THE Fig-leaf Covering Discovered: OR, Geo. Keith's Explications and Retractations OF Divers Passages out of his former Books, Proved Insincere, Defective and Evasive.


Thou art weighed in the Ballances, and found wanting,

Dan. 5.27.

Out of thine own Mouth, will I judge thee,

Luke 19.22.
Qui alterum incusat probri, ipsum se intueri oportet.

LONDON, Printed and Sold by T. Sowle, near the Meeting-house in White-Hart-Court in Grace-Church-street; and at the Bible in Leaden-hall-street near the Market, 1697.

The Fig-leaf Covering discovered, &c.

THE share I have had in this Controversy, de­pending between G. K. and his quondam Bre­thren, the People called Quakers, hath not been so much Argumentative (that I found ready done to my hands) as to turn his own Weapon upon himself, and detect the Inconstancy and Contradiction of the Man, who while pretending to give a List of others gross and vile Errors (as in his True Copy, p. 17.) and reflecting on several of our Friends by name (without excepting any) as holding gross and vile Errors, opposite to some of the fundamental Doctrines of Christianity, and yet so Hypocritical, as not to own and retract in publick their Errors exposed in publick, even lest such Retraction and Correction should lessen their Honour and Esteem among their too credulous Followers and Admirers (see Preface to Gross Errors, p. 2.) yet had not then essayed to correct his own, which by his own confession (True Copy, p. 17.) Needed both further Explanation, and in some part (as he mincingly worded it) an Emendation and Correction. This gave me occasion, after having inspected his Books, wherein I found many Contradictions both doctrinal and personal, as well as Absurdities, to be engaged in laying them before himself and others (the which I exhibited in three Tracts, the one entituled Apostate Exposed, the other People called Quakers Cleared, and the third Keith against Keith, the first and last of which he is still Debtor to) who have more than once called upon him for them (they having been promised in the third Month 1695) and at length told him, upon the great Joy and Peace he pretended to have in his publishing a lame Retraction of his former Exposi­tion of two Scriptures (which yet fell abundantly short of what had been proposed by him) That perhaps, had I [Page 4] not forced him to it, by exposing of him, he had stayed yet another Twelve-month, before he had given them, as in my Keith against Keith, p. 90, 91.

Now, after long Importunity (like the Widow to the unjust Judge) he emits something which he entitules, Explications and Retractations of divers Passages contained in his former Books, which that it may not want for noise, and perhaps to stave off the work he is already clogged with, he gives out may at present suffice for a Reply to T. E's and my late and former Books, Five of which now stick upon his hands. Yet lest he should seem wholly to fore-close himself from a larger Answer, he tells us, p. 42. he hopes to do it, E'RE VERY LONG.

This naturally leads me to call to mind, how he hath served T. E. with respect to two of his, which he told us, in his Postscript to his Gross Errors, printed Anno 1695, it was PROBABLE a due answer might be given to in due time, which due time is not yet come with him, but he hath laboured to shift it by more Ar­tifices than one. For seeing what just ground I may have (at least) to suspect him the Composer of those seven Queries proposed by the Bishop of London's Chap­lain to our Yearly Meeting Anno 1695, and made publick by himself, which he improved to cut himself out new work, while the old lay on his hands (as if it had been therefore designed) 'tis manifest from his Summoning us to meet him at Turners-Hall, alledging want of Time and ability of Estate to print answers to us, and his since telling us (in his Book Antichrists and Sadducees, p. 21.) that he hath offered to answer Vivâ voce, that there is no end of answering in print, few will be at the pains to com­pare book with book, and the Charge is too great for him, that he would fain have shifted that free and open way of answering by the Press, which he had drawn us into, and where we had pursued him, by appointing, without our consent, a day to Arraign us at his Bar, [Page 5] wherein had we complied, he might (as I once told him) have run off from the Cause he was hampered with and uneasie under, and by wrangling a-fresh upon some out-skirts of the Controversie, have drop'd the main one. Now this Project failing, What doth he do? Betake himself to answer T. E. in Print? Nothing less: But then he tries, whether he can set the Church of England and the Protestant Dissenters upon our Backs, informeth them, Vile Errors are boldly and avow­edly promoted among a sort or Gang of Quakers, as are not only as bad as any Popery, but MƲCH WORSE than the WORST of Popery, in divers respects, animates them to suppress our Books and disturb our Meetings, else Papists will out-do them in Zeal, &c. Ant. & Sadd. p. 40, 41. It is after all this, when none of these ways would take, that the poor Man is fain to pretend he hath an­swered them all at once, in the Book before me.

To which he prefixeth a Preface, wherein he excu­seth his delay, as having found divers more Passages that needed an Explanation, and some of them a Correction, above what he had discovered, when he published his pur­pose. So that it is to be hoped, it is now effectually done, in his own Judgment. But it seems our great Brags, telling of great matter of Contradictions and other Absurdities, found in his Books, justly occasioned a longer delay. Which I think should rather have forwarded him. I will assure him, had he collected those Passages out of his Books, ready to my hands, which I was fain to tumble over his Books for, it had eased me, and facilitated my work. As to his telling his Reader, We [...]ave an Itch to Scribble, repeating the same things over, [...]gain and again, that we manifestly pervert his words, pal­ [...]ably bewraying our Ignorance and Folly, seeing he pre­ [...]ends, if God permit, he may hereafter discover it in divers [...]articulars. I shall only say thus much, that were he [...]ot one of those, he once spoke of, that are more ready [Page 6] falsly to Accuse, than justly to Prove, he might have suspended his Brag, till he had brought his Proof along with him.

Thus much to excuse his Delay; now for beginning with us, before he had swept his own House; he alledges four things: 1. That his free Acknowledgment might excuse him from beginning with his own Books, till he had brought us to an equal Acknowledgment, or upon our stubborn and pertinacious Conceit of our Books, he might the more justly expose us, as guilty not only of Errors, but of hold­ing them pertinaciously. All which, with respect to us, is meerly precarious, a begging of the question, who him­self had once acquitted us, and that even from the Errors he would now fasten upon us, yea and out of some of the same Books he then cited in our Vindica­tion, and we still continue to defend as unjustly impu­ted to us, whereas his own (let him call them Errors, or some more diminutive name, if he please) he hath assigned as needing both Explication, Emendation and Correction. His second, Assigning his own to be Motes, ours Beams, is too idle for me to take notice of, as thinking his Testimony on his own behalf not valid. His Thirdly, alledging our Excommunicating him, is as shallow: For had not that drawn him to be Vindictive, it would rather have stirred him up, by a free and open Retraction, to have approved himself, to have exceeded us in Confessing and Forsaking. And his lastly is all of a piece with his second, That what he hath retracted or renounced, was never judged by him an Article of Faith, and that we have not proved him contra­dicting in his latter Books, any Article of Faith asserted in his former Books. To which I reply, Had he not done his work by halves, he would have found cause to have retracted his doctrinal Errors, Errors which every body else, that knows what Errors are, will acknow­ledge to relate to Articles of Faith, and which as suc [...] [Page 7] we have exhibited and argued upon, which must be left to the indifferent Reader's Judgment, who hath read his and our Books. In the mean time I enter upon ex­amining those before me, which he hath here pre­tended to explain or correct, which I also submit to the Judicious, whether they relate not to Articles of Faith, and also whether G. K. hath at length done his Work Well, Sincerely and Conscientiously, or on the contrary.

Sect. I.

§ 1 Beginning then with his first Section, Contain­ing, as he saith, divers Explanations and Emendations of Passages out of his Book of Immediate Revelation not ceased, Printed Anno 1668, and reprinted with an Appen­dix Anno 1676, in his §. 1. he saith, Some (but who, he saith not) are offended at the Term Immediate Reve­lation, and mis-construe it to a wrong Sence, never in­tended by him, as if he thereby did signifie such a Revela­tion, as did give us the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith of Christian Religion, and Principles thereof, without the Holy Scriptures, or other outward means of Instruction. To which I answer, The People called Quakers are not concerned in this Charge, at least with respect to the Term Immediate Revelation, for they allow the thing, and dispute not against the Term. And what himself hath said, on behalf of the Necessity and Usefulness of Immediate Revelation, the Book it self will plainly evi­dence. Yet lest this Reference may seem too general (a way I dislike in my Antagonist) let the Reader con­sult the Preface, and he will find G. K. there repre­sents this Doctrine of Immediate Revelation, a great and weighty Matter, which it hath been in his Heart, once and again from the Lord, to write of [saying, that] ‘It REMAINETH and is of necessary con­tinuance [Page 8] in the true Church—Not only for the Pre­servation, Safety and comfortable Walking of the Saints with God, but also in order to Men and Wo­mens becoming Saints. [And that] there is no Im­mediate Revelation now-a-days, as the common Pri­viledge of the Saints. [he accounts] such a Fundamen­tal Error in Men, that the greatest part of their other Errors are built on it, as 1. That the Scriptures out­ward Testimony is most necessary, and that no true and saving Knowledge of God is to be attained, but by the Scriptures being read or heard.’ See Preface, p. 1, 2. Now hence I argue, If it be an Error (ac­cording to G. K.) to assert that the Scriptures out­ward Testimony is most necessary, and that no true and saving Knowledge of God is to be attained, but by the Scriptures being read or heard: Then it is G. K. his Sense, and not a Mis-construction thereof, that a Saving Knowledge of God may be attained, by Imme­diate Revelation, without the help of the Scriptures, and that the Scriptures outward Testimony, is not most necessary, in his Judgment. And this Saving Knowledge must be a Knowledge of the Christian Religion, except he be prepared to retract his Re­traction.

But to obviate this Offence and Mistake (as he terms it) he recommends the Reader to what he hath said, from p. 38. to p. 42. of that Book (but cites no passage out of it) where I distinguish, saith he, of means intermitting and transmitting, and shew that it is the intermitting means, that hinders the Revelation to be Immediate, but not the transmitting. Answ. Here he Shuffles, the Debate here is not whether Revelation be Immediate or no, when transmitted through organized Instruments, either the Holy Scriptures or Men divinely inspired, but whether he hath asserted, such an Immediate Revelation is not ceased, as is received with either the one or the other. [Page 9] That the Reader may inform himself of, even in p. 40, within the compass of G. K. his Reference, for he there saith, ‘We find that he sometimes useth outward means, and sometimes he useth them not, but con­veigheth unto us, from and through his own Seed and Birth in us, the living Manifestations and Commu­nications of his Life, Will and Council, many, yea MOST TIMES without all Means, or Instruments from without, for most times we are left alone as to Instruments or Means without us.’ I would advise him therefore, in his next, either to retract this Pas­sage, which is within the Pages he hath so lately re­commended to us, or his referring us thereto to ob­viate the pretended Mistake and Offence; for this Pas­sage will hamper him else.

Now let us see whether he mends the matter by his other Book, called, Divine Immediate Revelation, for he tells us that in p. 44. thereof as an instance, He did own the Holy Scriptures to be a necessary means to give us the true Knowledge and Faith of Christian Doctrines and Principles: But that his own Citation saith not, but only that all other Doctrine and Heads of the Christian Religion (which he calls special, the other general Religion) are made known to us by the Scripture means, the Holy Spirit inwardly inlightning and inspiring, &c. Which doth not prove that they are a necessary means, a sine quâ non, that without which the Knowledge cannot be conveighed, but that they are profitable and useful means, when at­tended with Divine Illumination and Inspiration, and therefore not ad rem. What he would have noted, that twelve Years ago he distinguished between Gentile and Chri­stian Religion (saith he, between special and general Reli­gion, say I) though some call this a new Doctrine in him so to distinguish, I think hath little of weight in it, except he had told us who his Accusers were. For my part, I do not account it a New Doctrine in him, to distinguish [Page 10] between special and general Religion, yet I do esteem it a Contradiction to say, as in p. 63. of that Book, Cornelius received the Spirit immediately, and yet ob­tained it further by means of Peter's Preaching.’ [And again to assert,] ‘It is an Error to say, Cornelius had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile State, but the Holy Ghost was promised PARTICULARLY to Be­lievers in him, to such ONLY who believe in Christ crucified and raised again, &c. Truth Advanced, p. 70. neither of which he hath yet retracted.

He goes on, Seeing the word Immediate Revelation is no Scripture Term (though Revelation is) I can freely consent that the word Immediate be not pressed, or imposed on any. Answ. This is idle all over. We are not entring into a Strife of words with him, but will he retract the things? will he say, Revelation is not Immediate, now a days? which in two former Books he hath asserted that it is, and entitled one of them, Immediate Revelation not ceased, the other, Divine Immediate Revelation continued in the True Church; and told us the ill Consequences of deny­ing it, assigning it as such a Fundamental Error, that the greatest part of their other Errors are built on it, and in­deed the whole Superstructure of their Church and Ministry, as to its outward Constitution, (see Preface to Imm. Rev. p. 1.) This were he sincere, he would either retract or fairly maintain, but instead of that, he playeth upon words, and acts the Sophister, to his great Shame, were he not past it. For whereas, even in p. 42. of Imm. Rev. a Page he recommends us to even now, he could then say, ‘These who minister not immediately from the immediate Communications of Life, in their own Hearts can do us no good, for they cannot Minister and transmit the Communications of Life, who have it not in themselves; such are Wells without Water, and Clouds without Rain, said he then.’ Now such Ministers, who he knows still oppose Immediate Revelation, and [Page 11] deny an immediate Call, are by him reputed Pious, which is far from being Wells without Water and Clouds without Rain (for to such was reserved the Blackness of Darkness for ever, Jude 12.13.) and perhaps given with a design to lick their Fingers, as well as that he hath laboured to irritate them against us, for to suppress our Books and disturb our Meetings, that he might be eased of that Task he is so uneasie under, and hath hi­therto so unsuccessfully wearied himself with.

§ 2 To sweeten them and make Friends to himself of what he might as well account the Mammon of Un­righteousness, as Wells without Water and Clouds without Rain, he in §. 2. mincingly gives part of what he had said in the Preface to Imm. Rev. viz. His blaming them who say the Scriptures are a filled-up Canon, &c. And p. 4. of the Book it self, Though no new Essentials are to be added, yet a new and fuller and clearer Testimony may be added concerning the same old Essentials. This last passage he clips egregiously, for he there said, ‘Now though we say, That the Scriptures are a full and perfect Testimony of all the Essentials of the Christian Religion, yet we believe (contrary to these of the Na­tional way) that they are not a Canon so filled up, as no more is to be added unto them, from the same immediate Inspiration of the Spirit of God through his Servants, of the SAME AUTHORITY with them, for though no new Essentials are to be added, yet a new and fuller and clearer Testimony may be added, concerning the same old-Essentials.’ Now, as it is not his present Interest to give his Belief contrary to those of the National way, for he craves their help against us; so instead of being so sincere as to retract it, he slips it over in silence. And that his Belief now, and his Belief then, may not seem to interfere, he puts a Trick upon his Reader, concealing those words, where [Page 12] he had said [the Scriptures are not a Canon so filled up as no more is to be added to] and from the conclusiv [...] words, drawn from the Premises, he bids us note th [...] words [may be added] as importing the Possibility of such [...] thing, as if he had delivered nothing positive, had no [...] asserted, they were not a Canon so filled up, as no mor [...] is to be added to, but had been only proposing an Ad­dition, as a thing not impossible. A plain downrigh [...] Retraction, even of an Error, had been more to hi [...] Credit, than this false and deceitful Subterfuge, where­by the Man shews he rather labours to put a false Gloss upon his Cause, than ingeniously to Recant, what now he is unwilling to defend. To this he adds, Whether God shall be pleased to add to the Books of the Holy Scrip­ture, other Books of the same Authority, in any time to come before the end of the World, I judge it not safe for me to determine, either in the Affirmative or the Negative. Answ. If he had not (by with holding that part of the Citation I have given, and a perusing the Sence of that which he hath given, which he could never have done (unespied) had he cited the whole, as he ought) cast a Mist before his Readers Eyes, it would have been ob­vious that G. K. formerly was so far from not judging it safe for him to determine the Matter Negatively or Affirmatively, that he hath given his own Sence in the Affirmative, that Books of the same Authority with the Scriptures may be added. Who, were he now other­wise minded, and of an honest Mind not to mis-guide and abuse his Reader, would rather have retracted, and given this as the Fruit of his second Thoughts, than to have offered this, as his then Sentiments, which were not so, and would have been evident not to have been so, had the Citation been fairly given. I am perswaded, that as the Learned among the Church of England will readily see, so the Pious will abhor his palpable Deceit and Prevarication.

[Page 13] § 3 In his §. 3. He labours to excuse his blaming them, who deny that there is an Infallible way, whereby to discern the True Ministers and Members of Christ's Church from the False (he had added in that Preface to Imm. Rev. [Whence proceeds that promiscuous mixt Number of Teachers and People, whereof their Church is com­posed, who are GENERALLY void of any Expe­rience of a gracious Work, in their Hearts] but this he slily drops, as not ingenious enough to retract it, nor daring, to defend it) by telling us, Though such a discern­ing was given at times to the Prophets and Apostles, and others extraordinarily endued, whereby to know Mens inward States, without regard had to their Fruits, yet the general way that Christ hath given, whereby to know Men, is by their Fruits of Words and Works, whether Good or Evil. Answ. Surely he makes meer Babies of Men of other Perswasions, if they may not be supposed to know as well as himself, that at times extraordinary Men have been extraordinarily qualified. Nor was it in debate then between him and his Antagonists, whether the Prophets and Apostles had the Gift of discerning the True Ministers and Members from the False, but whe­ther it be a remaining Gift to this day: So that his varying the Terms from the present time to the time past, is a meer Sophistical Shift, who when he gives his former words, hath it [is] when he makes his Infe­rence, hath it [was.] Whose Sence formerly relating thereto is given Imm. Rev. p. 179 to 183. and p. 188 to 191. which T. E. hath laid before him in his Truth De­fended, p. 47 to 50. and G. K. hath not yet retracted. He in p. 179. thus hath it, ‘Whereas they say, The Tree may be known by its Fruits, and it is so, but by what are the Fruits known? Two Men may be found doing the same outward Work, which hath the same outward Appearance, and yet the one a meer Hypo­cri [...]e, the other a sincere Christian; Then by what [Page 14] can their Works and Fruits be known?—These Wor [...] which carry in them an appearance to be Good, an [...] yet are not Good, but dead Works, empty, witho [...] Life, though they have a fair shew, yet are they ro [...]tenness within. And p. 180. The Works having b [...] the Appearance, they are also seen and discerned [...] be such, and being Evil they cast an evil Savour, b [...] which in the Light, which begets the discerning, the [...] are felt, and he can have no Union with them, n [...] with the Tree, on which they grow; and this Ma [...] discerneth in the Manifestation of the Light, both h [...] own and his Neighbour's Works, of what Nature the [...] are; by the tasting and smelling of the Fruit the Tre [...] is known. And a little lower he adds, Hereto I giv [...] my Testimony, that there is such a thing, and I D [...] WITNESS IT in my measure, &c. This sho [...] touch is enough to shew what the Man held formerl [...] and pretended to witness in his measure, though no [...] being gone from the Light in which the discerning [...] received, and from that measure he then witnessed, [...] now wrangleth against it, for he saith,

Whatever inward Sense or Discerning any may pretend [...] have of another Man's Spirit being bad, yet we find no wa [...]rant from Scripture to receive an Accusation against an [...] far less a positive Judgment, without plain evidence of Ma [...]ter of Fact against them, by credible Witnesses, 1 Tim. 5.1 [...] Answ. Accusation implies an Accuser, and this respec [...] outward Conversation: But what is this to the Instanc [...] of a Man's Spirit being bad, or to those outwar [...] Works, which he said in the Citation above, had th [...] same outward Appearance, and yet the one might be meer Hypocrite, the other a sincere Christian? As he the [...] queried, By what can their Works and Fruits be known? S [...] may I, By what Evidence from without can they be co [...]victed, when the Charge relates only to the Man's Sp [...]rit being bad, even when his Conversation is not ac [...]cused? [Page 15] For where Matter of Fact, as without, is objected; the Evidence must be correspondent; but where the Fruit and Taste is inward, the Evidence and Demon­stration is also inward. But G. K. upon these false Pre­mises, labours to detect the ill Consequences of Mens being judged to be of a wrong Spirit, only by the pretended discerning of Spirits. Answ. If it be only pretended, not real, this doth not destroy the Doctrine, or render it unsound, because abused by ill Men, any more than pre­tending the Spirit is the Rule, is an unsound Principle in it self, because some pretend thereto, and act con­trary. Again, How came none of all this to be fore­seen and fenced against by himself formerly, when he gave Testimony, and that even from his own Expe­rience, to such a Taste, Savour and discerning of the Works that had the same outward Appearance, yet the one good, the other rotten within? Why did he not thus, even then, distinguish between the Pretence, and what was Real, to make void the Judgment, which is the Product of that Relish, of that Dis-union, if he thought Men with whom we can have no Ʋnion, (they are his own words above) ought not to be judged, to be of a bad Spirit, or that we may not declare, we have no Union with them?

He adds at the close, And even to know Men by their Fruits is a Gift of the Spirit, and proceedeth from a true Spiritual discerning, that is given in some measure Ʋniver­sally to all the Faithful, though they have not always such due use of it, but they may be and are at times mistaken. Answ. If these Fruits be outward Fruits, visibly evil or good Fruits, that the very Wicked have a discerning of: But if the Fruits be inward, perceptible by the in­ward Senses, the most extraordinary Endowments judg­eth not without them. By their Fruits ye shall know them (even them who come in Sheeps clothing, but are inwardly ravening Wolves) said Christ to the very Apostles, [Page 16] Matt. 7.15, 16. i. e. Ye shall taste them, ye shall savou [...] them, ye shall see through the Sheeps clothing, the out­ward Appearance, to the inward ravening wolfish Na­ture: That being the way by which alone the most ex­perienced discern the inward State of any. As well a [...] to assert formerly an infallible way of discerning th [...] true Ministers and Members from the false is given▪ and now, that there is not enough of it given to all the Faithful to keep them out of Mistakes, shews how con­fused the Man is in his present Shiftings and Shufflings.

§ 4 Whereas he had said, Imm. Rev. p. 12. ‘This Seed groweth up into a perfect substantial Birth, which is Christ formed within, the Body of Christ, his Flesh and Blood which cometh down from Heaven, and giveth Life unto Man which eateth it.—And it is called the Body and Flesh and Blood of Christ, because his eternal Life and Spirit dwelleth in it immediately.’ He here bids us Note, By this perfect substantial Birth he did not mean (as he now doth not) any Substance NEWLY PRODƲCED—but only a vital Ʋnion of Substantial Principles formerly existing. Answ. A Substance then he allows it to be, but not newly produced. Was that the Matter in debate then, Whether the Substance was newly produced, or no? or Whether it was a Substance or no? Or is not this rather an empty Shift, that he might seem to reconcile his former with his latter Wri­tings, without retracting either? Had another commit­ted such a Blunder, he had like enough to have been one of the first that would have reflected on him. But he now seems to forget what himself said Ex. Narr. p. 24. when he undeservedly taunted at W. P. who had administred no occasion, crying, This is rare Logick; and added, ‘You know there should be no term or thing of Importance in the Conclusion of any Syllo­gism or Argument, but what should be in the Premises.’ [Page 17] Let him therefore keep to his own Rule better, or ne­ver pretend to correct others Logick: For as is the Man's Cause, so is his way of defending it.

In p. 4. he adds, Whereas I did call that inward sub­stantial Birth, the Flesh and Blood of Christ, I did so call it only by a Metaphor or Allegory, for with such Metaphors, Allegories and figurative Speeches, the Scripture aboundeth in treating of the Spiritual and Divine Refreshments and Enjoy­ments of the Saints, as when they are called Bread, Wine, Milk, &c. Answ. To this himself shall reply out of p. 14, 15. of the same Book, where having proved from several Scriptures adduced, that the Spiritual discerning is held forth under the names of all the five Senses (of Seeing, Hearing, Tasting, Smelling, Feeling or Handling) he adds, ‘But saith the Natural Man [such an one as G. K. is now become, say I] These are only but Meta­phors and Figures [and then replies] Albeit these names be so, yet that hinders not, but the Spiritual Mysteries represented under them, are real and SUBSTANTIAL things, as really affecting the Spiritual Senses, as the outward Things affect the Na­tural —And indeed these Outward Things are but Figures of the Inward and Spiritual, which as far ex­ceed and transcend them in Life, Glory, Beauty and Excellency, as a living Body doth the Shadow; so that this whole visible World—is but a Shadow in respect of the Spiritual and Inward.’ Thus far G. K. formerly, whereby it appears, that he then ascribed the Shadow, the Metaphor to the Outward, the thing shadowed forth to the Inward: Now he assigns, on [...]he contrary, the Metaphor, Allegory or Figure to the [...]nward, and the thing shadowed forth to the Outward; [...]nd yet he is not so Ingenuous, as to own a Change in his Judgment, but would render his meaning now and formerly the same. Nor hath he here only asserted▪ That the Seed was a Substance, but also in his Way cast [Page 18] up, p. 60. (a Book printed Anno 1678, and as yet un­retracted) hath ranked the contrary Opinion among the great and woful Mistakes and Misconceptions of the Professors of Christianity, who in his seventh Argument, p. 64. thus hath it, ‘The Saints feel it in them as really to be a part or Particle of the very Substance of Heaven, viz. Of that Spiritual and Invisible Heavens where the Saints live, as they do feel the Body of their Outward Man to be a Part or Particle of the Substance of this Outward World. And having de­scribed this Divine Birth to be, not only a Substance, but a composed Substance of Body and Spirit, he plainly affirms, p. 65.’ ‘The Spirit is a measure of the Spirit or Soul of Christ the Heavenly Man.’ But if he will not believe what himself said formerly, nor yet re­tract his manifold Contradictions and Absurdities, 'tis to be hoped, the unbyassed and considerate will see him in his proper Colours, and that his Covering is but a Fig-leaf Garment.

But this Allegorical and Figurative Sense (as he termeth it) of Christ's Flesh and Blood, he saith, ought not to divert our Minds, nor take off our Faith from Christ's Flesh with­out us, &c. Answ. I readily grant it: For the advan­tage of that Faith (as Paul said of Circumcision of old to the Jews) is much every way, Rom. 3.1, 2. Yet this ex­cludeth not the Heathen, to whom the History hath not been revealed, and who are the Ʋncircumcision that keepeth the Righteousness of the Law, Chap. 2. v. 26. from any Benefit thereby, though not an equal. This him­self seemed sensible of, when in his Light of Truth Tri­umphing (printed Anno 1670, and not yet retracted) he said, ‘As many have suffered Hurt through the Dis­obedience of the First Man, to wit, Adam, who have not known expresly, that ever such a Man was, o [...] the manner of his Disobedience, so why may not EVEN MANY, receive Benefit through the Obe [...]dience [Page 19] of Christ in the outward, who have not expresly known his outward Coming and Sufferings, other­wise Adam's Disobedience were more effectual for Man's Destruction, than the Obedience of Christ were for his Salvation.’

His following Assertion (that to believe in Christ, as he gave his Body of Flesh outwardly to be broken for us, and his Blood outwardly to be shed for the Remission of our Sins, is the eating of his Flesh and drinking of his Blood, as well as the inward Enjoyment of his Life in us, and that this is clear from John 6.29, 35, 40, 47, 48.) I must a little compare with what he hath said elsewhere. In his Book entituled Rector Corrected, Printed Anno 1680 (a passage not yet retracted) he blames his Adversary p. 19. for saying, He would prove that the Flesh and Blood spoken of, John 6. are not a spiritual, invisible Substance, retorting thus, ‘Then what must we infer from this Interpretation of thine, but that we must eat visible Flesh and drink visible Blood?’ But hear him further, ibid. ‘When the Capernaanites understood it of visible Flesh and Blood, he told them, He that eateth my Flesh and drinketh my Blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him, to signifie that it was an inward and invisible Eating, of an inward invisible Substance, whereof he did speak:’ For proof of which he then quoted John 61, 62, 63. at large. Again P. 21. he saith, ‘Christ's giving his Flesh for the Life of the World, is more than to offer up his visible Flesh upon the Cross, for he giveth his Flesh to eat, and his Blood to drink, whereas many that believe Historically, that his visible Flesh was offered upon the Cross, do not eat his Flesh, and drink his Blood, for they have not Life in them, &c. So that with G. K. one while eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood, is an inward and invisible eating of an inward and invisible Substance, and it is proved to be so out of John 6. and his Adversary branded with Capernaanitism [Page 20] for denying the Flesh and Blood there spoken of, to be a spiritual, invisible Substance: Anon, Christ spake there of a Belief in him, as his Body of Flesh and Blood was broken and shed outwardly (it is not Capernaani­tism in him, it seems, so to assert, though it was in the Rector) and that very Scripture is referred to for proof, that he did so, and yet G. K. no Changeling the mean while, if ye will believe him; who not only acknow­ledgeth (That the Flesh which he said they were to eat, and his Blood they were to drink, was that which he had before he descended, Imm. Rev. p. 228.) but also in the fore­going Page hath it, ‘That they did eat his Flesh and drink his Blood as TRULY and REALLY in measure before he came in that Body of Flesh which was born of the Virgin Mary, as the Saints have done since.’ Again p. 258. ‘This Body of Christ, of which we partake, is NOT THAT which he took up when he came in the Flesh outwardly, but that which he had from the beginning, &c. See also Way cast up, p. 95. And thus referring my Reader to what may further occurr upon this subject when I come to my Sect. 3. §. 1. I betake my self to his next Paragraph.

