The Quakers Rounds, OR A faithful Account of a large Discourse, between a Party of them called Quakers, Viz. William Fisher, and Edward Burroughs, etc. with Mr. Philip Taverner, Mr. Richard Goodgroom, and Mr. M. Hall, Ministers of the Gospel; at the Public Meetingplace of West-Drayton, in the County of Middlesex; at which time and place, the Quakers maintained, I. That the Scriptures were not the Word of God, because the Devil spoke something, and Pharaoh spoke something that is there written. II. That no Man is justified further than he is Sanctified. III. That evil Motions not consented to, are not sin. iv That Perfection is Attainable in this Life. V That the Scriptures were given to the World, not to the Saints. Published by William Taverner, Preacher of the Word. LONDON, Printed by G. Dawson, for Lodowick Lloyd, and are to be sold at his Shop, at the Castle in Cornwell. 1658. To the READER. Friendly Reader, THou hast here as orderly a Relation of a confused Discourse, as the disorder in it would admit: the multitude of words, which this day's work was filled up with; I do not undertake to set down, they were legions, and far exceeding the largest memory; but the sum and substance of what was spoken on both sides is truly related; and here and there some few words inserted, for a further proof, and clearing of things spoken to: The Controversy lay chiefly between Mr. Richard Goodgroom, the Objector, and Edward Burroughs, the Defendant, to whom William Fisher was an Assistant; which two were the chief Speakers on that side: The Particulars objected against, E. B. which he had formerly delivered in a private Meeting, were as followeth: VIZ. I. That the Scriptures were not the Word of God, because the Devil spoke something, and Pharaoh something, which is there written. II. That no Man is Justified further than he is Sanctified. III. That evil motions not consented to are not sin. iv That Perfection is attainable in this Life. V That the Scriptures were given to the World, not to the Saints. These E. B. would not (at first) own to be his, as coming from the mouth of the Objector, and yet owned every of them in his Discourse, unless the last, which he endeavoured to skin over with that Text, John 5.29. but to no purpose; his own doubtless they were, else why would he undertake to maintain them? his Zeal in contending for them makes it evident (beyond all Controversy) that he is the true father of the child: There were some things in the managing of this Dispute (if it deserves such a name) just matter of reproof. 1. A disorderly, and confused speaking of many, at sometimes, together; both Parties must confess guilty in this thing. 2. A great prejudice in each Party against other; which appeared in this: neither Party was willing to own what the other said, though (for substance) they held the same thing: so that what with passion, and prejudice meeting together, there seemed rather a contending for Victory, than for Truth: I fear, there is neither Party can plead innocent in this matter: But I will no longer detain the Reader in an Epistle; only he may please to take notice; That E. B. and W. F. were the chief Speakers on that side, called Quakers: R. G. was the Man engaged in the Controversy, who heard those things delivered in a private Meeting by the person formerly named: P. T. and Mr. Hall, came as Hearears, not as Parties engaged further than other of the Company, being free to own Truth wheresoever they found it; and being present, did sometimes speak, when they found Truth engaging them thereto. Now that God would heal the breaches of Zion, and turn to his People a pure lip, that they might all call upon the Name of the Lord, to serve him with one shoulder, Zeph. 3.9. is the hearty desire, and prayer of him, Who owns all Saints in the bond of Love, under what distinction of Form soever. PHIL. TAVERNER. A true Relation of a giddy, confused Discourse, between a Party of them called QUAKERS, and some others, in the Public Meeting-place at West-drayton, in the County of Middlesex; jan. 18. 1657. THE first thing delivered by E. B. and objected against by R. G. Viz. I. That the Scriptures were not the Word of God, because the Devil spoke something, and Pharaoh something, which is there written. A strange kind of Assertion: as if nothing of the mind, will, and counsel of God were declared in the Scriptures; because something which the Devil spoke, and something which Pharaoh, and other wicked men spoke is there related; so much seems to be employed in the reason, as brought to prove the Assertion: yet do I not believe that the person asserting this doth so think, or judge of the Scriptures; for his acknowledgements were more honest in many things granted by him, if his heart, and tongue were agreed in the things, which (in words) he sometimes seemed to own: but whitherto can be the tendency of such giddy Doctrines, then to a weakening the authority of the Scriptures, and begetting in their hearers slighting, and undervaluing thoughts concerning the written Word? if this were not the intention of the speaker, it is well: but that the thing spoken hath such a tendency in it, who but may easily see? Yea, and it is much to be feared that such a rash, and inconsiderate kind of speaking hath brought forth in many an effect of its own likeness, viz. a sitting lose from & lightly esteeming the holy Scriptures, as a low, weak, and useless ministration. To this first thing, Edward Burroughs made reply after this manner. E. B. You lay it not down in my words, and also mistake my meaning. R. G. Whatsoever was your meaning, these were your words, and I have not wronged you a tittle. P. T. The question than is, to which of you two most credit is to be given. R. G. I have not added nor diminshed a tittle concerning his words: and there are others who can bear witness that these were his words, his very words. E. B. I said then, and so I say still; that the Scripture is not the Word of God, but a declaration of the Word: the Scriptures testify of Christ, who is the Word, but are not the Word themselves. P. T. We distinguish between the Essential, and Declarative word of God; we own Christ the former, and the Scriptures the latter. E. B. I say the Scriptures are a Declaration of, but are not the very Word of God. P. T. You do deny them to be the Declarative word of truth? an answer may be easily given, yea, or nay, which we wait to hear. E. B. I pray all take notice; I say, the Scriptures are a Declaration, but not the Word of God: and they are a Declaration of Truth, and falsehood; there is that which is false Declared in them as well as truth; and therefore cannot be the Word of God. For there is something Declared in them which the Devil spoke, and something which Pharaoh, and other wicked men spoke. P. T. The Scripture consists of two parts: An Historical, and a Doctrinal part: The former is a true record of several things spoken, and