
pag
67.
answereth
two
things
;
1.
That
this
is
all
one
,
as
if
a
Quaker
should
say
,
confute
all
the
Scripture
which
contain
our
Doctrine
,
and
therefore
dispute
no
more
,
untill
Thou
first
do
that
.
But
the
Man
is
good
,
where
there
is
little
to
do
:
But
if
he
had
not
intended
to
play
the
shifter
,
he
had
condescended
upon
some
particular
place
,
as
his
adversarie
did
,
otherwise
he
no
less
declareth
his
own
fear
than
Darius
did
,
when
he
objected
to
his
pursuing
Enemie
,
That
he
could
not
be
subdued
,
because
of
the
●pacious
Countries
,
thorow
which
it
behoved
Him
to
follow
him
.
2.
He
referreth
his
Antagonist
to
the
Examination
of
the
Westminster
Confession
,
chap
:
3.
Where
saith
he
,
he
may
have
his
misapprehensions
corrected
.
But
How
cometh
it
to
pass
that
the
Quaker
hath
taken
no
notice
of
many
Authors
,
as
Twiss
,
Rutherford
,
Dickson
,
to
whom
his
Adversarie
in
this
very
point
did
refer
him
.
2.
But
his
care
is
not
very
great
of
Commutative
Justice
.
Notwithstanding
of
which
,
Ex
abundanti
we
will
make
a
particular
and
impartial
enquirie
into
all
that
he
bringeth
against
the
meaning
of
the
Reformed
Churches
upon
that
place
.
The
Author
is
an
Enthusiastical
Arminian
,
called
William
Parker
who
is
the
Man
I
believe
the
Quaker
understandeth
;
for
beside
him
I
know
no
other
particular
examinator
of
this
Confession
.
Now
because
our
Quaker
placeth
so
firm
confidence
in
this
Author
,
that
he
thought
a
simple
reference
unto
him
sufficiently
doth
his
bussiness
.
I
had
a
great
desire
to
know
what
he
could
say
against
our
meaning
of
this
place
:
Which
place
appeared
to
me
to
hold
forth
our
Doctrine
,
as
clearly
as
the
sun-light
:
Having
therefore
made
diligent
search
,
at
length
I
found
the
book
,
in
which
Chap:
3.
He
undertaketh
a
particular
discussion
of
all
the
Arguments
brought
from
this
place
,
for
our
Doctrine
concerning
Election
and
Reprobation
,
which
how
he
hath
done
,
comes
now
to
be
weighed
.
And
1.
From
Vers.
6.
He
frameth
to
himself
an
Objection
,
that
because
it
is
said
,
that
they
are
not
all
Israel
,
that
are
of
Israel
,
therefore
it
seems
,
that
all
are
not
elected
;
To
which
he
answers
,
that
the
Apostle
intimat●
,
that
the
Carnal
Israel
,
or
all
that
are
come
of
Jacob
,
surnamed
Israel
,
are
not
the
Israel
,
to
whom
the
promises
of
Salvation
are
absolutly
and
finally
made
,
tho
in
general
the
conditional
promises
belong
to
all
Israel
,
as
the
Apostle
shews
vers.
4.
That
we
may
not
be
misunderstood
,
know
,
that
among
others
,
there
are
seven
promises
made
to
the
overcomers
,
Rev.
2
&
3
:
Chap.
and
such
as
persevere
in
the
Christian
Race
,
unto
the
end
,
or
to
the
death
and
burial
of
sin
.
Now
these
and
the
like
promises
belong
unto
the
Elect
,
that
are
chosen
out
of
the
furnace
of
affliction
.
Isa.
48.10
.
Which
with
Paul
have
fought
the
good
fight
of
Faith.
2
Tim:
4
:
7
,
8
:
And
so
may
fullie
expect
the
reward
,
because
God
is
faithful
that
hath
promised
it
.
Heb:
6
,
12
:
and
10
:
36.
James
1.12
.
I
Reply
,
this
commentarie
(
I
shall
not
say
a
comment
)
is
founded
upon
some
Scriptures
violentlie
detorted
;
for
none
of
them
doth
in
the
least
insinuat
,
that
these
of
whom
they
speak
were
chosen
to
grace
only
,
&
not
to
glory
(
which
groundless
distinction
was
invented
of
old
by
the
Pelagians
,
and
condemned
and
refuted
by
the
Orthodox
,
as
is
evident
in
the
Epistles
of
Prosper
,
and
Hilarius
Arelatensis
)
and
tendeth
to
the
overthrow
of
the
Covenant
of
Redemption
,
and
the
promises
of
God
the
Father
to
Christ
,
viz.
that
he
should
see
his
seed
,
and
the
travel
of
his
soul.
Isa.
53.10
,
11.
and
many
such
like
,
for
if
this
Doctrine
were
true
,
it
might
so
fall
out
,
that
none
should
come
to
Glory
;
for
according
to
it
,
the
gift
of
perseverance
is
bestowed
upon
none
,
and
so
the
Apostle's
perswasion
,
that
None
could
separate
him
from
the
Love
of
God
,
Rom
:
8.35
.
Should
have
been
vain
and
groundless
.
And
the
promise
to
cause
the
Israel
of
God
to
keep
his
Statutes
and
his
Judgments
,
to
do
them
,
Ext
36
,
27.
Should
be
meer
words
of
deceit
;
these
and
six
hundred
beside
of
such
absurd
blasphemies
are
unseparably
linked
to
this
Doctrine
.
As
for
the
Scriptures
cited
by
him
,
they
hold
forth
a
Character
of
such
a●
shall
be
saved
,
viz.
That
they
do
through
grace
overcome
,
love
the
Lord
Jesus
,
exercise
Patience
,
Faith
▪
and
the
like
graces
;
but
they
do
not
at
all
hold
forth
,
that
these
graces
,
and
perseverance
therein
are
in
Mans
own
power
,
so
that
he
may
reject
or
refuse
them
,
according
to
the
inclinations
of
his
own
will
,
and
that
God
doth
not
make
Men
irresistibly
,
yet
sweetly
of
unwilling
to
become
willing
.
All
which
this
Neo
-
Pelagian
through
the
Violence
of
torture
makes
these
Scriptures
to
speak
,
but
the
verse
it self
doth
sufficiently
refute
this
exposition
;
for
according
to
it
,
the
word
or
promises
of
God
,
might
be
without
any
effect
,
seing
it
might
fall
out
,
that
tho
all
were
elected
,
none
might
be
saved
.
Now
seing
this
Exposition
cannot
Stand
,
the
other
,
which
this
Arminian
would
fain
reject
,
of
its
own
accord
follows
,
viz.
That
not
all
,
and
every
one
is
from
all
Eternitie
elected
,
and
chosen
to
Salvation
,
as
the
whole
Scope
and
series
of
this
Chapter
doth
demonstrate
,
as
we
shall
evince
,
while
we
reply
in
particular
to
the
Answers
he
makes
to
the
objections
,
which
he
frames
from
this
place
.
2.
He
goeth
on
thus
,
Rom:
9.7
.
Neither
because
they
are
the
Seed
of
Abraham
,
are
they
all
Children
,
but
in
Isaac
shall
thy
seed
be
called
.
Where
the
Apostle
alludeth
to
Gen
17.18
,
19
,
20
,
21.
It
may
seem
then
,
that
only
Isaac
and
not
Ismael
was
chosen
.
Ans.
Isaac
was
chosen
alone
to
be
the
representative
seed
of
God
,
being
a
Type
,
first
of
Christ
,
in
whom
God
hath
made
his
Covenant
.
2.
He
being
a
seed
born
by
Sarah
,
represents
Faith
out
of
the
promises
,
rather
then
by
the
Strength
of
Nature
:
So
is
a
Figure
of
the
Spiritual
Seed
of
Abraham
,
which
are
begotten
or
born
by
vertue
of
the
promises
.
For
so
the
Apostle
explains
himself
v.
8.
That
is
,
they
which
are
the
Children
of
the
Flesh
(
of
whom
Ismael
carried
the
Type
)
These
are
not
the
Children
of
God
,
but
the
Children
of
promise
are
counted
for
the
Seed
:
As
for
Ismael
,
who
was
begotten
by
the
Strength
of
Nature
,
and
according
to
the
Flesh
of
Hagar
,
which
represents
the
the
Law
,
Gal.
4.21
,
31
:
He
figured
forth
these
which
should
be
saved
,
not
by
the
grace
of
the
promises
,
but
by
the
works
of
the
Law
,
a
people
,
with
whom
God
has
not
erected
His
Covenant
,
that
they
should
be
saved
in
that
way
,
but
tho
Ismael
carried
the
Figure
of
such
,
it
was
without
any
prejudice
to
his
Eternal
Election
or
Salvation
:
For
Abraham
praying
thus
for
him
,
Gen:
17.18
.