§ 5 Upon his giving us §. 5. a Quotation of Imm. Rev. p. 36, 37. relating to Infallibility, that ‘As it re­lates to the Seed, Birth and Spirit of God, it is Abso­lute, but as it relates to us, is limited and conditional, and is rather a Possibility of not being deceived, than an Impossibility of being deceived:’ He takes occasion to Query, Why he or any of us should be ashamed to correct any unsound and unjustifiable words, which have dropt from our Mouths or Pens, by Human Weakness or Inadvertency, or why should any be upbraided and reviled, as Apostates and Changelings, for so doing? To begin then with the last Clause, touching being upbraided and reviled as Apostates, &c. I answer, Whether our Charge (which [Page 21] he terms Ʋpbraiding and Reviling) against him of Apo­stacy leans upon so weak a Foundation as he here assigns it, and whether we have not proved him so to be, I dare commit to the Impartial and Judicious, who have read our Books and his, and there leave it. As to the rest I say, our Principle concerning Infallibility, which he hath so often vindicated, though of late he hath Scoffed at us for it, is no other than what himself hath asserted in the Citation above: Therefore hath he no need to quarrel with us upon that account, nor yet to upbraid and revile us (they are his own Terms) as he hath done therefore, were he (with us) a sincere Pro­fessor of the infallible Guidance and Leadings of the Spirit into all Truth. One instance of his taunting at us, I shall give out of his Antichrists and Sadducees, p. 31. whereupon G. W. his giving relation of a Matter of Fact, transacted (as himself confesseth) about twelve Years ago, and using the words [if I mistake not] he floutingly reflects, saying, Is this like infallible George Whitehead? Did G. W. then pretend to an infallible Memory? If not, Can he pretend still to believe, that the Spirit and infallible Guidance thereof is a standing Gospel-Privilege, and yet will he make a Feast to them that are otherwise minded, and whose contrary Prin­ciples he hath so severely censured, of the Doctrine himself maintains, like those Vain People that make a Mock of the Spirit's moving? O Shameless Man! But what yet adds to his Ephah, and augments his Evil, himself at the same time was guilty of, having ascribed Arguments (in his Book of Ʋniversal Grace) to the Evi­dence and Demonstration of the Spirit of Truth, which now p. 15, 16. he acknowledgeth his Sin and Error in, trusting (as he there saith) in the Mercy of God for Christ's sake, for the Pardon of that and of all his other sins. So that had any among us taken the Name of the Lord in vain, and fathered upon his Spirit what was the product of [Page 22] our own, G. K. of all Men (especially if he still believe the Principle, and be offended only at the abuse of it) was most unfit to throw the first stone, while he had not retracted his, which yet he hath done to the grati­fying of the Loose and Prophane: Which Work will be his Burden, except he unfeignedly repent.

§ 6 His next attempt is, to varnish over a Passage he gives us, §. 6. out of Imm. Rev. p. 54. thus, ‘And though I cite Scriptures, and make use of them in Ar­guing this Point, yet I can truly say, I have not my Knowledge from them; who had said but a Line or two above (which he giveth not here) I have not fetcht them from my own Wisdom, neither hath it taught me them.’ Now he bids us Note, He says from them, as being the Efficient Cause, but he did not de­ny, that he had his Knowledge by them, Instrumentally, to wit, the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith he had of Gospel Truths, and Principles of Christianity, for that is abundantly Acknowledged in MANY PLACES (saith he, but he names not one) in that Book. Answ. Were I to Ar­gue the Point with him Doctrinally, and not rather evincing the Man's False Allegations and Pretexts, I might query, whether the Belief that the Scriptures are true, was Communicated to him by themselves, or Re­vealed by the Spirit Immediately: But of this, a touch is enough. Now in order to shew what he meant by the word [From] which he harps upon, I recur to what he said a little above, with Respect to his own Wisdom, that he had not fetched his Arguments from them, so neither from the Scriptures. Did he mean that his own Wisdom was not the Efficient, but the In­strumental Cause, from which he fetched his Knowledge and Faith? Nay, that he did not: For in p. 55. he sai [...]h, ‘God Dwelleth in the Light inaccessible, the Mortal or Natural Understanding cannot Approach [Page 23] unto him—when it stretcheth it self to know him, it is Confounded and Dashed, more than if the Bo­dily Eye would set it self to look upon the Sun, &c. Again in p. 56. he useth the word [From] in the same manner, when he tells us, ‘Words spoken from with­out, though the best of Words uttered from Christ in the Days of his Flesh, or from any of the Apostles or Prophets, and yet recorded in the Scriptures, cannot reveal the Father nor the Son neither, they point only at that which Reveals, &c. Where the Intelligent may perceive, he (in like manner) useth from for by, for the words were uttered by Christ and his Apostles, and so he must intend, or as great a Grammarian as he is, he must have writ Non-sense: As well as that speak­ing of the Scripture-Record, he saith, They point only at that which reveals. They did not then, it seems (ac­cording to him) give the Knowledge, give the Revela­tion, but point only or direct to that which gave it. Also in p. 57. after having denied that the Words of Moses, the Prophets, David, Isaiah, &c. could reveal God (who had a little before cited that Scripture, Matt. 11.27. No Man knoweth the Father but the Son, and he to whom the Son reveals him) he Queries concerning Christ himself, ‘Did his words reveal him, or his Fa­ther unto them?’ Did they not mistake him for all this (and I query, Were not those Gospel-Truths which our Lord preached?)— ‘For their Eyes were held, were blinded, &c. Thus far out of G. K. formerly, even out of the immediately succeeding Pages, wherein I do not widely refer to MANY PLACES, I leave the Reader to search the whole Book for it (and perhaps all labour lost at last) as he doth; but give both Page and Passage. And now I leave it to the Reader, from whence he pretended to have his Knowledge and Faith formerly, and whether rather than retract what he then delivered, he hath not put a false Gloss upon [Page 24] his words, by an evasive Interpretation contrary to his Sense then.

§ 7 His next §. is designed to prove from these words of his Imm. Rev. p. 57. [Jesus Christ himself, who spake to them in the days of his Flesh Face to Face, did his words reveal him or his Father unto them] That he then as well as now believes there is need of the In­ternal Revelation to give the Knowledge of Christ, and that that Knowledge was needful to all Mens Salvation (either explicitly or implicitly) else why should he say, That it was needful to be revealed by the Spirits. Answ: ‘I find no words there of the Knowledge of Christ, as he came in the Flesh, but only of Christ as God, that God filleth all things, but is apprehended by nothing, but that which cometh from himself, is begotten by him­self, &c. p. 55.’ Adding towards the close of the Page, ‘It [the Carnal Mind] cannot by searching find out God, he dwelleth in another Principle, &c. And in p. 56. he tells us, how he is known, and revealed, viz. by the Son, for which he quotes Matt. 11.27. ‘And to manifest that no outward, mediate Revelation can do it (they are his following words) he in that and p. 57. in­stanceth, that the words uttered from Christ (as he hath it) in the days of his Flesh, or from any of the Prophets or Apostles, cannot reveal the Father.’ Who in his Gradation descends to this Query, saying, ‘To come to Jesus Christ himself, who spoke to them in the days of his Flesh, Did his words reveal him, or his Father unto them?’ But what is this to prove, that the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh, was needful to all Mens Salvation, either explicitly or implicitly, when as that was no subject of the Argument, but only of Scripture words spoken by himself in the days of his Flesh, or by others before and since? Who (when he comes to summ all that is said in this Argument (they are [Page 25] his own words, p. 70.) himself giveth it thus, ‘The Knowledge of God [he doth not of Christ according to the Flesh] being that which is indispensibly ne­cessary to every Believer and true Christian, and see­ing this cometh only by the Revelation of the Son immediately in the Heart, and by receiving it from the Mouth of God himself, and from the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost, &c.) hath not one Syllable of the Necessity of the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh, but only of the internal immediate Revelation:’ So hardly is the Man put to it, neatly to varnish over his Cause, and impose an untrue Explication, instead of a true one, upon his Reader.

§ 8 Yet he will be trying at it once again §. 8. where (citing out of Imm. Rev. p. 60. his having said, See­ing the Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh was not sufficient, nor to be rested in, but they were to look for a better, &c.) he tells us, It will appear from the foregoing and following words in that Book, that by the Know­ledge of him after the Flesh, he did not mean that Know­ledge of him as he came in the Flesh, but that Knowledge that the Disciples and Apostles had of him by their outward sight and hearing of him, or by what they could know of him, by the meer actings of the Mind, without Internal Revela­tion.’ Answ. Outward sight and hearing by the meer actings of the Mind, are foisted in now, not mentioned there, nor deduceable from thence. Yet I observe how he varies in treating upon one and the same Argumen [...]: When he speaks of Jesus Christ's speaking Face to Face in the days of his Flesh, he applieth it to the Know­ledge of him, as he came in the Flesh; but when he useth the words [Knowledge of Christ after the Flesh] he did not mean the Knowledge of him, as he came in the Flesh, but by outward seeing, hearing and the meer Actings of the Mind, &c. Yet all will not help him. [Page 26] For having shewed, p. 59. That if Christ's Bodily Pre­sence was not sufficient of it self to minister—but a MORE GLORIOUS they were to expect—then far less the out­ward Administration of any other Man. He in p. 60. adds, ‘For if Christ be no more to be known after the Flesh, much less any other Man, but they were to look for a BETTER, a more clear and full Manifestation in themselves [to wit] a Spiritual, Heavenly, Mysteri­ous Manifestation in themselves, even such a way as the World cannot know him or receive him, which made Judas (not Iscariot) to wonder and question him, saying, How is it that thou wilt manifest thy self to us, and not unto the World? By all which it will appear G. K. was not shewing that the Knowledge of Christ, as he came in the Flesh, was needful to Salvation to all (as he alledged §. 7.) nor yet here treating of the Know­ledge received by the meer Actings of the Mind with­out Internal Revelation, but was preferring the inward Manifestation of Christ in Spirit, to his bodily Presence in the Flesh; representing the outward Coming as no [...] sufficient of it self, the other as more Glorious, Heavenly, full and clear, such as the World could not receive▪ So that instead of extolling the outward Coming, and setting off the Benefits thereof, he was rather magnify­ing the inward, and lessening the other.

Whereas he adds, The true saving Knowledge of Christ is a spiritual Knowledge of him, as he came in the Flesh and died for us, so as by the inward Revelation of the Spirit [...] God, the Mystery of his Death and Sufferings is opened to us I answer, We deny not the unvailing of any Mystery to be a Spiritual Knowledge, nor yet that great Blessing and Benefits were purchased by his Death and Suffer [...]ings; but that such who have not had the opportunity and means of the knowledge of what Christ did out­wardly, and have died without it, either are not saved, or receive the Knowledge thereof in order to Salvation [Page 27] when dead, is what we have detected him, as contra­ [...]ictory to his former Writings in.

§ 9 From these words, Imm. Rev. p. 63. The glo­rious Gospel is not the words, the best of Scripture words, (there he stops, referring from p. 55 to 71.) he takes occasion §. 9. to declare, His sense was, that the [...]ords of Scripture are not principally and chiefly the Gospel, [...]ot the principal thing of the Gospel, but that p. 69. he calls [...]he Light the principal thing—But as the Scripture words without the inward Life, &c. is not the Gospel, so nor is the Spirit and Light, barely and abstractly considered, without [...]he Words and Doctrine, the Gospel, in the full and adequate sense of the word Gospel.’ Answ. I shall first confront him [...]ut of what he hath more fully delivered in p. 63. than [...]e hath here given, and then consider his References. [...]n the first place, he there saith, of the Gospel, ‘It is that which the words declare of, but not the words themselves, which may be read, heard and known by the Unbeliever [of whom he saith] but the Gospel he knows not, it is hid from him [and his reason is] for it is the Power of God unto Salvation, it is the Preach­ing of the glad Tidings of Salvation by Jesus Christ himself IMMEDIATELY in the Heart, it is Christ's saying in Man, by the powerful Breath of his Spirit, Awake thou that sleepest— He is the great Preacher of this great and glorious Gospel himself.’ Now Reader what Consistency is there between his say­ [...]ng formerly, the Gospel is NOT the Words, the Un­believer hath that, but the Gospel he knows not, it is [...]id from him, Christ himself is the great Preacher of that; and his now saying, that neither the Scriptures, nor the Spirit and Light, is the Gospel, barely and ab­stractly considered. He then said Christ preached it im­mediately, he now tells us (a little below) It cannot be conceived without some Form of Words and Propositions, that [Page 28] consist of words inwardly conceived, and cannot be outwardly preached, without some Form of Words outwardly expressed ▪ whereby he confounds a Declaration of or concerning the Gospel, with the Gospel it self, quite beside his Sen­timents formerly, That it was spoken in Man by Christ▪ by the powerful Breath of his Spirit, which surely may be without a Form of words, as outwardly. The one the Unbelievers may read, hear and know, and yet no [...] know the Gospel: But will he say the Gospel was never communicated by the Divine Breath, without a Form of Words, seeing he now makes the outward Preaching ▪ and the thing preached so inseparable to the Gospel, that neither of them are Gospel in the abstract? And where­as he tells, Imm. Rev. p. 213. ‘The Gospel was preached unto Abraham, Abel, Enoch, Noah, and to all Be­lievers who lived before Scripture was writ in a Book▪ and that it was spoken into their Hearts by the Spirit of Jesus Christ, &c. Will he now maintain that they had both the Scripture Words and the Spirit and Light, in order to make it Gospel? Could not Christ in speak­ing into their Hearts be conceived without some Form of Words, or was it not Gospel till so conceived?

Nor will his Allegations from p. 55 to 71. and p. 69 stand him in any stead. For the first Reference is wide, no passage assigned, and though I cannot find any thing there to help him off, yet I find in p. 56. what makes against him, viz. ‘The best of words uttered from Christ himself in the days of his Flesh, or from any o [...] the Apostles or Prophets, and yet recorded in Scrip­ture, cannot reveal the Father, nor the Son neither, they point only at that which reveals, and were spo­ken and writ for that end, that People might come to the Principle of true Knowledge in themselves (see also p. 59.)’ Whence I Query, Cannot the Gospel (which is the Power of God unto Salvation) reveal the Father, or doth that Gospel point only at that which reveal? [Page 29] Or is that which reveals the Father, (which he saith the best of words cannot do) as it is opened in Man by the Son, no Gospel, till outwardly preached or written? Thus for want of Sincerity to retract, and by labouring to defend as Congruous what is so Contradictory, is the Man entangled, and the more he toils, the more he is perplext. His second Reference, instead of doing him any good, further lays him open. For though he doth there assert the Light, as the Principal thing, yet not in ordine ad idem, not with relation to the Gospel, for which end he here adduceth it, for there was no Dissertation thereof there. His words are these, ‘One takes himself to read Commentators to furnish him for the Ministry, another to read Hypocrates and Galen to become a Physician, while their hands are out from the Light of Christ, which gives true Know­ledge and Ability to Minister either to the Soul or Body, and is the principal thing.’ Mark he doth not say it is the principal thing of the Gospel, he was not defining Gospel here, but what was the principal thing [...]o make a good Minister or Physician; nor did he say, [...]eading of Hypocrates or Galen was Gospel in the ab­ [...]tract, but the Light was the principal thing, or that [...]hey and the Light together make up the Gospel in the [...]ull and adequate Sense thereof. This I urge to shew [...]he Man's Falshood and Deceit, who offers so remote [...]n Instance, and wide from the subject we are treating [...]f, to prove that to which it had no coherence, and all [...]o cover himself, that the Shame of his Nakedness [...]ight not appear, which now is so much the more vi­ [...]ble, by this fresh Demonstration thereof.

From hence he sallieth to a Discourse about the Scrip­ [...]ures being called the Word of God. That he may ratifie our Adversaries, he represents it an unprofitable, [...]rtful and groundless Contention on our parts, especially [...]r Friend B. Cool, having in a late Book of his said, [Page 30] That as they declare the Mind of God with respect to us▪ and are his Commands to us, they may in that respect b [...] called the Word or Command of God to us: And so, sait [...] G. K. all other Professions in Christendom own them, and n [...] otherwise. Answ. Till he be more steady to what him [...]self owns, I deem him no fit Voucher for others, muc [...] less for all other Professions in Christendom: Yet fo [...] the sake of such, to whom he labours to traduce us, [...] reply, We contend not meerly about Words, but a [...] some Men have erred in denying the immediate Interna [...] Revelation is a continuing Gospel-Privilege, so hav [...] they also in mis-applying what hath been said in th [...] Scriptures, concerning the Word of God, whence i [...] hath come to pass, that as the Jews of Old thought i [...] them to have Eternal Life, while not coming to Chris [...] John 5.39. so these not attending to nor coming t [...] Christ, as inwardly revealed, have set up the Scripture as their Rule, in opposition to an inward Guidance by the Spirit of God in these days, assigning to them, wha [...] was spoken of the Divine Inshining Words. Now t [...] undeceive these, and direct them to an inward Prin [...]ciple in themselves, our Friends have been led to thi [...] Distinction, not in Derogation to the Holy Scriptures nor through an Itch of Contention, but as a necessar [...] Medium to six Mens Minds upon that Word, which i [...] able to save the Soul, and enlighten the Eye, which th [...] best of Words could not do without it. Yet very unf [...] was G. K. to fling this stone, who himself hath bot [...] used and defended this very Distinction in his Help i [...] time of Need, p. 65. (a passage not yet retracted) fo [...] there he not only tells us, ‘Though the Holy Scrip [...]tures declare of this Word, yet they are not tha [...] Word more than a Map or Description of Rome o [...] London, is Rome or London, or the Image of Caesar i [...] Caesar, or Bread and Wine is the Body and Blood o [...] Christ, &c. But also allows, ‘They may borro [...] [Page 31] the Name, and sometimes be so called, as the words or Prophecy of Isaiah, is called by himself his Vision, &c. He should therefore have first retracted his own unprofitable, hurtful and groundless Contention (as he calls it in others) before he had bestowed his Censures upon us. But the Man's Malice hath run him a-ground, who needed not, by this repeated instance, to have given fresh Evidence of his Instability (we having enough to load him with besides, and more than he can fairly get from under) were he not judiciously infatuated, in his en­vious Undertakings, as a just Recompence from the Just God for his Bitterness and Apostacy.

§ 10 His tenth §. is spent upon a Typographical Error, and a groundless Reflection upon and calumni­ating his Adversaries, which was so inconsiderable in it self, viz. [those Prophets] for [that Prophet] and so obvious to any intelligent Reader, as well as that it was never objected against him, that I know of, that I am perswaded, he having slid over so many more con­siderable ones, which were his own not the Printers, he would never have touched upon this, but to usher in a Slander. For after having told us, Divers Typogra­phical Errors are to be found in many or most of his former Books, which yet are obvious enough to the Judicious and Ʋn­prejudiced (Why then did he not give an account of them, as well as of this, when his hand was in, say I?) he chargeth his Adversaries with making that a Typogra­phical Error in some of their own Books, which is plainly obvious to be no such thing. But what proof doth he bring? What is that Error? And in what Book is it to be found? Must the Reader take all upon trust from him, both that his are obvious to be Typographical Errors, and that ours are not so, upon his single Evi­dence, on his own behalf and against us? And at the very same time that he was bespeaking his Reader to [Page 32] believe him, will he tell him, he must not believe us, and shew no Reason, but a Malicious Charge? Such Readers indeed his bad Cause stands in need of, but they will not help him. However this Outcry I take to be levelled particularly against T. E. for I know of none other assigned in any our Books, who in Truth Defend­ed, p. 108. gave notice of a Typographical Error in a Book of G. W's, viz. [to] instead of [for] which he found Corrected by a Pen ready to his Hand, and also shewed by the sense that the mistake must needs be in the Printer. Yet hath G. K. been ever and anon harp­ing at it, that it was the Author's, calling it, Postscript to Gross Errors, a dull, silly Juggle, and in his Ex. Narr. p. 27. a Trick of T. E's, so sordidly would he impose what there is no ground to suppose, were not an Error more acceptable to him than a Correction. But this be­ing again replied to by T. E. in his Answer to G. K. his Narr. p. 112. I refer thither.

§ 11 He had said Imm. Rev. p. 74. ‘Now the Bowels of the Father's Love stirred in Compassion to the Work of his Hands, that of the pure Creation in Man, which tho shut up in Death, yet it remained and perished not as to its Being— and this is the lost which God sent his Son into the World to save, &c. Now in §. 11. he explains himself to have meant there­by, the Soul of Man, that is a Created Being, and that he called it that of the pure Creation, not that it had not been defiled by sin, but by reason of its great worth, in respect of its Original and Primitive State, and its near capacity to be cleansed and purified. Answ. I might here shew that this is Doctrinally unsound, that Man's Body was Created pure as well as his Soul, that sin defiled both the whole Creation (not the Souls only) groaning and travailing in pain together, that the Creature it self also shall be delivered from the Bondage of Corruption into the Glorious Liberty of [Page 33] the Sons of God, Rom. 8.21, 22. So that as Man's Sin destroys both Soul and Body, Matt. 10.28. the Restora­tion affects both, but I chuse, after this transient Touch, to oppose G. K. to G. K. and shew what he then meant by the Lost, and that he did not intend the Soul of Man, as he here suggests. For in p. 71. he saith, ‘When God created Man, he created him in his own Image, he put his Image, Christ the express Image of him­self in Man, and he breathed in him the Breath or Spirit of Life, then did Man live indeed, he was a living Soul.’ By which it appears he did not then mean by living Soul, that which he now calls a created Being, but the Soul of that Soul, Christ, God's Image put in Men, who there adds, ‘And the Light of Men was his Life, lived in him, &c. Again p. 75. after having declared what is not to be saved, viz. The Old Adam, the Birth of the Serpent's begetting, he saith, ‘That which Christ came to save is that of God, which pro­ceeded from him, the Seed of God in Man, whereof Abraham's old decayed Body and Sarah's barren Womb was a Type.’ So that here's no mention of Bodies nor of Souls, but of the Birth of the Serpent and the Seed of God: And as what was spoken of the Birth of the Serpents begetting is not applicable to the Body, so nei­ther is what was said of the Seed of God in Man, appli­cable to the Soul of Man, although in his next §. he would fain perswade us to be so imposed upon.

§ 12 Where citing the passage I gave above out of p. 75. he bids us note, He calls the Elected Souls of Men, the Seed of God (upon which I Query, Were the elected Souls of Men the Seed of Abraham, for it was of the Seed of Abraham he was speaking, but he goes on) The Hebrew hath it, Seed of God, see the Margin, and that I call it the Seed of Abraham, is only by an Allegorical Allu­sion, to the spiritual and divine Birth in the Faithfull▪ [Page 34] Answ. He should rather have termed it an Allegorical Delusion, or delusive Allegory, or evasive Shift rather: For it is plain he was speaking of the two Seeds or Births, that of the Serpent and the spiritual and divine Birth, even of that Seed of Abraham, whereof Abra­ham and Sarah were a Figure, of that Seed which in the same Page he tells us, ‘Christ causeth to fructifie and bring forth Isaac, the Seed of Promise.’ So that he was not speaking of the Soul of Man, nor of Isaac the Begotten, but of the Seed, the Begetter, the Fructifier, which he terms, ibid. ‘The Pure Principle of the Life of the Lamb, which died not, could not die as to its self, but Man died from it, and it ceased to live in him—somewhat of a Divine Extraction in Man, whose Centre is not the Earthly Principle, but the Heavenly and Divine, &c. And in p. 76. ‘The Body of Sin is a Burden to it, and so the Light shineth forth in the Darkness, to visit the Seed shut up therein.’ By all which it is obvious what he intended by the Lost God sent Christ to save, viz. That Seed Man had lost, Man had slain as to himself, and that by the Pure Crea­tion in Man, which though shut up in Death, yet re­mained and perished not, he meant somewhat of a more noble Extraction in Man, to which the Body of Sin is a Burden, and not the Soul to whom it is no Burden, while it is shut up in Death. So foully hath he preva­ricated in wresting his words to what they will not bear, nor were not designed to bear, when given.

He goes on, This was never intended by me to l [...]ssen or obscure that great Truth of the Gospel, That the Man Christ is the Promised Seed of Abraham, in the true literal Sense and without all Allegory, as he was born of the Blessed Virgin— and that Promised Seed of the Woman that should bruise the Serpents head. Answ. What he intended is best inter­preted by what he said, except he would perswade us that he said one thing, meant another. I shall not [Page 35] therefore think much to transcribe a Passage or two al­ready given in our former Books, and not yet retracted by him. In his Way cast up, p. 99. he saith, ‘Though the outward Coming of the Man Christ was deferred, according to his outward Birth in the Flesh for many Ages, yet from the Beginning this Heavenly Man, the PROMISED SEED, did inwardly come into the Hearts of those that believed in him, and bruised the Head of the Serpent, and destroyed him that had the Power of Death, that is, the Devil.’ And in Way to the City of God, p. 125. ‘Even from the Beginning, yea upon Man's Fall, God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself, and Christ was manifest in the HOLY SEED inwardly, and stood in the way to ward off the Wrath of God from the Sinners and Unholy, that it might not come upon them to the uttermost, during the day of their Visi­tation. For even at Man's Fall the Seed of the Woman was given, not only to bruise the Serpent's Head, but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone and pacifie the Wrath of God towards Men.’ And also p. 128. he Queries, ‘Why might not Christ suffer in Men before his outward Coming, as he doth now suffer in them long after it?’ Again, ‘The Seed hath been the SAME in all Ages, and hath had its Sufferings under, by and for the Sins of Men, in them all, for the removing and ABOLISHING of them.’ This I bring, not to entertain a strife about words, but seeing he abso­lutely told us what he ever intended, I demand the In­tent hereof, whether he did not then acknowledge Christ's Appearance as a Seed, and the Effects thereof, both to reconcile attone and pacifie the Wrath of God towards Men, and also to bruise the Head of the Ser­pent, was previous to that of his being born of the Blessed Virgin, the which he knows to be that which we have all along pinched him with, out of his former [Page 36] Writings, and which to this day he hath neither re­tracted nor defended.

§ 13 Whereas he had said Imm. Rev. p. 87. 'The Soul speaks to God in the Son,—Through him not at a distance but near: He now §. 13. saith, His Sense was, not at a discontinued distance, but both near and afar off▪ Answ. This idle Shift will not help him, he is positive, he is not a distance, but near, and adds, ‘Where his living Drawings are felt, his eternal Power is felt, making way for the Soul unto God, breaking through all the Powers of Darkness, &c. And is that Pre­sence, wherein the livings Drawings are felt, &c. at a distance, absent, not near, even within, say I? Yea Christ is near as Mediator, ‘He is Man's Advocate unto God, and there is none to intervene or come betwixt God and the Soul, but Christ the alone Mediator, to whom God speaks in his Son, said G. K. but a little above, and in p. 88. speaks of the Appearance of Jesus to mediate in Men, which could not be spoke of the Body received of the Virgin and now glorified in Heaven, for that is at a distance, not near; but of that Presence which is not at a distance, but near; even of him who is the high and holy one that inhabits Eternity, with him also that is of a contrite and humble Spirit, Isa. 57.15.’ Nor will his Notion of a discontinued distance help him, but rather shew he is a meer Shuffler. First, for that it is no Scripture Phrase, ‘Yet expresly delivered in the Scriptures, in plain express Scripture-terms [there­fore by his own Rule, Truths Defence, p. 170, 171.] should not be required by one sort from another, as an Article of Faith, or Doctrine, or Principle of the Christian Religion.’ 2ly, However it may hold in the Mathematical Science, with respect to a direct Line, which extends from the place near to another remote and afar off; yet here, Ʋbiquity being an Attribute not [Page 37] only of the Deity, but even of the Man Christ (accor­ding to his own Assertion, Way Cast up, p. 130, 131. and not yet retracted) so that God and Christ are every where, not confined or circumscribed to a remoteness, as in a direct Line, where one part is near, the other afar off, this distinction will not hold. 3ly, What he alledges out of Acts 17.27. where Men are bid to seek the Lord, if happily they may feel after him and find him, reacheth not his purpose, viz. That he is not at a dis­continued distance: It being spoken of the Ʋnfaithful, and even to them God was not afar off; however they might be far from him, so as to feel and find him: For that which may be inwardly felt and found, is not far off.

But hear him again, I did not intend in the least, saith he, by asserting the Mediation and Intercession of the Media­tory Spirit of Christ in the Saints, to deny or derogate from Christ's Mediation and Intercession without us in Heaven. Answ. Neither do we. But what doth he retract then, if it be still good Doctrine that Christ is Mediator in his inward Appearance in Man, as well as in Heaven? What hath he been hitherto contending with us about, in his several envious Pamphlets? Will he give up the Cause at last, and cry Peccavi, for his fierce opposing and slandering us as denying Christ's Mediatorship, upon this very foot, rather than retract this Passage? Or will he do neither, but twist and twine and wriggle in constant Inconstancy, and neither plainly renounce nor plainly defend what he hath so plainly asserted for­merly?