done by several persons, and upon several occasions; and here we grant that there are some things recorded which are in themselves false: The Pharisees spoke concerning Christ: say we not well thou art a Samaritan and hast a Devil? the thing as spoken by the Pharisees was false & blasphemy against the Son of God: and we also meet with many things left upon record in the Scriptures which the Devil and wicked men spoke falsely: but then we must distinguish between the thing related, and the relation of it; the relation is true, though the thing (as spoken by the Devil and wicked men) is false: the Scripture doth truly relate some things which were falsely seoken: And concerning the Doctrinal part of the Scripture: It is a true record of divine Truth concerning things to be believed, and done, having its rise from the pure Fountain, the Spirit of truth. E. B. We say, and grant the same. P. T. Where then lies the difference? Will. Fisher. (He was one of them called Quakers) we all hear themselves acknowledge the Scriptures a declaration of falsehood, as well as of truth; and how then can this be the word of God? P. T. Friend do not mistake nor go about to pervert my words, I distinguished the Scriptures into an Historical and doctrinal part: And concerning the former I do not say it is a false Declaration, although some things declared therein are false: The Scripture is a true Declaration of whatsoever it Declares, and nothing of falsehood can be charged upon it; it truly Declares those false things, which some wicked ones spoke: the falsehood is theirs who spoke it, not the Scripture that relates it: some of the Devils words which he (upon several accasions) spoke, are there related; but no where (through the whole Scriptures) are any of the Devils Doctrines taught, but every where declared against: and farther, those falsehoods, and blasphemies which the Devil, and many wicked men spoke (which are there recorded are not the greatest part of what is written, but that which is upon occasion) here, and there mentioned, and the mentioning of these things is for our benefit and advantage, that knowing what a one the Devil is we might more carefully watch against his wiles: and take heed of associating ourselves with such who are Children like this their Father, lest they prove a snare to us: And concerning the Doctrinal part of Scripture: you heard me call it; a true record of divine Truth: it is truth both in the declaration, and in the thing declared: and here, I shall add farther. First, That these Scriptures are no other than the language of the Spirit of truth, which spoke in those holy men of God, who were the Penmen thereof. Secondly, It is the same Spirit which dwells and speaks in the Saints now with that which dwelled and spoke in the Saints in former days. Thirdly, The Spirit is so one, and ever the same with itself, that it never contradicts, or speaks things contrary to itself E. B. we grant all this, and say the same. P. T. Then so fare we are one: And from this grant we may add (though it was not then hinted) that what soever Spirit brings any other, or teaches contrary Doctrine to what was preached by Christ, the Prophets, and Apostles (and left upon record in the holy Scriptures, for our learning) is not of God but of the Devil; not the Spirit of Christ, but of delusion (in what garb soever it comes.) E. B. I say no more than what the Scripture itself says, viz. it is a Diclaration of things that were believed, Luke. 1.1. For as much as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a Declaration of those things, which are most surely believed among as: ye see here, it is called a Declaration of things that were believed: this is Scripture language, a Declaration of things which were believed. P. T. You own it a Declaration of things that were believed (in former days) but do you own it a Declaration of things that are to be believed by us, in this our day, things that we are to believe? E. B. Yea, which we are to believe: but still I say, and I pray all take notice: I say, the Scripture is not the Word of God, but a Declaration: the Scripture is but writing; and it is not the writing which is ihe Word, but the thing written of. P. T. Since ye are so shy of calling the Scriptures the word of God, will ye own them the words of God, the words of the Spirit of truth, which spoke in those servants of God, who were the Penmen thereof? nothing was answered directly to this, but a multitude of words heaped up together about a Diclaration of, and the thing written of; of many words but little matter: why they should be so shy of calling them (at least) the words of God, I cannot say, unless they were afraid lest such a grant should have made us too near together: For Christ useth both expressions, John. 5.24. Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, etc. Chap. 8.31. If ye continue in my Word, etc. And in Mark 8.38. whosoever therefore shall be ashamed of me and of my word, before this adulterous, and sinful generation, etc. John 8.47. He that is of God, heareth Gods words: John. 15.7. If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, etc. and john 14.23. where by word, and words, is meant one, and the same thing, viz. That Doctrine of divine and heavenly truth, which was preached by Christ and afterwards by his Apostles, (the Spirit teaching them all things, and bringing all things to their remembrance, whatsoever Christ had said unto them: John. 14.26) this divine, and heavenly Doctrine which was preached by Christ, and his Apostles, and afterwards delivered in writing and left upon record (to this day) in the Scriptures, we call the Word or Words of God. E. B. The thing written of, I call the Word of God, but not the Scripture, which is no other than mere writing. P. T. We distinguish between the writing, and the thing written: it is not the writing as it is mere ink, and paper, but the thing written, which we own the Word of God. W. F. Let us then at last, see wherein we agree, and wherein we differ: we say Christ is the Word of God, so say they; we say the Scriptures are they which testify of Christ, so say they we say the Scripture is a Declaration of things to be believed, so say they: we say the writing is not the word of God, so say they. P. T. We say, that Christ is the essential word, and the Scriptures the Declarative Word of God: not the mere writing, but the thing written: that divine, and heavenly Doctrine which is contained in these writings is the pure word of truth given in by the Spirit unto those who were the Penmen of the Scriptures, and remains unto us (unto this day) a rule in the letter concerning things to be believed, and practised by us. E. B. I say the Scriptures Declare the Word of God, and therefore are not the Word; for that which declares, and that which is Declared, are not one and the same thing, but two. P. T. You have heard the distinction, which is a