O
that
Ismael
might
live
before
Thee
,
or
in
thy
presence
.
v
:
20
As
for
Ismael
,
I
have
heard
thee
.
His
being
such
a
Type
,
was
no
more
prejudicial
to
Him
,
then
that
Moses
and
Aaron
were
debarred
entrance
into
Canaan
(
They
therein
being
a
Figure
of
those
,
that
should
be
shut
out
of
Gods
Kingdom
for
unbelief
)
without
any
hazard
to
their
own
Salvation
,
as
hath
been
said
before
.
In
order
to
our
Reply
to
this
and
the
following
Objections
,
we
premit
.
1.
That
this
and
the
following
Verses
of
this
Chapter
,
are
brought
in
by
the
Apostle
,
as
Arguments
,
to
prove
his
Proposition
laid
down
,
v.
6.
viz.
That
all
are
not
Israel
,
that
are
of
Israel
,
therefore
whatever
floweth
from
these
Verses
,
as
their
immediate
Consequents
,
is
the
meaning
of
the
sixth
Verse
.
2.
That
the
convincing
clearness
of
this
place
hath
forced
all
to
acknowledge
,
that
the
Apostle
is
here
speaking
of
Predestination
of
men
,
in
order
to
their
eternal
estate
,
and
not
as
to
the
things
of
this
Life
only
,
as
Bellarmin
de
Grat
et
Lib.
Arb.
L.
2.
C.
15.
Stapleton
Ant
,
pag.
526.
And
among
the
modern
Lutherans
,
Hunnius
upon
the
place
in
hand
,
who
confesseth
that
the
Apostle
digresseth
into
the
large
field
of
Predestination
.
Yea
Arminius
himself
,
in
his
Analysis
of
this
Chapter
,
dareth
not
deny
it
,
tho
he
fain
would
.
Having
premised
these
things
,
we
come
to
his
Answer
,
The
Substance
of
which
is
▪
That
Ismael
was
not
himself
rejected
of
God
,
but
only
a
Type
of
these
that
are
not
the
Children
of
God
,
which
we
shal
refute
,
by
evincing
these
two
Things
.
1.
That
tho
Ismael
be
considered
here
as
a
Type
only
,
this
place
gives
good
ground
for
the
Doctrine
of
our
Confession
of
Faith
,
against
which
he
here
fighteth
.
2.
That
Ismael
himself
was
not
elected
.
As
for
the
first
of
these
Propositions
,
it
is
evident
;
For
otherwise
there
should
be
no
Correspondence
betwixt
the
Type
and
the
Antitype
,
and
so
a
Type
should
not
be
a
Type
.
I
prove
it
:
If
Ismael
was
excluded
from
being
counted
the
Seed
of
Abraham
,
only
by
the
meer
good
pleasure
and
absolute
Dispensation
of
God
,
and
not
conditionally
,
so
that
Ismael
himself
could
have
caused
it
to
come
to
pass
,
that
he
should
have
been
counted
the
Legittimate
Heir
and
Lawful
begotten
Son
of
Abraham
,
of
whom
the
Church
and
Christ
according
to
the
Flesh
was
to
Spring
,
then
there
are
some
passed
by
in
the
Eternal
Decree
of
God
,
and
that
absolutely
,
to
whom
God
from
all
Eternity
determined
to
give
no
Saving
Grace
,
but
punish
them
for
their
sins
;
But
the
Former
is
true
,
yea
and
so
true
,
that
(
I
am
sure
)
none
acknowledging
the
Scriptures
will
deny
it
.
The
Major
is
no
less
clear
,
except
(
as
we
said
before
)
any
shal
be
so
absurd
,
as
to
deny
a
Correspondency
or
Analogy
betwixt
Type
and
Antitype
,
and
so
deny
a
Type
to
be
a
Type
,
for
in
this
Ismael
was
a
Type
,
in
that
he
was
not
reckoned
to
be
the
Seed
of
Abraham
,
and
a
Child
of
the
Flesh
,
not
a
Child
of
Promise
,
all
which
came
to
pass
by
the
absolute
Dispensation
of
God
,
and
not
conditionally
,
so
that
Ismael
might
have
brought
to
pass
,
that
he
should
have
been
the
Legittimate
Heir
and
Seed
of
Abraham
,
and
born
by
Vertue
of
a
special
Promise
:
Neither
on
the
other
hand
was
the
Election
of
Isaac
unto
these
Priviledges
,
from
which
Ismael
was
excluded
,
conditional
,
but
by
the
absolute
Dispensation
of
God
:
For
I
think
none
will
say
,
that
Isaac
could
have
hindered
himself
to
be
born
by
Vertue
of
a
special
promise
,
and
so
counted
the
only
Son
,
as
we
see
he
is
called
Gen.
22.
2.
Therefore
,
if
there
be
any
Correspondence
betwixt
Type
and
Antitype
,
the
Lord
from
all
Eternity
did
pass
by
some
,
that
is
,
decreed
that
he
would
not
give
them
Grace
,
but
permit
them
to
remain
Children
of
the
Flesh
,
whom
he
did
not
give
unto
Christ
Jesus
,
to
be
his
Seed
by
Vertue
of
the
Promises
of
the
Covenant
of
Redemption
.
We
come
now
to
the
second
Proposition
viz.
That
Ismael
himself
was
not
Elected
,
This
by
any
thing
we
can
learn
from
Scripture
,
is
most
evident
.
For
1.
He
was
by
Gods
own
Command
thrust
out
of
the
Church
,
Gen.
21.12
.
And
that
upon
the
Account
of
his
persecuting
the
Heir
of
Promise
,
and
the
Church
and
Image
of
God
in
him
.
Gen.
21.9
.
Gal.
4.29
.
Now
in
Scripture
we
find
no
mention
made
of
his
Repentance
,
or
Re-admission
into
the
Church
:
Hence
there
is
no
Ground
of
Charity
concerning
his
Salvation
.
2.
We
find
nothing
that
Ismael
exercised
all
his
Life
,
except
Robbery
and
Blood-shed
,
as
appears
from
Gen.
16.12
.
and
20
v.
Which
Lessons
the
Saracens
his
Posterity
have
exactly
learned
from
him
.
As
for
Gen.
17.18
,
20.
It
speaks
of
nothing
lesse
than
the
Salvation
of
Ismael
:
for
as
it
appears
from
verses
19.20
.
compared
together
,
the
Lord
clearly
intimates
,
that
he
will
neither
establish
his
Covenant
with
himself
,
nor
with
his
Seed
,
and
clearly
asserts
,
that
the
things
in
which
he
heard
Abraham
for
his
son
Ismael
,
was
only
these
pertaining
to
this
Life
:
From
all
which
it
is
clear
,
that
Ismael
lived
and
died
without
Grace
,
or
special
Favour
of
God
,
and
therefore
was
no
Elect
Vessel
;
for
I
believe
that
none
will
deny
,
that
the
making
out
by
Scripture
,
that
Ismael
lived
without
the
Special
Favour
of
God
,
will
abundantly
clear
this
place
from
all
the
mist
,
whereby
our
Adversaries
endeavour
to
darken
it
;
That
which
he
sayes
of
Moses
and
Aaron
,
their
being
Types
of
these
who
were
to
be
excluded
from
Gods
spiritual
rest
,
who
notwithstanding
were
godly
themselves
,
is
so
far
from
saying
any
thing
to
the
Purpose
,
that
I
am
certain
he
considered
not
what
he
was
saying
:
For
who
did
ever
infer
simply
,
because
he
was
a
Type
of
those
that
were
passed
by
in
Gods
Eternal
Decree
,
therefore
he
was
passed
by
in
it
himself
,
we
make
no
such
Inference
,
as
may
be
seen
from
what
we
have
already
said
.
I
might
here
take
notice
of
many
other
things
,
such
as
his
forming
the
Objection
,
so
that
he
dissimulates
no
small
part
of
the
strength
thereof
,
not
at
all
taking
notice
of
the
Analogy
between
the
Type
and
Antitype
,
he
knew
to
be
urged
not
a
little
by
our
Divines
,
notwithstanding
that
he
himself
asserreth
Ismael
to
be
a
Type
,
and
so
considered
in
this
place
,
2.
I
might
take
notice
,
that
he
clearly
intimates
,
that
there
is
now
a
possibility
of
Salvation
by
the
Works
of
the
Law
and
Strength
of
Nature
.
If
it
be
Replyed
,
that
he
qualifieth
what
he
saith
by
the
following
words
,
viz.
that
God
hath
not
made
a
Covenant
that
men
should
be
saved
this
way
.