§ 14 He would perswade us (if he could) §. 14. that by these words Imm. Rev. p. 99. [Jesus Christ re­vealed in Man is the Foundation of the true Church] He did not mean only and alone the Light Within, but that the true Knowledge and Faith of Christ, as he is both God and [Page 38] Man, and who as Man died, rose and ascended, &c. is grounded upon him as inwardly revealed, &c. Answ. He was not speaking of Jesus Christ revealed TO Man, but of his being revealed IN Man, which is the Scope of his Argument from p. 99 to 129. Who in p. 101. saith, ‘Christ must be revealed by the Father, before he became a Foundation, this is that which buildeth, which edifieth the effectual Working in every part, the Revelation of the Arm of the Lord IN Man's Heart.’ And p. 103. having told us that ‘Whatsoever Church is not builded on this Foundation (Christ Jesus immediately revealed both in the whole Body and every Member thereof) is not the true Church, but a Synagogue of Satan, a vile Harlot, Mystery Ba­bylon, the Mother of Fornicators, for the true Church is one in all Ages, and hath ever had one Foundation Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, to day, and for ever.’ [Note this must relate to his inward Appea­rance only, for he had not taken Flesh of the Virgin from everlasting.] He proceeds to Query, ‘What was this Foundation of the Church of God, before ever Scripture was writ, &c.?’ [Was not that before his outward Appearance in Flesh, say I?] ‘Was it not Jesus Christ the Word, which was in the Begin­ning, &c.?’ To which he answers, ‘It was even the Word which came from God himself, and taught them immediately.’ Again p. 105. to prove that Moses testifieth to this Foundation (Christ revealed in Man) he quotes Deut. 30. v. 11 to 16. which treats of the word nigh in the Mouth and Heart. And p. 107. ‘The Jews and People of Israel who lived in Moses's time, and were SAVED [he saith] it was through Faith in this Word, in this Prophet raised up IN them, in their Hearts, not AT A DISTANCE, but nigh. And this [he calls] Christ in them, the Hope of Glory, the Mystery hid from Ages and Gene­rations, [Page 39] but was EVER made manifest in the Saints.’ ‘Again p. 112. he shews, that under the Name of Wis­dom, Solomon manifestly points at this Principle and Foundation, Jesus Christ the Wisdom and Power of God:’ Then asks p. 116. ‘Where is this Wisdom to be found? How are Men bewitched from the true Path, where it appears, and how were we bewitched by them, seeking her without us?’ And now I leave it to the Reader to judge what G. K. meant by saying, Jesus Christ revealed in Man is the Foundation of the true Church, and whether he hath not falsified his Sense for­merly, rather than he would retract what yet he dares not defend, who hath done it premeditatedly, most of these Quotations having been more than once laid before him in Print already, and argued upon, to which he gives the Go-by while he obtrudes such an Interpre­tation of his words formerly, as these passages do di­rectly oppugn, and takes no notice of what we have alledged out of them.

What he next offers out of p. 243 to 247. he pre­tends as a proof that he did then own the Man Christ without us in Heaven, as our Head and Foundation, and ob­ject of our Faith. Answ. He speaks indeed there of the Man Christ, who suffered in the Flesh at Jerusalem, his being the Spring, out of which all the living Streams flow into our Souls, p. 245. and that he is to be prayed to, p. 247. which none of us deny. But the question being about the object of Faith, and this Quotation therefore adduced by him, to prove the Man Christ without us in Heaven, is the Object of our Faith (though that is not treated of in the Citation given) I shall shew what G. K. spake of the Man Christ even as inwardly revealed. Who p. 244. l. last, calls him ‘The hidden Man of the Heart, whom Paul witnessed that he lived in him, this he understood of Christ as Man, saith G. K. Which shews he there spake of him, as a Spiritual Man, but [Page 40] the Body which the Jews Crucified he p. 245. calls ‘That Temple in which the Fullness and Centre of Life did dwell.’ And in his Way cast up (a Book not yet retracted) p. 102. he is yet more positive, that ‘It is not the outward Flesh and Blood that is the Man— but the Soul or inward Man that dwelleth in the out­ward Flesh—such as Christ was, even from the be­ginning.’ So that by this Position, when he speaks of the Man Christ, he must mean not the outward Flesh and Blood, but the Soul or inward Man, which was from the Beginning, and in time suffered in Flesh, whom Paul and the Saints witnessed in them, as Man, which he seemed to foresee, when he tells us here, Lest any should surmise, that by Christ Jesus in all this large Cita­tion, I did mean the Light Within only, and not the Man Christ Jesus without us, I expresly mention the Man Christ Jesus without us, p. 246. who is ascended, &c. Answ. He then said, even in behalf of us, whom he hath since tra­duced, as well as himself, that ‘We own Christ Jesus, not only as God, but as Man, and that both inwardly and outwardly. [But] the immediate Fellowship and Union with the Man Christ Jesus without us, who is ascended, &c.— We have [saith he there] through the measure of the Life of Jesus Christ, as Man made manifest in us.’ Thus he tells us the effect of the Faith wrought, viz. Immediate Ʋnion of the Man Christ without us, who is ascended, is by the inward Manifesta­tion of the Man Christ: Then surely that Manifestation must be the Object of our Faith, say I, viz. That which being presented before us gives the Fellowship, gives the Union within as ascended.

Yet so much Flourish doth he make upon this Quota­tion, that he angrily suggests, p. 10. It is abundantly sufficient to discover the Impudence of his late Adversaries, who by perverting his words assert, That he made the Light the alone Object of Faith, which (he saith) he never did. [Page 41] Answ. What we have charged, yea and proved upon him, on this head, he is neither so fair as to give, nor sincere as to retract; therefore I shall (for the Readers Information) repeat some of them. For he not only saith (Help in time of Need, p. 66. ‘The Object or thing which is ministred is Christ the living and eternal Word, nigh in the Heart, &c. ‘Again Imm. Rev. p. 132. agreeing with both Papists and Pro [...]estants, that God speak­ing in Men is the formal Object of Faith; he p. 151. repre­senteth the hidden Manna, white stone, and new name, as the Object of his Knowledge that overcometh, and [saith] none knows this Object but he.’ [Doth none know that Jesus is ascended, but he [...]hat overcometh, seing none knows this Object but he? But he goes on] ‘What is the Object but Jesus Christ himself, not only revealing, but revealed in the Soul, &c?)’ But also in his Book of Ʋni. Grace, p. 80. (a Passage not yet re­tracted) from what was said Rom. 10.14. and Psal. 62.7, 8.65.2. he infers, ‘If the Lord hath required them [the Heathen and Kingdoms of the World] to believe, then (Christ, the Name of God) the Object of Faith, the [...], hath been in some measure manifested and held forth unto them.’ Whence I Query, Whe­ther he did not then make the Light Within (the in­ward Manifestation of the Man Christ) the ALONE Object to the Gentiles? Or could that be the Object of theirs or of the Jews Faith, which our Lord had not yet received of the Virgin, which was not Conceived, nor Born, much less ascended? And yet they had Faith, and that Faith had its Object, yea and it was a saving Faith too. ‘The Jews and People of Israel, who lived in Moses's time, and were SAVED, it was through Faith in this Word, said G. K. Imm. Rev. p. 107. forecited.’ Let him then reconcile these Passages to his late No­ [...]ion, that, ‘Faith in Christ, as he died for us and rose again, is indispensibly necessary to all;’ Further Discovery, [Page 42] p. 16. or never pretend that we pervert his words, when we shew he once asserted the inward Manifesta­tion as the Object of SAVING Faith, even where the outward hath not been revealed: And there it is the only one.

§ 15 That Scripture Luke 15.8, 9. concerning the lost piece of Money, he freely confesseth §. 15. is one of those places of Scripture, he hath, through weakness of Ʋnder­standing, misunderstood, and unduly applied to prove a Truth▪ Answ. Here is no retracting this (which is the first shew of Retractation I have hitherto met with) as unsound as untrue; No it was only misunderstood by him, an [...] unduly applied, but it was to prove a Truth, he pretends▪ Let us hear then what he hath next to say for himself▪ Why it seems in construing the lost piece of Money men [...]tioned in this place to be the Light Within, he was too muc [...] swayed by the Quakers Authority. But what Man of Se [...] was he to be so imposed upon in the mean while, say I▪ However now he is sufficiently convinced (he saith) Chri [...] did not mean the Light Within, but the lost Souls of Men▪ and he plainly now understands, that by the lost Sheep, [...] piece of Money and the lost Son, is understood men, or t [...] souls of men. Answ. He plainly understands amiss, bo [...] in confounding those three Parables together (for t [...] lost Sheep was lost out of the Wilderness, Luke 15. [...] the lost Son came back of his own accord, v. 18. an [...] the lost piece of Money was found in the same Ho [...] where it was lost, v. 8.) and also in understanding [...] the lost piece of Money, the Souls of Men. Yet [...] enforce it, he adds, They who expound the lost piece [...] money to be the Light Within, will find difficulty to sh [...] what the nine pieces are which are not lost, whereas to unde [...]stand it of the Souls of men, there is no difficulty in [...] Answ. As Similies seldom go on all four, so neith [...] must Parables be pursued too far, yet hence I ta [...] [Page 43] occasion to demand of him, Whether there be no diffi­culty to find, who the Woman is that had ten Souls, kept nine and lost one; or has the same Woman lighted the Candle, swept the House, sought and found one of her Souls in the House, and what that House was, where she found the Soul she had lost? Surely Absurdities will grow upon him thick and three-fold (as the Saying is) if we come to examine him throughout. However he endeavours to prove his Assertion, That by the lost piece of Money is meant the Souls of Men, not the Light Within, from the Womans lighting the Candle to seek the lost piece of money, which plainly signifieth (saith he) that the way that the Lord useth to find the lost Soul, is by lighting a Candle in it, and inwardly enlightning it, to see its lost Condition. Answ. First, The Lord can find the Soul without lighting a Candle in it, but he lights a Candle in it, that by the Light thereof it may find him, in and through that Gift of his Light, Spirit or Grace, which he had put into it, and which it, by departing therefrom, is said to have left. Which if the Creature had totally lost, so that its day of Visitation were over, there had been no remaining spark in the Soul to seek it, nor had it received that degree of renewed Light, whereby to light the Candle, and both seek and find the lost piece. Secondly, The very design of the Para­ble, was to set forth, not what God had lost, but what Man had lost, the Candle being used by Man, who needed it, not by God and Christ, who needed it not. Man was the loser, he was to sweep his own House, in order to find what he had lost, which was primarily the Divine Gift which God had given him and his Soul (or rather the Life of his Soul) but consequently of that. And indeed G. K. himself more nearly hits the Scope of the Parable, in the Explication he here gives of what he had said Imm. Rev. p. 125. the which he tells us, T. Hicks imposed a perverse Gloss upon, viz. [Page 44] That God had not lost himself, nor Christ had not lost Christ, but men had lost both by their Sins. So little doth he mend the matter by his present Exposition of the Parable. Yet to that degree is the Man infatuated, that what most deserved notice, viz. His many flat Doctrinal Contradictions, he can glibly slide over; this which himself said above, was a misunderstanding, an undue application of Scripture, and yet to prove a Truth, comes very frankly from him, as if he longed to ex­pose his Folly and Unsoundness, which he had given but too great Demonstration of before.

§ 16 His next §. is designed to correct his Corre­ction of our Translation, and that with respect to two Scriptures positively. That place 1 Cor. 2.2. where our Translation hath it [among you] he had rendred [in you] Imm. Rev. p. 126. Now he tells us, Though the Greek words [...] can be grammatically translated in you, yet they will not ALWAYS admit of the Transla­tion, otherwise in many places, the Sense would be marred, as 1 Cor. 2.2. and that that place and Col. 3.1. (He should have said Gal. 3.1.) are to be understood of Christ, a [...] outwardly Crucifi [...]d, and that the true Sense of Paul's word [...] related to the outward, which included his inward appea­rance consequentially. Answ. As I am not entring into a Debate with him of Doctrinals, but only to manifest [...] his Incoherence and Instability, I apply my self wholly thereto, and Query, If Paul preached Christ's inward Appearance only by Consequence, inclusively, why did he but a few Lines back, Imm. Rev. p. 125. from Col. 1▪26, 27, 28. infer (which here he hath not retracted) that Paul preached Christ in them, pointed them to him in them, him Crucified in them, &c?’ (Was he i [...] them by Consequence only?) And why did he say▪ alluding to the Mystery in the Gentiles (for so it is in th [...] Greek, said G. K. then, and is he now better skilled [Page 45] in the Greek than then, say I?) ‘This Mystery is Christ the Mystery in them, hid in them, the Trea­sure hid, and till it be found, it is not the Hope in them, but in them in whom it was manifested, it is the Hope of Glory?’ Will he say otherwise now? And will he pretend to demonstrate it? For till then this passage (unretracted) is Evidence against him.

In what follows he gives out, That he freely acknow­ledgeth his Weakness in Ʋnderstanding, in straining these and some other places of Scripture (which he names not) to prove what they did not directly and properly prove, the which undue Application of both these places 1 Cor. 2.2. and Gal. 3.1. both here and where-ever they may be found in any other of his Books, particularly Uni. Gr. p. 42. he re­tracts and corrects as above-mentioned. Answ. Though he speaks of some other places of Scripture, yet I per­ceive he retracts and corrects but two, so that of Col. 1.26, &c. lies still, as a bar in his way. And this Retractation being bounded by the word [above-menti­oned] must relate to the rendring [...], in you, and Christ's being Crucified in Men, which is the whole of what is there alledged. So that it should seem it is not Doctrines, but Explications of a Scripture or two, that he pretends to retract or correct. Nay he addeth in general terms (as if he designed to hide himself from his Reader, and play fast and loose) that he remaineth in the same Testimony, AS TO THE MAIN, as to Christ's inward Appearance, and in all other parts of it re­lating to Essentials of Christianity and spiritual Experiences, &c. But what those Essentials are, and in what branch or lesser matter, he relinquisheth his former Testimony, the Reader may guess if he pleaseth, for Information he gives none. The Poor Man hath an ill Cause to de­fend, and the least said the soonest amended, which I take to be the reason he shuns descending into parti­culars. Yet when he writes again, I would gladly [Page 46] know from his own Pen, 1st, Whether he now dare assert, that [...] can no where (throughout the New Testament) be, with good Sense, as well as gramma­tically rendred, in you; and if any where, in what place, and how long he will stand to that Exposition? 2ly, Whether Paul did not preach Christ Crucified in Men, even when he could not be supposed to mean his out­ward Crucifixion, as when he saith, Rom. 6.6. Our old Man is crucified with him, and Gal. 2.20. I am crucified with Christ, again Heb. 6.6. They crucifie to themselves the Son of God afresh? 3ly, What other places of Scripture hath he strained beyond what they directly and pro­perly prove? For according to my measure of Under­standing, he hath took time enough, since he first gave out his purpose of explaining and amending his Books to have made these more Compleat and Intelligible, had he designed it, or were he a sincere Convert, where h [...] now hovers for Protection, and perhaps Promotion.

As dark is he in what follows, for he remains in th [...] same Testimony (if ye will believe him) as to all opening [...] of Truth at any time given him of the Lord, and delivere [...] in this or any other of his Books, therefore let none judg [...] amiss (saith he) of my free and Christian Acknowledgmen [...] in this, or any other Mistakes, that upon a further Disco­very I am made free to acknowledge, retract or correct Answ. What he accounts Openings given him of the Lord, and how long he will so account them, he i [...] wise that can tell: For as he gives us no Catalogue o [...] them, nay seems to expect, as I find from a passage p. 42 l. last of these, the Reader should cull them out for him and he will retract them, if he see cause, so what he for [...]merly gave as Divine Openings, he now denies to b [...] such, as particularly the Arguments drawn in his Boo [...] of Ʋni. Gr. he then ascribed to the Evidence and Demon [...]stration of the Spirit of Truth, he now p. 16. confesseth h [...] Sin and Error in so doing. Thus in him is verified th [...] [Page 47] Saying of the Apostle James, Chap. 1. v. 8. A Double-minded Man is unstable in all his ways.

§ 17 In the next place, §. 17. he gives us a piece of a passage out of Imm. Rev. p. 137. thus, ‘Then they would turn their Backs upon them, and their Col­ledges would become like Abbacies at this day.’ Upon which he bids us Note, The great Rudeness and Ʋnman­ [...]erliness he saw in many of the Collegiants, and other Ʋn­ [...]hristian Behaviour in our Meetings, and elsewhere, drew [...]his passage from him. Answ. Were this true (as it is not) it is a very rash Censure, from the Misdemeanor although) of many Collegiants, to propose the laying wast of Colledges indefinitely, especially if he then [...]hought the Constitution was good, and the Fault only [...]n the irregular Lives of the Scholars. But that this is not true, but a false Pretence trumped up of late to [...]helter himself under, I shall appeal to the very Book [...]t self. He had said, p. 136. ‘That upon this Founda­tion of denying Immediate Revelation, depends their Church, Ministry and their WHOLE Clergy, and their so called Theology, and Philosophy, Schools and Colledges.’ Then he goes on, ‘For if once Peo­ple were perswaded and convinced, that God did teach and would teach them, who wait on him—then they would turn their Backs upon them, and their Colledges would be like the Abbacies at this day (which lodged that Prophane Rabble of Papist-Monks and Friars, who pretended as great Spirituality, as the National Priests do) an Habitation for Owls and ra­venous Beasts, see p. 136, 137.’ What Deceit was it [...]hen in G. K. to assign the Scholars Rudeness and Un­mannerliness, as withdrew this passage from him, when [...]hat it was not it, but he had assigned another, viz. The [...]enying Immediate Revelation, or the Teachings of God's Spirit? If G. K. can read this without Shame, I [Page 48] am perswaded the considerate Reader cannot without Detestation, that the Man should obtrude so gross an Untruth upon him. And in so much as he adds, That he neither then was, nor now is, against Schools of good Learning, either of Divine or Natural things, but the abuse and Irregularity of them. I ask what he now calls Schools of good Learning of Divine things, whether those Schools which he once would have had become an Habi­tation for Owls and ravenous Beasts, those Theology and Philosophy Schools and Colledges which depend upon the denying Immediate Revelation? Are they now become Schools of good Learning with him? Or ought they now to be Suppressed? For that is the Matter in Debate, Whether these Schools be good, in order to make Men Ministers of Christ, 'Whither (he says Help in Time of Need, p. 35.) ‘Fathers and Relations send them to learn the Calling, as ever the Shoe-maker, or other Trades­man past his Apprenticeship, and then becomes Free to use the Trade?’ This let him fairly retract or de­fend, it being the main hinge of the Controversie, which he hath not dared hither to cope with, perhaps for the same reason, that the Chief Priests and Elders refused to answer Christ, whether the Baptism of John were from Heaven, or of Men: For the Man is in a Dilemma, he must please his Flock at Turners-hall at present (who perhaps do not yet think such Schools to be good, to make Men Ministers) till he can settle better to his Advantage, yet he must not displease the Clergy, ex­cept he was sure he should never stand in need of them.

That many called Ʋniversity Men, have had (among whom he reckons Wickliff, Luther, Cranmer, &c.) and may now have a good measure of true Spiritual Knowledge, he pretends, he dares not be so Ʋncharitable as to deny. Answ. What his Sentiments may have been or yet are of particular Men, I do not enquire, what they have been of the Order, of the Degree, is manifest out of the [Page 49] same p. 137. where he goes on thus, ‘Then down should all the proud, lording, lofty Clergy, with their many Degrees of Doctorships, Lordships and Masterships pass, who being Strangers to the true Knowledge, are vainly puffed up in their Fleshly Minds, by the Form of Knowledge in the Letter, &c. This is it which I laid before him once before in my Keith against Keith, p. 143. and which he hath not yet retracted, nay nor took notice of here, though he gave us a Passage even now out of the same Page, which shews the Man had rather slide over it, than either de­fend it, and so displease the Clergy he would now fawn on, or renounce and disclaim it, as an Error in him formerly, and so be reputed a Man changed in his Judg­ment by those few who hold with him, and would still be reputed Quakers, viz. His Flock at Turners-hall, which yet recommends him not as sincere to either. Nor will an excepting some out of a general Rule, while this Hand-writing is upon the Wall against him, satisfie any Men of Judgment, that are of that Order and De­gree he hath thus reflected on, and who are not willing to be imposed upon, that this is a reasonable and ade­quate Compensation, for those Epithets so lavishly bestow­ed upon them, both in the place above, and elsewhere.

§ 18 In this §. 18. he gives us a new Exposition (I never heard of from him before) of what he did un­derstand by the Historical Knowledge and Faith, viz. That Knowledge and Faith that respects the History of Christ's Birth, Life, Death, Resurrection, Ascension, &c. with all the Circumstances of Times, Places and Names of Persons, &c. as related by the four Evangelists, which elsewhere (but he doth not say where) he hath called the express or ex­plicit Knowledge and Faith, which many of the Faithful ne­ver had. But the Doctrine of Christ simply considered (he saith) is one thing, and the History or Historical Revela­tion of the many Circumstances of Times, Places and Per­sons, [Page 50] &c. [...]d [...]lating to that Doctrine, is another thing Answ. That this is a meer Shift, the Objection raised Imm. Rev. p. 228. which he gives not, and his answer will fully declare and evince. The Objection was, That G. K. did not mention any thing of the History or Historical Parts of Christ's Birth, Life, Miracles, &c. (mark, he did not say of the Circumstance of Time, Place or Per­sons, but of the History, &c.) as being any Essential part of this new Revelation, whereupon his Adversary brands him with Familism. G. K. answers, p 229. by distin­guishing the parts of Religion into those necessary to the Being of it, and those not necessary to the Being of it, which he thus summeth up, ‘The Knowledge and Be­lief of the History of Christ, his outward Coming, Birth, Life, &c. and of the other Historical parts o [...] the Scriptures—are such parts of our Religion and Faith, as are to make up the Intiredness or Fullness of it—But that the Historical Knowledge and Faith is not an essential part of true Religion [he instanceth in] Cornelius, whose Prayers God heard, and yet he knew not the History of Christ, nor of his Death and Sufferings, till it was preached unto him by Peter ▪ p. 230.’ By all which it appears what he then mean [...] by Historical Knowledge and Faith, viz. Not the Cir­cumstances of Times, Places and Persons only; but that Relation which Cornelius wanted, and for want whereo [...] he denies (in his late Book stiled Truth Advanced, p. 45 and 70.) him to have received the Holy Ghost in his Gentile State. Who sure must be very uncharitable to Cornelius, and the many Faithful who never knew al [...] the Circumstances of Times, Places and Persons, &c. (as alledged even now) if they having the Essentials o [...] Religion, and being destitute only of the Circumstance [...] of the History, not of the History it self, must there­upon miss of having the Holy Ghost, which is the na­tural Consequence of this new Interpretation of Historica [...] [Page 51] Knowledge and Faith. Yet to make it yet more fully appear, hear him further p. 232. where he saith, ‘In them who have not the Scriptures, the Spirit and Light sufficiently teacheth them the parts of Religion absolutely necessary, without the Scripture, to which parts the History of the Scripture doth not belong.’ What parts are those, say I? For the Spirit doth not teach the Knowledge of Christ's Birth, Life, Death, Resurrection, Ascension, &c. without the Scripture, (omitting Circumstances of Time, Place, &c.) there­fore he could not formerly mean, as he now saith, but his saying so now, is a false Pretence. See also p. 243. where he saith, ‘True Religion and Christianity may subsist without the Knowledge of Christ in the Let­ter, to wit, In the Mystery of the Life of Christ in the Spirit, and yet even here, where the History is wanting [he doth not say the Circumstance of Time, Place, &c.] the Mystery or in-side of Christianity is not without its skin or out-side, namely an outward Confession unto God, &c. This I doubt not but he would now account Deism in us; but I observe, he did not then oppose Mystery to Mystery, but Letter to My­stery, out-side to in-side, yea that he admitted of an out­side, viz. an outward Confession unto God, which might sub­sist without the Knowledge of Christ in the Letter (which is more than bare Circumstances of Time, Place or Per­sons) even where the History is wanting: And that in the Mystery of the Life of Christ in the Spirit. So that then true Religion and Christianity (with him) might subsist in the Mystery without the History: Nor was it the De­bate between him and his Antagonist whether all the Cir­cumstances were Essential to true Religion, but whether the literal and historical Knowledge was so, which G. K. denied, as hath been already instanced.

Now upon his thus Expounding Explicit and Implicit Knowledge, he tells us, He knows not any thing to be found [Page 52] in all his former Writings, to the contrary, notwithstanding the Attempts of his Ignorant Adversaries, who affirm it, and whom he hath sufficiently Answered (as he pretends) in diverse of his late Books, particularly that called Ant. and Sadd. detected. Answ. This is a very nimble way of Purgation, to say he doth not know it is to be found in his Books, yet confesseth we have affirmed it, (but where he saith not) and alledgeth he hath sufficiently An­swered us, but for that he names but one of his Books particularly, and in that assigns neither Page nor Pas­sage, that the Reader might be forced to take all upon Trust, without Examination: And yet pretends in the Title Page hereof, that these may at present suffice for a Reply to T. E's and my former and latter Books. At this rate it is easie Answering whole Volumes. However if the Reader be disposed to see what I have affirmed out of him, upon this Subject, he may find it in My People called Quakers cleared, p. 17, to 22. and Keith against Keith, p. 69, to 71. I Answered what he then had offered in Ant. and Sadd. with relation to his distinction of Explicit and Implicit, though he having now vamped a new one upon it, I have touched upon none but that here, and for the old ones refer as above. But he adds, upon Supposition, that any such thing can be found in my Books, I retract and renounce it, which is Childish all over. Can a Man retract or renounce a Passage, upon Supposition, and not know what the Pas­sage is? Or can we suppose him sincere, and that he would renounce or retract it, if he knew it, when he takes so overtly notice of (and conceals from his Rea­der) the Passages from whence we have deduced his former Sense with respect to the Knowledge of the Hi­story and of the Mystery? Again, if it be sufficient to say, upon Supposition any such thing can be found, I retract and renounce it, without assigning the Citations given, methinks he need not have been these 18 Months, po­ring [Page 53] at it; but a few Lines by way of Advertisement, with respect to the many Contradictions and Absurdi­ties objected against him out of his Books, That upon Supposition they are to be found, he retracts and renounceth them might have served: For this is the length and breadth of G. K. his Retractation here.

§ 19 His mis-paging a Place in Imm. Rev. hath led him to invert the number of his Paragraphs. I shall therefore, following the due order of the Pages, begin with his §. 20. G. K. had said p. 253, 254. ‘When the Vital Energy and Influence of the Life of Christ is suspended upon the Soul of a Man, and cea­seth to act or operate, so as to give any sensible re­freshment or enjoyment of it self unto the Soul, this is as proper a Death, as when a Man dieth, for when a Man dieth, his Soul dieth not in it self, but unto that Fellowship it had with the Body.’ This I have given more largely than G. K. hath done in these, who be­gan only from the words [This is as proper a Death] after having acknowledged (not that the passage is un­sound, for when did he ever say so? But) that it is un­safely worded, he retracts it, he saith, and instead of that now averrs, the unio [...] betwixt Body and Soul being broken, is more properly a Death, the other he takes to be understood rather figuratively than proper. And his Reason is, the Soul doth wholly cease to act in that Body while it is dead, but Christ ceaseth not oft-times to act in a dead Soul, by sharp Reproof, Conviction for Sin and fresh Visitations, in order to quicken and renew it. Answ. Were I to Argue the Point with him, I might tell him what he brings is not in or­dine ad idem. The Soul's dying as to its Fellowship with the Body, are the tearms of a Position, whence it is said to be dead; so in like manner its Fellowship with the Life of Christ being broken, is that which deno­minates it spiritually dead: But what is this to Christ his [Page 54] acting in it (who is not dead, whatever the Soul be) by Reproof, Conviction or renewed Visitations, which yet may be (for ought that he hath offered to the con­trary) by even renewed Vivifications or Enlivenings. This shews he states not the Matter fair: However as an Evidence of the Man's Mutability and Self-inconsi­stency, and present Darkness, I observe, that he who so lately unjustly Charged G. W. with Allegorizing a­way the Birth, Death and Sufferings of Christ in the outward, would do the like to the inward, rendring the breaking of the Union betwixt Soul and Body, to be more properly a Death than the other, which he now takes to be understood rather figuratively than proper. Whereas himself in the instance I gave above, §. 4. out of Imm. Rev. p. 15, 16. to the natural Man (as he there calls him) his objecting that these (the out­ward Senses of Seeing, Hearing, &c.) are only but Fi­gures and Metaphors, asserts, ‘That the outward things are but Figures of the inward and spiritual, which as far exceed and transcend them in Life, Glory, Beauty and Excellency, as a living Body doth a shadow [and concludeth] that this whole Visible World, with all the Glory in it, is but a shadow in respect of the spi­ritual and inward.’ And will he now say the Name, the Denomination is more properly applicable to the Shadow, than to the Substance, to the Figure than to the thing figured? Which yet is the natural tendency of his late halting Retractation, so bewildred is the Man in his Undertakings, and driven to his shifts to patch up his late Notions, without an effectual disclaiming of his former Writings.

§ 20 So having given us a Citation out of Imm. Rev. p. 256. where he had said, [Christ, according to his Spiritual Birth in the Saints, is the Seed of the Woman] which yet of late he will not allow us to say, he betakes [Page 55] himself to this silly shift, that he did understand it but Allegorically, and by way of Allusion, and never intended that Christ was not the Seed of the Woman, in the true and proper sense of the words, without all Allegory, as he was Made of a Woman, and Born of the Virgin Mary, &c. Answ. But what then will become of his saying, Way Cast up, p. 99. ‘Jesus Christ is the same Yesterday, to Day, and for Ever:’ Was he so only Allegorically, by way of Allusion, and not really and properly so? Or was he Born of the Virgin Mary from the beginning? He told us then, ‘Yesterday is from the Beginning; to Day at present; and for Ever, in all Ages to come; [and added] This is the promised Seed, which God promised to our Parents after the Fall, and actually gave unto them, even the Seed of the Woman, that should bruise the Head of the Serpent. And there­fore though the outward coming of the Man of Christ was deferred according to his outward Birth in the Flesh, for many Ages, yet from the beginning this Heavenly Man, the Promised Seed, did inwardly come into the Hearts of those that believed in him, &c. And must all this be turned off as only Allegorical, and by way of Allusion? Were not himself under a Delu­sion, he would say otherwise.