full answer to this: but do you not grant, that that heavenly Doctrine which is there Declared is truth? E. B. Yea I grant it. P. T. And that those holy men of God who writ the Scriptures, did both speak and write, as they were moved by the holy Spirit. E. B. Yea, I say so also. P. T. And that those things there declared, and given forth in writing, are things to be believed, and practised by us, in these our days, as well as by those in whose generation they were written. E. B. I grant all this. P. T. Then you say (in effect) the same, and no other than what we do; viz. that the Scriptures are the Declarative Word of God; and consequently, the wide difference (as it seems) between us concerning the Scriptures, being the Word of God, is rather in words, and expressions, then in matter, and substance. R. G. What they grant doth not yet satisfy us; for they acknowledge the Scriptures only a Declaration, and deny it to be the Word: but I say further, and will prove it, that the Scriptures are the Word of God. W. F. The letter of the Scriptures? R. G. Yea, the Letter. W. F. Mark that Colonel, (speaking to Colonel Bisco, who was there present) he says, he will prove the letter to be the Word. R. G. I say, the Letter, by a Figure: Before the argument was laid down, one of them called Quakers (whose name I know not) produced that text of the Apostle (2 Cor. 3.6.) calling out to the People, to hearken to the form of wholesome words: who also hath made us able Ministers of the new Testament; not of the Letter, but of the Spirit, for the Letter killeth, but the Spirit giveth life. W. F. The Apostle was a Minister of the word, and Gospel of Christ, and he says, not of the Letter, but of the Spirit: but thou sayest the Letter is the Word of God, and wilt undertake to prove it: wilt thou then contradict the Apostle, and prove him a Minister of the Letter, when himself says; not of the Letter, but of the Spirit? R. G. You wrist the Apostles words; who doth not there speak of, or mean the Letter of the Scriptures; but the difference between the legal and Gospel Ministration. W. F. But thou saidst that thou wouldst prove the Letter of the Scriptures to be the Word of God. R. G. I said, I would prove the Scriptures to be the Word of God, which I am ready to do; but ye are so full of words that ye will hear none but yourselves, nor give me leave to speak. W. F. Well, we will hear thee. R. G. I lay it down in this argument: That which Christ, and his Apostles owned to be the word of God, is indeed, and in-truth, the Word of God, and aught to be so owned by us: But Christ, and his Apostles owned the Scriptures to be the Word of God: Ergo: The assumption, or minor Proposition R. G. proved by two texts of Scripture: the first, concerning Christ's owning the Scriptures to be the Word of God, I do not well remember: but in stead of that, take another, Mark 7.13. Making the word of God of none authority by your tradition, which ye have ordained, etc. The Lord Christ in the former part of the Chap: reproves the hypocrisy of the Pharisees; and tells them, vers. 8. For ye lay aside the Commands of God and observe the traditions of men: The 10th verse makes it evident, that by the Commands of God, which they rejected; Christ means the law given from God to the people of Israel, by the hand of Moses, which was a written Law: and the same which he calls the Commands of God, ver. 8, 9 he calls the word of God, vers. 13. making the word of God of none effect, or of none authority by your traditions, etc. it relates to the Law given by Moses, and more particularly to the fifth Commandment, Honour thy Father, and thy Mother, etc. which was one of the ten, and written by the same hand as the rest were; whence clearly appears, that Christ owned, and called the written Law the Word of God. R. G. And that the Apostles owned the Scriptures to be the Word of God, will appear by comparing that text, 1 Thess. 2.13. with some others: For this cause also we thank God without ceasing; that when ye received the Word of God which ye heard of us; ye received it not as the Word of man but as it is indeed the Word of God. You see in this text, that what the Apostle preached, and these Thessalonians received, was indeed, the word of God: Now that which the Apostle preached was no other, than what had been long before spoken, and written by Moses and the Prophets: For proof of this, ye may consult, Act. 26.22. and 28.23. whence appears, that what was written by Moses, and the Prophets, was owned by the Apostle, as the Word of God. W. F. Thou speakest now of that which is written; but didst undertake, and saidst, thou wouldst prove the Letter of the Scriptures to be the Word of God. P. T. He said, by a Figure. W. F. Thou saidst the Letter. R. G. You cannot conceive (since I speak of a Figure) that my meaning was the mere writing; but by Letter, and Scripture, I meant the thing containing, for the thing contained, the writing for the thing written. E. B. Well, I will answer thee: The Apostle preached the Gospel; and this we grant is the word, and power of God to salvation, unto every one that believeth: the Gospel is the word, and power of God, but not the Scriptures: and it is the Gospel which the Apostle preached, and which the Thessalonians received not as the word of man, but as it was indeed, the word of God: the Gospel is the Word of God, the Scriptures are not. P. T. There is a twofold coming of the Gospel, viz. in word, and secondly in power: 1 Thes. 1.5. and it is the same, the very same Gospel of Christ in the hand of both Ministrations: the same Gospel of Christ when it comes in word, and Letter, as when it comes in Spirit, and Power. Again the Apostle writ the same which he preached; he did not preach one thing, and write another; but the same Gospel, and word of truth which he preached, the same he writ: if that therefore which he preached was not the word of man, but indeed the word of God; then that which he writ was also not the word of man, but truly, & indeed the word of God. Let us here add another text (though not then mentioned) 2 Pet. 1.19. We have also a more sure word of the Prophets, etc. The Apostle Peter calls that which the Prophets spoke, and writ, the Word, (ye will not I hope say the word of man, but) the word of God in the mouth, and writings of the Prophets. E. B. The Scripture is that a man may carry up, and down with him in his hand, or pocket, but so he cannot the word: yea, if the Scripture be the word, than I may say, I have the word of God in my hand (lifting up his Book to the people, that all might see it) than I may say, I have Christ in my hand, and I have the Spirit in my hand, I have Life, and Death, Heaven, and Hell, in my hand, etc. R. G. You have that in your hand which declares all these: these were R. G. words not (as some have said) you have the thing signified; but, you have that which Declares all these. E. B. So I