We
return
,
That
if
his
Principles
stand
,
these
words
and
the
former
must
of
Necessity
compleat
a
Contradiction
,
for
all
these
that
were
to
be
born
(
to
use
his
own
Words
)
by
Vertue
of
the
Promises
,
Isaac
represented
them
,
but
Ismael
represented
not
these
,
but
others
;
now
seing
these
represented
by
Ismael
,
might
be
saved
,
as
well
as
these
represented
by
Isaac
,
according
to
the
Principles
of
the
Universalists
,
it
inevitably
follows
,
that
they
must
be
saved
by
the
Works
of
the
Law.
His
next
Objection
he
gives
in
these
Words
together
with
his
answer
,
is
Rom.
9.10
,
11.
It
is
said
there
is
a
Purpose
of
God
,
according
to
Election
,
not
of
Works
,
but
of
him
that
calleth
.
Ans.
Altho
Election
there
seems
to
import
nothing
but
Gods
Grace
,
as
the
Explanation
following
(
not
of
Works
,
but
of
him
that
calleth
)
will
in
some
sort
evict
,
yet
we
grant
there
is
a
Purpose
of
God
,
both
according
to
Election
of
Persons
and
Things
,
and
that
either
General
or
Special
,
as
hath
been
by
us
already
often
acknowledged
,
and
the
Eternal
Election
of
Persons
in
Mankind
now
fallen
,
whether
General
or
Particular
is
out
of
Grace
,
and
not
by
their
own
Works
,
wrought
by
the
Strength
of
Nature
,
howbeit
in
that
Special
or
Particular
Election
arising
out
of
the
special
Foreknowledge
of
God
;
Works
of
Grace
and
perseverance
therein
are
looked
upon
as
Means
and
the
way
to
Life
,
yea
as
a
Condition
,
and
a
Motive
both
in
that
and
the
final
Election
of
the
Saints
,
which
we
call
the
Election
out
of
the
Furnace
,
Rev.
3.4
.
Thou
hast
a
few
Names
in
Sardis
,
which
have
not
defiled
their
Garments
,
and
they
shal
walk
with
me
in
white
,
Rev.
3
,
8.
Behold
,
I
have
set
before
thee
an
open
door
,
and
no
man
can
shut
it
,
for
thou
hast
a
little
Strength
,
and
hast
kept
my
Word
,
and
not
denyed
my
Name
.
Read
more
at
large
,
Rev.
7.13
,
14
,
16
,
17.
Reply
,
This
answer
,
tho
I
will
not
say
the
best
,
is
the
rarest
that
any
man
could
have
readily
lighted
on
:
for
to
assert
the
cause
of
Election
to
be
Grace
,
and
yet
to
be
some
stages
behind
good
works
,
as
he
doth
here
,
while
he
acknowledgeth
Election
to
be
of
works
,
not
wrought
by
the
strength
of
Nature
,
as
saying
somewhat
more
,
then
when
he
granted
Election
to
be
of
Grace
,
is
certainly
so
absurd
,
that
one
can
invent
nothing
more
absurd
,
tho
he
bend
his
wit
to
the
very
purpose
,
for
then
it
were
all
one
to
say
,
that
works
done
by
the
strength
of
Nature
are
the
cause
of
Election
,
and
Grace
is
the
cause
of
Election
:
or
Election
is
of
Grace
,
and
Election
is
of
works
,
done
by
the
strength
of
Nature
were
Equipollent
.
2.
That
Election
is
Grace
,
or
rather
to
speak
with
the
Apostle
,
Rom
11.5
▪
of
Grace
,
is
most
certain
,
but
he
takes
again
his
Confession
,
and
soon
repents
that
he
hath
spoken
the
Truth
,
while
he
maketh
Election
to
be
of
Works
,
tho
not
wrought
by
the
strength
of
Nature
,
and
maketh
these
to
be
Motives
moving
God
to
Elect
some
rather
than
others
,
quite
contrary
to
the
Apostle
,
Rom.
11.6
.
who
makes
a
clear
Opposition
betwixt
Grace
,
and
Works
,
of
whatsoever
kind
in
the
point
of
Election
.
But
3ly
.
He
is
yet
more
blasphemous
and
absurd
,
in
that
while
the
Apostle
telleth
us
,
that
by
these
words
,
but
of
him
that
calleth
,
work
;
in
general
,
or
without
limitation
are
excluded
,
he
will
in
spite
of
him
,
force
this
very
same
Phrase
to
include
Works
.
But
4ly
.
That
the
Apostle
here
excludeth
all
kind
of
Works
from
being
the
cause
of
Election
,
is
clear
from
the
Connection
of
the
Words
with
what
goeth
before
and
followeth
;
for
these
words
(
that
the
purpose
of
God
&c.
)
cite
the
consequent
of
the
Apostolick
En●hymem
,
of
which
the
words
going
before
in
this
verse
,
and
the
following
is
the
Antecedent
:
which
two
propositions
the
particle
(
that
)
coupleth
,
obtaining
the
place
of
the
Particle
therefore
;
But
this
Antecedent
,
or
the
Apostle
by
it
most
carefully
excludes
all
kind
of
Works
,
from
being
the
cause
of
Gods
preferring
Iacob
to
Esau
,
Therefore
no
kind
of
Works
can
be
the
cause
,
why
God
elected
some
,
while
he
rejected
others
.
Now
it
is
to
be
observed
,
that
even
giving
,
and
not
granting
,
Iacob
and
Esau
to
be
considered
here
only
as
Types
,
that
this
our
conclusion
will
well
follow
,
seing
without
respect
to
their
future
Works
,
it
was
determined
,
That
the
younger
should
have
the
Inheritance
,
Lordship
and
Dominion
,
and
the
elder
contrary
to
the
custom
of
Humane
Laws
,
only
for
the
good
pleasure
of
God
,
was
to
be
excluded
from
them
.
Now
we
say
,
seing
there
must
be
an
Analogy
betwixt
Type
and
Antitype
,
of
necessity
some
must
be
appointed
to
the
heavenly
Canaan
,
and
Spiritual
Dominion
,
without
consideration
of
their
doing
good
,
as
the
cause
moving
God
to
this
Election
:
And
some
must
be
excluded
from
this
Spiritual
Canaan
,
Inheritance
,
and
Dominion
,
without
the
consideration
of
their
evil
deeds
,
as
the
cause
moving
thereunto
;
If
any
should
say
,
tho
the
Children
had
done
neither
good
nor
evil
,
yet
the
Lord
foreseeing
the
good
deeds
of
the
one
,
and
the
evil
of
the
other
,
did
so
and
so
decree
concerning
them
,
they
can
say
nothing
more
absurd
,
and
antiscriptural
;
For
1.
then
there
can
be
nothing
made
of
these
words
,
(
neither
having
yet
done
good
or
evil
)
neither
can
any
reason
be
shewed
,
why
they
were
here
cast
in
by
the
Apostle
.
But
2.
and
more
particularly
,
these
words
of
necessity
exclude
some
kind
of
works
from
being
the
cause
of
Election
or
Rejection
;
Ergo
they
exclude
works
of
whatsoever
kind
,
seing
they
exclude
without
limitation
,
the
doing
of
good
or
evil
,
and
so
render
that
distinction
of
Works
,
done
by
the
strength
of
Nature
,
and
by
the
help
of
Grace
,
of
which
he
here
talketh
,
altogether
groundless
;
yea
according
to
this
distinction
of
his
,
one
might
say
,
that
such
good
works
are
here
only
excluded
,
which
tho
good
as
to
the
substance
of
the
Action
,
yet
are
accompanied
with
no
kind
of
sincerity
and
singlness
,
but
are
intended
directly
for
a
sinful
end
:
But
good
works
accompanied
with
any
kind
of
sincerity
,
and
having
no
sinful
end
directly
intended
,
tho
they
be
notwithstanding
wrought
only
by
the
strength
of
Nature
,
are
not
excluded
;
I
say
,
according
to
his
distinction
,
this
might
be
said
.
For
the
Text
affords
a
like
ground
for
both
;
which
assertion
he
that
denyeth
,
is
bound
to
give
a
ground
for
the
one
,
more
than
for
the
other
,
from
the
Text.
3ly
:
The
Apostles
conclusion
drawn
from
this
Text
,
which
is
,
as
hath
been
shewed
,
his
Antecedent
,
excluding
works
without
limitation
,
from
being
the
cause
of
Election
,
convinceth
all
these
of
contradicting
the
Scriptures
,
who
will
notwithstanding
pertinaciously
assert
,
that
only
some
kind
of
works
is
excluded
.
And
now
from
what
is
said
,
this
his
distinction
of
special
and
general
,
that
is
,
certain
and
uncertain
Election
falls
to
the
ground
;
For
if
the
cause
thereof
be
not
works
,
but
the
grace
and
good-pleasure
of
God
,
then
no
part
of
Election
can
be
uncertain
,
except
(
Obstupeo
,
surgunt
que
comae
,
vox
faucibus
haeret
)
they
make
the
good
pleasure
of
God
,
that
is
,
God
himself
changeable
;
and
then
all
Election
shall
be
uncertain
,
and
so
this
distinction
shall
fall
to
the
ground
however
.