Having told us his present and former Belief, that by Gen. 3.14. Christ's Birth after the Flesh was really intend­ed (which we question not, for one Scripture may have a Literal, and Mystical Sense, both real, both pro­per, as this hath) he adds, But this Allegorical Allusion of Christ's Birth in the Saints I did not ground on Gen. 3.15. but on Mat. 12.50. and Rev. 12.1, 5. Answ. The tearm [Seed of the Woman] he must borrow from Gen. not from Mat. 12.50. and Rev. 12.1, 5. and al­so that this Seed should bruise the Serpents Head, in the instance above. As well as that when he said, Way to City of God, p. 125. ‘Even at Man's Fall the Seed of [Page 56] the Woman was given, not only to bruise the Ser [...]pent's Head, but also, &c. he must refer to the Pro­mise made, Gen. 3.15.’ ‘This he called Imm. Rev. p▪ 12. (as alledged above in [...] §. 4 and there Cited by him, and observed [...]y me▪ to which I refer as him­self doth to what himself said in that § which [...] there Answered) a perfect, substantial Birth of an Heavenly and incorruptible Nature, the Body, Flesh and Blood of Christ [and in his Way Cast up, p. 96. saith] the Saints in all Ages did feed on it.’ ‘And seeing Christ had Flesh and Blood from the beginning [he afforteth that] he was Man from the beginning, for as God simply he cannot have Flesh and Blood, for God is [...] Spirit, therefore it is the Fl [...]sh and Blood of Christ, as he is Man, or the Son of Man [for which he Ci [...]es Christ's words] unless ye eat the Flesh of the Son of Man, &c. ‘Again in his Way to the City of God, p. 133. he calls it the Heavenly or Divine Substance or Es­sence of which the Divine Birth was both Conceived in Mary, and is INWARDLY Conceived in the Saints.’ And must all this be now turned off as an Al­legorical Allusion, as imp [...]oper, &c? O the inconsistency! O the variable [...]ess and unsoundness of this wavering, fickle Man! Who having lost his Guide, is perplext and entangled in Fetters of his own making, while in­sincerely alledging and adducing false pretexts, to cover himself with, which are too narrow and too short.

Thus having gone through his first Section, and touched the most material passages, not designedly overlooking any, although he hath omitted several, of which I may chance to put him in mind of at the close, I come to his second Section, containing his Explanations and Emend [...]tions (as he calls them) of passages in his Book of Universal Free Grace, Printed Anno 1671. which how Effectually done, I now purpose to Exa­mine.

Sect. II.

§ 1 Waving then his Preamble which respects the Title Page, and hath been touched upon above §. 5. of Sect. I. I begin with his §. 1. where he pretends to remain in the same Testimony against that absurd Doctrine of absolute Reprobation, rendring Salvation impossible to the greatest part, or indeed to any part of Mankind, and adds, yet an Election even of Persons, as well as of the Divine Seed, I have owned, &c. I shall therefore examine whe­ther what he now owns be correspondent to what he then owned, seeing he here pretends not to retract any thing. Beginning then with p. 107. of Ʋn. Gr. (which he widely refers to, without giving any Citati­on thence) I observe, that to Mens objecting from that Scripture [I will have Mercy, on whom I will have Mercy] that God hath not Mercy upon all, but upon [...]ome only, he Answers, ‘These words relate not to Mens first coming into the World, but unto a time after, when they had despised the much Long-suffer­ing of God, extended unto them, that after a time of Gracious Visitation, though never so small, he may have Mercy upon some, to give them a longer time, and yet not have Mercy upon others, to give it them.’ [...]he which rather makes against a Personal Election [...]an for it, say I: For if God have Mercy upon all, [...]ot upon some only, it is in order that Election, the [...]uit of his Mercy, should extend to all (not to this or [...]at Person only, or as Persons, but) as adhering to [...]d found in that Divine Seed, wherein the Election [...]ands: So that this makes not for him, but against [...]n. And whereas he now tells us, that in p. 108. he [...]ows the Common Translation of those words, Acts [...]. 48. [And as many as were ordained unto Eternal [...]fe believed] the Reader will find, if he consult the [Page 58] place, that he did not allow it, for he rendred it [who, ever believed, were ordained unto Eternal Life, or or­dered or placed into Eternal Life] which is both a Transposition and varies the Sense, i. e. they were not ordained to believe, but the Believers were ordained or ordered into Eternal Life. Whereto he there adds, ‘Although the Common Translation should be admit­ted [he doth not say, he doth admit it, but although he should] it proves not what they intend.’ ‘And thereupon he grants indeed, that as whoever believ [...] are ordained to Eternal Life, so whoever are ordaine [...] unto Eternal Life, do believe [and so far G. K. give [...] in these, but what himself thence inferred he gives not viz.] which hinders not but that others may hav [...] had a Day of Visitation, wherein it was possible fo [...] them to have believed, but God did fore know the [...] would not believe, and so he did not predestina [...] them to Life.’ Which again spoils his late Notion [...] Election of Persons, as well as the Divine Seed (for whic [...] end perhaps it was omitted by him) seeing the Electi [...] was not Personal, but in the Divine Seed: All othe [...] having had (as he saith) a Day of Visitation, where [...] it was possible for them to have believed (then sure [...] was possible for them to have been Elected, and t [...] Election was not limited to Persons, say I). To the he adds a third Reference out of p. 109. The obj [...]ction (which he gives not here) was this, that fr [...] John 6.37. All that the Father giveth me, shall co [...] some would infer that none but the Elect, who are given Christ, can come unto him, and they all shall. To wh [...] he Answers. ‘There is a more general giving and a m [...] special giving, which is only applicable to the Sain [...] who are his Children, and cannot but come unto h [...] But what is this to prove an Election of Persons, to [...] the more special giving is only applicable to the Sain [...] ▪’ Are Saints and Persons Synonymous tearms? Or is [...] [Page 59] Saints rather a Qualification? Such cannot but come un­to him; but is that predicable of Persons indefinitely? Or only of Persons found in the Divine Seed, wherein the Election stands? So little doth he help himself out in his vain Essays to Reconcile his late with his former Sentiments: The inconsistency whereof I shall further make appear in an instance or two out of his Book of Truth Advanced compared with a passage or two out of Ʋn. Grace.

Who in p. 105. of Ʋn. Grace (having in p. 104. Asigned his Understanding thereof, to be given of the Lord, by his Spirit) thus delivereth himself, ‘There are two Seeds, one Elect and of God, the other Re­probate and of the Devil—Who so now cleave to this Elect Seed in the true Faith, and persevere so to do, are chosen of him before the Foundation of the World, as fore-knowing and fore-seeing them in Unity with this Seed, which is Christ, in whom they are there­fore said to be chosen, Eph. 1.4.’ The Reprobate Seed is that Seed of Darkness and Unrighteousness of Men, which is of the Devil. They now which cleave thereunto, and continue in Unity therewith, until the Day of their Visitation from the Lord Ex­pire, they are the Reprobates [and concludeth] ‘Thus though the decree of Election and Reprobation be from Everlasting, yet it Respects Men NOT SIM­PLY AS MEN, but as finally adhereing and cleaving [...]o the Elect or Reprobate Seed.’ Thus far G. K. for­ [...]erly, which how Reconcilable the Ʋnderstanding (he [...]en said) was given him of the Lord, by his Spirit, is [...] his late Understanding, will be further Obvious up­ [...] comparing it with his Assertion in Truth Advanced Printed Anno, 1694.) p. 12. He there Assigns it as an [...]ror to say, ‘That the Elect Seed is only Christ, and [...]he Reprobate Seed is only the Serpent or the Devil, [...]nd when any come into Christ by Faith, they come [Page 60] into the Election, and may be said to be Elected, b [...] not before, but when they depart from him, or an [...] not come to him, they may be said to be Reprobate [...] ▪’ And again, ibid. He reckons it ‘Absurd, and contrar [...] to Scripture to say, A Man may pass from Election [...] Reprobation, as if God's Election were a variable thi [...] [saith he, then adds, that] The Scriptures declar [...] the Gifts and Callings of God are without Repentanc [...] ▪’ Thus one while this variable Man declares, as accor [...]ing to the Ʋnderstanding given him of the Lord by his Sp [...]rit, that the Election and Reprobation are in the t [...] Seeds, the decree of Election and Reprobation respe [...] not Men, Simply as Men, but as finally adhering a [...] cleaving to one of the two Seeds: Another while, it [...] an Error to Asse [...]t, the Elect Seed is only Christ, a [...] the Reprobate Seed is only the Devil, and that M [...] may come into, or depart from the Election. [...] there is now no passing from Election to Reprobati [...] with him, without Fal [...]ifying the Text; and all [...] from the same Pen, from a Man not Erring in Fun [...]mentals (if ye will believe him) but steady and sted [...] in his Testimony (viz. as any Weather-cock.)

Yet this is not all, for as I had in my People called Q [...]kel's Cleared, p. 42. referred from p. 9. to 15. of▪ Truth Advanced, compared with his Book of Ʋ [...] Gr. from p. 73, to 79. and p. 105. to the end, a [...] Indication of G. K. his Instability while treating [...] this Doctrine of Election and Reprobation, which he [...] took no notice of here, either to Retract or Defen [...] shall give an Instance or two of what he hath said, b [...] Formerly and Lately concerning Conditional Election, so leave this Head. In that Book of Ʋni. Gr. p. [...] having said [God willeth not all to be saved Absolut [...] but Conditionally (parte Objecti) upon their b [...]ving] and its being Objected [either God willeth the [...] believe Absolutely or Conditionally] he answers [we [Page 61] CONDITIONALLY] Aagain in Truths Defence, p. 193. To J. A. his urging [That Christ Died for those that perish, Absolutely or Conditionally] G. K. an­swers [partly both] Again to J. A. his Objecting [That seeing the Condition it self, to wit Faith, is the Gift of God, he either bestows it upon them Absolutely or Conditionally] G. K. Replies to p. 194. ‘God is willing to bestow it upon them and work it in them, not upon the Condition of their first Believing, before he give them to believe— but the Condition is, if they do not finally resist his Spirit of Grace, &c. Thus far for Conditional Election: Now hear what he saith against it, in Truth Advanced, p. 11. ‘As for that Conditional Election, (saith he) as it is not a Scrip­ture Phrase, so it doth not agree with Scripture, but is contradictory unto it; for if such a Conditional Election were, it would be General or Universal, and comprehend all Mankind; for why are one part more than another, seeing Eternal Life and Salvation are held forth Conditionally to all?’ And from Christ's [...]eaching, That many are called, few chosen, he infers, ‘This cannot be a Conditional Election, for it would not be good Sense to say, Few or some are Conditio­nally-Elected, saith G. K. All which I now leave with him, seeing he hath hitherto over-passed it, to recon­cile if he can, and to inform his Reader, whether to say (Election is Conditional, and that the Condition [...]s, if they do not finally resist the Spirit of Grace; and [...]gain to say, That Conditional Election is not a Scrip­ [...]ure Phrase, but Contradictory to Scripture, it would [...]ot be good Sense to say, Few or some are Conditio­nally Elected) are both true, and no Contradiction? Till then, though I could load him with more upon his Subject, these may suffice.

[Page 62] § 2 His next §. is very short, what he had said of the Spirit of Life from God, its being entred into the Two slain Witnesses, he would turn off, as said only by an Al­legorical and Metaphorical Allusion. But in this he is not plain, whether the Expression it self be Allegorical and Metaphorical, or his ascertaining that time, as already begun, only be so. For I remember the Testimony he hath given in this Book of Ʋni. Gr. p. 5. and elsewhere with respect to this and the Church being now com [...] and coming out of the Wilderness, he hath Contradict­ed in Truth Advanced p. 157, 158. of which more an [...] in my Sect. III. §. 9.

§ 3 In his §. 3. quoting a place in Ʋni. Gr. p. 6 he bids us note, That diverse of his Adversaries among the Sect of Quakers, with whom he hath had a great Cont [...] of late, have from this passage sought to infer his Agre [...]ment with them, so as to hold that the Light within was suf [...]ficient to Salvation, without any thing else, and thereby [...] only excluding all outward Helps and Means of Salvation but even the Man Christ Jesus, and his Death, and Suffer [...]ings and Sacrifice of himself, from being necessarily concern [...]ed in our Salvation. Answ. As this is a Slander upon us so also hath he not attempted to prove it, offering [...] Evidence, no Demonstration out of any of our Book [...] to make it out. 2dly, I cannot find that any of us hav [...] so much as brought the Citation in p. 6. against him For my part, I (who have been more particular i [...] Confronting him out of that Book, than any of them have it not; and it cannot be a Typographical Error, se [...]ing the passage given is in the Page assigned. Yet [...] busie is he at Fighting as with the Man of Straw he ha [...] set up, that he bestows above a Page upon it, which th [...] Foundation being wrong (for we deny the Charge) de [...]serves not my notice.

[Page 63]Nor have we blamed (as he also alledgeth p. 18. upon his single Credit without referring to any Book of ours) his distinction between first and second, Legal and Evangelical Covenant, given to both Jews and Gentiles: But his late saying, That even the Law within, both in Jew and Gentile, made nothing perfect, until the Faith of Christ the One Offering come to be revealed, by which One Offering he hath for Ever perfected them that are sanctified (as in Truth Advanced p. 71.) ‘I have opposed to his saying (Way to City of God p. 125.) that through the coming of Jesus Christ in the inward, even before he was outwardly come or manifest, many were saved, and attained unto PERFECT Peace and Reconcilia­tion with God in their Souls.’ ‘And to what he alledg­ed in Ʋni. Gr. p. 8. &c. that the Gospel lay hid within the Law, as within the Vail — that Christ Jesus was in the Law and under it—that universally in ALL Men, both Jews and Gentiles, there hath been both Moses and the Prophets in Spirit, and also Christ.’ See my Keith against Keith p. 4, 12, 13, &c.

Nor yet have we blamed his saying, None were justi­fied by the Law, or first Ministration of the Spirit or Light within, or their Obedience thereunto, but thro' Faith in Christ (which yet are not delivered, as deduced by us out of him) but shewed what he meant by Faith in Christ then, viz. a believing in the Light, nor is the outward Name that which saveth, but the inward Na­ture Vertue and Power which was made manifest in them, said he, Ʋni. Gr. p. 30. who had said p. 29.’ ‘That in diverse of these Gentiles the Seed was raised, which is that Divine Nature or Birth, by which they did the things contained in the Law, and SO were JUSTIFIED by him.’ Also in his Postscript to G. W. [...]is Nature of Christianity, p. 65, and 70. (Cited by me Keith against Keith p. 11. and not yet retracted) ‘God was in Christ, reconciling Men to himself ever since [Page 64] the Fall in all Ages, both before and since Christ suf­fered in the outward, having given them or put in them, the Word of Reconciliation, by which they who became renewed thereby were reconciled and justified in all Ages [blaming R. G. his Doctrine, that] no Men were justified nor reconciled, until Christ suffered Death in the outward, because then, and not till then [his Adversary had said] was Re­conciliation and Justification wrought &c. to whom also he assigns as an Error, the asserting, ‘That Obe­dience to the Light within in the Conscience, is bu [...] the work of the first Covenant, and Righteousnes [...] thereof, and that no Man is justified thereby.’ By a [...] which the Reader may perceive G. K. hath not fairl [...] stated what we objected to him out of his Books, as we [...] as that he had no cause to say (as he doth here p. 19. [...] That upon a diligent search into his Books, and an imparti [...] examination of all the places Cited by us to prove it, he ca [...] find no such thing, as that he had formerly asserted, M [...] might be justified and saved, without all Knowledge a [...] Faith of Christ without us, as he was Crucified &c. Fo [...] what I have here laid before him (of which I hav [...] Treated more at large in my People called Quakers clea [...]ed p. 26, to 31. out of his Book of Ʋni. Gr. p. 28, 29, 3 [...] 34, 35, 36, 56, 57, 58, 115, 117, and 120.) are sufficie [...] to shew both what he formerly called Faith in Chris [...] and what Faith justified even the Gentiles before Chri [...] was Crucified, even a belief in the inward Manifestatio [...] in the Word nigh in the Mouth and Heart, as Ʋni. G [...] p. 34, 35. and abundantly elsewhere.

However there is a blunder of his behind (p. 18 which having slipt over, I now return to, where [...] saith no Justification is by that Law, whether it be underst [...] of Moses his outward Ministration, or the same Ministr [...]tion of Moses in Spirit, where the Law is writ but in Tab [...] of Stone, till the Seed be raised &c. Upon which I Q [...]ry, [Page 65] Whether the Ministration of Moses in Spirit was writ in Tables of Stone, or the fleshy Tables of the Heart? If upon the former, where were these Tables to be found? Who had the keeping of them? And who wrote them there! He had need have recourse to his Metaphorical Allusion again, and even that will not help him: But it is just with God, that such as Fight against his Wrath, and are Bladder-blown with their own Learning, should expose themselves, that others may see (if they will not) that Pride goeth before Destructi­on, and a haughty Look before a Fall, Prov. 16.18. Yet in as much as in the Citation above out of Ʋni. Gr. p. 29. I have shewed that he then allow'd that in diverse of the Gentiles the Seed was raised, and they were justified by Christ: In as much also as he here recurrs to his late distinction of Express and Implicit Knowledge and Faith (for which he widely referrs to his Book of Anti. and Sadd. Detected without either assign­ [...]ng Page or Passage, or observing that I have An­swered him even with respect to that very distinction, [...]n my Keith against Keith p. 62, to 71. which seems to be the [...], or Universal Heal-all of G. K's Languishing Cause, brought in at every turn to stop a gap with, whether applicable or no) I shall tell him, He that affirmeth must prove, and if he will affirm those Gentiles had an Implicit Faith and Knowledge, that Christ was outwardly to be Born, Suffer, Die and Rise again, [...]n order to their Justification, he must not barely al­ [...]edge, but demonstrate that they had it, either expli­citly or implicitly; which I have more than once put him upon, and he hath not yet attempted to do, as well [...]s that I have shewed, that even then, several of the Citations given out of him (while unretracted) block [...]p his way: Which I again press upon him, to do; whatever comes short hereof, being meer Trifling.

§ 4 G. K. having so severely as well as unjustly re­flected [Page 66] upon G. W. (Ex. Narr. p. 39, 40.) as having Allegorized away Christ's Birth, Death, Resurrection, Ascension and coming to Judgment, it might reasonably have been expected himself should not have exceeded therein, or at least, that he would have corrected and retracted his own, before he found fault with another. Yet when his own Allegories (or Metaphorical Allusions, as he now tearms them) lay at his Door unretracted, hath he been casting the first Stone at another, so un­just is he. The instance before me (and which a [...] length G. K. endeavours here to palliate in his §. 4.) is in Ʋni. Gr. p. 9. where alluding to Moses his putting a Vail before his Face, he saith, ‘The Word became Flesh, and dwelt in us, said John. And this inward Appearance of Christ in Flesh, is his Appearance i [...] Weakness, as Natural and yet Spiritual, the Mystery hid within the Vail of Flesh, or Natural Spirit▪’ Again, ‘This is the Body of Christ that is indeed Spi­ritual, but for our Cause, descendeth into a Natural Form or Appearance— Thus it is sown Natural, but is raised Spiritual, and thus also we become changed thereby, both in the Soul and Body, so as being sow [...] Natural we come to be raised Spiritual. And indeed there was no other way, that we could be made Spiri­tual, who were Natural, but that Christ Jesus, who was and is Spiritual, should become (so to speak) Natural. Hence he is called the [...], i. e▪ the Word Innaturalized, &c. This I have given more largely than G. K. hath done in this §. and leave it to the Reader to judge, whether the Allegory be not stretched upon the Tenters. Yet hence he bids u [...] note, Though he deny not the Flesh of Christ in the inward in an Allegorical and Metaphorical Sense (but he once owned it to be a perfect, substantial Birth, Imm. Rev▪ p. 12. as I have observed already) yet he freely acknow­ledgeth, he hath unduly and improperly applied that place[Page 67] John 1.14. and 1 Tim. 3.16. to the Flesh of Christ in the inward, both here and in Way cast up, p. 133, 134. And that though he might possibly excuse it, to be only said by way of Allusion, yet even in that respect, he retracts it; as improper (he will not say unsound, it seems.) Answ. But doth he also remember, that before he had pretended to retract it, that he had blamed another (though without a cause) for what himself, it seems by this Concession, was culpable of? Was he then rectus in Curiâ, fit to im­peach others, if they had deserved it, while himself an Offender in that which he charged others with. Or is it not hence plain, that he was more quick-sighted abroad, than at home? Fastning that as a Deduction from others allegorizing of Scripture (viz. an allego­rizing AWAY Christ's Birth, Death, &c.) which he would be loath should be imputed to him, as the Conse­quence of his own? So injurious a Detracter is he.

§ 5 Now from his saying, Ʋni. Gr. p. 9. This is sown Natural (to which he addeth in a Parenthesis, viz. the Divine Seed, while he omits what he had said of our being changed thereby, both in Soul and BODY, so as being sown Natural to be raised Spiritual) but is raised Spi­ritual, he bids us Note, §. 5. This is but an Allusion, and was no wise intended in prejudice of the Resurrection of the Body, for in this same Book, p. 70. I plainly assert the Re­surrection of the Body, as a thing not yet attained by the de­ceased Saints. Answ. Although he hath been so far from granting it to us, in the like case, but branded us as Atheists, Antichrists and Sadducees upon this very account; yet I do allow, that as there are Celestial Bodies, and Bodies Terrestrial, 1 Cor. 15 40. So that the asserting the raised Bodies to be Spiritual, is not in prejudice of a bodily Resurrection. Yet I find it is not enough for him to say, in his own behalf, that because Allusions in many cases are not safe, he wisheth he had not used it in this case, but he must tag a Slander at the end [Page 68] of it, viz. That some great Preachers among a sort of Quakers, that are turned his Adversaries, do WHOLLY apply ALL that is said, 1 Cor. 15. of the Resurrection to the inward rising of the Soul or Seed within. And that one of their Ministers (whom he names not) could not be per­suaded by him, that it was meant of the Resurrection of the Body after Death. To all which I say, I less question his Malice than his Veracity, a Story supported only by the Allegation of a professed Adversary: Therefore if he would be believed, he must both name the Persons and bring a better Voucher: For I will assure him, he ha­ving so often laid to our Charge, what we never so much as thought of, and that even after our denying it, and putting him upon the Proof, that I shrewdly suspect he hath done no better by them whom he would fasten this Accusation upon.

§ 6 To what he had said Ʋni. Gr. p. 20. [That by that which may be known of God, Rom. 1.19. is meant the Gospel] he in § 6. tells us, he still holds, that in a figurative way of Synecdoche, it may be called Gospel, or as the word Gospel may be extended to a more general Significa­tion; than is commonly used in Scripture, he will not deny. Answ. A figurative way of Synecdoche! Why what way of Synecdoche doth he know that is not Figurative, as much as he pretends to Learning? He would have paid us off, I trow▪ if we had committed such a Blunder. Again, he doth not here deny that the word Gospel may not be extended to a more general Signification, than i [...] commonly used in Scripture. So then the Debate i [...] not, it seems, whether by [that which may be know [...] of God] be understood the Gospel, but whether tha [...] Signification be not more than what is commonly (ma [...] he doth not say always, but commonly) used in Scripture▪ And so it is the common Acceptation only of the word a [...] used in Scripture, that this Legomachist, or Word [Page 69] pecker is contending about, who yet scorns to admit he is any way doctrinally unsound, but only with respect an undue application of a Scripture or two, now and then will afford to emit a Retractation or Correction: And even of them he is very chary.

After the same manner he (in what follows) retracts his undue application of these places of Scripture (viz. Rom. 1.16. Col. 1.23. & 1 Tim. 3.16. for he names no other here) to the inward Principle, as to what it did or doth dis­cover and reveal universally in all Men, and particularly in such of the Gentiles to whom the Gospel was not outwardly preached. Which still relates to and is bounded by the words [undue application] but whether the Gospel hath not been preached to the Gentiles, who have not been under any outward Administration of the Gospel, which is a Doctrinal Point, he resolves us not, as if he designed nothing less than Plainness. Therefore I shall give a touch of what he hath formerly delivered argumenta­tively upon this subject out of Ʋni. Gr. p. 28, 29. and not yet retracted. Who having said it is evident, that this inward Principle was the very Principle of the Gospel in them, enforceth it thus, ‘If the Gentiles shall be judged according to the Gospel, then the Gospel behoeved in some measure to be manifest unto them, for no Man shall be judged according to that which is not made manifest.’ This is solid Reasoning, beyond an [...] Application of a Scripture or two▪ of which more I shall offer at the close of this §.

Now he tells us, Ʋpon a diligent, Search into the Holy Scriptures, he finds that in all places in the New Testament, where the word Gospel is used, it signifieth the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised Messiah, that was outwardly TO COME▪— of which the inward Principle is but a part. Answ. Here he is out again, for the New Testament being written, not when Christ was outwardly TO COME, but after he was outwardly come, the word [Page 70] [Gospel] there, when it signifieth the Doctrine of Sal­ [...] by the plentiful [...] come, not as [...] so positive, that in [...] where the word Gospel is used, [...] the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised [...] in an instance or [...] hath over [...] when Paul speaks, 2 Cor. [...], 8, 9▪ of them that preach another Gospel, are [...] some of the places, which upon a diligent Search [...] he finds, speak of the Doctrine of Salvation by the pro­mised [...] Or will he confess, that the word Gos­pel was here used, to signifie something else. Also when the everlasting Gospel was again to be preached [...] after the [...] the word, [again] it had been discontinued to be preached [...] History of Christs Birth, Death, &c. had not) doth that place R [...]. 14.6, 7▪ mention any thing of the Do­ctrine of Salvation by the promised Messiah? There [...] not a word of that [...] there: but saying with a loud [...] Voice, Fear God will give Glory unto him. &c. (be in [...] preached with Commission from on high) is called preach­ing the everlasting Gosple [...]. Did G. K. in his diligent Search [...] over-look this [...], how could he say [...] IN ALL PLACES in the New Testament, where the word Gospel is used, it signifieth the Doctrine of Salvation by the promised Messiah? I might also instance in Rom. 1.16. (although he refuseth to allow it me now) that the Gospel cannot be said to be the Power of God unto Salvation, to the Believer, in any other Sense, than a [...] it a powerful, energetical, inward Principle; for as it is barely Historical, the Ungodly have that Belief though they went the Power. So that as the Power o [...] God, is not a Belief or Relation concerning the Power▪ so neither (in a strict, genuin Sense) is the Gospel, which is the Power of God unto Salvation, either the Re­lation [Page 71] [...] it self, or the Historical Belief of what is [...].

[...] he further asserts here, That whatever Doctrine [...] or have at any that preached, the great subject [...] not the promised Messiah, to wit the crucified Jesus, of the main Foundation, &c. it is not the Gospel in the pro­per, full and adequate Sense and Signification of it, as the Scripture, useth it, (observe he doth not say, it is not the proper, full and adequate Sense and Signification of the [...]ord, in any wise; but it is not the proper, &c. Sense and Signification of it, as the Scripture useth it, so loth is he yea to retract any further, than an undue Appli­cation of a Scripture or two) so he adde; that Paul in that place (Col. 1.23.) meant the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ crucified, and the Grace and Gift of the Holy Spirit given of God to Men through him, and the other Apo­stles and Evangelists in that clear and bright Dispensation then given, &c. Answ. Paul's words were not so re­stricted, to that clear and bright Dispensation of the Gospel, as to go no higher. The Gospel he was speak­ing of, was preached to (or in) every Creature under Heaven. This relates to the time past, but in the other Sense it was never so preached to all Men living (what­ever G. K. thinks it may have been to them after they were dead) therefore it could not be meant of the Do­ctrine of Salvation by Christ crucified, with respect to that clear and bright Dispensation the Apostles were under, but of that Gospel, which had been preached to (or in) EVERY Creature under Heaven. This Ob­jection G. K. foresaw, therefore adds, Though it was not [...] that time actually preached to all Men, yet it was began [...] to be preached, and that after the Prophetical Stile, that which was to be done, is said to be done, Answ. This will not help him, for first where that Prophetical Phrase i [...] ▪ or how it is used, he assigns not: 2ly. Neither did the Apostle speak of it, as what was then begun to be [Page 72] preached, or of what was to be done; but of what wa [...] preached, was done; and that not only to a few, tho [...] the Primitive Christians preached to, but to (or in [...] every Creature under Heaven. It was an Ʋniversa [...] Gospel, universally preached, Paul was speaking of, [...] that G. K's Allegations are unsound.

One thing I shall take notice of here out of his p. 23▪24. relative to this subject, which may excuse my han [...]dling it there, where he takes notice, that the Gospel o [...] the Kingdom shall be preached in all the World, and that th [...] is not the inward Principle only, but the Doctrine of Christ's Birth, Death, &c.) instancing those words of Christ▪ Where-ever this Gospel of the Kingdom shall be preached, [...] also shall be told, what this Woman hath done, &c. Answ▪ This makes against him, not for him: For Christ did not say, Where-ever THE Gospel of the Kingdom but where ever THIS Gospel of the Kingdom, shal [...] be preached, &c. So that the Gospel may be preached where this Gospel, giving a Historical Relation of Christ' [...] Birth, Death, &c. may not, even without contradicting Christ's words. And that the glad Tidings, brought by them whose-Feet are beautiful upon the Mountains are Gospel in a secondary Sense, we deny not? Yet so that as the outward and visible things are the Figures o [...] the Inward and Spiritual (as G. K. hath asserted, Imm. Rev. p. 15.) so the name Gospel is more immediately and properly applicable to the Inward.