say, this Scripture Declares those things: it is a Declaration of the Word, but is not, itself, the Word. P. T. It is not the Essential word, but the Declarative word of God, wherein the mind, will, and counsel of God concerning us is made known. E. B. The Word was before any Scripture was given; for they were given many years after the creation of the world, and some of them at one time, some at another, but the word was from eternity. P. T. Those Doctrines of divine, and heavenly truth recorded, and delivered to us in the Scriptures, were the things of the Spirit of God, before committed to writing; and remain the same in this day of the Scriptures, and shall be the same when the Scripture, viz. the writing shall be no more: but this doth not (at all) contradict what hath been asserted, viz. that the thing written is this word of God, the mind, will, and counsel of God given forth to us in writing, which we are to own, and follow as a Rule to us in all our ways. E. B. I pray all take notice what I say, The Scriptures are but writing, and therefore cannot be the Word of God; the writing is not the Word, but the thing written of. P. T. You have been sufficiently answered already, but you will receive none; only go your Round in a circle. We do not affirm, that the ABC, etc. or that words of the Scripture, as they consist, and are made up of Letters, and syllables, are the Word of God; but that which is expressed by these: The Spirit makes use of these words consisting of letters, and syllables to speak to us, as we are able to bear, and to understand: and that which is here written, viz the mind, and meaning of the Spirit expressed in these words, in this writing, or Scripture, is that we call, and own the word of God; or the things of the Spirit of God Declared, and given forth to us in writing. The second thing debated was concerning Justification; which took up near two hours' time, wherein I spoke little, by reason I could fully close with neither party: In which discourse words were multiplied, and especially by them called Quakers, who would ofttimes speak two or three successively, giving way to none other: I thing, I may truly say, that I never spent so long time in hearing spiritual things spoken to, with less profit: whatsoever it was to others, it was to me a most wearisome, and unprofitable Discourse; which I shall leave till the last, and then give a brief hint of it. The third thing laid down formerly by E. B. for Doctrine, and now objected against by R. G. was, III. That evil motions not consented to, were not sin. And what plain contradiction is here, to own them evil and yet not sin unless consented to? If evil motions, then are they a deviation from the holy, righteous, and good law of God, and consequently, unrighteousness: and the Apostle tells us, All unrighteousness is sin, 1 john 5.17. Bellarmine lays it down more subtly (for it is one of his Doctrines) when he says, concupiscence is not sin unless consented to: but to grant them evil motions, and yet deny them to be sin till consent be given; who can be so dull sighted as not to see a plain contradiction in such a position? if evil in their own nature, how can they be called otherwise then sin, even before consented to? if neither evil, nor sin, how can consent make them sin? E. B. Thou hast not laid down my words right according to my meaning. R. G. They are the very same words I heard you deliver, without any alteration. W. F. We say, that temptations are not sin, or transgressions, unless consented to. Mr. Hall, of Colbrook in Middlesex: do you speak of temptations from without, or such, which have their rise from within, and out of a man's own heart? E. B. I said then, and say the same now, that temptations unto sin are not sin, without consent: For the Devil tempted Christ, who yet did no sin, because he consented not to the temptation. R. G. You now speak of temptations which are from without, and from the Devil, which we grant are not our sin unless consented to, but our question is (according to what you seemed to own in your discourse) whether evil thoughts, and motions which are from within, and rise out of the heart are not sin, unless consented to? W. F. Dost thou grant no difference between thoughts, and motions. R. G. Those motions to sin, which arise out of a man's own heart, have ever the thoughts going along with them, and whether consented to, or no; Solomon tells us, the thought of folly is sin. E. B. I say, motions to sin are not sin without consent. R. G. Such motions which arise out of a man's own heart. E. B. Yea; Such motions. R. G. And take along with you all your own words, viz. Evil motions arising out of a man's own heart, are not sin, unless consented to: And what is a contradiction if this be not? evil motions, and yet not sin; our consent makes them more sinful, but cannot make them to be sin, if they were not such before. E. B. They are not my sin, although evil in themselves, unless I consent. R. G. whose sin are they then? W. F. They are not his sin, unless he consents: Ye know the Apostles words; It is no more I that do it, but sin that dwells in me, Rom. 7.20. Mr. Hall. Who is that Me in whom sin is found? was it not Paul? and who is that Him in whom sin dwells, is it not Edward Burroughs. W. F. Ye see (according to the Apostle) it is not he that doth it, but sin that dwelleth in him. Mr. Hall. In the Apostle was flesh found as well as spirit, and these two were contrary, maintaining war one against another; the Apostle being the person, or subject in whom were both found. And while E. B. says, it is not I, but sin that dwells in me; Who is the Me in whom sin dwells, but Edward Burroughs (a man in whom is flesh, as well as Spirit) and if he be the subject in whom sin dwells, whose is the sin, but his in whom it dwells? E. B. That which I say concerning evil motions is this: That although they are evil in themselves, yet they are not sin to me; till I consent. P. T. You grant them to be evil, and sin in themselves before consented to. E. B. Yea, I do. P. T. And that these evil motions, which are sin in their own nature, are sin in you, though not yet consented to. E. B. I grant this also: but I say; though they are sin in me, yet they are not sin to me. P. T. If by sin to you; you mean no more than that God will not enter into judgement against his creatures because of these things, nor charge aught of this nature upon them, as to condemnation: we shall easily grant, that God will never impute to, or charge upon his servants (as a severe Judge against them) that which is not allowed by them: that sin shall not be imputed, or charged upon any to their eternal condemnation, which is not consented to, owned, or allowed of by them. E. B. This is the same which I say. P. T. But this of Gods not charging it upon the creature to condemnation, is only out of his own Mercy, and Free Grace; and not, as if the thing were not