Behold
,
Reader
,
the
blasphemy
and
absurdity
,
into
which
these
universalists
run
themselves
;
For
Election
,
which
is
the
cause
of
good
works
,
they
make
to
be
the
Effect
of
good
works
,
and
so
something
which
is
eternal
,
to
be
the
Effect
of
that
which
is
in
time
,
destroying
all
kind
of
order
(
This
Argument
Augustin
useth
against
their
Doctrine
.
D●
.
Predest
.
Sanct.
C.
16
)
and
proclaim
real
changes
in
the
Father
of
lights
,
in
whom
is
no
variableness
or
shadow
of
turning
;
But
why
should
we
tarry
so
long
in
refuting
one
,
in
whom
is
not
to
be
perceived
the
least
shadow
of
reason
,
for
what
he
saith
,
as
the
Reader
may
perceive
.
As
for
the
Scriptures
brought
by
him
here
,
we
have
nothing
to
say
,
but
only
deny
,
that
they
make
any
thing
for
his
vagrant
Election
,
seing
he
doth
not
essay
to
infer
any
thing
in
its
behalf
from
them
,
contented
himself
barely
to
act
them
,
which
when
we
have
diligently
considered
,
we
cannot
find
the
least
appearance
of
their
Doctrine
to
flow
from
them
;
we
shall
therefore
passe
on
to
his
ensuing
Objection
and
answer
.
Rom.
9.10
,
11
,
12.
For
the
Children
not
being
yet
born
,
it
was
said
,
That
the
elder
shall
serve
the
younger
,
where
Jacob
and
Esau
were
disposed
before
they
were
born
.
Ans.
1.
It
is
granted
,
that
all
men
may
be
so
,
yea
are
so
both
for
their
temporal
estates
here
,
&
eternal
condition
hereafter
,
but
in
a
most
wise
and
just
way
.
2
:
We
have
shewed
before
that
the
Apostle
relating
to
Gen.
25.23
.
doth
not
speak
of
the
persons
of
Jacob
and
Esau
,
but
of
their
seeds
,
The
Nations
of
the
Edomites
,
and
the
people
of
Israel
.
3.
It
is
not
their
eternal
state
that
is
there
spoken
of
,
but
their
Rank
and
Place
in
this
World.
Now
as
it
is
lawful
for
the
Lord
to
make
some
Governours
and
Superiours
,
and
others
Inferiours
or
Subjects
;
So
it
was
not
any
injustice
in
him
,
to
make
the
Seed
of
Jacob
the
greater
and
superiour
Kingdom
:
For
even
the
Edomites
were
appointed
to
a
good
and
comfortable
condition
.
4
The
Apostle
makes
this
disposal
of
them
before
hand
,
to
prove
that
Jacob
or
Israel
's
preferment
was
of
meer
Grace
,
and
so
the
Argument
was
apt
for
this
Discourse
,
and
in
that
book
where
he
asserts
Gods
grace
against
our
own
Natural
Works
and
Merits
.
Lastly
,
there
is
in
this
Subordination
of
Esau
to
Jacob
a
Spiritual
Document
,
shewing
,
that
the
Natural
or
Earthly
Man
must
be
subject
to
the
Spiritual
and
heavenly
Man
,
for
Edom
signifies
Earthly
.
Reply
,
It
is
well
that
after
●o
long
struggling
for
a
desperate
Cause
,
he
conceds
all
at
length
:
For
if
God
hath
disposed
of
the
Eternal
Estate
of
every
one
,
universal
Election
is
a
bottomless
Fiction
,
except
his
Patrons
affirm
,
That
either
all
obtain
Eternal
Life
,
or
else
that
matters
fall
out
otherwise
than
God
hath
disposed
,
and
determined
concerning
them
.
2ly
.
Whatever
he
hath
said
relating
to
Gen.
25.23
.
For
his
Opinion
before
,
we
refuted
it
before
,
except
he
mean
some
other
place
beside
this
,
which
he
handleth
this
present
Text.
viz.
Rom.
9.
3ly
.
That
their
Eternal
Estates
are
there
spoken
of
is
clear
,
seing
the
Apostle
without
the
least
shadow
of
ambiguity
,
speaks
of
the
Children
themselves
,
and
that
the
Election
of
the
one
,
and
the
Rejection
of
the
other
,
was
antecedent
to
their
doing
good
or
evil
.
And
that
this
is
spoken
of
the
Children
themselves
in
some
respect
,
he
himself
here
asserteth
:
Then
I
say
,
If
this
be
true
,
their
Eternal
State
must
be
here
spoken
of
,
seing
the
Lord
loved
the
Person
of
Iacob
,
and
hated
the
Person
of
Esau
,
before
they
were
born
,
or
had
done
either
good
or
evil
:
And
that
this
Assertion
may
the
more
evidently
appear
(
viz.
That
God
loved
the
Person
of
Jacob
,
and
hated
the
Person
of
Esau
,
even
before
they
were
born
,
I
shall
more
particularly
vindicat
Mal.
1.2.3
.
from
his
depravations
,
which
follow
in
his
next
Objection
,
and
Answer
thereto
:
The
first
of
which
is
,
That
this
place
Mal.
1.2
,
3.
cited
here
by
the
Apostle
v.
13.
to
confirm
that
which
he
had
said
concerning
Jacob
and
Esau
in
the
former
verses
,
is
not
to
be
understood
of
their
Persons
,
but
of
their
Seeds
.
For
then
this
place
of
Malachi
should
be
adduced
by
the
Apostle
to
no
purpose
,
seing
he
is
here
speaking
of
the
Person
of
Iacob
and
Esau
,
which
to
say
,
is
both
blasphemous
and
absurd
.
Moreover
,
the
Prophet
Malachi
clearly
intimats
,
That
he
is
speaking
of
the
Persons
of
Iacob
and
Esau
,
at
least
rhat
he
is
not
speaking
of
their
Seeds
,
so
as
to
exclude
their
Persons
,
Was
not
Esau
Jacob's
brother
?
which
Phrase
must
be
understood
in
the
first
place
of
Iacob
&
Esau
themselves
▪
and
secondly
of
their
Seeds
:
Neither
is
the
reason
of
this
Arminian
of
any
weight
,
drawn
f●om
the
words
of
the
3
verse
,
And
hath
laid
his
Mountain
waste
,
to
prove
his
point
,
yea
,
the
very
contrary
follows
from
the
words
.
Thus
I
have
hated
Esau
,
Therefore
,
I
have
laid
his
Mountain
waste
,
for
the
Vastation
of
the
Idumean
Mountains
is
mentioned
as
the
effect
of
divine
hatred
against
the
Person
of
Esau
,
extending
it self
in
a
secondary
manner
to
his
Posterity
:
Even
as
the
love
of
God
to
Iacob
did
extend
it self
to
his
Posterity
,
as
is
clear
from
Deut.
10.15
.
with
many
other
places
of
Scripture
.
Where
it
is
evident
,
that
the
love
of
God
did
principally
and
chiefly
terminat
upon
the
person
of
Iacob
,
and
secondarly
on
his
Seed
and
off-spring
.
Furthermore
,
our
exposition
is
clear
from
the
very
words
of
the
Text
it self
:
For
the
good
Condition
or
Freedom
from
Devastat●on
,
in
which
then
the
Jews
were
,
is
holden
forth
by
the
Prophet
,
to
be
an
Effect
of
the
Love
of
God
to
Iacob
,
extending
it self
to
his
posterity
,
even
as
the
Destruction
of
the
Edomites
was
an
Effect
of
his
hatred
of
God
to
Esau.
In
a
word
,
the
good
Condition
of
the
Israelites
hath
the
same
kind
of
Relation
to
the
love
of
God
towards
Iacob
,
which
the
Devastation
of
Edom
hath
to
the
hatred
of
God
towards
Esau
:
But
that
the
good
Condition
of
the
Children
of
Israel
,
was
the
Effect
of
the
free
love
of
God
to
Jacob
,
the
Prophet
there
clearly
intimateth
,
and
as
we
said
before
,
many
other
places
assert
;
Therefore
the
Devastation
of
Edom
,
was
the
Effect
of
the
hatred
of
God
to
Esau
,
extending
it self
to
his
wicked
Posterity
:
He
sayeth
moreover
,
That
the
cause
why
God
hated
Esau's
Posterity
at
that
time
,
is
declared
in
the
4
v.
In
these
words
,
We
are
impoverished
,
but
will
return
&c.
In
which
words
,
saith
he
,
Their
Incorrigible
wickedness
is
declared
.