Yet in as much as G. K. still shelters himself under the tearms undue Application of some Scriptures, and ac­knowledgeth no Error in Doctrine, I shall give a fo [...] Instances of what he delivered formerly Doctrinally upon this subject, in his Book of Ʋni. Gr. who to an Objection [that the Gentiles have not had the Gospel preached to them all this time by-past] thus answers, p. 20. ‘Though the Gospel came not unto them out­wardly, by the Ministry of Man, yet it came unto [Page 73] them inwardly, by the Ministry of God himself.’ Again, Whereas our Adversaries denied [this Manifestation of [...] in the Gentiles is the Gospel, or any Manifesta­tion, of a Saving Nature] G. K. argueth thus, p. 21. ‘If it were not Evangelical and the VERY GOSPEL IT SELF in an inward Ministration, it would quite [...]ender the words of the Apostle Impertinent—for Paul is here speaking what the Gospel was, and what was revealed in it, both to the Just and to the Unjust.’ [...] that it was not then delivered as a Figurative way of [...] dothe, according to his last Phrase, but the VERY GOSPEL it self, or the Apostle must speak Imperti­ [...]ntly. What! Had he not then made a diligent Search [...]to the Scriptures? Or did they tell him one thing [...]hen, another since? But he adds, p. 22. ‘By this Ma­nifestation they did see the invisible things of God, and his eternal Power and Godhead, &c. But had [...]hey a Revelation of the Manhood of Christ, so as to [...]ave the Knowledge and Faith of Christ's Birth, Death, &c.) either explicitly or implicitly, seing it is not the being the Eternal Power and Godhead, that makes it [...]ospel now with him, without the other. If he will [...] it, he must prove it: If not, Why did he not [...]tract this as a Doctrinal Error, and unfound ▪ Again, [...]. [...]5. ‘That these Gentiles, who did call upon the Name of the Lord, and were SAVED were not un­der any outward Administration of the Gospel [Sure­ [...] this Gospel then was somewhat inward, under the in­ [...]ard Administration whereof they were, say I] is most evident [he saith] from the Objection framed by the Apostle, Rom. 10.14, 15. and his answer there­unto.’ Who p. 36. explains what the hearing and the [...]ing heard was. ‘The hearing that Faith comes [he [...]escribes to be] a Hearing by the Word in the Mouth and Heart [and that which they heard or obeyed, was] not the Law or Light of Nature, but the Gospel [Page 74] [whence he infers] So that the VERY GOSPEL hath been preached unto ALL, otherwise they shou [...] never have been charged with not having obeyed [...] ▪’ This the Reader may find both more largely cited an [...] argued upon in my People called Quakers cleared, p. 27, 2 [...] and Keith against Keith, p. 13 to 17. and by this ma [...] see that it is not only his Sense of some particula [...] Scriptures, but matter of Principle and Doctrine, where [...] we have shewed his Self-inconsistency, and which it y [...] remains upon him to reconcile or retract one of them and not think to lurk under some general tearms of [...] undue Application of a Scripture or two, or as t [...] word is commonly used in the New Testament, and te [...] us, as in his Preface, he neither retracts nor renounce [...] any one Assertion, contained in his former Books, that ev [...] was judged by him as an Article of Faith. For as wh [...] the Gospel is, is an Article of Faith, so had he retract [...] his former Assertion thereof, he must have made th [...] Acknowledgment, which rather than do, how doth▪ twist and twine?

§ 7 He gives in his §. 7. a passage out of Ʋni. G▪ p. 43. where he speaks [of the Lord's sending his S [...] into the World, both in the outward and inward [...] that thus the Seed of the Woman doth bruise the Se [...]pents head] upon which he bids us Note, I did not pl [...] our Salvation wholly upon Christ's inward Appearance, [...] upon God's sending him, both in the outward and inward, [...] bruise the Serpents head. Answ. Nor have we charg [...] him that he did: For 'tis one thing to place our Salv [...]tion upon God's sending his Son both in the outward and inward; and another thing to fix it so upon a B [...]lief and Persuasion of God's sending him in the ou [...]ward, that a Man cannot be Saved without that Kno [...]ledge and Faith, even where the means of knowing▪ are not afforded, which is that we have shewed his former [Page 75] and latter Sentiments so contradictory in. Yet one [...] I think to observe here, viz. That he not only [...] in the same Page, where this Citation is given, [...]hat Christ, even inwardly Crucified, is both the Wis­ [...]om of God, and Power of God, unto them who be­ [...]ve] but a little lower, after having told us, ‘The most proper and usual Signification of the word i [...] to be [in] not [among, or unto] and that we are always to take the most usual and proper Signification of the word, where no cogent reason moves to the contrary, [...] none doth here (viz. 2 Cor. 5.19.) he adds, Christ was not Crucified outwardly either among the Gala­ [...]ians or Corinthians, and the Riches of Christ, that Paul told the Gentiles of, was not any outward thing, which they were to find outwardly, nor did he bid [...]hem go any where without to find these Riches, but [...]reached God and Christ, and the Kingdom, and the Word near, even in themselves.’ So that if G. K. be [...]e credited (who hath not yet retracted this) when Paul speaks of God's being in Christ, reconciling the [...]orld unto himself, and putting IN them (as he then [...]dred it) the Word of Reconciliation, he was [...] them of any outward thing, or an outward Cru­ [...]xion, but of God and Christ's Kingdom and Word, [...] in themselves. Will G. K. say so still? Or will [...] say the contrary? Nay, he will do neither, but drop [...] as unwilling to appear open and plain?

He proceeds to tell us, He did not understand, that the [...]ging Men simply to the inward Principle, so as only [...] in the Light, Word or Spirit within, was a bringing [...]n to the Christian Faith, but that it was a proper means Preparation and Introduction, &c. And a little lower [...] distinguisheth between the Genus and Difference super­ [...]ded, and that the true definition of a true Christian takes both, which is the Substance of what he here offers. [...]sw. What he once thought of the Gentiles, who [Page 76] had not the Knowledge of Christ, as he was to [...] in the Flesh, himself shall declare. Omitting then [...] many Instances we have already brought out of his f [...]mer Books, I shall transcribe two, neither of them [...]tracted. The first I find in Way cast up, p. 44. wh [...] he not only allows, ‘That whoever in any AGE [...] Place of the World joyned their Hearts unto [...] Grace, and did believe and obey its Teachings, made them good and pious Men, but also in the [...] Page corroborates it by a Testimony out of Justin M [...]tyr, thus, ‘Such was Socrates among the Grecians, wh [...] Justin Martyr in one of his Apologies, did expre [...] call a Christian, and classeth him with Abraham, [...] ▪’ Again, In his Book of Divine Imm. Rev. among [...] several Testimonies of the ancient Fathers, which in p. [...] he saith, are owned by the People called in Derision Q [...]ker [...], he gives this as one p. 158, 159. out of Jus [...] Martyr, ‘That who liveth with or according to [...] Word are Christians—as among the Grecians, Socra [...] Heraclitus and many others:’ [and adds] ‘When Justin Martyr calleth them Christians, it is to be [...]derstood in part, that Christ was in part known [...] Socrates, although we find not that Socrates had [...] Knowledge of Christ, as he was to come in the F [...] and suffer Death, &c. Now hence I ask him. Wh [...] is the most distinguishing Character of a Christian, t [...] Genus, the inward Conformity to the Divine Word or the differentis, some discriminating Token by [...] outward Belief and Conformity, devoid of the inwa [...] Subjection of Spirit? That they who have both, h [...] much the Advantage, is undeniable: But wheth [...] where one is wanting, which is the best, truest a [...] most properly a Christian, he that knows not th [...] Christ is come in the Flesh, hath Suffered, &c. yet li [...] according to the Word, or he that hath that Kno [...]ledge, and liveth not according to the Word, I lea [...] [Page 76] [...] every true Christian to consider: As also, Whether [...] as live according to the Word, have been reputed [...] G. K. Christians in part, and know not that Christ as to come and suffer in the outward, either are not [...]ved, or must have their. Saving Faith given them, [...]er they are dead, as G. K. hath insinuated Pres [...]. and [...]d. Chur. p. 112.

And now I am upon this subject, I shall take a step [...] what he saith §. 8. p. 24. and consider it under one. [...]at many were Saved by Christ, before his coming in the [...]sh, as well among Gentiles as Jews, I nothing question, [...] I never did, saith he. Answ. His former Belief I [...]pute not, his latter I have given out of Presh. and [...]d. Ch. p. 112. even now. So that if he believe So­ [...]tes and others were Saved, who had not the Know­ [...]ge of Christ, as he was to come in the Flesh out­ [...]rdly, it is not that that Faith they then had, was [...]ving with Eternal Salvation (as he of late phraseth it) [...] they must either be born again into the World, to [...]ceive it, in some other Revolution, or at least have [...]t Faith, they received not WHEN LIVING, [...] or after their Death, in their passage through the [...]lley of the Shadow of Death, as I have also observed my Kei [...]h against Keith, p. 108 and elsewhere. This [...]t we have more than once proved upon him, so that [...] present stating his Belief reacheth not the Matter Controversie, and wherein we have shewed the Con­ [...]diction between his former and latter Writings.

Now to return to his p. 22. whence I made this Di­ [...]ession, in order to prove that the bringing Men to [...] inward Principle, had been proposed by him as In­ [...]ductory to the bringing them to the Christian Faith, [...] referrs us to his fifth Argument in Ʋni. Gr. p. 88 to [...] and cites a passage out of p. 92. the Scope whereof [...]s, a treating of the true and only Method to bring Peo­ [...] to own the Scriptures, to own Moses, the Prophets and [Page 78] Christ in the Flesh, his miraculous Birth, Doctrine, [...] This Method, he now saith, he very well approves of [...] for as the Knowledge of Christ the Word Incarnate or [...] Flesh, presupposeth some Knowledge of God, and of his Word, to preach to People that are ignorant of God, and of his [...]vine Perfections, that there is a God, and what his Di [...] Perfections are, is very proper and necessary. Answ. [...] was at this once before, Ant. and Sadd. p. 27. and I a [...]swered him in my Keith against Keith, p. 69 to 71. [...] of that he takes no notice here, notwithstanding he g [...] out in his Title Page, this Book of his may at pres [...] suffice, as a Reply to T. E. and my late and form Books against him. Who, had he designed to h [...] been as good as his word, he should here have tak [...] notice of my answer, especially in as much as what [...] now offers is in effect the same, with what he [...] brought before, and I had replied to: But the Ma [...] willing both to cut his Work shor [...], and that the P [...] should be bigger than the House, as if he were build [...] a second Mindus. That which I objected then (and [...] do) is that this Method of beginning with the Prea [...]ing of the inward, was not only with respect to the G [...]tiles, who were Ignorant that there was a God, a what his Divine Perfections are, but even with resp [...] to the nominal Christians, therefore it answers not [...] end adduced by him. That it respected even the P [...]fessors of Christianity, I prove first, from the Objec [...]on there raised, That the Quakers have no Method, a [...] G. K's answer, ‘That they have the best and only tr [...] Method in their Words and Writings, first to tu [...] People to the Light, &c. Now the Method used [...] us in our Words and Writings, being with respect [...] the so called Christians, his meaning must also relate them. And when he adds a little below, ‘It is [...] want of this true Order in Preaching the Gospel, th [...] Men have had so little Success hitherto, and that [...] [Page 79] Lord hath blest it to us with wonderful Success &c. it is plain he was not writing to or of the Preachers that were going to the Indies, among the Heathen, but to his Countrymen, that dwelt among us, and disliked our Method, which he said, had been blessed with won­derful Success (and that was here also) the like he had said Way to City of God p. 156, 157. wherein he assigns it as a Method, the Lord hath taught us to hold forth to People [to whom I pray, only to Turks, Jews and Pagans?] whereby they attain unto Holiness, to a being made conformable to the Holy Life of Jesus Christ, and come to know the true and great End and Use of his outward coming.’ Now as the know­ing the true and great End of Christ's outward coming presupposeth a Belief, that he was come, (for we are not speaking barely of the witnessing the inward Effects thereof, but of knowing the Use and End of it) this Method must needs be intended to relate to both, and not the Gentile only. And therefore G. K. is the more [...]nsincere in alledging he still approves of this Method, as if his Judgment then and now were the same, as it is not, as well as in restricting that to the Gentiles, which was not so intended, when given. What he builds here, upon this false Foundation, falls in Course.

§ 8 He begins his §. 8. with a touch at his late Ex­position of the piece of silver, Luke 15.8. for which as [...]e referrs to his Sect. I. §. 13. so do I to the same in [...]ine. Then he pretends firmly to remain in his Faith of God his making Salvation possible to all Men, which hath [...]een considered in §. 1. of this Section: At length he [...]cknowledgeth, that diverse of the Arguments (which is [...] pretty large reference) he hath used to prove the Truth [...] that Principle, are not so proper and demonstrative, nor [...]re several places of Scripture, as Rom. 10.7, 8, 9, 10. [...] it. 2.11, 12. 1 Cor. 12.7. and that several Parables but he names none) brought in Arg. 10. p. 60, to 65. [Page 80] so duly applied to that Effect. Therefore the undue applica [...]tion of these places of Scripture, or any other that can be foun [...] to that Effect (but who must look them up for him▪ Or when will he give them us? in the next 18 Months▪ Or some other Revolution?) he freely retracts (he saith) which though that necessarily respect the inward Prin­ciple of God's Grace, &c. yet THESE PLACES are n [...] to be understood only and alone of that, but respect that brig [...] Gospel-dispensation, that had then appeared in the World [...] the Apostles Preaching, &c. Answ. This Retractatio [...] terminates, not to an acknowledgment that he wa [...] unsound formerly (for when did he allow that? [...] wonder) but to an undue application of three Scrip­tures (the rest the Reader is left to guess at) and th [...] divers of his Arguments (of which he particularize [...] but one, and out of that Cites no passage) are not [...] proper and demonstrative, nor duly applied to tha [...] Effect, which shews the Man would fain represent ever [...] thing, which he is fain to say something to, as Mot [...] while Beams are the tearms he liberally bestows upo [...] us, and that of things he falsly lays to our Charge. Ye [...] seing he now saith, these places of Scripture are to b [...] understood not only of the inward, but of the brig [...] Gospel dispensation the Apostles were under, I Quer [...] what he thinks of that place of Scripture 2 Cor. 5.19 (which was brought by him in that very Page 43. [...] Ʋni. Gr. out of which he gave us a Citation in this ver [...] §. and hath not retracted, though he could not chu [...] but see it) that God was in Christ reconciling the World [...] himself. Did it relate to the time present only? [...] [was] the Present Tense with him now? Or to th [...] time past also? And when himself said (Way to City [...] God, p. 125.) ‘Even at Man's Fall the Seed of the Wo [...]man was given, not only to bruise the Serpent's Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone or paci [...] the Wrath of God towards Men, and this is the Lamb [Page 81] that was slain from the beginning of the World:’ Did he intend that this commenced only from the Age the Apostles lived in? Or will, he, upon second thoughts, retract and correct this as unsound, which he hath never yet touched upon, though we have often laid it before him? For this is either true or false Doctrine? If true, then not limitted and restricted to the Age of the Apo­stles, and downwards only: If false, it is a Doctrinal Error, a Fundamental one, the faint tearms of undue Ap­plication will not do here, which I doubt not but him­self foresaw, with respect to this and many other places objected against him, and therefore designedly to have omitted them. Who, if he ever intend to be appro­ved a sincere Convert among the People whom he now seeks shelter under, must mend his Hand at it, or they must receive him upon very easie tearms.

§ 9 Before I enter into a particular Disquisition of what G. K. offers in §. 9. finding he words it darkly, as well as useth Deceit in the repeating of it, I shall state the Doctrine delivered by himself, Ʋni. Gr. p. 69, to 72. and then Animadvert what he saith, upon what himself gives. After an Acknowledgment p. 67. that [Adam was at first made with an ability or power, to know and do the Will of God, which he lost, by his Fall] he tells us in his 3dly, ‘This Loss is descended upon all Adam's Posterity— yet not imputed to them, before their own Actual or Personal Transgression.’ Who Answering several Objections of our Adversaries relating to Infants being Sinners, as desce [...]ded from Adam, asserts p. 69. ‘That there is a Seed of Sin trans­mitted from Adam unto all his Posterity in the Natu­ral Birth— but that this is not Mens Sin, nor im­puted unto them, before Actual Transgression [and p. 70▪] that the word Adam is not understood of that first Person, whose Name was Adam, but of that sin­ful [Page 82] and sinning Nature, which being derived from him, bears his Name.’ And in p. 72. ‘If God hath de novo, or of a new, given unto all Men a sufficient Prin­ciple of Light and Life, to know and do his Will, then he may say, as in Isaiah— What could have been done more unto my Vineyard &c? viz. in Point of Righ­teousness— in giving that which was sufficient to ena­ble it to bring forth good Fruit, and consequently in punishing it for remaining unfruitful?’ And towards the close of that Page, he saith, ‘Let the Scriptures be searched throughout, and it shall never be found, that Men are simply condemned, or made inexcuseable for Adam's Sin, but for their own Sins in the first place, and for those of their Ancestors but consequentially &c. This last Citation G. K. gives first, then inferrs from that other Citation [if God hath de novo &c. which he also gives] that he Argued from the Righteousness of God, not simply considered, but with respect to a new Dispensation after the Fall. To which I Answer, The new Dispensation is a Fruit of Mercy as well as Justice, extended to the Vineyard in order to its bringing forth Fruit, his Punishment afterwards is an Effect of his Righteousness; but God's not punishing Infants, who never sinned is an Effect of Justice, of Righteous­ness only. Yet that he may put a Trick upon his Rea­der, he jumbles these two Quotations together, (which spake of different things, the first, of a new Dispensation to Mankind, in order to bring forth Fruit; the second, of Infants not being condemned, who never sinned) and that in these words, I did give p. 72. that none are simply condemned and sent to Hell, for Adam's Sin, for I cannot agree to that uncharitable Opinion, that any dying Infants perish, or suffer the Fire of Hell-fire, sim [...]ly and only for Adam's Sin, what God in strict Justice might do is one thing, and what he will do, is another. And now I desire the Reader to observe the Man's Falshood, [Page 83] while pretending to give his own words, the Sense of which he hath notoriously perverted, fetching in what was written in the beginning of the Page, which re­spected God's Righteousness in a renewed Visitation; and expecting of Fruit, and clapping to the end of the second Quotation, which spake of the not condemning Infants, who never had sinned, those words [what God in strict Justice might do &c.] as if they had im­mediately followed in the Quotation, whereas they preceeded half a Page and more above, and were ad­duced to a different end. Which is such a degree of Notorious Prevarication and Falshood, that is rarely found in the worst of our Antagonists.

By this time the Reader may give a guess what the Man would be at; which till I had thus traced him, was very obscure to me. For his pretended dissatisfaction with the method he had used from p▪ 67, to 72. in the way of managing this Argument (which he calls) effectual and solid in the main, as to the substance of it, yet not with re­spect to diverse weighty Circumstances in answering Objecti­ons against it (which is all he gives, so much as leaning towards a Retractation) could give me no light into it: Who as he saith not that his former Arguments were unsound, but that they were effectual and solid in the main: So wherein any Circumstance is otherwise, he assigns not, but by his Legerdemain and Foul Play leaves a more open way for us, to track his Sense here, than in many of the foregoing; which Course is not to his Credit.

In his Quotation out of p. 69. he is not quite so gross. What he had there said of a Seed of Sin, its be­ing transmuted from Adam into all his Posterity, he gives at large, with this addition [I still affirm it] what fol­lowed in that place [that it is not Mens Sin, nor im­puted unto them before Actual Transgression] he takes no notice of, nor doth he so much as O' [...]e it. But to [Page 84] Excuse himself from Answering all these Objections that are raised (he saith) about the manner of its conveyanoe and being transmitted, and by what chinks &c. (he con­fesseth) it puzzleth him. And that is a wonder; he will allow any thing puzzleth him: Nor do I think he would have alledged it, but that he was loth to go too far in seeming to Contradict what he had delivered formerly. Yet at length, speaking of Infants, he con­cludeth, they all need that God be merciful unto them for Christ's sake, and therein I agree with him, but to different Ends: For I distinguish between Mercy and Justice; the not punishing Infants who have not sinned, is a Fruit of his Justice, the preserving them from sin­ning, by his Divine Seed, is a Fruit of his Mercy. And thus I close this Section.

Sect. III.

§ 1 He begins his Sect. 3. with a Quotation out of Rector Corrected (Printed Anno 1680.) p. 22. thus▪ ‘By Christ his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World, we understand both the Offering up of his Flesh, as his dying for us upon the Cross, and also his giving his Flesh to eat, and his Blood to drink &c. Which distinction I admit, viz. that his giving his Flesh for the Life of the World had a twofold signification; the one was Propitiatory, a Dying for us upon the Cross, as he hath it; the other, his giving his Flesh to eat, was Spirit and Life, and fed the Soul. And herein we agree with him. What he adds that he did not place all our Salvation upon the Light within, excluding the Man Christ without &c. but that he did lay a great weight upon i [...], is not the Matter in Controversie, as he hath been often told. We both lay a great weight upon Christ's outward coming, and do not place all our Salvation up­on the Light within exclusive thereof: and also have not [Page 85] charged him with what he here seeks to purge himself from, any otherwise than as argumentum ad hominem, i. e. that we are no otherwise so than himself, who hath with us formerly born Testimony to the sufficiency of the Light, where the History hath not been revealed, distinguishing, as himself hath done, between the ne­cessity that Christ should come and suffer for all, and of the Revelation of the History thereof, where the means a [...]e not afforded, its being indispensibly necessary to Salvation; to such.

Before I take notice of the Citation he gives out of Rict. Corr. p. 26. I shall observe what he saith to that passage of his ibid. p. 25. that by his Flesh and Blood, [...]ohn 6.50, 51. Ch [...]ist meaneth ONLY Spirit and Life, which he holds it needful to retract a [...]d correct (as [...]e saith) yet assigns it, as either a Typographical Error, [...] an Oversight in him, for want of due Consideration. That it was neither, but a Judgment upon deliberation, [...]d that he hath abtruded a Falshood upon his Reader, thus demonstrate, first, that the Matter in Dispute [...]tween him and his Adversary, would not be suppo­ [...]d to be, Whether the words spoken by Christ, were Spirit [...]d Life, or no. Christ had expresly affirmed it, and [...]e Rector doth not deny it; and it were idle to suppose [...]xcept he had been so presumptuous, as to say so in [...]idem verbis) the Rector would alledge that when [...]rist said, they were Spirit and Life, that he meant [...]y were not Spirit and Life: But whether they were [...] so, might admit of Dispute 2dly, As Christ had [...], It is the Spirit that quickneth, the Flesh profiteth no­ [...]g, so G. K. gives us those very words: And to his [...]ersaries objecting Spiritual Flesh cannot be broken, nor [...]itual Blood shed, (which relates to the Spiritual [...]h and Blood only, for the other might be broken and [...]) G. K. alledgeth the Scripture speaks of a broken [...]it, and the Holy Spirit's being shed: Whereas had [Page 86] not G. K. meant that it was only Spirit and Life, this instance had been wholly remote; and it had been enough to have said, it related to both outward and in­ward Flesh and Blood, and that the outward might very well be broken and shed.

To drive it yet more home I betake my self to his Citation out of p. 26. which shall give more fully than he hath done, viz. ‘Although the Saints do not eat the Visible Flesh of Christ [he adds here, to wit, by the Bodily Mouth] and drink his Visible Blood, yet they partake of the Benefit and Vertue of both his Flesh and his Blood, and the Substance of both doth remain, which is his glorified Body in Heaven, and the Vertue of which doth really extend unto th [...] Saints, both in Heaven and on Earth, by which they are Spiritually refreshed and nourished, as with Mea [...] and Drink, and thus we do not divide Christ [her [...] G. K. stops with an &c. but I go on] nor his Fle [...] and Blood, although a distinction there is betwi [...] that Flesh which he had from the beginning (a [...] which the Saints fed on in all Ages from the begi [...]ing) and that which he took upon him in the Virgi [...] Womb.’ From this latter, which G. K. would ha [...] concealed from us, I observe he allowed of a distinctio [...] betwixt the Flesh and Blood, Christ had from the b [...]ginning, and that which he took upon him in the Vi [...]gins Womb. Let him now tell us therefore, what th [...] Flesh (which Christ had from the beginning and whi [...] the Saints fed on, in all Ages) was, besides Spirit a [...] Life? Again, as he gave us not this part of the Ci [...]tion, which he could not stumble over without so [...] hurt to himself; so to what he did give, he foists [...] the words [so wit, by the Bodily Mouth] and i [...] proves it, as an Evidence that the word ONLY was most an Oversight in him, that he did not intend that Faithful did not partake of the unspeakable Benefit of [Page 87] Flesh and Blood, that was outwardly broken and shed, but his sense was, they did not eat it with the Bodily Mouth, but by Faith, and that the Vertue conveyed may be said to be Spi­rit and Life, i. e. had a spiritual sense and signification. A [...]sw What he said above, of the Saints feeding, could not be an eating visible Flesh, either with bodily or spiri­tual Mouth, seing it was a feeding common ro Saints in Heaven and on Earth too: Nay the substance of the Flesh and Blood doth remain, even according to him, and what they feed on, is not on the substance even of Christ's glorified Body in Heaven, but of the Virtue which extends therefrom: And what is this Virtue? Is it not only Spirit and Life? However seing he is so fond of his addition [viz. by the Bodily Mouth] I desire to be resolved in one thing, as a Point of Philosophy, Whe­ther if that which be to be eaten be Bodily, any thing but a Bodily Mouth can eat it, and whether if the Mouth be not Bodily, the Food can be said to be Bodily, for that a Corporeal Substance (a Substance, which is not only Spirit and Life, but also Bodily) should be fed on by an Incorporeal Mouth, is equally as inconceivable by me, as that a Corporeal Mouth should seed on an in­corporeal Substance. If G. K. resolve me this fairly, erit mihi magnus Apollo.

§ 2 In p 26. of these Explications (for now I trace him by Pages, not by §'s) he alledgeth for his having brought (Rect. Corr. p. 29.) the words of Hilarius, that it was to excuse G. F. and not that he did not believe that Christ had the true Nature of Man, consisting of a true rea­sonable, created Soul, and a true Body, for that he aid al­ways believe that he did partake of Mary's substance &c. Answ. He hath not fairly stated the Matter in Contro­versie, as well as that he assigns not, where our Charge is to be found. That he had the true Nature of Man, as we our selves acknowledge, so have not objected it [Page 88] against G. K. but whether ‘Christ, who partook of the Nature and Image of Man from the Seed of Mary, did not partake of a Nature and Image much more Excellent, than that of Man in its greatest Glory, from God and his Seed, who did really sow a most Divine and Heavenly Seed in the Virgins Womb, which as it supplied the Males Seed, so it had much more in it, and brought forth a Birth that as it had the true and whole Nature of Man, so it had a Per­fection above it, not only in accidental qualities, but even in Substance and Essence [they are his own words in Way to City of God, p. 131. and not yet re­tracted] And again whether in as much that after Death it was not subject to Corruption, the Name Human be not too mean a Title, whereby to express it, far less that it should be called so now, when it is glorified, and is altogether. Heavenly and Spiritual, the Scripture no where giving unto his Body such a Name as Human, but that the first Man is of the Earth, earth­ly; the Second Adam, the Lord from Heaven, 1 Cor. 15. Heavenly [as hims [...]lf declares Rect. Corr. p. 27.] is that which we have of late laid before him, in opposi­tion to his late Carnal tearms of Human, Humanity, and imposing them upon us:’ Who have therefore blamed the Word Human, Humanity and Humane Na­ture, as applicable to Christ, because we did believe his Manhood Nature (as G. K. saith) was more Excellent than that of other Men: So that his Judgment given for­merly of G. F. and others, and which he here repeateth, as it was truly stated then; so is it the same still, al­though he now chargeth it without proof upon divers Quakers indefinitely (without naming any) that they have used the terms Humanity and Humane with reference to Christ, which till he be more particular, who have so done, and where as well as how, whether Controversial­ly, keeping to their Adversaries tearms, or as declara­ [...]ive [Page 89] of their Faith and approving of those tearms, de­ [...]erves not my further notice.

But he never thought (he pretends) that any of them [...]enied him as Man to be a Creature, or to have been pro­ [...]uced by Generation of and from the Properties of Man in [...]ary, as some of them have, he saith, but who these some are, nor where they have so said, he declareth not, but after his wonted manner accuseth without offering proof: A blind way, sure, of Answering of Books, for [...]s such he gives out this Book in his Title Page. Yet [...]hat Christ was Born of the Virgin, and that that Bo­dy was Created and consequently a Creature, we deny not, although that he was produced by Coagulation, or by Generation of and from the Properties of Man in Mary (a Notion started by R. Cobbet, answered to by St. Crisp, renewed by G. K. in his True Copy p. 22. and replied to by T. E. in his Truth Defended p. 134 &c. a Book G. K. is still Debtor to) is what we do indeed deny, [...]s even G. K. hath done formerly. Who in Rect. Corr. p. 27. (besides what have offered even now, with re­spect to the Word Human) thus hath it, ‘Even the outward visible Flesh which he took of the Virgin, seing it was not PRODUCED or formed by HU­MAN GENERATION [then not from the Properties of Man in Mary, say I] but by a Divine Conception, through the over shadowing of the Holy Ghost, and did far excel the Flesh of all other Men that ever were since— the Name Human is but too mean a Title &c. Again p. 29. he quotes Hilarius, that ‘Jesus Christ was not formed by the Nature of Humane Conception, and that the Original of his Body (which he affirmed to be an Heavenly Body, yet had of the Virgins Substance in it) is not of an Hu­man Conception, that both the Soul and Body of Christ are of a more Excellent Nature, than these of other Men, although having all that belong to the [Page 90] true Essence of Man, either in Soul or Body.’ And saith further, ‘Why is the Flesh Conceived of t [...] Holy Ghost judged by the Nature of an Humane Body▪’ Thus far G. K. out of Hilarius; which how reconcil [...]able it is to that Notion, that Christ was produced [...] Generation of and from the Properties of Man in M [...] (which to be sure is Human) I leave to the Reader t [...] judge, in the mean time shall observe what he faith [...] his Way to the City of God, which also gives Evidence [...]gainst him. He begins p. 131. thus, ‘Even accordin [...] to that Birth he was the Son of God, no less than t [...] Son of Man, as having God for his Father, as he ha [...] the Virgin Mary for his Mother. Is this an Hum [...] Generation then, a Generation produced of and fro [...] the Properties of Man in Mary, or a Divine one? ‘Th [...] it is not Humane, not produced by Human Generation or Human Conception, he hath told us above, in t [...] Instances there given, and in Way to City of God p. 13 [...] 133. after having described this Birth to be a certa [...] middle Nature, Substance or Being, betwixt th [...] Godhead and Mankind, transcending even the Na [...]ture of Angels [he calleth it] the Heavenly or Di [...]vine Substance or Essence, which was both Conceive [...] in Mary, and is inwardly Conceived in the Saints▪’ Are then the Properties of Man in Mary, and this mid­dle Nature, this Super-Angelical Nature, this Heaven­ly and Divine Substance, relatives? Or do they signifi [...] the same thing? That what is predicable of the one, i [...] also, of the other? Or is it not rather manifest tha [...] G. K. is in Confusion and Darkness, Self-contradicto­ry, and yet not Candid enough to own it, and as loth to retract it?