sin or venial in its own nature: yea, it is acknowledged by yourselves to be (in in self) sin; and sin (in its own nature) deserves death: but yet it is improperly said, that it is not sin to you: for as it is sin in you (which you have granted, so is it sin to you, in two respects: first, In point of defilement, you are defiled by the indwelling of this sin in you; and in this regard it is sin to you. And secondly, As it is a just matter of reproof that which God doth reprove, and will (in his good time) fully destroy in his people: but while it abides, and dwells in them; it defiles, and is that which comes under reproof; and in these regards, sin to them. The fourth thing objected against E. B. was; iv That Perfection is attainable in this Life. E. B. Thou didst not take my meaning aright. R. G. I heard your words, and understood by your discourse, that you owned perfection a state attainable in this life. E. B. I said, that the Saints were to press on toward perfection. R. G. It is granted the duty of all to press forward to what is before; not ceasing, or giving over till perfection comes: but still (while in this life) there remains imperfection in those, who have attained highest; and that of full perfection is to be looked for hereafter, a State yet to come. E. B. The Scripture speaks (in many places) of some that were perfect, while in this life; and this we are to press after. P. T. There is a twofold perfection: First, In point of freedom from sin; secondly, in point of spiritual attainments: The former is such a state of freedom, and deliverance from sin, that there remains not so much as the indwellings of any sin in us, not so much as a thought, motion, or the least inclination to the least sin: The latter is such a state when the soul is so filled with the light of the glory of God shining in upon it, that we cannot say, we want; yea, that we are not capable of receiving, or desiring more: and we deny either of these a state attainable in this life. E. B. I do not say, that there is such a perfection in this life, which admits of no addition. P. T. Then (possibly) the difference may not be so great between you, as it was thought to be. And indeed this grant, with what was yielded in the former discourse, of sin dwelling in us, might have ended the difference, and brought over both parts to a joining issue; but that he was not faithful to his own confessions; sometimes granting, and at another times falling off again, and going about to prove the contrary to his own grants, which he did (most of all) in this business. E. B. It is not a thing impossible to attain perfection in this life, yea, there have been some, who have attained it. P. T. We do not question concerning the power of God, whether it be possible to him (to whom nothing is impossible) to work such a work in us, and for us (even here, and in this life) but whether, according to God's ordinary way of dispensations, it be a state that ever hath been, or shall be actually attained, and come up to while we abide in these houses of clay; this, I suppose is the question between us; and is that which we deny. E. B. There have been those that were perfect: we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, 1 Cor. 2.5. and let us therefore as many as be perfect, be thus mined: Phil. 3.15. Ye see the Apostle plainly owns it concerning some they were perfect; and he speaks of men in this life. P. T. The word perfect, sometimes signifies no more than sincere, and upright-hearted: thus it is taken in divers places of Scripture, Gen. 6.9. Job. 1.8. with several others. 2. It is sometimes taken for grown men, who are called perfect, as being attained higher than others, though not yet come to the state of full perfection: in this sense, it is used, Heb. 5.14. and 1 Cor. 14.20. we find mention of a threefold estate, viz. Children, young men, and Fathers, 1 john 2.13. which relates to a threefold stature in Christ, the one higher than the other: there are persons of a lower, and a higher form in Christ; the young men higher than the Children; and the Father's higher than the young men, and yet not come up to the highest; for they are growing men still, pressing forward to what is before. And the same who are called Fathers, in this Epistle of john, are by the Apostle Paul called perfect, in the two texts formerly mentioned: that is, Fathers in Christ, or men of higher attainments, and of a greater growth, both in knowledge, and in grace, than babes in Christ: these are said to be perfect in comparison of others, who are lower, and inferior to them; yet were not these come up to the highest; for the Apostle, who was one of these perfect men, acknowledges himself in the same Chap. not to have already attained, or to be already perfect; but he reached forth, and pressed forward to what was before. And yet farther, we grant perfection in every Saint, even in this life. Every degree of true, and spiritual light, every manifestation of divine, and heavenly glory in the Saints is perfection in its own nature: but the highest hereof is no more than somewhat of perfection dwelling in imperfect creatures; not such a degree of perfection which swallows up all imperfection. E. B. I will prove that the Saints may, yea, do live, and not sin; which is no more than what the Scripture affirms: He that doth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous, 1 john 3.7. R. G. He that doth righteousness is righteous, as he (viz. Christ) is righteous, in likeness, but not in measure: Christ was perfectly righteous, and without sin; but the most righteous among the sons of men have yet imperfection, and sin in them. W. F. Harken to the form of wholesome words: Blessed are the undefiled in the way, who walk in the law of the Lord: blessed are they, that keep his testimonies, and that seek him with the whole heart; they also do no iniquity, they walk in his ways, Psal. 119.1, 2, 3. they do no iniquity; therefore perfect, and do not commit sin. R. G. They do no iniquity allowedly, as owning, and approving the ways of unrighteousness; they follow not the course of the wicked, who commit all uncleanness with greediness; nor lie in wickedness as the rest of the world; yet are they not perfect without sin, but find ofttimes cause to complain with the Apostle, what I would, that I do not, but what I hate that do I, Rom. 7.15. E. B. That there have been such who were perfect without sin; appears from that testimony, which Christ gave of Nathaniel: Behold a true Isrealite, in whom is no guile, john 1.47. in whom is no guile, therefore a man in whom was no sin. R. G. It will not follow, that he was wholly without sin, because a man in whom was no guile: These words of Christ prove him to be no hypocrite, but a plain upright hearted Isrealite, yet do not grant him a perfect man without all sin. E. B. It is said, in whom is no guile, and if no guile were found in him, than he was