Reply
,
That
Edom
was
an
incorrigible
wicked
people
is
true
,
but
nothing
to
his
purpose
:
For
in
this
their
Resolution
,
considered
in
it self
,
of
which
Resolution
alone
the
Prophet
speaketh
,
and
in
reposing
themselves
in
their
own
Lands
,
there
can
no
wickedness
be
shewed
.
Hence
we
conclude
with
Junius
,
that
noble
Interpreter
of
Scripture
,
on
the
words
,
That
in
this
4
v.
is
contained
a
Decument
,
that
God
is
about
to
confirm
Israel
,
now
brought
back
from
Captivity
,
to
defend
the
Land
,
and
to
magnifie
himself
in
all
things
;
but
on
the
other
hand
,
that
he
was
about
to
deprive
the
Idumeans
,
whom
he
had
Reprob●t
,
of
all
power
to
return
or
rebuild
their
Common
wealth
,
tho
they
had
endeavoured
to
do
it
.
Add
to
all
this
the
body
of
Orthodox
writers
,
both
Ancient
and
Modern
,
approving
our
meaning
of
this
place
,
we
shall
name
two
;
But
as
Gylippus
was
to
the
Lacaedemonians
,
they
me
accounted
in
stare
omnium
:
The
one
is
Hierom
among
the
Ancients
,
upon
the
place
,
who
saith
,
He
doth
not
only
say
,
I
loved
Jacob
before
he
was
born
,
but
also
I
hated
Esau
before
he
was
brought
forth
;
But
I
also
have
reserved
my
love
and
hatred
for
their
Posterity
.
The
other
is
Luther
,
De
servo
Arbitrio
,
Cap
,
161
▪
who
sayes
It
is
not
therefore
the
temerity
of
the
Idumeans
which
is
reproved
,
but
the
ingratitude
of
the
Children
of
Israel
,
who
see
not
what
God
bestoweth
upon
them
,
and
of
what
he
depriveth
their
Brethren
,
the
Idumites
,
for
no
other
cause
,
but
because
he
loved
the
one
,
and
hated
the
other
.
In
which
place
Luther
largely
demonstrats
,
that
the
Prophet
here
speaks
of
these
things
which
he
did
to
Israel
and
Edom
,
as
the
Effect
of
his
eternal
love
and
hatred
,
in
opposition
to
Erasmus
,
who
by
special
Command
of
the
Pope
,
did
undertake
the
defence
of
the
Pelagian
Doctrine
,
in
his
Diatribe
de
Libero
Arbitrio
.
Add
to
all
these
the
History
of
Jacob
and
Esau
,
as
a
good
Commentarie
on
both
places
,
now
in
hand
,
which
declareth
that
Esau
was
a
profane
Person
Heb
12.16
.
and
elsewhere
,
and
that
Jacob
got
grace
,
and
so
was
saved
,
which
is
more
than
a
demonstration
,
that
the
Lord
determined
from
all
Eternity
,
to
save
the
one
,
and
passe
by
the
other
,
which
is
the
thing
we
plead
for
;
That
which
he
sayes
in
the
fourth
place
is
true
,
but
nothing
to
his
purpose
.
Seing
the
Question
is
,
whether
or
not
the
Apostle
in
this
place
handleth
the
matter
of
Eternal
Election
and
Reprobation
:
In
the
fifth
place
,
he
taketh
the
place
of
the
old
Libertins
,
who
denyed
that
any
godly
man
ought
to
be
subject
to
any
Magistrat
,
tho
never
so
just
,
if
he
want
true
Grace
;
by
reason
of
which
Doctrines
huge
Confusions
were
raised
in
Germany
,
as
also
by
Venner
,
who
with
his
Complices
began
to
raise
great
Tumults
in
England
,
while
he
minded
to
make
this
Doctrine
of
our
Author
practicable
.
He
goeth
on
to
deprave
the
14.
and
15.
verses
;
The
substance
of
what
he
saith
,
we
shall
faithfully
deliver
in
so
far
as
he
militats
against
our
Confession
.
Having
inferred
from
these
verses
by
way
of
an
Objection
to
himself
,
That
it
seems
there
are
some
to
whom
God
will
not
shew
mercy
.
He
answers
,
That
the
Apostle
pre-occupies
an
Objection
,
which
some
might
make
out
of
the
Continuance
of
Gods
Mercy
,
still
to
the
Children
of
Israel
,
but
withdrawn
from
Edom
,
as
before
;
What
shall
we
say
,
is
there
unrighteousness
with
God
?
Next
that
Exod.
33
,
19.
here
cited
by
the
Apostle
,
speaks
not
of
Gods
first
Grace
,
which
he
gives
to
all
alike
,
but
of
the
second
which
he
continueth
to
these
that
walk
humbly
,
and
answerably
to
the
first
,
as
Moses
had
done
.
To
which
I
reply
.
1.
That
he
makes
his
Objection
,
pre-occupied
by
the
Apostle
,
to
be
no
Objection
:
For
from
the
Lords
continuance
of
his
Mercy
upon
the
Humble-walking
under
it
,
and
his
withdrawing
the
same
from
Esau
,
upon
the
abuse
thereof
,
none
could
infer
with
any
colour
of
reason
,
That
there
is
unrighteousness
with
God
,
seing
the
abuse
of
good
things
deserveth
the
Depravation
thereof
:
And
so
according
to
him
,
the
Apostle
was
triffling
all
the
while
.
Again
any
that
runneth
not
into
willful
prejudice
,
may
see
that
the
Apostles
objection
hath
more
apparent
Strength
in
the
judgement
of
Humane
Reason
,
by
far
than
our
Author
maketh
it
to
have
;
for
it
is
an
inference
drawn
from
what
the
Apostle
had
said
in
the
former
verse
,
of
the
absolute
rejection
of
some
,
while
others
were
Elected
,
which
Doctrine
carnal
reason
,
as
it
doth
yet
,
knew
too
well
how
to
wrest
;
And
from
this
Doctrine
according
to
carnal
Reason
no
little
absurdity
seemed
to
follow
:
Wherefore
the
Apostle
appeals
from
its
Tribunal
to
that
of
the
Scriptures
,
yea
even
to
such
a
Text
as
speaketh
of
the
absolute
Dominion
of
God
over
the
Creature
.
Yea
the
most
absolute
imaginable
.
Now
if
the
objection
had
been
such
an
one
;
as
this
Arminian
professeth
it
,
there
had
been
no
necessity
of
the
Apostles
betaking
himself
to
this
place
of
Scripture
.
2.
What
he
talketh
here
of
his
twofold
grace
,
stands
and
falls
with
what
he
said
of
his
twofold
Election
,
which
distinction
we
have
already
rejected
;
for
this
Distinction
of
Grace
in
first
and
second
,
it
is
groundless
,
for
it
is
not
in
the
least
insinuated
in
this
Text
,
viz.
Exod
:
33
:
19.
That
Moses
had
gotten
in
the
beginning
from
God
some
kind
of
Grace
,
which
had
not
the
Divine
power
of
God
coming
along
therewith
,
causing
Moses
irresistibly
,
yet
sweetly
walk
in
Gods
Statutes
.
But
leaving
him
to
use
well
,
or
abuse
the
grace
gotten
.
Now
he
must
prove
this
from
the
Text
,
if
he
would
conclude
any
thing
from
it
;
moreover
,
If
Moses
speak
only
of
a
second
grace
here
,
which
a
first
must
in
Faith
and
humble
walking
necessarily
preceed
,
then
this
Text
holds
forth
the
Dominion
of
God
to
be
no
more
absolute
over
his
Creatures
,
than
that
of
a
Magistrate
towards
his
well
or
ill
deserving
subjects
,
whom
he
ought
to
reward
or
punish
,
according
to
their
desert
,
and
not
to
whom
he
will
only
:
And
so
this
Text
shall
destroy
it self
.
Lastly
,
if
the
exposition
of
this
universalist
were
sound
,
then
the
Apostles
Conclusion
,
which
he
gathereth
in
the
next
verse
should
not
follow
,
but
rather
the
quite
contrary
thereof
.
For
if
God
give
a
first
grace
to
all
,
and
that
so
sufficient
,
that
it
lyes
only
in
Mans
will
to
come
,
or
not
to
come
unto
God
,
and
that
Man
hath
power
either
to
will
or
nill
,
at
pleasure
,
either
to
turn
,
or
not
to
turn
to
God
:
and
yet
notwithstanding
,
some
come
,
and
some
come
not
,
then
all
that
makes
the
one
to
differ
from
the
other
,
is
certainly
of
him
that
willeth
.
The
Answer
of
our
Antagonist
to
this
16.
verse
is
rare
viz.