He Queries, If Christ's Humanity be not a Creature, o [...] Created, what is it? Answ. Himself hath said, Way Cas [...] up p. 104. (not yet retracted) ‘Let all the Scriptures be searched, and it shall not be found that Christ be­came [Page 91] Man, and took to himself the Soul of Man, at his Conception in the Womb of the Virgin Mary, but only that he took Flesh, and was the Son of Mary, David and Abraham according to the Flesh, but accor­ding to his Heavenly Nature, even as Man, he was the Son of God—whose Name is Wonderfull, Counseller, the Mighty God, the Everlasting Father and Prince of Peace. Thus much of his Holy Manhood, but that which was born of the Virgin, he calleth, ibid. p. 113, 14. ‘That Vessel and Temple that Suffered at Jerusa­lem, in which Christ Jesus was and is, and in which he is now glorified in the Heavens, that he is the Root and Vine, not simply as the Word, but as the Word incarnate, and as dwelling in that most pure and wonderful Vessel that suffered at Jerusalem. So that here he could distinguish between the Holy Man­hood that dwelt in the Vessel, and the Vessel in which it, dwelt; between that which was in time, and created, and that which was from the Beginning.

He tells us that T. E. hath argued in his late Book (but where he saith not) that if Christ be a Creature, he is not God: Then adds, But all who have the sound Faith, believe that Christ as Man is a Creature, or created Being, but as he is the eternal Word, he is God and not a Creature, where­upon he suggests, we do not own Christ hath a Two-fold Nature essential to him, the one Ʋncreated as God, the other Created as Man. Answ. He slanders us, for as we own a Two-fold Nature in Christ, so we confound them not; that which was created, and that which was un­created: For we say (as he himself said in the Citation given even now) as he is the eternal Word, he is God and not a Creature, but that God was Born of the Vir­gin Mary, and died, we read not: So that by distin­guishing (as G. K. once did) between the Holy Temple, which is united to the Godhead, and in which the God­head dwells bodily, and the Word which is God, and [Page 92] not appropriated to that Vessel what is only applic [...]ble to the Godhead, we confound them not together which the asserting the Creature (or what was create [...] to be God would do. Nor doth he explain what I means by Christ as Man his being a Creature. Doth [...] mean the outward Flesh and Blood, which (Way cast [...] p. 102. he saith) is not the Man—but the Soul or inward Man, such as Christ was even from the Beginning? Or doth he mean what he calls elsewhere the Vessel or Tem­ple, in which Christ Jesus now is? For the Man doth shift and vary his tearms so often, that it is hard to know whereto to hold him: Else methinks he should not find fault with another's saying, The Creature is not God.

The next Quarrel is at W. P. whom he cites not fairly, although he saith W. P. expresly saith it in his Serious Apology, p. 146. W. P's words are these, ‘He that laid down his Life, and suffered his Body to be Crucified by the Jews, without the Gates of Jerusalem, is Christ the only Son of the most High God; but that the outward Person which suffered was properly the Son of God, we deny.’ What G. K. gives is thus and as he saith expresly, 'That Man or outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem, is not properly the Son of God, in which he is doubly injurious: First in concealing that part, where Testimony was born by W. P. that he who suffered, was Christ the Son of the most High God; 2ly, In adding the word [Man] which was not there, but only [outward Person] which, besides the pretending to give the words expresly, is so much the worse in him, in as much as he hath distinguished be­tween the Man Christ, and the Vessel or Temple in which the Christ Jesus now is. But these Tricks will do him no good, but be a means further to detect and expose his Fraudulent dealing.

[Page 93] § 3 The next passage he gives is out of Rect. Corr. p. 27. Before he enters upon the Explication of his [...]wn Sense now, he vents an old Slander against G. W. not oftner brought by him, than rejected and refuted [...] such by T. E. of which G. K. takes no notice here,) viz. that he knew not in the least (for how could he know that was not knowable, but a malitious and false Charge?) [...]hat G. Whitehead had put the Sense upon Heb. 9.28. in [...]rejudice to Christ's coming without us, to judge the World [...] his glorified Person, which since he hath found, he saith. Yet in p. 28. of these Explications, after having alledged [...] without proof) that G. W. and other leading Men among [...]he Quakers, have by their printed Books led them into this [...]oul Error, he (as if he were conscious to himself of [...]ver-charging them) adds, although now he and some [...]thers seem to own it, that Christ will outwardly come again, [...]hough (lest this Grant should seem too favourable, to [...]ch to whom he will not be Just) he insinuates, that if [...] Scrutiny were made among them one by one, few among [...]hem in comparison would be found to own it, in respect of [...]e many that would deny it. Thus, instead of fairly con­ [...]ssing his own fault in traducing us undeservedly, he [...]eaps up False Accusations, without proof, and that [...]e the Fruits of Prejudice and Enmity, for which will [...]e Bitterness to him in the end, when Christ shall [...]ome to Judge him except he unfeignedly repent.

He hath not spent so much time in venting ground­ [...]ss Calumnies at others, but that he will make amends [...]r it (if that will do) in being as short, when he comes [...] his own part. He is convinced (he saith p. 27.) that [...]e true Sense of those words, Heb 9.28. is of Christ's out­ [...]ard Coming the second time, in his glorified Body to judge [...]e World, but he shall not enlarge to give his Reasons at pre­ [...]t, why he so understands it, nor to answer LARGELY [...]e Reasons he gave in that Book, for that would take up too [...]ch time, and it sufficeth, that he retracts that Sense for­merly [Page 94] given, which, he thinks, is the more general sense Christian Expositors. Answ. One would think that fro [...] the third Month 1695 to the tenth Month 1696. [...] which this came out (as I take it) had been time eno [...] to have made his Work more compleat; if not, by [...] consent he should have had eighteen or nineteen Mont [...] longer to have done it in. But I guess there was som [...]what else in the Wind, he can better find time to cut o [...] new Work, Summon us to his Court at Turners-H [...] and bespatter us behind our Backs, than cope w [...] those Reasons he offered in that Book, for I am pe [...]suaded they are too Mighty for him, and that he wo [...] not have given us this little, if he could possibly ha [...] avoided it with any Credit. However I observe he [...] modest all of a sudden, that he will not averr all Ch [...]stian Expositors are of his Mind; nay he doth but thi [...] it is the more general Sense of them, which is pre [...] fair for a Man that runs on at his rate, and is not ove [...] much upon the guard in his Assertions: And it is [...] he will allow any to be Christian Expositors, who a [...] not of his Mind. Somewhat was the matter sure; th [...] he is no more Positive nor Uncharitable.

Yet that he may not seem to have nothing to say [...] himself, though he will not cope with his former Re [...]sons, he alledgeth that whereas it is said, He will a [...]pear the second time without Sin unto Salvation, d [...] not inferr (being understood of his Coming without us to Jud [...]ment) that Sin remains in the deceased Saints until his Co [...]ing, but that at his Coming, he will not charge Sin [...] them, but will solemnly acquit and discharge them of [...] their Sins, whereas upon all others he will charge their S [...] upon them, as is clear from Matt. 25. Answ. Where [...] Sin remains (as G. K. saith it doth not in the deceas [...] Saints) there is none to Charge: But where it doth r [...]main, it seems he will Charge it, for which he referrs▪ Matt. 25. and the Reason is plain they were Goats, i [...]penitent [Page 95] Sinners, persisted in Evil to the last: How­ [...]ver he goes on, Though the deceased Saints need no Sal­ [...]ation from Sin, yet from some of the Effects or Conse­ [...]ences of it they do, until the Resurrection, for which he [...]uotes Paul's Saying, We are Saved by Hope, &c. and [...]hat seing Death is the last Enemy that is to be destroyed, [...]he Resurrection from the Dead is that Salvation, &c. Answ. He distinguisheth not between Salvation from [...]in and the compleating the Glorification: The Ac­ [...]uittal, the Discharge, the Salvation is present; the [...]eward, and Fulness of Glory comes after, when Christ [...]omes to Judgment: By Hope we are Saved, saith Paul, [...]heir Salvation was present, and it was a Salvation by Hope; their Hope related to the eternal Reward and Enjoyment, unseen, for Hope that is seen, is not Hope.

I shall also consider what he saith of Death not being [...]ully and in all respects swallowed up in Victory, and that [...]ull Salvation and Enjoyment attained, which all true Chri­ [...]ians do yet wait for, which he gives out of Rect. Corr. [...].42. as a Evidence his Belief then and now was the same. Answ. That [the Promised did from the Beginning in­wardly come into the Hearts of those that believed, [...]uised the Head of the Serpent, and destroyed him [...]hat had the Power of Death, the Devil] himself hath [...]sserted Way cast up, p. 99. So that the Deliverance [...]as present, the Acquittal and Salvation present, the [...]erfection of Triumph, wherein Death should be fully [...]d in all Respects (even Ʋniversally and Irrecoverably) [...]wallowed up in Victory, was to come, then the Salva­ [...]on and Enjoyment will be full, which as he links them [...]ogether, bespeaks his then Sense was not, that the [...]olemn Acquittal was to be postponed to the last day for what solemn Acquittal or Discharge had the Sheep, Matt. 25. but rather a Rehearsal of what they had [...]one for Christ?) but that the Compleatness of Glory was then to commence. Nay what himself writ then, [Page 96] I deem a more fit Expounder of his Sense then, th [...] G. K's present Allegations, which are partial and de­signed to strain things, as that he may not seem to b [...] the inconstant Man, he is. He said p. 39. of Rect. Corr. (so little before the Citation which G. K. gives her [...] (viz. out of p. 42.) ‘His inward Appearance may we [...] be called, his Appearance the second time without Sin unto Salvation, namely to effect that inward clean­sing and Sanctifying unto Perfection. This he there delivered as the Effect of the inward Appearance. Is it probable then, that G. K. could then believe the Salva­tion from Sin, the Acquittal, the Discharge was to be delayed to the Day of Judgment, when he said it was to be perfected here? Or is he willing he may be sup­posed to have clashed against himself formerly, that in may be the less Surprizing, that he doth so now?

§ 4 I now come to consider how far he retracts what he once delivered concerning Baptism and the Sup­per. With respect to Baptism, he saith, p. 28. What­soever is said in his Rect. Corr. Truth Defended, or an [...] other of his Books whatsoever, that Water-Baptism was [...] commanded, Matt. 28.19. he fully and freely retracts ▪ Then he gives us what he had said to the same Effect in his Ant. and Sadd. p. 34, 35. without taking notic [...] of my answer thereto, in my Keith against Keith, p 8 [...] to 92. wherein I shewed how imperfect that Retractatio [...] was, limited to the Exposition of two Scriptures, viz. Matt. 28.19. relating to Baptism, and 1 Cor. 11.26▪ relating to the Supper. And seing he hath extende [...] his Retractation no further yet, I shall not only refer [...] the Reader to those I had collected in my People calle [...] Quakers Cleared, p. 35, &c. but also expose some mor [...] of his Contradictions upon that subject of Water-Bap [...]tism (which are not given as an Exposition upon Mat [...] 28.19.) for him to reconcile or retract in his next.

[Page 97]In his Fresh. and Ind. Chur. p. 184. printed Anno 1691, [...] urgeth, ‘If Water-Baptism had been a standing Gospel Commission, Paul would never have said, He was not sent to Baptize, but to preach the Gospel, nor have thanked God he baptized so few. It were strange to think, that Paul would thank God he did not so fully obey a Gosel-Precept, said G. K. then.’ Thus farr [...]ssertory, now let us hear him argue the Case. To his Adversaries alledging, that Paul meant Christ sent him not principally to baptize, G. K. replies, Truths Defence p. 134. ‘Why doth he transgress his own Rule, to go from the proper to the improper Signification of the word [Note, This is G. K's Rule also Ʋni. Gr. p 43.]’

‘Why might not Paul and others Baptize without a Commission, to wit by a Permission, as well as he did Circumcise Timothy? To this Query I will oppose another Query of G. K's, as I find it in Truth Advanced p. 183. Qu. 4. ‘Whether Paul's Saying, He thanked God he did Baptize but a few at Corinth, doth prove that Water-Baptism was of no more Esteem or Value than Circumcision, seing a Faithful Preacher might say concerning a People to whom the Gospel had been preached—He thanked God he was not sent to preach to them, but to a People that were more Worthy? Doth this prove that the Preaching of the Gospel is to be laid aside? saith G. K. And now I Query, Did Paul, or doth any Faithful Preacher, preach to a People [...]hey are not sent to? He knows who once objected that [...]gainst the National Clergy: But not a word of that [...]ow, for fear he be brought upon his Knees for it. But [...] G. K. fit to reprove another of transgressing his own [...]ule, who one while gives wanting a Commission as [...]e Reason why Paul thanked God he baptized so few: Another while suggests by way of Query, that was not [...], but the Hearers Unworthiness. If he will undertake [...]o defend both, let him.

[Page 98]In p. 29. he saith, It is not proper for me in this place to give any large account (Why not? Will he do it in ano [...]ther place? or is he minded wholly to shift it?) of the reasons why I am otherwise minded, as to the Sense of these two places of Scripture, Matt. 28.19. 1 Cor. 11.26. Bu [...] I think it not improper for me to give one of his Reasons why he was so minded, out of Presb. and Ind. Chur. p. 182, 183. who then said, ‘To call that a Command of God, which he hath given them no Command to practise, is to set up the Precepts of Men in the room of God's Commandements, as the Pharisees did of old, and is a taking of his Name in vain, for which he will not hold them Guiltless. And they can ne­ver prove [adds he] by all their Art and Skill, that Water-Baptism is commanded by Christ, Matt. 28.18, 19. for all God's Commands and Precepts, espe­cially of publick Institution, relating to the Church, are express, in so many express words, and are not left to be gathered by uncertain and doubtful Conse­quences.’ This is argumentative and let him get over it, if he can, and detect the Unsoundness thereof, if h [...] dare cope with it. In the mean time let us hear, whe [...]ther the Reason he now offers (and which we may sup [...]pose to be his only one, and that his talking of Rea [...]sons is a meer Flourish) will weigh down this. H [...] saith, We no where find in all the Scriptures such a Phr [...] or manner of Speech, that over any Man (but Christ a [...]o [...] who is both God and Man) did Baptize with the Holy Ghos [...] or had Power so to do. Answ. [That God and Chri [...] gave the Holy Ghost, and did baptize with the Hol [...] Ghost, by the Ministry of Faithful Men, both in Preac [...]ing, Prayer and laying on of Hands] himself hath ac [...]knowledged, Truth Advanced, p. 184. printed but An [...] 1694. Therefore what he adds here (That this disti [...]ction of the Apostles Baptizing not Principally, yet Instr [...]mentally or Ministerially, is as false and unwarrantable, [Page 99] to say God created the World principally, yet Angels did it instrumentally; Christ redeemed the World principally, by his Death and Sufferings, but the Martyrs redeemed it by their Deaths, instrumentally) will stand him in no stead, except he could prove on behalf of Angels and Martyrs, that the former created the World instrumentally, and the other redeemed it instrumentally, as he hath granted that God and Christ have Baptized by the Ministry of Faithful Men. For although we read the Angels are said to be Ministring Spirits, sent forth to minister for them who shall be Heirs of Salvation, Heb. 1.14. yet we no where read they were instrumental to the Creation (for God created the World not only principally, but even without Instruments) nor was the World so much as instrumentally redeemed by the Death of the Martyrs, their Death was not so much as contributary thereto, but solely and wholly by Christ the Redemer. So that the Cases are not parallel: And if this be his topping Reason, he may well talk of keeping the rest behind.

His Reason why the Coming of the Lord mentioned 1 Cor. 11.26. is this outward Coming, he deducing from the outward Practice of breaking of Bread in the Supper (which I rather take to be that himself might eat Bredd among them, who continue the Practice of breaking of Bread) naturally leads me to shew the Defectiveness of his Re­tractation, even herein. For were he a Sincere not Belly-convert, why doth he not retract and enervate what I have offered in my People called Quakers Cleared, p. 38 to 41. out of his Rect. Corr. p. 60 to 65 and Tr. Def. p. 9 & 139 to 142. And why not tell us what he thinks of the Supper as now used, as well as of them who use it. In his Pres. and Ind. Ch. p. 185. he said, ‘That which ye now use is neither substantial Dinner nor Supper, being only a little Crumb of Bread, scarce so big as a Nut, and a Spoonful of Wine or two, which hath little outward Substance, and NO INWARD [Page 100] AND SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICATION unto you, as ye use it, while ye altogether deny that the Saints are Partakers of the Substance of Christ, or that Christ really and substantially dwelleth in his Saints, &c. Will he say so still? For he hath not yet retracted this. Or will he now say, Theirs is a Sup­per, and that Christ dwelleth not really and substan­tially (but by a Metaphor and Allegory) in his Saints? Or will he rather take a Mid-way, couching himself under general Expression, till he sees he can make no longer Friends, but of them who repute breaking of Bread to be a continuing Divine Ordinance, and of his Flock at Turners-Hall too? And whereas he said, ibid. p. 184, 185. ‘These who altogether are for the out­ward Baptism and Supper, and deny wholly the in­ward and Spiritual Baptism and Supper of Christ, which is only known and received by the Holy Spirits inward Revelation, no Charity can be allowed unto them, to judge them true Christians in any degree, but altogether for the time Hypocrites and Formalists.’ Will he retract or defend this now? Or would not himself be willing to be one of these Hypocrites, or a worse, provided they would receive him and maintain him?

He saith now p. 30. That it stands well with good rea­son, that what is represented to Mens Hearts of our Lord's Sufferings by their Hearing, Sight, Smell, Tasting and Feel­ing, in the use of these Signs instituted by himself, will more effectually affect their Hearts and Souls, than what is done alone by the Hearing or Reading, &c. Whereupon I Query, of whom he thus speaketh, Of Men, or of Chil­dren? If of Men, I must put him in mind that he once spake of and pretended to witness a Preaching and Hear­ing beyond what could affect the outward Senses, even à tast and discerning begotten of the Lord, which tasteth Words and Works, as the Mouth tasteth Meat, Imm. Rev. [Page 101] p. 180. as I have also observed Sect. I. §. 3. If of Chil­dren (viz. of such of whom he said, ‘If these who are so Zealous for Water Baptism, where cordially Zeal­ous for the Inward and Spiritual Baptism, they might be the more borne with, as Men bear with Children, that use Liknesses and Figures of things, that suit most with the Age and State of Children, &c. See Presh and Ind. Chur. p. 184.) then when they become Men, they must put away Childish things according to that of the Apostle, 1 Cor. 13.11. So that take him either way, while one of them is unretracted, he runs himself upon the Pikes: Which had he been sincere and true even to his present Sentiments, he might have obviated by a hearty espousing of the one Cause, and as heartily re­nouncing the other: But this Laodicean way of neither Hot nor Cold, will be Spued out, even of Men, in time.

He alledgeth indeed (without so much as touching upon what we have offered out of his former Books) that God hath given him of late, since he found many of the People called Quakers greatly opposed the Faith in Christ Crucified and raised again, as a necessary thing to our Chri­stianity and Salvation (as he falsly chargeth us) a further and clearer sight, and a more deep inward Sense and Con­sideration of the great Benefit and Advantage the Practice of these outward things (when duly practised) is to the Pre­serving the Christian Faith and Doctrine in the World. But in this he is not plain, whether he now reputes them duly practised or no. What he believed formerly, hath been shewed above, and his not being found in the Practice of those things he pretends God hath given him so clear a fight of the Benefit of, would tempt one to think, that (if he durst acknowledge it) his Sense is the same still, with respect to its not being duly pra­ctised, which perhaps he might declare, had he no ex­pectation of personal Advantage from them who use it. for to suppose there is so much Benefit and Advan­tage [Page 102] accruing by the due practice of it, that this sight is given him of God, and yet that it is no where duly used, is very preposterous: For sure that which shews the Benefit it is to the preserving the Christian Faith and Doctrine in the World, would both lead into the due Practice, and capacitate duly to practice it: But the Man is like himself in every thing, who adds, That God hath given him to see that the spring and Ri [...]e of that great Opposition in many against these outward Practices, hath been and is a secret Prejudice against the Doctrine of Christ Crucified, and the mysterious working of an Antichri­stian and Diabolical Spirit, designing to draw Men from the name and thing of Christianity to Paganism and Deism, and at the next step to Idolatry and Atheism, as p 30, 3 [...] Answ. This is a lying Divination and ungodly malici­ous Charge which G. K. hath taken up, from the Fa­ther of Lies, for which he will not be held guiltless, in the day to come, except he repent. If it were so with him (when he said of the Means and Ordinances used by the Protestants, ‘Ye make it a Mediator, and so rob him [Christ] of his Glory, and are ALL GROSS IDOLATERS, as the Papists, who make the Vir­gin Mary and other Saints their Mediators, see Imm. Rev. p. 87.) he should not have entituled others to it, from his own Guilt.’ But I believe I hit upon a truer Reason even now, viz. That he seeks himself in what he doth, not others.

His telling us p. 31. The Abuse of things ought not to take away the due use of them, is as idle. For first, Why is not he then in the due use of them himself? Is he afraid it will not down at Turners-Hall? 2ly, Why did he, as confessed by himself, Sect. I. §. 17. propose the having Colledges become like Abbacies, for the Rudeness, Ʋn­mannerliness and other Ʋnchristian Behaviour of many Colle­gians, if the Abuse ought not to take away the due Use? Will he undertake now to say, They were not Schools [Page 103] of good Learning? If so, let us hear him. If not, must [...]olleges of good Learning become an Habitation for [...] and ravenous Beasts (as he proposed Imm. Rev. p. 137.) and the reason assigned in this Book, be the Abuse, the irregular Lives of the Scholars, and yet will he defend the Abuse ought not to take away the due Use? Is there no Contradiction, deserving a Retractation, in all this? Or can it be supposed that the Pious and Learned among my Sort, will make use of such a Proteus, for their Sect master, who changeth as the Wind, and pretends not to see it?

§ 5 From what follows, citing a Passage out of Rect. Corr. p. 71. he saith, These foregoing words, For that Com­ing of Christ in his Bodily Appearance at Jerusalem, Anti­christ will not, doth not deny, I retract as unsafely worded, &c. Answ. But doth he retract them as unsound? For his Retractions, as they come from him very sparingly, so also as faintly, who while he is profuse in bestowing hard names upon others undeservedly, saying theirs are Beams, gross and vile Errors, destructive to the Fundamen­tals of Christianity, &c. the few he gives of his own are with him but Mo [...]es, an undue Application of a Scripture or two, and that to defend a Truth, unsafely worded, &c. Then he goes on, Though a sort of Antichrists may not deny, but confess in Hypocrisie to Christ's outward coming; as also they may confess in Hypocrisie to his coming in Mens Hearts, &c. (He had best look to it, he have not marked out himself for an Antichrist) yet I am satisfied (saith he, but offers nothing to satisfie another) the true mean­ing of these words, 1 John 2.18. compared with 1 John 4.3. respects principally the Coming of Christ in the Flesh, as he outwardly Suffered, &c. Answ. Then it doth not affect the Papists, at least principally, whereby the Man hath given away the Controversie depending betwixt the Papists and Protestants (so far as he is able to do it) [Page 104] in the Description of Antichrist. For if the Apostle described, at least principally, that Antichrist was to spring from among them that denied Christ's outward coming, then Antichrist (the principal Antichrist) was not to rise out of the Papacy, but from among Jew, Turk or Pagan, as the Papists would willingly persuade us. Doth he think this will please any sort of Prote­stants? Or did he do it, on set purpose, that if he should be outed of Turners-Hall, and a Prop should fail him from among the Protestants of several sorts, whom he would fain gain to his side, to suppress our Books and disturb our Meetings, he might have an Asylum among the Papists? If so, let them take him, for I am per­swaded, all sober Protestants who know him, will be Sick of him in a while.

As kind as he is to the Papists, he is willing we should ly under his Obloquy, whom he chargeth p. 30. (upon no other proof but a referring to divers of his own Books in general, and to his Narrative and Antichrists and Sadducees in particular, without giving any Quota­tion or Page, or so much as taking notice of our an­swers any otherwise than by a renewed Slander, that ours are but seeming Confessions we give to the Man Christ without, while, as he falsly alledgeth, we place Mens whole Salvation upon an inward Principle, &c.) as denying Christ come in the Flesh in three respects, for after he hath branched the Denial of Christ come in the Flesh into four Parti­culars, as 1. to deny, with the Jews, that he who did so come, is the Christ. 2ly, To deny that he is both God and Man, to be worshipped with Divine Adoration, as the Mahume­tans do, and that the Man Christ is our Salvation, and the Object of Faith and Adoration. 3ly, To deny the Vertue and Efficacy of his being a Sacrifice, by his Death, for the Remission of all Mens Sins, who ever shall be Saved from the beginning to the end of the World. 4ly. To deny that all the Light, Grace and Divine Influence of his Spirit that any Man [Page 105] [...]th, or ever had, is by Jesus Christ, who hath procured and [...]rchased it by his most holy and perfect Obedience unto [...]ath, he assigns the three last, to our Charge upon his [...]ngle Evidence, which as a notorious Falshood and Slan­ [...]er we reject. Yet in as much as he here pretends he [...]ill call me to an account e're very long, for my Keith [...]gainst Keith, who should have delayed his Charge, till [...] produced his Proof, I shall tell him, I may chance to [...]ll him to an account hereafter, if he do not make out [...]s Charge, when he emits his Answer to mine.

§ 6 Upon his having said, Rect. Corr. p. 195. ‘(Nor doth it follow, that because Confession in the Adult is necessary, that therefore Baptism with Water is) be thus paraphraseth, viz.’ I still adhere to it with all [...]aritable Christians, that Baptism with Water is not of [...]al Necessity with Faith and Confession, unto Salvation. Answ. But herein he foully prevaricates, concealing his [...]entiments formerly, relating to Water-baptism, and by the words [still adhere] representing them, not as [...], Retractation (but rather as a Confirmation) thereof. ‘Or will he now say, as he did then p. 195. that to affirm Water-Baptism is necessary to Salvation is no­thing but a Popish Superstition, which the Protestants generally deny, &c. and offer to prove (as he did [...]hen p 191 to 195.) that Water-Baptism was not com­manded by Christ, Matt. 28. and that Paul's Commissi­on, though he was not sent to Baptize with Water, wa [...] [...]s universal and full as that of the other Apostles?’ If [...], let us hear him? If not, Why doth he pretend still [...]o adhere to it, that Water-Baptism is not of equal necessity with Faith and Confession, unto Salvation, and assign the reason here, That many of the Martyrs did [...]bly confess to Christ, who were put to death before they could be Baptized, and that the desire of Baptism, in such [...]ases, is judged equivalent to Baptism? Is that it he ad­hered [Page 106] to then? If not, where is the Man's Honesty, Where his integrity? Instead of a fair Retractation, [...] labour to render his Sense then and his Sense now ( [...] widely discrepant) as if they both had needed rather [...] Confirmation, than either of them a Retractation? Bu [...] such shifts become his Cause.

His next Essay is to prove the Necessity to Salvatio [...] of Confession in the Adult, which is managed as unsu [...]cessfully. For though he did say, in the Citation giv [...] ‘Confession of the Truth may well consist witho [...] Water-baptism, namely in a holy Conversation, an [...] Profession of Christianity with the Mouth, as the Apo [...]stle said With the Mouth Confession is made to Salvation ▪’ Yet this doth not prove what he would inferr p. 3 [...]. from this Book which he saith was Printed for 16 Yea [...] past, viz. that it is no New Doctrine for him to say, It [...] a Necessary Duty, that every one among the Quakers sh [...] give a Confession of their Faith to Christ and his Doctrine [...] the Fundamental and Essential Parts thereof, before they ca [...] be owned to be Members of a Christian Communion, and th [...] [...] they do this, whatever great and high pretences th [...] make, &c. they can never be justly esteemed a Church [...] Christ. For that Confession may well consist in a Hol [...] Conversation and Profession of Christianity with th [...] Mouth, is one thing, and the Confession with th [...] Mouth is not only Necessary to Salvation, but we mu [...] have Creeds or Articles of Faith composed for us [...] Subscribe or Answer by Yea or Nay (that which [...] proposed, when he began to grow quarrelsome in Pen [...]silvania) is another. Yet in as much as he hath pretend [...]ed to have been 33 Years amongst us, and a Preach [...] the most part of the time, I ask him, How came we [...] hear nothing of this from him, till he began h [...] Schism in America? Nay why did not himself gi [...] us his Confession of Faith in order to his own Inductio [...] at least into the Ministry? Or was he never fit to [...] [Page 107] [...]ned as a Member of a Christian Communion, till of [...], that he began to set up for himself, in Opposition [...] his quondam Brethren? Or will he maintain that [...] himself and the Christians of that Age were thus [...]ated themselves▪ if so, I demand Chapter and [...]erse; if not, what doth he think of them, were Paul [...]d they fit to be owned Members of a Christian Com­ [...]nion, or to be justly esteemed a Church of Christ? [...]d from this Dilemma let him fairly acquit himself, if [...] can. Whereto I shall add, That a Confession, even [...]th the Mouth, we both Approve of and Practise, [...] not in Man's time, by Human Prescription, or ac­ [...]ording to the Will of Man, nor in the words which Man's Wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth, Cor. 21 13. For Confession as well as Prayer cannot [...] performed, as we ought, without the help of the Spi­ [...], 1 Cor. 12.3. Rom. 8.26.