perfect. P. T. He was perfect with that perfection, which is called sincerity, and upright-heartedness; but not perfect according to that twofold perfection (in either part of it) which we spoke of in the beginning. And here one of the company attempting to prove, that Nathaniel sinned after this, accounting him one of that number spoken of, Mat. 26.56. Then all the Disciples forsook him, and fled: W. F. asked, if Nathaniel were one of the twelve: it was answered, in haste, yea, one of the twelve, and although presently corrected, by saying, he was one of the Disciples, and followers of Christ: yet here W. F. catched at that word, one of the twelve, made a great stir about this slip of the tongue; saying, Thou hast been reasoning and standing out all this day, against God, and his truth, and God hath now left thee to thyself to show thy own nakedness, with more of the like sort; clearly manifesting to what I was able to judge, a great Spirit of selfishness, and bewraying much imperfection while he contended for perfection. P. T. You will make a man an offender for a word, while yourselves are found in the same guilt; who affirm that it was meant of the twelve, when it is said, than all the Disciples forsook him, and fled: whereas Judas (one of the twelve) had before this forsaken, and gone away from Christ, being now one of those, who came with that great multitude to take him: so that there were but eleven, of whom it is said, than all the Disciples, (viz. the eleven that were with him) forsook him, and fled: and so this proof came to nothing, though, I believe, it is more than they can prove, that there were no more than merely the eleven with Christ, at that time, when he was taken, by those that came along with Judas: but I will trouble the reader no farther with this. E. B. We read of a hundred forty, and four thousand, who stood with the Lamb upon mount Zion: Rev. 14.1. and of these it is said ver. 5. In their mouth was found no guile, for they were without fault before the throne of God: If without fault, then perfect, and without sin. R. G. These were without guile, as not being hypocrites, but sincere, and upright-hearted towards God; and their perfection (as to a being faultless before the throne of God) is to be understood in point of Justification not Sanctification; all truly believing in Christ are perfectly Justified, though not perfectly Sanctified in this life. E. B. I will prove it yet further from that of the Apostle, As he is, so are we in this world, 1 john 4.17. If as Christ is, so are we; who then can deny, but we are perfect without sin, for so was Christ. P. T. Shall this Text decide the Controversy; at , will you hear some other speak beside yourself? E. B. I will yet add a further proof, from that 1 John 3.9. He that is born of God sinneth not: What can be spoken more plain? P. T. Have you yet done, that I may have leave (at last) to speak a word? E. B. We will hear thee. P. T. I shall then begin with your last Text; He that is born of God sinneth not: we find in the same Chapt. vers. 8. He that commits sin is of the Devil; and between these two is a wide difference. 1. He that is born of God sinneth not after the same rate, as those, who are of the Devil; he chooses not the way of sin, nor yields up himself a servant to unrighteousness: There is a Law in his members rebelling, yet can say with the Apostle, I delight in the Law of God after the inward man, Rom. 7.22. His falls are weakness, not wilfulness; which is true of every Christian, while he is, (as we may say) truly himself, and not under a temptation: David (in the matter of Vriah) ran very far, yea, sinned presumtuously, and wilfully, and with premeditation; but it was (at this time) an hour of darkness upon him; he was now under temptation, and therefore acts not like a child of God, as at other times: A Christian while under a cloud of temptation, is not indeed himself, neither can we (at such a time) judge of him, or his estate. 2. He sins not that sin, which is unto death, (spoken of Chap. 5.16.) Christ calls it blasphemy against the holy Spirit, which shall never have forgiveness, Mark 3.29. He that is born of God sinneth not this sin; but as the Apostle speaks, vers. 18. He that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not. 3. Which I conceive is more directly the meaning of the Apostle in this Text; He that is born of God sinneth not: that is, so far as born of God; that which is born of God, or the new creature in him doth not sin; so far as he is acted by the pure principle of light and life in him, the Spirit of truth received, he doth not commit sin: the Spirit leads forth to nothing, but what is righteous and good; the flesh to nothing but what is evil and sinful, Rom. 7.17, 18. To your former Text; As he is, (viz. Christ) so are we in this world. I answer, it cannot be understood in the full latitude of it; that as Christ is, so are we. For 1. He is God over all, blessed for ever; so are not we: 2. He (Christ Jesus) hath performed the office of a Mediator between God and Man; For there is one God, and one Mediator between God and Man, the Man Christ jesus, 1 Tim. 2.5. He is the Mediator, so are not we: ye will not grant every man his own Mediator, and consequently, so many persons reconciled to God, so many Mediators; when the Apostle says, there is one God, and one Mediator; yet but one. 3. He is risen from the dead, ascended into heaven, and sat down at the right hand of the Father in glory; so are not we: Yet in some other respects, as he is, so are we: but then we must distinguish between the truth of the thing, and its manner; for things that are like, are not like altogether, and in all respects: for instance, 1. He is the Son of God, so are we; true in respect of the thing, but not in respect of the manner: Christ the Son of God by nature, and eternal generation; we the Sons and Daughters of God, by the grace of Adoption. 2. In respect of holiness, and Sanctification; as he is, so are we: true in respect of the thing, but not in respect of the manner; Christ was holy from his conception, and originally; but so are not we: we are sanctified in time; he was perfectly just, and holy, without any blemish of sin; so are not we; for there still remains some indwellings of sin in us. 3. In respect of those spiritual, and heavenly virtues which shined forth in him; being meek and lowly, humble and selfdenying, patiented towards all, and overcoming evil with good, etc. as he is, so are we; true in respect of the things themselves, but not in respect of the manner or measure: Every true Member of Christ, doth bear the image and likeness of Christ their Head; the same spiritual virtues, and true excellencies shine forth, both in the Head and Members; but with this difference, 1. What was and is in the Head originally, is found in the Members, only as dependants upon Christ their Head. 2. What was in the Head to the height of perfection, is found in the Members, but to some degree. 