Tho
our
Salvation
be
meer
of
Mercy
,
yet
Man
can
both
will
and
run
in
some
sort
,
as
this
Scripture
imports
;
because
he
could
have
said
nothing
less
to
to
the
purpose
:
For
the
Argument
which
may
be
framed
from
this
verse
,
and
it
is
not
of
him
that
willeth
,
Ergo
Election
,
or
the
purpose
of
God
,
(
one
of
which
words
must
of
necessity
be
supplyed
from
verse
11.
Otherwise
the
Apostles
words
would
want
a
cohesion
,
and
the
verb
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
which
of
necessity
must
be
understood
here
,
shall
want
a
Noun
)
is
not
an
effect
of
the
will
of
Man
,
or
of
his
good
works
moving
God
thereunto
.
Now
this
Argument
is
not
touched
by
the
answer
,
as
is
of
it self
apparent
:
He
therefore
here
delivereth
up
the
cause
,
and
endeavoureth
to
cheat
his
Reader
.
2.
This
place
imports
no
more
a
power
in
all
men
to
will
,
or
run
in
the
way
of
Gods
Commandments
,
than
these
words
in
Ezek.
36.22
,
32.
Not
for
your
sake
,
and
leave
in
all
Men
a
power
to
merit
at
the
hand
of
God.
He
goeth
on
to
comment
upon
the
17.
and
18.
verses
.
And
1.
He
desires
us
,
To
note
that
here
the
Lord
doth
not
say
,
for
this
purpose
I
have
created
thee
,
but
raised
thee
up
or
brought
thee
upon
the
Stage
.
But
this
is
the
vainest
of
evasions
,
for
none
but
an
Athiest
can
deny
,
that
God
from
all
Eternitie
did
decree
to
raise
up
Pharaoh
for
that
same
end
,
for
which
in
time
he
raised
him
up
:
and
consequently
,
that
he
decreed
to
create
him
for
the
same
end
,
otherwise
God
failed
of
his
first
end
,
and
was
forced
to
betake
himself
to
the
next
best
:
Which
to
affirm
is
to
make
God
a
Man
,
and
so
to
profess
atheism
with
open
face
;
yea
this
Doctrine
bringeth
the
wisdom
of
God
below
that
of
a
Man
,
seing
according
to
it
the
omniscient
God
,
did
creat
Pharaoh
for
an
end
,
which
he
knew
he
was
never
to
obtain
.
But
2.
That
Pharaoh
was
not
only
brought
on
the
Stage
,
but
also
created
to
the
end
,
that
God
might
manifest
His
Power
and
Justice
in
His
Destruction
,
is
clear
from
Pro
▪
16.4
.
Where
it
is
said
,
that
God
made
,
wrought
,
formed
,
or
created
,
for
all
these
will
the
word
Pagnal
bear
,
all
things
for
Himself
,
yea
even
the
wicked
,
the
Spirit
of
God
holding
forth
,
that
this
is
a
Paradox
,
unto
the
day
of
evil
.
2.
He
sayes
,
That
Pharaoh
was
known
unto
the
Lord
to
be
a
proud
and
obstinate
Rebell
,
as
is
evident
,
Exod:
8.2
.
But
what
he
would
hence
inferr
is
not
evident
,
except
that
Pharaoh's
ill
disposed
will
was
unconquerable
by
the
grace
and
power
of
the
omnipotent
God
:
To
repeat
which
Conclusion
is
more
than
to
refute
it
.
That
which
he
sayes
in
the
third
place
,
viz.
That
God
shewed
Pharaoh
the
danger
of
disobedience
before
he
sent
his
Plagues
upon
Him
:
As
also
his
fourth
observation
,
viz.
that
he
makes
him
of
unwilling
willing
to
let
his
People
go
,
is
meer
nothing
:
For
himself
here
on
the
matter
grants
,
That
from
Gods
Exalting
Pharaoh
to
the
Throne
of
the
Kingdom
,
He
was
destinat
to
destruction
,
and
his
day
of
grace
gone
,
otherwise
his
first
note
upon
this
Text
is
nonsense
:
Therefore
it
follows
,
That
all
the
warnings
antecedent
to
the
Plagues
are
not
Declarations
of
the
mind
of
God
to
save
Pharaoh
:
And
that
his
causing
of
him
to
let
the
people
go
,
was
no
infusion
of
grace
in
him
.
His
5.
note
viz
▪
That
God
did
not
harden
Pharaohs
heart
,
by
infusing
any
hardness
into
it
,
but
rather
used
means
to
soften
it
,
and
bend
his
heart
to
obedience
,
we
imbrace
withall
our
heart
,
as
to
the
first
part
;
for
the
second
part
thereof
,
it
is
ambiguous
;
For
if
we
understand
these
words
of
a
real
design
in
God
to
soften
the
heart
of
Pharaoh
by
these
means
,
it
is
false
,
seing
God
himself
declareth
,
Exod:
4.21
.
Even
before
these
were
used
toward
Pharaoh
,
that
he
had
no
such
intent
,
but
the
contrarie
thereof
.
He
sayes
6ly
.
That
the
Lord
destroyed
him
not
,
untill
his
heart
byassed
and
willfully
revolted
from
that
inclination
of
letting
Israel
go
,
to
which
the
Lord
had
brought
and
wrought
him
:
So
that
the
Lords
pleasure
in
hardening
,
must
out
of
this
example
be
understood
of
such
as
are
first
or
last
refractory
against
his
grace
and
gracious
requiring
Motions
.
Reply
,
upon
as
good
a
ground
he
might
assert
,
that
Dives
in
hell
had
such
inclinations
and
workings
of
grace
,
together
with
power
to
use
them
aright
,
if
he
had
pleased
,
which
if
he
had
improved
aright
,
he
might
have
passed
thorow
the
impenetrable
gulf
,
to
the
place
where
Lazarus
was
.
For
Dives
,
Luk.
16.27
,
28.
Had
an
inclination
and
a
vehement
desire
,
that
his
five
Brethren
might
shun
the
place
of
torment
,
in
which
he
was
:
And
surely
this
inclination
and
desire
was
as
good
in
it self
as
Pharaohs
,
of
letting
Israel
go
;
and
surely
the
Motive
that
prompted
Pharaoh
to
yield
to
the
peoples
departure
,
was
not
a
whit
better
than
the
motive
of
this
desire
in
Dives
,
for
both
were
acted
by
the
fear
of
punishment
:
Hence
let
the
Universalists
be
ashamed
of
their
first
grace
,
seing
it
is
common
to
these
in
Hell
as
well
as
to
these
in
the
World.
2.
If
this
his
Doctrine
(
viz.
that
Pharaoh
and
every
Man
else
had
a
sufficient
Measure
of
Grace
given
them
,
and
power
to
use
it
well
or
ill
at
pleasure
,
according
to
the
good
or
ill
improvement
of
which
,
they
might
have
been
saved
or
damned
)
be
true
,
and
this
Arminians
exposition
of
Exod:
9.16
.
Here
cited
by
the
Apostle
be
to
be
received
,
then
the
Apostles
Conclusion
vers
,
16.
is
a
meer
Non
sequitur
;
for
according
to
his
exposition
,
the
Lord
should
not
have
mercy
on
whom
he
will
,
and
harden
whom
he
will
,
but
these
only
who
will
,
or
desire
to
have
Mercy
,
or
to
be
hardned
;
seing
this
Universalistick
Doctrine
makes
the
main
and
Chief
difference
,
betwixt
these
that
are
actually
saved
,
and
not
saved
,
to
flow
from
the
will
of
Man
,
which
they
say
has
a
power
to
receive
or
reject
Grace
,
and
so
to
be
mollified
,
or
hardned
absolutely
,
at
pleasure
;
now
I
say
,
to
say
this
,
and
yet
to
assert
that
God
hath
mercy
on
whom
he
will
have
mercy
,
and
hardneth
whom
he
will
,
is
no
less
ridiculouslie
contradictorie
,
than
if
one
should
say
that
such
a
judge
had
absolute
power
over
such
a
guilty
City
,
to
save
alive
or
put
to
Death
all
the
Citizens
at
pleasure
,
and
yet
in
the
mean
while
that
there
were
such
and
such
Conditions
proposed
to
this
City
,
which
they
could
imbrace
or
respect
as
they
listed
,
upon
the
performance
of
which
Conditions
,
this
judge
could
not
,
nor
might
not
put
to
death
any
,
nor
save
the
rejectors
thereof
.
He
goeth
on
to
comment
upon
the
9.
verse
.
Why
doth
he
yet
find
fault
?
Who
hath
resisted
his
will
!
Thus
,
it
seems
then
that
his
will
in
condemning
the
wicked
is
irresistible
.
Answer
,
the
will
of
God
is
manifold
.
First
voluntas
Signi
,
that
which
he
would
have
done
by
Men
,
and
that
may
be
resisted
or
dissobeyed
.
2
ly
.