§ 7 That which comes next, instead of a Retra­ [...]ation, is a Defence of his Truths Defence. ‘He had [...]ere ascribed p. 104. that Revelation was Immediate, [...]nd Argued upon it p. 105. that to speak properly all Revelation is Immediate, even as all Vision is Im­mediate.’ ‘This he toucheth not upon here, though [...]e gives us a Citation out of the same Pages, to prove [...]hat he then admitted the Word Immediate Revelati­on is not any Scripture Phrase, and that if the thing it self were granted, that God doth inwardly reveal and speak his Mind, &c. as he did in and to his Saints of Old — so that the Saints do hear, see, per­ceive, taste, savour and feel after God himself, as he reveals himself in his Son by his Spirit, the Con­troversie about the Name or Phrase would soon be at an end.’ Which we readily grant him, for if Men witnessed the Thing, they would not contend against the Name or Phrase, but rather allow it, nor should [Page 108] we so much press the Term, but in order to enfo [...] and evince the Thing. Therefore his Comment up [...] it, That 16 Years ago he was not for holding up a Contr [...]versie about the Name or Term, Immediate Revelation, [...] no way deduceable from the Premises, for besides th [...] he did not then say he was for holding up no Contr [...]versie about the Name &c. but that the granting [...] Thing would soon put an end to the Controversie abo [...] it; so his own Practice, in those Pages, which was [...] Arguing for and Defending the Term, declareth, [...] then took it to be a necessary Medium, in order [...]gain a Belief of the Thing, to insist upon, explain a [...] defend the Tearm. What he adds (without shew [...] proof) against many of us, that we have earnestly a [...] fiercely contended for that term, and his insinuating wit [...] a [no doubt] will much blame him for not contending f [...] it now, deserves my notice no further, than a rejecti [...] it, as a Slander, of which he hath store. For we [...] other ways contend for the Tearm, than himself did [...] that very time, viz. as a suitable means to perswade [...] the Thing, and prefer the belief and witnessing the in [...]ward Revelation (which would take away all Dispute [...] about the Phrase) to any Contest about the Name.

Upon a Presumption that we blame him now for no [...] contending for the Tearm, he Queries, Are they be­come of late more Eagle-sighted to see this and other thing▪ they judge to be Errors in my Book, which they did not for­merly see, or at least gave me no notice of? Then why do they blame me, that I have both of late seen, and noticed divers [...] Errors in their Books, which formerly I had not seen, fo [...] want of due Examination, nor noticed? Answ. He state [...] the Case amiss with respect to us. What we have Col­lected out of him being not so much to detect the un­soundness of his Principles, as his late Contradictions to his former Principles, and is rather a Vindication of them, for the most part, than the contrary. Yet i [...] [Page 109] [...]on this view, which he hath led, he hath drawn and [...] it were invited us to, by pretending (as in his Se­ [...]us [...] Appeal p. 21.) that he l [...]d not Contradicted himself in [...]NY THING, referring to his own words in his Printed [...] for proof, we have not only shewed he hath Con­ [...]dicted himself in MANY THINGS, but have also [...]nd, here and there, especially in those Books bor­ [...]ing upon the time of his Schism from us, an un­ [...]und passage or two, are we to be blamed for our ex­ [...]sing of them, which perhaps had not occurred to us, [...]t upon the Scrutiny himself occasioned? Whereas [...]mself had Read our Books, and in Year 1692. quo­ [...]d them in Print in his Christian Faith and Serious Appeal) [...] an Evidence of our Soundness in Doctrine, who a lit­ [...]e time after quoted some of the very same Books to [...]ove us unsound in those very Doctrines (as I have [...]fted already in my Apostate Exposed, and Keith a­ [...]ainst Keith p. 57, and 116.) which shews G. K. is not [...] much Eagle-sighted, as Double-sighted, looking vari­ [...]sly yea contrarily upon one and the same Object, as [...]mself is changed from a Friend to an Enemy.

§ 8 G. K. after having given a Citation out of Truths Def. [...] 170.171. ‘That if nothing should be required of one sort from another as an Article of Faith, but what is ex­presly delivered in Scriptures, in plain express Scrip­ture Tearms, of how much Advantage it might be to bring to a true Reconcilement &c. saith p. 33, 34.’ [...]ome of his late Opponents have brought this place to prove [...]m guilty of a Contradiction, by his late practice of what, [...]ey call, his imposing on them unscriptural Creeds and Tearms, as when he told them, They must believe in Christ [...]ithout them for Salvation &c. Answ. His stating his Opponents Allegations, even if he had not so often No­ [...]oriously traduced them, deserves no Credit, except he [...]ad brought his Proofs along with him, by whom, where [Page 110] and when they were so laid down: Yet whether G. [...] may not have so Preached Christ without, Heaven R [...]surrection and Day of Judgment without, in su [...] terms as might minister just occasion to some to ende [...]vour to hold him to his own Rule, of Scripture tear [...] and expressions, may deserve our Enquiry. I [...] then that C. Pusey in his Modest Account p. 56, to 5 [...] after having given the Citation out of Truths Dese [...] much larger than G. K. hath here given it, Queti [...] thus ad hominem, 1. ‘Where are the express wo [...] of Scripture that say, The same Body for Matter a [...] Substance shall rise— 2. That none but those t [...] have the Faith of Christ Crucified can love Enemies▪ 3. That the 400 Pieces of Silver that Abraham P [...]chased the Burying-place with, signifie 400 Vertu [...] and that those who have not those 400 Vertues cann [...] have the Priviledge to be Buried in that most Exce [...]lent Burying-place— 4. That Adam and Eve we [...] not Naked before the Fall, and that the Garden G [...] placed Man in, was no part of this visible Earth— 5. That Men may not have that Holy Ghost, that w [...] given to Believers in Christ Crucified, without t [...] Faith of Christ Crucified (whereas G. K. had sai [...] Looking-glass for Protestants, p. 28. It is our Faith th [...] the Heathen once had the Spirit of God, and th [...] Pharaoh, before his Heart was hardned, had the Sp [...]rit of Grace)— 6. That the Light is not sufficie [...] without something else— 7. That no Man can [...]tain unto Eternal Life and Happiness without t [...] Knowledge of Christ's outward Sufferings, Deat [...] Resurrection &c. If this was it G. K. meant by [...] Charge above, it reacheth not his purpose, for (w [...]ving that I might say, would I take G. K. for my E [...]ample, C. P. doth but Query, they were simply proposed [...] him as Queries, as G. K. hath alledged for himself [...] Ant. and Sadd. p. 34.) what he doth Query is n [...] [Page 111] Whether we (viz. we, to whom the History hath [...]en revealed) must believe in Christ without us for [...]alvation (the tearms of G. K. his Charge) but whe­ [...]er NO MAN can attain to Eternal Life and Salvati­ [...]n without the Knowledge of Christ's outward Suffer­ [...]gs &c. which being an Article of G. K. his Faith at [...]resent, even contrary to what he had Asserted former­ [...], who then was for keeping to express Scripture [...]ords, C. P. hampers him with it, and is cogent a­ [...]ainst G. K. but not to the End assigned by G. K. for [...]at we must believe in Christ for Salvation, is not que­ [...]ioned, but whether no Man can attain to Eternal Life [...]nd Salvation, to whom the History is not revealed, is the Query. Thus much for C. P. now let me present [...]he Reader with the gross Notions I brought out of his Book of Truth Advanced, relating to the Resurrection. He had said p. 27. ‘That the Coats of Skins where­with God clothed Adam and Eve after the Fall, was a clothing them inwardly with the Righteousness of the Lamb— and outwardly with the Skin and Flesh of this Frail, Mortal and Corruptible Body— that the true Body of Man lyeth within the Shell, Oar or Mine of this Gross, Heavy and Corruptible Body, and that is it which shall be the Resurrection-body, at the Re­surrection of the Dead.’ (And upon this Notion that Man had not this Grosness and Imperfection before the Fall, be grounds his Chimera, p. 28. of Man and Womans be­ing made Back to Back before the Fall, and afterwards split [...] divided into two halves, in order to their multiplying their Species, which they could not do without that Separation, as they might have done, if the Fall had not been). And in p. 113 he saith, ‘Within this Brutal Skin of the gross Body that [...]otteth in the Grave, there is lodged the true Body of Man— that at the Resurrection of the Dead nothing of the drossy part, that is Brutal, shall Arise, but only that which is proper to Man as Man, [Page 112] such as Adam had before the Fall. So the Flesh th [...] is Gross, Mortal and Corruptible, is not that Fles [...] that shall be Raised up Immortal and Incorruptibl [...] &c. And p. 115. he tells us, ‘The Separation [...] made between the pure and noble part and that dro [...] part in Man's Body in the Mystical and Invisibl [...] Machpelah, or Sepulchre in Hebron, in the Land [...] Israel, Figuratively and Mystically understood, th [...] Ephron signifieth the Dust-Eater and the 400 Pieces [...] Silver, so many Vertues, the number 400 [as [...] adds p. 116.] being produced of Four answering [...] the Four Elemental Principles and Qualities of th [...] Body, and the number Ten to the Ten Command­ments, which may be branched forth into other Te [...] ‘And a little lower, p. 116. that the Graves that sha [...] be opened at the Resurrection are not any visibl [...] places on the Globe of this Earth, but certain invisi­ble places to our Carnal Eyes, where they are lodge [...] until the time of the Resurrection. [And p. 117.] Thus commonly Men have two Graves, the first give [...] them by Men till the Separation be made betwixt th [...] Kernel and the drossy part by Putrefaction (as sup­pose after a Year, more or less) the second give [...] them by God &c. Now he having in the close of these thus summed up the Matter, p. 118. viz. ‘But against the Doctrine of the Resurrection, as HERE deli­vered and opened by plain Evidence of Holy Scrip­ture, and in Scripture-words and tearms, to whic [...] it is only safe to keep in this and all other things &c. I (in my Keith against Keith p. 46, 47, and 141.) p [...] him upon giving plain Evidence of Scripture, and i [...] Scripture-words and tearms for these his Monstrou [...] Notions of the Resurrection. Whereby the Reade [...] may perceive, I give better Light into the Controver­sie, as well as assign Page and Passage, than G. K. hat [...] done, who now dare leave it with the Judicious, whe [...]ther [Page 113] G. K. hath not administred occasion to be reflected on, as transgressing his own Rule.

He saith p. 34. The word without is easily understood, when we speak of Earth, Sun, Moon, Stars, Judea, Moses, David, that they were without us, and that Christ was Born at Bethlehem, and Bethlehem was without us, and adds at the close, it had been as little needful to have mentioned Christ without us, as Heaven without us, as Judea without us, had not that wild Notion of many, who own no Christ without, nor Heaven, Resurrection, nor Day of Judgment without, occa­sioned it. Answ. This is to Slander not prove, nay he doth not so much as attempt to prove it, wherefore as a false Charge I reject it. To the rest I say, whatever Exposition agreeable to the Scriptures, may be allowed to another, G. K. having precluded himself by that Passage Cited, Truths Defence p. 170, 171. ought not to Claim it: For his saying, 'Nothing should be requi­red from one sort to another, as an Article of Faith, &c. but what is expresly delivered in Scripture, in plain EXPRESS Scripture-tearms, signifieth either something or nothing. If nothing, what was it said for? If something, where's the boundary? We see how largely he hath ranged in what hath been given above, by C. P. and my self? Who while pretending to be of the same Mind still as formerly, now interpreteth his meaning to be, not that every word must be expressed in so many Letters and Syllables, when there is no necessary occa­sion for it, but in plain easie terms, as are equivalent to Scri­pture terms. But who shall be judge of the occasion, say I, or that the tearms are equivalent? For this brings all into uncertainty again, if G. K. may be his own judge. It is as much as to say, They must be delivered in plain Scripture-tearms (which are obvious to every one that can read) or in equivalent terms (of which my self, not the Reader shall be judge.) And upon this stock, as he hath already grafted his Hydra of Absurdities and [Page 114] Contradictions, enough to nauseate the Sober and In [...]telligent, so may he superfoetuate upon them at plea [...]sure, who had he kept to Scripture-words and expres­sions perhaps had found never a Stone to fling at Friend [...] in America.

§ 9 ‘The substance of what he gives out of Truth Defence p. 191, 192. is that the Sacrifice of Christ's Death did truly extend for the Remission of Sins past, from the beginning of the World, that all the Belie­vers that lived under the Law and Prophets, and be­fore the Law, were saved by Faith in Christ— and by Vertue of his Death and Offerings, once for all, all have had, have, or shall have a Day of Visitation— and shall be accountable to the Man Christ, on the score of his Dying for them.’ Upon this he descants, p. 35. not retracting but defending it, as proving that he did not place our WHOLE Salvation upon an inward Principle, excluding the Man Christ Jesus from being jointly concerned with his Light, Grace and Spirit in Men, as (he falsly saith) many called Quakers do: And that he then held, that all who were saved in any Age of the World, were saved by Faith in Christ, as well before he came in the Flesh as since. All which is granted him, as I have often told him, but whether that Faith was ALWAYS at­tended with a Revelation that he came and suffered outwardly, else NOT SAVING, is the Matter in Controversie. For whereas some had objected, There can be no Justification without Faith in Christ, but these Gentiles had not Faith in Christ, G. K. answers by deny­ing the second Proposition, Ʋni. Gr. p. 30. that they had not Faith in Christ. And how did he prove that, may some say? Did he offer to prove that they had an Im­plicit Faith in Christ (his late distinction) or that they might have the History of what Christ did and suf­fered, or was to do and suffer, without Circumstances [Page 115] of Times, Places or Persons (a new-coined fetch he hath in Sect. I. §. 18. of these) nothing less. ‘But as he had said Imm. Rev. p. 243. that true Religion and Christianity may subsist without the History of Christ in the Letter, to wit in the Mystery of the Life of Christ in the Spirit, and yet, even here, where the History is wanting, the Mystery or Inside of Christia­nity is not without its Skin or Outside, namely an outward Confession to God &c. So here Ʋni. Gr. p. 30. he saith, ‘If they did cleave unto and believe in the Light, they believed in Christ, for he is the Light, nor is the outward Name that which saveth, but the inward Nature Vertue and Power signified thereby, which was made manifest in them &c. So that Faith in the inward Manifestation was Faith in Christ then with G. K. and also Saving. ‘This he calls ibid, p. 34. the main and principal Thing, the Word of Faith, the Gentiles did share in with the Jews, that whoever a­mong the Gentiles did believe and call upon the Name of the Lord, were saved, no less than the Jews. And ibid p. 56. he calls it, ‘Some Manifestation of him, in and among the Gentiles, sufficient to Salvation. As well as that he had said, ibid p. 36. The very Gospel hath been preached to ALL, otherwise they should never have been charged with not having obeyed it.’ All which I offer that G. K. may not couch himself under general tearms, and thereby cast a Mist before his Rea­der's Eyes, as he endeavours to do in what follows, where he saith

That by Faith in Christ, I meant the Man Christ (who is both God and Man) who in the fulness of time came in the Flesh, and shed his Blood, for the Remission of their Sins, is obvious to any Intelligent Reader. Answ. Then it seems he was the Man Christ before that fulness of time, that he came in the Flesh and suffered, viz. that which he calleth Way to City of God, p. 133. ‘That Heavenly and [Page 116] Divine Substance or Essence of which the Divine Birth was both Conceived in Mary, and is inwardly Conceived in the Saints &c. As such he calls him the Seed of the Woman that even at Man's Fall was given to bruise the Serpents Head, and to be a Lamb or Sa­crifice to attone and pacifie the Wrath of God to­wards Men, and that he bore the weight of his out­ward Sufferings, in great measure, from the very be­ginning.’ See ibid p. 125, 126. Now the Matter in Debate between G. K. and us, even with respect to what he hath formerly asserted, is whether this Attone­ment, this Sacrifice, this bearing the weight of his Sufferings from the beginning, did bruise the Head of the Serpent in none, attone for none, save none, either before Christ's Offering up of himself in the outward, or where a Revelation from God, that he should so suffer, was not given? That without his outward Coming, ac­cording to the Decree of God, Redemption had never been Purchased, so that whoever are saved in any Age of the World, it is by Vertue thereof, is fully and hear­tily acknowledged by us: But whether this Vertue hath never saved any, but where the History (I do not say, the Circumstances of Times, Places &c. but the Histo­ry) hath been revealed, is that wherein we oppose G. K. formerly to G. K. latterly. Therefore what he adds, That we are most injurious to him, and false Accusers of him, who call this a new Doctrine, to affirm that all whoever were saved with Eternal Salvation, were saved by Faith in the Man Christ, either express or implicit, even by him that was in the fulness of time Crucified for them, is an unfair stating of the Controversie. For besides that contrary to his own Rule (Ex. Narr. p 24. as hath been hinted more than once) the terms [Eternal, Express or Im­plicit] are added to the Premises, to make a noise with, that he may seem to say somewhat to salve up his own Contradictions, which he accounts false Logick in ano­ther; [Page 117] Faith in the Man Christ is not the Matter in De­ [...]te, but whether Faith in the Man Christ implies al­ways a Belief of what the Man Christ was to do and suf­ [...]er in time: For the Man Christ he asserts (Way cast up, [...]. 123.) is present in and among us, and adds, I do not [...]an his external or outward Person, for that is ascended in­ [...] Heaven: Whereas he would now confound the Man Christ and outward Person together, as if the believing [...] the Man Christ, as inwardly manifest, and what the [...]an Christ did and suffered outwardly were equivalent [...]arms. But he hath many a passage to Retract, if he [...]aw would render these tearms convertible, and sug­ [...]st that what is predicable of one, is also of the other.

This brings me to what he accounts a Trifling and Nonsensical Objection in us (but where it is objected, he [...]ith not) to argue that they could not believe in Christ [...]rucified, before he was Crucified, for that it was one and [...] same Christ that was to be Crucified and that was Cruci­ [...]ed, even the same yesterday, to day and for ever. Answ. We grant it, that he who was to be and who was Cruci­ [...]ed, is the same yesterday, to day and for ever, who [...]ough he received something additional in time, viz. [...]r Flesh, which he had not from the beginning, yet [...]as no less Christ, before he descended into the Womb [...] the Virgin, than since. ‘Yet to open the occasion of his Objection of mine, which this Trifler calleth Tri­ [...]ing and Nonsensical in us, the distinction I shall shew [...]as G. K's, not ours, by assigning it, Truth Advanced, [...] 70. as a dangerous and hurtful Error to say, that Men may have that Holy Ghost that was given to Be­lievers in Christ Crucified, without all Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified [which to refute, he [...]ds] It is not said Cornelius had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile state— nor is it any where to be found that any received that Holy Ghost, which Christ promised PARTICULARLY to Believers in him, but such only [Page 118] who believed in him, even Christ Crucified and Rais [...]ed again, &c. And also p. 71. ‘It is called the Hol [...] Spirit or Spirit of Holiness because it worketh a pecu­liar degree and kind of Holiness in all true Believers in Christ Crucified, above what the most upright Gen­tiles do witness or experience in their meer Gentil [...] state.’ Now this Error he pretends to correct in others is not that Men may have that Holy Ghost (as his tearm are) and not believe in Christ (for who held so? [...] pray) but that they may have it, and not so believe as to have his Crucifixion revealed to them. For he wi [...] not pretend sure, that Cornelius believed not in th [...] Light, believed not in Christ, when his Prayers a [...] Alms came up as a Memorial before God, though h [...] did not account him a Believer in Christ Crucified. An [...] why? Not that Christ within and Christ without a [...] two Christs? But because that Heavenly Mystery w [...] not yet made known to him. So that the distinction be [...]ing his, the Trifling is his own, and the Nonsensicalnes [...] if any Bodies, is G. K's, who is the Raiser, the Autho [...] of it.

This leads me to take notice what he offers nex [...] with respect to the Gentiles not having that Holy Gho [...] which the Believers in Christ Crucified had. I havi [...] in my People called Quakers cleared p. 20, to 33. pinch [...] him with Contradictory Passages thereto out of his fo [...]mer Books (more I have added since, Keith again Keith p. 9, to 39.) G. K. in his Ant. and Sadd. p. 2 [...] varies the tearms thus, viz. ‘He is not said to be t [...] Holy Ghost or Holy Spirit in wicked Men, nor in p [...]ous Gentiles— to wit, by Union.’ Whom that might drive out of this muse, I Cited him (Keith [...]gainst Keith p. 60.) out of his Divine Imm. Rev. p. 4 [...] saying, 'Plato, Plotin and other Gentile Philosophe [...] spake of a most inward Union and Communion of [...] Soul with God in a certain Intellectual and Spirit [...] [Page 119] contact or touch, &c. Now to help himself off here, when he had touched upon my Objection (without so much as naming me, or any Book that he had it out of, but only in general that, his Adversaries had objected it, [...] if he designed the Reader should not find it) he An­swers p. 35, 36. That Plato had no Faith in Christ, so much as im [...]licit, is more than they can prove, and that di­vers Sayings in his Books makes it probable he had. As to Plotin, who lived above 200 Years after Christ, and wrote against the Christians, he suggests his Expressions might not be so much from his own Experience, as his Master Plato's Writings, or allowing he might have some true Experience of a Divine Contact or Ʋnion, it was in some transient way, like a glance or slash of Lightning. Answ. If G. K. will al­low Plato to have had the Divine Spiritual Contact, Union, &c. himself must prove beyond probabilities, and may-be's, that Plato had Faith in Christ, yea even in Christ Crucified and Raised again, to wit such a de­gree of Faith, as was accompanied with a Divine Uni­on, such an Union which in the Quotation given out of Ant. and Sadd, above, he denies to have been given to the Pious Gentiles or to Cornelius, who had not that Faith. And if that could be done, and Plato could be proved to be more than a Speculative Philosopher, is it not pretty fair that G. K. even when denying that Cor­nelius (of whom the Holy Scripture give so large a Character, as a Devout Man, one that feared God, whose Prayer and Alms were come up as a Memorial before God, Acts 10.24.) had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile state, should admit Plato might have it, and that by Union? Was Plato a better Man than Cornelius? Or is not G. K. worse than either? A very Changeling in Religion? And yet stiff in defending he is not so, Nay Plotinus, himself, a Writer against Christians shall have so much of G. K's good word (though Cornelius go without it) as that he will not deny he had not this Union, at least [Page 120] in a transient way: A sign that they who write against Christians (a Work himself hath lately taken in hand) have more of his Favour than the Pious Gentiles.

But he hath not spun his Thread fine enough yet, so that if the word [Union] will not fetch him off, but he be hampered there, in p. 36. he will riveit it, with the words [permanent and lasting, inward residence, abiding] and then he vaunts, saying, It is great Igno­rance in his late Opposers, not to understand how the Spirit of God, who is holy, may work in the Hearts of the Gentiles, and Ʋnbelievers (but we were speaking, not of Gentiles and Unbelievers indefinitely, but of Cornelius and the Pious Gentiles) yet hath no inward residence or abiding Ʋni­on or Communion with them, but such only who have Faith in Christ. Answ. The words fore-cited, viz. MOST INWARD UNION AND COMMUNION cut the Nerves of this New Exposition; for what can be so, if not that which is a permanent, lasting, abiding Residence; and that in the Pious Gentiles? But, to mis­lead his Reader, as he adds, so also he substracts, at pleasure, yet gives it as our Inference. For besides the word Pious (which he left out, as if the Debate had been only of the Ʋnbelieving Gentiles) he here speaks of Faith in Christ, not of Faith in Christ Crucified, his own tearms, when he denied Cornelius to have had that Holy Ghost (as if there had been two Holy Ghosts) which was a peculiar Gift, to Believers in Christ Crucified and Raised again, and not to every Believer in Christ in­definitely, to whom the History thereof had not been re­vealed. All which shews the Man is a meer Shuffler, seek­ing to reconcile his former with his latter Sentiments (instead of retracting either) by indirect means, adding to and taking from the Premises, at pleasure, and yet giving them as if they were, even so stated, what we had alledged to him. A Work ill be­coming a Scholar, to such Illiterate Antagonists, as [Page 121] [...]e would render us: But his Cause and Management are a kin.

§ 10 Waving then any Doctrinal Discussing of the Point (for the Matter before me is a Consideration of the Incongruity and Incoherence of his Contradictory Assertions, and the Defectiveness of his false Covers) instead of shewing wherein the Scriptures alledged by him, do not answer his purpose, I come to consider the next trifling Objection (as he also calls it) we have made, but where he saith not. I had in my Keith against Keith, p. 107, 108. quoting him out of Presb. and Ind. Chur. p. 111, 112. shewed this Notion there (that Men who had not the express Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified, WHEN LIVING, might have it at or after Death, to wit, in their passing through the Valley of shadow of Death) favoured that of Purgatory (as in my People called Quakers Cleared, &c. p. 31 to 33. and else where I proved what he held with respect to that of the Transmigration of Souls.) Now to obviate both these, he alledgeth a passage out of his Pretended Anti­dote, p. 115, 116. (which Book I know not how to come by) That all that go to Christ in Heaven after Death, must have an express Knowledge of Christ in Heaven. Whence he Queries, both whether the Souls now in Heaven, can be without all Knowledge of Christ, and whether the Souls of Plato, and Socrates (whom farr be it from him, he saith, to suppose they are not in Heaven) are still without all ex­press Knowledge of Christ? Answ. If the Faith the Gen­tiles have, will carry them to Christ in Heaven, they are well enough. We doubt not but their Knowledge there will be compleat; nor do we think when they are once there, they will be sent back again for want of an express Knowledge, before they came thither. However I thought, before this great Philosopher arose, that the Faith and Knowledge that carried me to Christ [Page 122] in Heaven, was Saving Knowledge, and that if I had not my Saving Faith and Knowledge here, I should never come thither. Thus to extricate himself from an Imputation of holding the Notion of a Purgatory, on which he was like to be stranded, he alledgeth another as unsound, i. e. They shall have their express Knowledge of Christ in Heaven, the tendency of which, as it is a Procrastination, a putting off the day of Sal­vation, so it contradicts the Scriptures, which say, TO DAY, if ye will hear his voice, harden not y [...] hearts, Heb. 3.7, 8. NOW is the day of Salvation, 2 Cor 6.2. Thus he shews his unsoundness, in what follows his Malice, by insinuating if some of his Opposers (whom he names not) think there is no Christ in Hea­ven, having any bodily Existence, it's no wonder they think the Saints in Heaven have no knowledge of him. In which he is both Injurious and Detractive, as well as Self-inconsistent in his malitious Charge, once vented by his Brother Apostate, Chr. Lodowick, who then de­fended that it was not true, and quoted a Book of G. W's called Malice of Ind. Agent, p. 17. and another written by some Friends called Testimony for the Man Christ Jesus, which p. 4. cited W. P. on that behalf, wherein both G. W. W. P. and those Friends assert the Man Christ's Existence in his glorified Body in Heaven, see G. K. his Christ. Faith, p. 12, & 13. as he is also in suggesting, we think the Saints have no knowledge of Christ in Heaven, which I remember not to have heard from him before, and is equally false with the former▪ Thus we see what he wants in Evidence he makes up in Slander, and all to patch up his own poor Cause, which the more he tacks on, of such kind of false Allegations, the worse it looks.

§ 11 Thus he pretends to have performed what he promised with respect to those Books of Imm. Rev. [Page 123] Rect. Corr. and Truths Defence, which how effectually I have already observed, what is wholly pretermitted may advise at the close. The next Book he nibbles at, is Help in Time of Need, printed Anno 1665, of which he saith p. 37. All these passages, so far as I did understand them, to respect the People called Quakers, as a visible Body of People, together with the GENE­RALITY of their Ministry, and GENERAL way of Worship and Discipline, &c. I retract, as being too large and ample a Commendation of them GENERALLY considered—And I freely and willingly acknowledge my weak­ness and short-sightedness in having so high and great an Esteem of them GENERALLY considered. Answ. Then it may yet be true with respect to some among the Quakers, but not to the Generality. Let us hear then what he said then of them in general, and see whether he will now allow it to be true of some of them, in order whereto I shall give some of his own words, he hath in this Page cited, with my Observations from his general Retraction, in Crotchets. He then said, ‘Now the Light hath shined forth in such clearness, that we [i. e. as now interpreted, some of us] have seen to the bottom of all Babylon's Treasures. And we [to wit, some of the People called Quakers] do witness this day come and broke up among us in pure perfect Brightness, every one in their measure, &c. And we [viz. Not the Generality, but some of us] have seen the Bride, the Lamb's Wife, the New Je­rusalem descending from above, from God out of Heaven—And her Light is like unto a Stone most precious, like a Jasper clear as Chrystal, and we [some of us] have seen the Frame and Proportion of this City, with the Walls and Gates of it, (within which our [i. e. some of our] feet have stood)—And the Lord hath made us [some of us] Citizens of this City, and Stones of this Building—And as the Mi­nistry [Page 124] and Worship of the Church or House of God among us, [viz. among some of us] is Spiritual, so is the Order, Discipline and Government among us, [i. e. some of us] And now what I have declared un­to you (and the Manifestation of the Spirit of Truth will shew much more, even the perfect Pattern of the House of God in the Mount) concerning these things, which are necessary and expedient in order to a through, cleanly and perfect Reformation, we [i. e. some of us] the People of the Lord, called Quakers have fallen upon them, being taught and di­rected by the Wisdom of God.’ Thus far out of G. K. in which what I have inserted in Crotchets, shews the natural Tendency of this present Retractation. If this displease such among the Church of England-men and Protestant Dissenters he now would fawn upon, as too large a Character of any of us, perhaps for their sakes, in his next, he may retract it yet further. That he did not do it now, I do not so much impute to any remaining Esteem of any of us, as that the Man is loth to be thought wavering in his Judgment, and that there­fore it would go easiest off, to make it general, which he may hereafter restrict as narrow as he pleaseth. Yet let me add, The Quakers (neither in the General nor in the Particular) do not any more need his Testimony for them, who is gone from that which gave it, than Paul did that of the Pythones Damsel, who said, These, Men are the Servants of the most high God, &c. Acts 16. v. 16, 17. What I touched upon transiently in my Quakers Cleared, &c. p. 42. opposing this Book to that of Truth Advanced, being designed only as an Indication of the Instability of the Man, who would pretend not to see it, not that we craved his good word.