3. What was in the Head, without any contrary thereto; is found in the Members, but with some contrary to it in the same subject; they are not perfectly light, there is darkness as well as light; flesh as well as spirit in the Saints, Rom. 7.25. So then, with my mind, I myself serve the Law of God; but with the flesh the Law of Sin. The last thing asserted by E. B. and objected against by R. G. was, That the Scriptures were given to the World, not to the Saints. E. B. I do not remember, that I spoke it in these words. R. G. I well remember your words, and have neither added, nor deminished a tittle. E. B. I was speaking to those words; Search the Scriptures, etc. John 5.39. and said, that this Scripture was not given to the Saints, but to the World, at least to the unbelieving jews. P. T. If this Scripture was given (as you say) to the World, and Unbelievers only; then consequently all other Scriptures were given to the World, and not to the Saints; for this, Search the Scriptures, etc. relates to, and implies in it all other Scriptures. E. B. All the Scriptures were not then written. P. T. I mean it of such Scriptures, as were then extant; for this Text cannot be conceived as speaking of that which yet was not; those Scriptures which were written after: but all Scriptures written aforetime, (viz. the Law of Moses, the Psalms, and the Prophets, etc.) are implied in this; and if this were given (as you say) to the Unbelieving World, and not to the Saints; then consequently, none of those Scriptures which this relates to, were given to the Saints, but to the World; which I think, you will be hardly able to make good. W. F. Thou speakest more unreasonably in this, than thou hast all the day before. P. T. I speak directly to your Friends words, who expresses himself; Search ye the Scriptures: which if it be a Command, and this Command reaches no further, than to the Unbelieving World; to whom shall we conceive these Scriptures (in the judgement of your Friend) to be given, which this Text relates to? It is indeed clear, that these words were spoken directly to the Unbelieving Jews; and are rather to be read, ye do search the Scriptures, for in them ye think to have eternal life, and these are they which testify of me: which words are rather a reprehension, and reproof to the Jews to whom they are spoke; I say a reproof, not that they did search the Scriptures, (for this is a commendable practice, and every Christian man's duty, Acts 17.11.) but that while they searched the Scriptures, they still neglected him of whom the Scripture spoke; they searched the Scriptures, but did not believe in him (Christ Jesus the Messiah promised) of whom Moses and the Prophets, had written; and whom the Scriptures did testify of: For they testify of me, and ye will not come to me, verse. 40. But now if you will have this a Command, and affirm, that this Scripture was given to the Unbelieving World; what follows? but to those that are commanded, and whose duty it is to search into the Scriptures, are they given, yea, to these only are they given: therefore if the Unbelieving World are only commanded to search the Scriptures; can they be conceived to be given to any other: and thus he plainly owns (though he would seem to deny it) that the Scriptures were given to the World, not to the Saints. I am of an easy belief, that E. B. when he mentioned that text of john 5.29. Search ye the Scriptures: or, ye do search the Scriptures; (which may be read either way) meant no other, but these words (when spoken by Christ) were spoken to the unbelieving Jews, which is true; but than it will not follow, that these words which were (at first) spoken to Unbelievers, were written afterwards (the holy Spirit moving holy men of God to this work) for their sakes only to whom they were spoken; and consequently that this Scripture was given only to Unbelievers, (viz. the Unbelieving Jews) which were his very words, if he hath not forgotten himself. For first, what are recorded in Scripture, as things directed to some particular persons, when spoken, were not written only for their sakes to whom spoken; but according to that, Psal. 102.17. These things shall be written for generations to come, etc. 2. What was formerly spoken of, or spoken to Unbelievers particularly, and afterwards committed to writing (the holy Spirit moving hereunto) was not written merely for such in future generations to whom they were (at first) spoken, (viz. Unbelievers,) but for all sorts of persons to whom this Scripture should come, 1 Cor. 10.11. Yet thirdly, whatsoever was written by those servants of God, who were the Penmen of the holy Scripture, was written chief, (though not only) for the sake and benefit of the Saints to the World's end; for their learning (in chief) was the Scripture given, Rom. 15.4. and therefore that giddy Assertion (which is affirmed to have dropped from E. Burroughs mouth, (viz. That the Scriptures are given to the World, not to the Saints) hath no footing to bear up itself upon. E. B. I grant the Epistles were given to the Saints. P. T. It is well you grant it, though I do not see how you should deny it; and not only the Epistles, but all other the holy Scriptures (as the Apostle calls them, 2 Tim. 3.15. were given to the Saints. No more was spoken to this, for the night grew on; and I think hardly any but were sufficiently wearied with a confused and unprofitable Discourse: The company beginning to break up, E. B. pretended a charge against R. G. concerning something which he had preached (either a year, or years ago) in Bedfordshire; but the people not caring to hear him any longer, he forbore to speak farther as to that, and turned his discourse to his own Proselytes. How far E. B. owns the authority of the Scriptures of the New-Testament, doth not clearly appear; and whether he denies the Scriptures of the Old-Testament, as being of no use to the Saints, I am not able to say; but if this should be in his, or in the heart of any of his followers; let that of the Apostle be consulted with, (if the Scriptures, which himself in so many words owned to be given to the Saints, may be for satisfaction) Rom. 15.4. For whatsoever things were written aforetime, were written for our learning, etc. Things written aforetime, relate to the Scriptures of the Old-Testament, to those things written in the Books of Moses, the Prophets, and the Psalms, etc. and of these the Apostle affirms, they were written for our learning; which relates not to the World, but to the Saints; for the Apostle puts himself in the number of those, for whose sake (in chief) these things were written. The Apostle indeed tells us, 1 Cor. 24.22. wherefore Tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not; but the same Apostle affirms the Scripture to be given, chief, for the sake of the Saints, and such who do believe, in