Voluntas
Beneplaciti
,
that
which
he
is
pleased
to
effect
,
and
that
either
absolutly
,
to
be
done
by
himself
alone
,
or
with
others
,
which
cannot
be
withstood
;
or
conditionally
in
case
the
Creature
act
his
part
,
this
Conditional
will
may
also
be
repugned
;
So
that
wicked
Men
can
not
excuse
themselves
by
the
irresistibilitie
of
the
first
or
last
mentioned
will
of
Gods
irrevocable
decree
,
at
length
past
upon
the
obstinat
and
incorrigible
sinner
,
which
like
his
powerful
and
efficacious
will
,
is
inexpugnable
:
But
it
is
the
obdured
Mans
refractory
and
inflexible
will
,
that
hath
now
made
this
will
or
decree
of
God
so
peremptorie
against
him
.
So
that
God
hath
just
cause
to
fault
and
blame
the
Man
that
perisheth
,
but
not
è
Contra.
Reply
in
the
framing
of
his
Objection
,
he
should
have
inferred
that
it
seems
that
the
Will
of
God
,
in
passing
by
some
,
while
he
from
all
Eternity
elected
others
to
Glory
,
and
of
hardning
them
in
time
,
is
irresistible
,
or
unchangeable
,
for
of
these
two
the
Apostle
here
speaks
:
But
let
us
come
to
his
Answer
,
in
which
we
may
observe
,
that
this
distinction
of
voluntas
Beneplaciti
,
in
absolute
and
conditionat
,
is
a
meer
fiction
,
as
appeareth
even
by
the
Testimony
of
Arminius
himself
,
who
in
his
Book
against
Perkins
,
acknowledgeth
that
voluntas
beneplaciti
is
without
limitation
effi●acious
.
But
2dly
this
Distinction
of
voluntas
Beneplaciti
in
absolute
and
conditionat
,
makes
God
as
changeable
as
a
man
;
for
if
the
Lord
have
a
real
Will
and
Intention
,
that
such
and
such
things
be
done
by
some
men
,
in
order
to
obtaining
such
and
such
Priviledges
,
v.
g.
Eternal
Life
,
then
there
can
be
nothing
imagined
,
able
to
hinder
the
bringing
to
pass
of
this
desire
,
but
two
things
,
viz.
either
the
want
of
Power
,
or
a
real
Change
in
the
Will
of
God
;
but
both
those
are
equally
absurd
:
neither
let
any
say
here
,
that
this
will
of
God
is
only
conditionat
in
respect
of
the
ends
only
,
and
not
of
the
Means
and
Conditions
thereof
:
For
whosoever
willeth
any
thing
,
he
willeth
and
desireth
all
the
Means
and
Conditions
,
in
order
to
its
bringing
to
pass
,
and
will
give
a
Beeing
to
all
those
Conditions
,
if
it
be
in
his
Power
,
which
Power
none
dare
derogat
from
God.
3dly
.
This
Objection
,
as
this
Arminian
propones
it
,
is
no
Objection
,
for
in
Substance
it
is
this
,
If
the
Lord
hath
proposed
such
Conditions
,
as
men
can
perform
and
so
obtain
Salvation
,
and
yet
obstinatly
refuse
them
,
so
that
at
length
the
Lord
after
their
rejection
thereof
,
decreeth
their
Eternal
Ruine
,
then
he
hath
no
Reason
to
find
fault
with
Man
,
but
the
Blame
thereof
lieth
upon
himself
.
Now
I
say
to
propose
the
O●jection
thus
,
is
to
render
the
Apostle
ridiculous
,
for
there
is
no
more
appearance
of
Reason
here
,
than
a
Subject
should
have
to
grumble
and
repine
,
when
he
is
punished
by
his
Prince
,
for
denying
Obedience
to
him
,
which
to
have
performed
was
in
his
Power
.
4ly
▪
If
the
Objection
had
been
of
no
more
seeming
strength
,
than
this
Arminian
or
Pelagian
(
for
all
is
one
)
alledgeth
it
to
be
,
the
Apostle
had
easily
found
out
another
Answer
,
than
that
which
he
doth
in
the
following
Verses
,
where
he
stops
the
Mouth
of
the
Objecter
with
the
absolute
Power
of
God
over
the
Creature
,
shewing
that
the
Creature
hath
no
more
Reason
to
complain
that
God
decreed
,
to
pass
by
some
,
and
condemn
them
for
their
Iniquity
,
than
the
clay
of
the
same
lump
hath
to
complain
of
the
Potters
Unjustice
,
because
he
did
not
destinat
it
for
as
honourable
an
use
,
as
another
part
of
the
same
Mass.
In
short
,
if
the
Objection
could
be
so
framed
,
as
that
there
could
be
an
Answer
thereto
found
out
,
suiting
the
Genius
of
Humane
Reason
(
which
is
the
Scope
of
our
Author
here
,
and
all
the
rest
of
his
Brethren
)
then
there
should
be
an
indissolvable
,
and
more
than
Gordian
knot
cast
to
any
that
were
perswaded
of
the
Divinity
of
the
Scriptures
,
for
considering
the
Apostles
Answer
in
the
following
Verse
,
they
should
have
but
too
much
Ground
,
to
suspect
most
vehemently
,
that
the
Apostle
was
not
assisted
with
the
Divine
Spirit
,
who
betook
himself
for
Sanctuary
to
the
absolute
Power
of
God
,
in
the
case
wherein
he
,
or
any
man
else
might
have
sweetly
satisfied
Reason
,
and
not
thus
stopt
its
mouth
,
by
imposing
as
it
were
an
imperious
silence
,
and
left
it
far
less
quieted
,
than
they
found
it
;
That
which
he
commenteth
upon
v.
20
is
not
a
whit
les●
vain
than
the
rest
:
the
Substance
of
which
is
,
that
the
Apostle
in
this
v.
stops
the
Mouth
of
these
,
who
complained
,
that
God
created
them
with
Liberty
of
will
,
and
so
with
power
of
falling
,
to
which
saith
he
,
it
is
answered
,
that
this
Faculty
might
be
improved
to
the
Salvation
of
the
Creature
,
as
well
as
to
the
glory
of
Gods
grace
.
To
which
we
Reply
,
that
no
such
Interpretation
can
be
gathered
from
the
Text
,
for
the
Objection
proposed
in
the
former
v
,
doth
not
in
the
least
intend
,
from
the
Liberty
of
Mans
Will
,
to
do
Good
or
Evil
,
to
conclude
that
Man
is
not
guilty
,
but
rather
God.
But
from
the
Immutability
and
Irresistibility
of
Gods
Will
and
Decree
of
passing
by
and
rejecting
some
,
(
as
he
did
with
Esau
)
the
Objecter
endeavoureth
to
free
Man
from
Guilt
,
and
fix
it
upon
God
,
neither
is
he
a
whit
happier
in
taking
up
of
the
Apostles
Answer
;
for
the
Apostle
doth
not
flee
to
the
Liberty
of
Mans
will
,
that
he
may
draw
his
Answer
hence
,
but
the
absolute
Dominion
of
God
over
the
Creature
,
and
that
〈◊〉
an
one
as
he
hath
,
who
possesseth
wood
,
Iron
,
Clay
,
or
such
Materials
,
and
is
wilfull
to
make
various
Kinds
of
Instruments
,
which
may
serve
either
for
honourable
or
dishonourable
uses
;
but
these
Materials
that
are
appointed
by
the
Owner
and
Artist
thereof
,
cannot
be
said
to
be
wronged
by
him
,
or
to
have
any
Ground
of
Complaint
,
and
that
by
Reason
of
the
absolute
Power
,
that
the
Owner
and
Artist
hath
over
them
;
even
as
any
of
Mankind
that
from
all
Eternity
are
passed
by
and
rejected
of
God
,
and
destinat
to
Destruction
for
Gods
own
Glory
,
as
it
is
said
Prov.
16.4
.
have
no
Reason
to
complain
.
Now
in
this
Analogy
lies
the
Strength
of
the
Apostles
answer
,
which
who
ever
denyes
shal
never
be
able
to
find
the
Sense
of
this
Text.
Hence
it
appears
(
whether
ignorantly
or
maliciously
,
I
know
not
)
that
this
Arminian
hath
come
short
of
uptaking
either
Objection
or
Answer
:
But
most
of
all
absurd
is
what
he
sayeth
,
in
his
Commentary
(
rather
depravation
)
of
the
21
v.
viz.