However to palliate his having said formerly, The Church was come out of the Wilderness, he alledgeth, The chief Leaders among the People called Quakers led him into it. [Page 125] Answ. I presume it was not long since he thought him­self a Chief Leader among them, more fit to lead than to be lead. But why then did he entitule his Book, Help in the Time of Need, from the God of Help, and not rather, Help from the Leading Quakers? Again in p. 55. when he entituled that part, The long-looked for Day of God, broke up among us, the Lord's People called Quakers— Writ in the Fear and Will of the Lord, he should rather have said, Written, Parrot-like, as I was taught ▪ And when he said p. 62. The Ministry is Spiritual, and so are the Ministers, Men taught of God, he should have added, As I have been told. But who led him to say, he witnessed his day come and broke up among us in perfect Brightness, [...]s p. 58? Did they lead him thus to vaunt of his own Condition, beyond what was read? O Shameless, [...]onfused Proteus!

He alledgeth indeed at the top of p. 38. His Zeal [...]nd Fervour did carry him too far, that he had great in­ [...]ard Experience of the Lord's Love and Goodness at that [...]me (more I doubt not, than he hath now) that he is [...]nsible and truly convinced he had too far exceeded in the [...]houghts of his Spiritual Attainments, both then and since This since, I question not, to be too true, whatever [...]e did then) and that he freely retracts and revokes, what­ [...]ver passages are to be found, in this or any of his latter Books, [...]hat are justly Offensive, on the account of his going beyond [...]he due Bounds of his real Growth, and Spiritual and inward [...]ation in the Truth, so far as any thing of the least mix­ [...]re of Mistake or Ʋntruth is to be found therein. And [...] 39. That he adheres [...]o his Testimony in this, and all other [...]s Books, as to Matter and Substance of many weighty [...]ings therein, and the good Advice he gave to his Country­ [...]en in that Book, &c. All which are general Tearms, [...] if designed for Deceit to lurk under, who while pre­ [...]nding to retract every thing wherein he exceeded, or [...]here a Mixture of Mistake and Untruth is to be [Page 126] found, and assigning no passage in particular, retracts nothing in effect, but gives himself Scope to extend or restrict it, as he pleaseth, hereafter, which is no Evi­dence of a sincere and hearty Sorrow. And what he adheres to, he leaves us as much in the Dark con­cerning, as if he chose rather to walk in Disguise, than to be open and plain. Again, How shall it appear, he had a certain Guidance in any thing, when even what he is willing we should allow him to have retracted, he hath been as positive in, and laid as high, as what he would yet be thought to adhere to? Who, if he sti [...] account that Advice good, he then gave to his Country-men, must still think, That Prelacy is a Limb of Anti­christ, that his Country-men ought to have kept their Vo [...] against it, as in p. 37. & 39. of which I shall give mor [...] in §. 13. which if he still dare defend (as he hath com [...]mended his Advice then given) to be good Counsel sti [...] those of the Church of England may consider what [...] kind of Proselyte he is like to prove, if they shou [...] take him in, and if the Counsel were not good, Wh [...] did he not rather revoke, recall and retract that Advic [...] given in that Book, than applaud it as good? B [...] the Man seems willing to keep in with both, if he ca [...] not knowing perphaps, whom he may need a Pro [...] from most.

§ 12 In his next he gives a Citation out of Help, & p. 63. where he had said, ‘Now we need not say, Wh [...] will go down into the Grave, and bring up Christ [...] us, or who will ascend to Heaven, to bring hi [...] down to us, or who will go over the Seas, and bri [...] us Tidings of him from Jerusalem, him (whose Na [...] is the Word of God) we of a Truth witness near [...] even in our Hearts, so that we need not either a [...]cend, descend, or go forth, &c. Upon this he telle [...] us what T. E. hath brought against him, out of [...] [Page 127] Book called Truth Defended, p. 110, 111. (for this is the only time he hath cited any Book and Page, of all that he hath alledged against us) which I wave taking no­tice of, for two Reasons. First, For that G. K. is still Debtor to that Book of T. E's, and the Answer to G. K. his Narrative, and I design not so farr to gratifie him in picking out a single Passage in a Book, while he overlooks the rest, to which long since he made a shew as if he would emit an Answer. 2ly. As my design is not Controversial, but the detecting the Man's insincere Explications and Retractations of his former Books, so the doing that here, and exposing G. K's false Gloss, will of it self, make void what is alledged by him out of T. E. relating to this Quotation. The Importance then and signification of his words above, he thus gives p. 40. We need not say who will go over the Seas, and bring us Tidings of him from Jerusalem, where [...] suffered in the Flesh, for all sincere Christians are well satisfied with the Faith they have already of Christ, by the [...]tward Testimony, &c. So that they neither seek nor need [...]y other ground of Confirmation to their Faith, either of an [...]tward Voice from Heaven, or from beyond the Sea, from [...]erusalem, &c. Answ. Ground of Confirmation to their [...]aith, were not the Tearms mentioned in that Book, [...]herefore would he have kept to his own Logical Rule, [...]ould not have been added here. Again, as he calls [...] a little below, ‘The word of Faith which Paul preached, and Moses before him,—which was able to Save them that turned their Minds thereto, &c. [...]o in Imm. Rev. p. 77. he had said, ‘He reveals the whole Council of his Will by the word of his Mouth, the Light reveals the whole Will of God—he need not go forth to seek a Law without him, or a Teacher without him, the Word is near—to which Moses [...]pointed the Jews, and Paul the Romans. Now if [...]y both spake of one word, and both said, Men need [Page 128] not ascend, descend or go beyond the Sea, to fetch it, and G. K. hath cited them both, as concurring in the one and the same Testimony, then G. K. his Allega­tion, whereby he would restrict it to Christians al­ready satisfied, who needed no Voice from Heaven o [...] Jerusalem, as a Confirmation of their Faith, falls to th [...] Ground in course; seing it was good Doctrine before seasonable Doctrine before, and the Cause alledged th [...] holds now, even by G. K. his own Confession, viz. Th [...] the Light reveals the whole Will of God, and w [...] able to Save them (even in Moses's day) who gave [...] to be taught and led thereby. Had he indeed urg [...] that the word nigh in Moses his day, and the wo [...] nigh in Paul's day was not the same, and that there w [...] need of ascending, descending and going beyond t [...] Sea in Moses's time, which then ceased, when Chri [...] was offered up, how Unscriptural soever this h [...] been, yet there had been some colour for his prese [...] Exposition, whereas it being the same now as the [...] and attainable not by ascending, descending, &c. [...] an inward witnessing it, then as now, the limiting [...] to satisfied Christians, who seek not a ground of C [...]firmation of their Faith, is both an Abuse of the Te [...] and a false Gloss upon G. K. his Sentiments former [...] which it had been more to his Credit to have retract [...] than thus to have sophisticated.

§ 13 Herewith G. K. winds up his Citations [...] of his former Books. As for his other Books, call [...] Way to City of God, Way cast up, and Light of Truth, answer to R. Gordon, or any others of the like Na [...] and Importance (which is a pretty wide Reference, sa [...] he alledgeth he seeth no present need to vindicate t [...] from our Perversions and Wrestings (as he calleth th [...] and that one not called a Quaker, but of another Comm [...] (whom he names not, perhaps that he might not [...] [Page 129] [...]over the Author of the Snake in the Grass) said to him, that instead of doing him a Diskindness, they had done him a great Kindness. Again p. 42. That in diverse printed Treatises of his (whereof he names none but a printed Letter at the end of G. Croes his general History of the Quakers, and his Anti. and Sadd. without assigning Page or Passage) he hath given divers Explications of most (he doth not say of all, but of most) of the Quotations brought by us against him. The which I take to be so idle, shifting and loose a way of Writing, denoting Guilt and Insincerity, that barely to repeat it, is to answer it, which when he shall think fit to descend into Particulars, a particular Reply may perhaps be given to.

The next thing I observe is that he thus bespeaks his friendly and juditious Reader, If any of my above-given Explications seem to him in any degree strained beyond what the genuin Sense of the words will bear (though I know not any one such) I am freely willing, that what he thinks in any degree strained, he may take it, if not for a genuin and proper Explication (if so be it is in the least inconsistent with the Truth of the Holy Scripture) to be my plain and free Retractation: For what I cannot fairly defend by Ex­ [...]lication, I am freely willing to correct and amend by Re­ [...]ractation, p. 42. Answ. This is Nonsence all over. Can the Reader at the same time deem it strained, not [...] genuin and proper Explication, and yet allow it to [...]e a plain and free Retractation? For if it be an Ex­ [...]lication, then not a Retractation, for they are not Syno­ [...]imous Tearms, and if strained, not genuin nor pro­ [...]er, then not plain and free, much less fairly defended [...]y Explication. Besides that, he that will strain an [...]xplication beyond what it will bear, cannot be sup­posed to be freely willing to retract it, seing it was [...]is Unwillingness to do that, which drew him to strain [...]is Explication: So that this profound Scholar hath [Page 130] run himself a-ground miserably. Yet surely, had he not been conscious to himself of using strained Explica­tions, he need not have given this Caution to his friendly and judicious Reader, for such are not apt to take things at the worst hand, nor so to conceive with­out just Cause administred. Had he given it as a Cau­tion to the Captious and Inimical, not to the Friendly and Judicious, there had been less ground to suspect, he knew he had deserved such a Censure: And indeed he hath so managed his Work all along (as will be obvious upon the reading of these) that he could not expect, but it would be excepted against, even by the Friendly, that do not give away their Judgment.

To mend the matter he now tells us, he freely re­tracts all Passages in any of his Books, in so far as they are inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures, and submits them to the Test thereof. Answ. As this is general, no parti­cular passage assigned, it is no Retractation at all: For who, even of them that are least conscious to them­selves of having offered what is not perfectly con­sistent with Scripture, may not say so, and that the [...] submit theirs to the Test thereof, which may be ra­ther called a Purgation and Vindication than a Retracta­tion? Again, when at one time he faith the Text saith thus in the Greek, the proper and usual Significatio [...] must be kept to, as Ʋni. Gr. p. 43. another while re [...]tracts that, alledgeth the Sense would be marred, i [...] that Translation were admitted, and all this upon th [...] same Scripture, as hath been instanced above, Sect. [...] §. 16. and Sect. II. §. 7. what must be the Test then▪ Who the Interpreter? If G. K. himself? It may be [...] question how long he will keep of that Mind? [...] another? Who is that other? And what Assuranc [...] will G. K. give that he will stand to his Arbitrement▪ Yet upon this he gives his Reader very oily Words tells him how ready he would be to correct them, for tha [...] [Page 131] possibly divers other particulars may have not been observed, and p. 43. That he would receive an Information most kindly, as a most friendly Office, and judge himself greatly obliged to be thankful to him, which I take as an artificial Cover, that he might not be suspected to have slipt over so many without the least notice, which he had received Information of. As for ours, he represents them to be without a right Ʋnderstanding, from a Spirit of Prejudice, or a Scoffing, Taunting, Airy, Ʋnchristian Spirit, which as it is no Encouragement to any Man to take the Pains to be Scavinger to his Books (for what Security can the Reader have, he shall be better treated?) so it denotes, not a hearty Desire of Infor­mation (for why then did he over-look them he was informed of?) but a design to hide and cover him­self under specious Pretences, and excuse himself from engaging, where he cares neither to retract nor de­fend. Who saith of T. E. C. P. and me, That we have blamed and censured the soundest Passages for most part in his Books, in relation to Doctrine, though generally such as most need Correction, we have past without the least Censure. To which I answer, In as much as he is thus conscious to himself of passages that need Correction, why did he not clear his hands of what was depending, before he called upon his Reader for more Work? To the rest I say, It is Contradictions, not Doctrines that we have mostly alledged out of his Books: And where they have offered themselves, we have taken them; the censuring his Doctrines, any otherwise than by comparing the Contradictory Assertions, be­ing the least part of what we have been engaged in.

He begins p. 44. thus, Finally, with a free and willing Mind I make a general Retractation of all the hard Names, and uncharitable Censures, I have at any time past upon any, differing from me in p [...]int of Judgment—that have not deserved them. But who have deserved them, and [Page 132] what Censures such have deserved, he that knows, can tell: For G. K's part, the Determination he keeps in his own Breast. Wherefore I appeal to the several sorts of Protestants in this Nation, Doth this satisfie you, whom he thus hath censured and given these hard Names unto? Do ye look upon this as a sincere, hearty Retractation, springing from deep Regret, as he gives out, or that it is any thing but a meer Shift? Is this sufficient Compensation to you, the Members of the Church of England, for his tearming ‘Prelacy a Limb of Antichrist, Help in Time of Need, p. 37 That filthy thing set up in the Land,’ p. 38. telling the Presbyterians, ‘They did well in departing from you, who gave your selves forth to be the Lord's Ministers and Servants, running and he sent you not, and that your Covetousness and Ambition, and seek­ing how to please Men, and not any Zeal for God, set you on lording it over the People, and that what ye gave forth as his Ordinances, &c. were the meer Inventions of Men, and Babylon's golden Cup of For­nication—for whose Pride, Pomp, Covetousness, Tyranny and Ambition, God's Wrath was kindled against you, and he poured Contempt and Desola­tion upon you, ibid. p. 47, 48.’ Or to you of the Presbyterian way, for his alledging in the Title Page, ‘That ye have GENERALLY shrunk from what but of late ye so zealously asserted and maintained to be the Cause and Work of God [Was not that, your Covenant against Prelacy? say I] the MOST PART actively complying to the building up again and healing old Babylon—like the Dog returning to the Vomit, and the Sow to the Puddle, after the be­ing once washed) others lying by, and cowardly bowing under, and giving up themselves to a detesta­ble Neutrality.’ And p. 50. ‘That when ye got upon the Walls and Bulworks of your Enemies building, [Page 133] and levelled it to the Ground, when ye had rooted out Prelacy, and the many Corruptions and Superstitions that accompanied the same, and digged down a good part of Babylon's up-setting, that then ye took your selves to build—Whose Form of Church-Discipline, Order and Government, is nothing upon the Matter better than the Episcopal, saith G. K. p. 52.’ Or to you Independents and Bap [...]ists for linking you with the former, as ‘ALL of you open and declared Enemies to the Holy Spirit, its inward Revelation and Inspi­ration, &c. see Presb. and Ind. Ch. p. 45.’ For these are not yet retracted by him, and how know ye but he still esteems you, as DESERVING these Epithets? It is true indeed, he pretends a little below, He was never so uncharitable as to judge that few or none were truly Pious, or of a true Christian Spirit, but such as were of the same Profession with him. So that he was charita­ble it seems, when he gave this Character of you in the Lump: And I do not find he clears you yet, except by such a particular Exception out of a general Rule, which leaves you in the dark as to the Exemption, to [...]he Indemnification, not to the Charge. Whose Sense of you now, if we may gather from his Judgment upon others, in his Way cast up, p. 35, 36. where acknow­ [...]edging that the Lord had some among the Presbyte­ [...]ians, who belonged to his true Church, he saith, ‘Far the greatest Number of their Church-Members were of Gross and Scandalous Lives, utterly Inconsistent with true Piety, is not a very charitable one.’ And [...]re the rest of you sure, he thinks better of you?

What he widely (and without shew of proof) alledg­ [...]th against us, as oppugning the great Fundamentals of the Christian Religion, and of nasty tearms and words used by [...]me Preachers among us, worse than Bill insgate, which he [...]lso assigns in general Tearms without specifying what [...]hey were, and who gave them, while he applauds [Page 134] himself, as never having that Faculty, deserves not my notice, except to reject as an unproved Slander. The Man is gauled and fretted, his Work being too heavy for him, either to clear himself, or make out his Charge against others, whom if he cannot overturn with Argu­ments, he would fain over-run with Noise. But no Weapon that is formed against thee, shall prosper, and every Tongue that shall rise against thee in Judgment, thou shalt condemn, said the Lord of his Heritage of old, Isa. 54.17. who is the same to his, to day, yesterday and for ever.

§ 14 Thus having gone through G. K. his Explica­tions and Retractations, the Fruit of 18 Months Toil▪ and shewed what poor, silly, sh [...]fting, deceitful and evasive Allegations he hath used all along, more like [...] Pedantick Trister and Quibbler (his Charge upon others) than a Man of sound Knowledge and Expression (his ow [...] Character of himself) and also reflected upon his insin­cere and mincing Retractation, of those few he pretend [...] to Correct, as if in nothing Doctrinal he had erred, bu [...] only in an undue application of a Scripture or two, no [...] unsound but unsafely worded, and that many times deli­vered in ambiguous tearms, I had once thought to hav [...] Collected those Passages he hath wholly pretermitted and we have exposed in ours, to which these are pre­tended as an Answer. But considering this would ad [...] too much to the Bulk of these, which hath alread [...] swelled beyond my desire, and that it will necessaril [...] fall in, in course, if ever he reply to ours, Five where of lye upon his Hands unanswered, I forbear at presen [...] waiting to see whether the next 18 Months will produc [...] a more mature Birth, than the preceeding have done▪ Yet not so, but that I shall direct where they may [...] found, and what Subj [...]cts they Treat of.

I shall then premise, that had he really designed t [...] purge himself, satisfie his Reader and reclaim what h [...] [Page 135] could not defend, or wherein his Judgment was altered, he would have been so far from overlooking whole Books (as he hath done, his Light of Truth, Way Cast up, Way to City of God, Presb. and Ind. Churches, Chri­stian Faith and Serious Appeal, to which I may add his Postscript to G. W's Nature of Christianity) that he would rather have erred on the other hand, by repeating them over and over, as he insinuates, in his Preface, that we have done. Nor would he have excused himself by a silly pretence (depending upon his own Veracity, with­out Demonstration) that ours needed them not, that we had perverted and wrested his words, &c. as hath been observed already. And had he been really and conscienciously concerned (or to use his own words, p. 44.) Did he, with deep Regret, acknowledge and blame his too great rashness, in giving hard Names and passing un­charitable Censures, on such as deserved it not, he would have descended to a more particular Retractation, and Explanation what the undeserved Names and Censures were, and who deserved them not; whereas now, this limitation and reserve opens a way to him to make a Nose of Wax of his Recantation at pleasure, as they please him, or his future Circumstances put him in a condition, either to stand in need of them, or the con­trary. And whereas (over-passing his more early Books) he had Vindicated us so lately as in the Year 1692. even since he began to be litigious in America, as sound with respect to most of if not all the Doctrines he now pretends we are unsound in, and that from 28 Years converse, both in publick Meetings and private Discourses, even with the most noted and esteemed among us, as he al­ledged, Serious Appeal, p. 7. and that this hath been objected to him (both in my Apostate Exposed, a Book G. K. is still Debtor to, and elsewhere) it is not suffi­cient for him now to heap up unproved Accusations a­gainst us, without taking notice of what we have said in [Page 136] our Defence, but to have offered (had he designed a thorow Retractation, even thereof) something at least, as an Evidence that his Opinion then was ill grounded, and now leans upon a surer and faster bottom, than that of Prejudice or a Personal Pique, which every Ju­dicious Reader knows, is apt to miss-way the Judgment. Thus far in general: Now to be more particular, [...] come to recapitulate some of the Quotations, G. K. hath wholly leapt over, wherein what I give out of him in one Book, I shall not offer again, when brought by us in another, as not designing more shew than sub­stance.

The first I shall observe, is what T. E. hath offered in his Truth Defended p. 47, to 50. out of G. K. his Imm. Rev. p. 179, 188, 190. relating to a knowing a Tree by its Fruits, proceeding from an inward relish, taste and discerning; which G. K. hath not touched upon, to Explain or Correct.

The next, Treating concerning the Man Christ, as being Man from the beginning, before outwardly Born and Conceived of the Virgin, that as inwardly revealed he was a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone and paci­fie God's Wrath to Man, the promised Seed, the Seed of the Woman that did actually bruise the Serpent's Head ever since the Fall, had inward Flesh, which th [...] Holy Men fed on, in ALL AGES, and that more tha [...] visible Flesh is the Ransom, out of G. K. his Imm. Rev▪ p. 226. Way cast up, p. 93, to 99, and p. 102, 103 104, 111, 141, 142. Way to City of God, p. 125, and Rect. Corr. p. 20, 21, 27, 28. may be seen in T. E's Truth Defended, p. 117, 119, 91, 94, 104, 142, 150▪ and in his Answ. to Narr. p. 36, 46, 86, 87, 100. op [...]posed there to G. K. his late Sentiments. For wha [...] he gives but even a transient touch at the Page, how little soever he say to the purpose, those I bring not but these he hath entirely overlookt.

[Page 137]What G. K. had asserted of Christ's Bodily Presence, not being sufficient to the Church, that Christ is Media­tor as he is in Men, T. E. hath given in his Answ. to Narr. p. 87, 88, 108. out of G. K. his Imm. Rev. p. 59, 120, 121, 107. and Way to City of God, p. 127, 139. none of which G. K. takes any notice of.

Of Christ's Resurrection-Body, that it is not Car­nal, but Spiritual, T. E. giveth in his Truth Defended, p. 127. and Answ. to Narr. p. 47, 55. out of G. K. his Rect. Corr. p. 23, 24, 44, 54, 55. also overlookt by G. K.

I shall be very Cautious in what I bring out of my Quakers Cleared, in as much as G. K. hath pretended to Answer it, in his Ant. and Sadd. designing only to give such Quotations, as he hath slipt over both there and here, although G. K. his Entituling these, as what may at present suffice to the Answering T. E. and my former and latter Books, I might have been excuseable, had I took him at his word (which he so seldom keeps to) and brought them nevertheless. Therefore leav­ing him to supply that defect, when his E'RE VERY LONG comes, that he emits a larger Answer to mine, and also over-passing what I have already hinted §. 4. of this Section, touching Baptism and the Supper, that his Retractation of what he had said in his Truths Defence and Rect. Corr. related only to his Exposition of two Scriptures, viz. Mat. 28.19. and 1 Cor. 11.26. and out of my Sect. I. §. 18. wherein I gave what he had omitted out of Imm. Rev. p. 228, 232, and 242. I shall only offer, that what I gave out of Ʋni. Gr. p. 28, 29, [...]0, 34, 35, 36, 56, 57, 58, 115. (concerning an in­ward saving Illumination, given to the Gentiles, the Gospel its having been Preached to all, and that the Word of Faith within was the main and principal [...]hing, in Opposition to his Sentiments of late) he hath [...]ice slipt over, both in his Ant. and Sadd. of which I [Page 138] gave notice in my Keith against Keith, p. 71. and also here, in these.

What I have alledged to him in my Keith against Keith, p. 9, to 36. (as inconsistent with what he had de­livered in his Chr. Faith, p. 6, 7. Truth and Innocency Defended, p. 19, 20. Further Discovery, p. 17, 18. and Truth Advanced, p. 70, 71.) out of G. K. his Light of Truth, p. 11, 15. Postscript to Nature of Christianity p. 65, 70. Ʋniversal Grace, p. 8, 21, 22, 24, 25, 26, 36, 52, 53, 54. Looking-glass, p. 28. Imm. Rev. p. 77, 103, 105, 109, 111, 112, 113, 213, 221, 227. Way cast up, p. 44, 45, 95, 99, 100, 103. Rect. Corr. p. 50, 150, 187. Truths Defence, p. 70, 114, 121, 141, 212. Divine Imm. Rev. p. 26, 27, 63, 54, 55, 79, 154, 158. Plain Short Catechism, p. 9. These G. K. toucheth not upon, in the least.

To which I shall add what one W. C. (a Church-man) hath gleaned out of him, in Two Small Tracts, the which, whoever presented them before him, he wil [...] not pretend, I suppose, not to have seen. The first was Entituled, Mr. G. Keith at Turners-Hall Contra­dicting Mr. G. Keith at the Tolbooth of Aberdeen, who there opposeth to several Passages in G. K's Ex. Narr [...] Quotations out of his Imm. Rev. p. 200, 243, 244, 231, 4. chiefly respecting the Object of Faith, a Funda­mental Principle, as in p. 5, to 10. of that Book. In hi [...] Second Letter, stiled, Mr. Keith no Presbyterian no Quaker. &c. from p. 7, to 15. he gives G. K. hi [...] Contradictory Sense relating to Baptism, the Supper Sinless Perfection, Election and Reprobation, and Com [...]mon and Saving Illumination, and that out of G. K. hi [...] Quakerism Confirmed (as to be found in the Collectio [...] of R. Barclay's Books) p, 586, 618, 619. and Ʋni▪ Grace, p. 105. I wave what was there also brought, no [...] only out of the Pages (fore quoted) by T. E. or m [...] but even those out of Ʋni. Gr. p. 74, 75, 76. becaus [...] [Page 139] tho' those Passages are not touched upon by G. K. yet something having been brought by him out of those Pages, although with different Ends and upon a diffe­rent Occasion, I will rather not insist on it, than admi­nister a seeming room for Exception.

Without making any further Comment upon these Omissions of G. K. having shewed what we expect from him, I shall only observe, that notwithstanding he could not but be Conscious to himself of his manifold Pretermissions, and evasive Shiftings of what he hath touched upon, in the close he presumeth to say, he prays to God, we may have a Heart given us of God, if not to follow him as an Example, yet to follow the Example of other GREAT PENITENTS— for he that hideth his Sin, will not prosper, &c. Which (besides the ta­king the Name of the Lord in vain) shews great Hypo­crisie and great Scaredness, as well as Ostentation, in ranking himself among other great Penitents, forgetting, it seems, or at least little regarding the Wise Man's Counsel, viz. Let another Man praise thee, and not thine own Mouth; a Stranger, and not thine own Lips, Prov. 27.2. Whether the friendly and juditious Reader, he would lately bespeak on his side, will not think this strained, and undeserving the Applause he craves, is left to his mature, sedate and impartial Consideration.

J. P.


PAGE 3. Line 14. and l. 32. p. 6. l. 26. p. 8. l. 24. p. 12. l. 9. for Retrac [...] read Retractation. p. 4. l. 20. f. s [...]ing r. waving. p. 8. l. last r. with [...] p. 9. l. 22. r. Doctrines. l. 28. r. a profitable. p. 10. l. 15. r. thing. l. 29. r. [...] commended. p. 12. l. 19. f. perusing r. perverting. p. 13. l. 14. r. given [...] p. 15. l. 33. r. Endowment. p. 19. l. 20. r. Capernaumites. l. last and p. 20. l. [...] r. Capernaumitism. l. 30. f. and r. or. p. 23. l. 30. f. I r. and. p. 24. l. 8. af [...] Christ r. as he came in the [...]lesh. l. 11. r. Spirit. l. 28. after Flesh r. face to fa [...] p. 25. l. 2. after not r. say. l. 20. f. that r. the. p. 28. l. 20. r. Christ's. p. 3 [...] l. 20. r word. p. 3 [...]. l. 10. r. judicially. p. 32. l. 6. r. of our. p. 33. l. 7. f. r. after. p. 31. l. 8. f. Seed r. Heir. l. 14. f. Divine r. more Noble. p. 35. l. [...] after and r. so. l. 28. f. absolutely r. so lately. p. 36. l. 27. f. yet r. not. p. 3 [...] l. 6. f. and r. or. p. 38. l. 7. r. become. p. 39. l. r. f. the r. his. p. 40. l. 2 [...] f. of r. with. l. 31. f. within r. with him. l. 31. r. light within. p. 41. l. 15. [...] the r. this. p. 42. l. 3. f. has r. how. l. 20. f. left r. lost. l. 32. r. consequentiall [...] p. 44. l. 18. f. the r. that. l. 20. r. 1 Cor. 15.12. p. 46. l. 25. f. or r. and. p. 4 [...] l. 26. f. be r. become. l. 28. after pretended r. to. l. 32. f. withdrew r. what dre [...] p. 50. l. 17. f. are r. serve. p. 52. l. 19. f. 69. r. 62. p. 55. l. 26. f. 14 r. 1 [...] p. 59. l. 21. f. of r. in. p. 60. l. 8. r. calling. l. 33. r. all Men. l. 34. r. ex part p. 63. l. 8. f. them r. all. l. 16. r. a vail. p. 65. l. 8. f. Wrath r. Truth. l. 1 [...] f. they r. he. p. 69. l. 2. r. respect to. p. 74. l. 13. r. tell. p. 81. l. 20. f. 69. [...]. 6 [...] p. 92. l. 1 r. appropriating, p. 93. l. 8. f. the r. that, l▪ 24. dele for, p. 99. [...] ▪ f. this r. his, p. 102. l. 1. r. advantage, p. 107. l. 5. r. initiated, l. 20. f. ascribe [...] r. asserted.

This keyboarded and encoded edition of the work described above is co-owned by the institutions providing financial support to the Text Creation Partnership. This Phase I text is available for reuse, according to the terms of Creative Commons 0 1.0 Universal. The text can be copied, modified, distributed and performed, even for commercial purposes, all without asking permission.