That
as
the
Potter
makes
no
Vessels
of
set
Purpose
to
be
broken
,
tho
he
makes
some
for
dishonourable
uses
:
So
the
Lord
makes
none
of
the
Sons
of
men
of
Purpose
to
be
destroyed
,
tho
he
makes
some
Superiours
and
Inferiours
in
the
Church
and
Common-wealth
;
I
say
this
is
most
of
all
absurd
,
for
it
is
as
clear
as
if
written
with
a
Sunbeam
,
that
the
Apostle
is
here
speaking
nothing
of
high
and
low
Degrees
in
Church
or
State
,
but
of
these
who
perish
,
and
these
who
are
saved
Eternally
;
according
to
this
Explication
,
every
one
that
is
in
low
Degree
should
be
a
Vessel
of
Wrath
,
fitted
for
Destruction
:
Seing
none
can
deny
,
that
this
is
all
one
with
a
Vessel
of
Dishonour
:
as
also
every
one
that
is
in
high
Degree
in
Church
or
State
should
be
a
Vessel
of
Mercy
,
aforetime
prepared
unto
Glory
,
and
one
of
Gods
called
Ones
,
as
the
Apostle
was
,
(
whose
calling
I
think
was
effectual
,
and
so
certainly
a
Saint
)
such
a
mark
of
Believers
and
Unbelievers
was
never
heard
before
.
To
Corroborat
what
he
sayes
on
this
Verse
he
gives
us
his
notes
on
Jer.
18.3
,
4
,
5.
among
which
one
is
,
that
the
Lord
expostulates
with
Israel
for
not
suffering
him
to
mould
them
a
new
.
To
which
we
answer
,
that
it
will
no
more
follow
from
this
place
,
that
the
Heart
of
corrupt
man
is
stronger
in
resisting
than
the
Power
of
God
,
and
that
God
cannot
make
men
of
unwilling
to
become
willing
,
which
is
the
meaning
of
our
Adversaries
Words
,
than
real
ignorance
of
what
was
to
come
,
may
be
concluded
to
be
in
God
from
Isa.
5.4
.
and
59.16
.
Other
notes
he
has
upon
this
place
,
such
as
,
That
the
Lord
forms
men
a
new
by
Force
or
Violence
,
but
works
with
them
as
free
Agents
,
serving
for
nothing
except
to
declare
this
Authors
maliciousnesse
;
for
he
here
insmuates
,
that
the
Reformed
Churches
judge
,
that
God
deals
with
a
sinner
in
his
Conversion
,
as
if
he
were
a
Stone
or
a
Bruit
,
the
contrair
of
which
appeareth
from
their
Confessions
,
and
in
special
in
the
Confession
,
which
he
here
impugneth
.
Ch.
10.1
.
He
goeth
on
to
comment
upon
the
22
verse
where
he
says
,
That
it
is
not
so
much
as
implyed
,
that
these
Vessels
of
wrath
,
spoken
of
in
this
verse
,
by
the
Apostle
,
were
fitted
by
the
Lord
to
Destruction
.
Yea
saith
he
,
the
contrary
is
imported
,
where
the
Apostle
sayes
,
That
〈◊〉
endureth
them
with
much
long
suffering
;
For
if
God
created
them
,
or
designed
them
of
purpose
to
Destruction
,
things
had
succeeded
according
to
his
hearts
desire
.
In
Reply
to
these
Cavils
we
find
no
difficulty
;
for
God
may
be
as
well
said
to
fit
men
to
Destruction
,
as
he
is
said
to
harden
some
.
verse
18.
For
I
think
none
will
deny
,
but
hardening
is
a
fitting
to
Destruction
.
2.
I
think
none
dare
deny
,
that
even
while
God
was
hardening
Pharaohs
heart
,
he
was
exercising
his
long
suffering
patience
,
in
permitting
him
to
fulfill
his
course
of
sin
.
Augustin
de
Civit.
Dei
Lib.
16.
sayes
.
God
of
the
same
Mass
,
condemned
through
Original
sin
,
did
as
a
Potter
make
one
to
honour
,
and
another
to
dishonour
:
Our
Author
sayeth
moreover
,
That
it
is
not
said
,
they
were
created
but
fitted
for
Destruction
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
Reply
,
Altho
our
Adversary
loves
alwayes
to
pass
over
the
Connection
of
the
verses
of
this
Chapter
,
as
indeed
he
hath
good
reason
to
do
,
he
notwithstanding
may
permit
us
to
consider
it
:
In
which
we
shall
find
,
that
men
may
be
said
to
be
fitted
to
wrath
,
even
as
some
part
of
the
lump
of
clay
is
fitted
by
the
Potter
,
for
Vessels
of
Dishonour
:
But
it
is
appointed
for
this
dishonourable
use
as
soon
as
it
is
appointed
to
be
vessels
:
But
so
it
is
,
That
the
Lord
so
ordereth
of
men
as
the
Potter
of
his
Clay
,
as
the
Apostle
here
shewes
.
It
is
clear
therefore
,
That
by
this
word
Fitted
,
must
be
understood
among
other
things
,
Appointed
or
Decreed
.
He
goeth
on
to
Comment
on
the
23
verse
,
where
among
some
other
things
,
which
he
hath
not
to
the
Purpose
that
he
intendeth
,
he
asserts
,
That
this
preparing
of
the
Vessels
of
Glory
,
is
not
attributed
to
Gods
Eternal
Decree
.
And
in
this
he
is
but
like
himself
,
who
,
as
we
have
heard
above
denyeth
on
the
matter
,
that
there
is
any
Decree
of
God
concerning
the
Salvation
or
Damnation
of
men
in
particular
before
death
:
Altho
at
another
time
,
as
we
have
also
heard
,
he
sticketh
not
to
contradict
this
;
But
that
this
preparation
is
Attributed
to
the
Decree
of
God
,
is
clear
,
not
only
from
the
Scope
of
the
Apostle
,
and
the
Energie
of
the
word
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
〈◊〉
but
also
from
no
few
other
Scriptures
,
such
as
Eph.
1.
4
,
5
,
6
,
7.
A
length
to
shut
up
this
Discourse
,
Let
the
Reader
Observe
with
me
.
1.
That
tho
men
bring
full
Wain-loads
of
Arguments
,
in
appearance
like
Goli●h's
Sword
,
from
the
Armorie
of
corrupt
Reason
whereby
to
overthrow
the
genuine
meaning
of
this
place
,
they
are
not
to
be
regarded
,
neither
on
this
account
are
we
to
be
moved
or
shaken
,
as
touching
the
behalf
of
this
place
.
For
in
so
far
as
we
are
shaken
from
it
through
the
force
of
these
Reasons
,
We
yield
to
these
great
Adversaries
of
Christ
Jesus
,
the
Socinians
,
that
grand
Principle
of
all
Orthodox
Christians
viz.
that
Reason
as
well
as
the
rest
of
the
Scriptures
Rivals
,
ought
to
strike
fail
,
and
yeild
preheminency
thereto
,
as
being
the
entire
and
ultimat
Rule
of
the
Faith
and
Manner●
of
a
Christian.
This
I
have
good
reason
to
note
here
;
For
there
be
many
that
though
they
cannot
but
perceive
this
Text
to
be
,
without
the
highest
violenting
and
detorting
thereof
,
utterly
incapable
of
any
other
sense
,
than
what
the
Reformed
,
and
in
especial
our
Reverend
Westminister
Assembly
,
give
upon
it
still
,
notwithstanding
alledge
,
that
on
the
account
of
their
most
powerful
Reasons
to
the
contrary
,
This
our
meaning
is
not
to
be
received
,
seek
another
where
we
will
.
2.
That
if
there
be
a
Doctrine
in
all
the
Holy
Scriptures
,
out
of
the
r●●ch
of
,
and
far
above
the
Line
of
Humane
Reason
,
contrary
to
Corrupt
Reason
,
and
in
its
Estimat
repugnant
to
all
Reason
(
as
certainly
there
is
)
then
no
man
will
deny
,
but
that
this
Doctrine
of
Eternal
Election
,
and
Reprobation
,
is
one
of
the
chief
o●
such
Doctrines
,
as
having
for
its
Object
,
that
which
i●
no
less
Impervestigable
than
Eternity
,
no
less
unfathomable
than
Immensity
,
no
less
Incomprehensible
,
than
he
whose
very
name
is
Wonderful
,
and
so
wonderful
that
none
can
know
it
,
even
God
himself
,
according
to
his
Eternal
actings
and
workings
,
3ly
.
That
this
place
of
Scripture
,
is
one
of
the
chief
Seats
of
the
Doctrine
of
Election
and
Reprobation
:
Hence
we
most
rationally
infer
,
that
in
agitation
of
this
great
Controversy
;
If
any
Scriptures
be
brought
,
which
seemingly
(
for
none
do
it
really
)
speak
contrary
to
this
Text
,
Light
is
to
be
brought
from
this
place
,
for
expounding
and
clearing
up
the
meaning
of
these
seemingly
repugnant
Scriptures
,
〈◊〉
rather
,
that
ê
contra
,
these
should
be
made
〈◊〉
Standard
and
Guide
in
exposition
of
this
.
FINIS
.