the text formerly mentioned. There were some of the Company jealous of these men, lest they might be Jesuits; but I speak freely my thoughts, I do not believe any such thing concerning either of them; W. F. (though a man of subtlety enough to make him one of that Fraternity, which he discovered abundantly more in a former meeting, (as I was informed from some there present) then in this, yet was known to some of the Company from whence he came; and how he hath turned from one thing to another, till he came (at last) to this Sect of Quakers. And for E. B. I do not apprehend him to be a man of such parts, and of that measure of subtlety, which is ordinarily found among the men of that Brotherhood; unless he had more than an ordinary art of hiding himself under a garb of pretended simplicity; so that for my part, I do not judge or believe any such thing concerning either of them; though I fear too many such Deceivers are crept in among us, shrouding themselves under several Forms, where they can find most shelter; and of these, more who are Jesuits in Principles, than Jesuits in Orders; I apply it not to these, I hope better things of them. The second thing, (which was concerning Justification) I passed over (in its proper place) but shall now give a brief hint of it, in the close of this relation: It was very large, (with multiplicity of words on their part called Quakers) but as confused, and unprofitable a discourse as ever I heard: The thing delivered for Doctrine by E. B. and objected against by R. G. was, II. That no man is further Justified, than he is Sanctified. E. B. Thou hast mistaken my words, as laid down by me. R. G. These were the very words you expressed, and no alteration. E. B. I said, that Sanctification was an evidence of Justification; and that no man could any further know himself to be justified, than as he was sanctified. R. G. You spoke nothing of an Evidence, or of a man's knowing his Justification by his Sanctification; but confounded both together throughout your Discourse: and having first laid it down as your Assertion; That no man is Justified, further than he is Sanctified; you had also (not long after) these words, viz. no man is justified further than he is restored. E. B. I say, that whosoever is justified, is restored from a state of ignorance and death, into a state of light and life; and sanctified in the whole man, that he may live to God. P. T. Justification and Sanctification are never separate, as to the subject Justified; but whom God justifies, the same he sanctifies; yet are these two distinguished in their nature. E. B. I grant, that these are never divided; but he that is justified, is sanctified; and he who is sanctified is justified, R. G. Though not divided or separate, when we speak of the person justified; but the same who is justified is also sanctified; yet are they distinguished in their proper natures; and we may not confound them together: but let us know what you own the cause of Justification. E. B. The Freegrace of God. R. G. That is the primary efficient: but I query concerning the Meritorious cause; or whether we are justified by that righteousness which Christ wrought out for us in his own person, or by the work of righteousness which he works in us by his Spirit. E. B. Justification is only by Jesus Christ. Upon this, an ancient man of the company (whose name I knew not) desired to hear from E. B. what he believed concerning Christ; for I have (saith he) read somewhat in a Book of yours, concerning what you believe; but that not giving full satisfaction as to what, and how far you own Christ, (the Mediator between God and Man,) I would willingly be further satisfied (at this time) from your own mouth; and this happily might give some further light concerning what you own in this point. E. B. I believe that Christ was born of a Virgin; and that both in his birth and life, he was without sin; that he was crucified at Jerusalem, and risen again from the dead, etc. He fully acknowledged the History of Christ's life and death; but concerning the end of Christ's dying, he spoke little, if any thing at all: I do not remember that his long confession had any thing of that acknowledgement in it; Who was delivered for our offences, and raised again for our Justification, Rom. 4.25. and yet (probable) he may own it; I believe he doth. R. G. This is nothing to the purpose; you have not yet granted Christ's Righteousness a cause of Justification. E. B. I say, that we are not justified by our own, but by the Righteousness of Christ. P. T. Christ fulfilled all Righteousness in his own person. E. B. I grant that. P. T. And Christ works a work of Righteousness in our hearts by his Spirit. E. B. Yea, he doth. P. T. And which of these do you mean, when you say, we are Justified by the Righteousness of Christ? E. B. These are but one and the same. P. T. How can this be? is that Righteousness which Christ wrought out in his own person, and which he works in us by his Spirit, the same individual Righteousness? E. B. None are justified by Christ but those who receive Christ; and those who receive Christ, in them is his righteousness fulfilled. P. T. Christ's rignteousness, which he wrought in his own person did consist, and was made up of several acts of conformity to the law; these acts were all transient, and are passed, and gone may hundred years since: The fruit indeed, and benefit of whatsoever Christ did, and suffered, redounds to us who believe; but can that which was his personal righteousness, which was performed by and in his own person, so many years ago, be found in us? this is impossible. E. B. I will answer thee for that; Christ works the same righteousness in us by his Spirit; whereby we come to bear the image and likeness of Christ; and this I call not our own but Christ's righteousness. R. G. What Christ works in us by his Spirit is our Sanctification; and you will not grant any difference between Justification, and Sanctification, but confound them together. W. F. Dost thou own a Justification by Christ secluded from the new birth, and the work of sanctification. R. G. I own them as two, and distinct in their nature, yet seclude not Sanctification from Justification as to the person justified, they go always together, W. F. God doth not justify persons remaining, and continuing in sin, he justifies from sin, not in sin. R. G. God justifies none in their evil and sinful practices; he doth not justify them that they should continue in sin; but that being freed from sin, they might become servants of rigteousness. W. F. Doth Christ justify men, while sinners? R. G. Christ justifies sinners as sinners; I mean, that every person, till the act of Gods justifying pass upon him is a sinner in himself, Rom. 4.5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifyeth the ungodly, etc. P. T. It would not be amiss, if they would give a definition of Justification. W. F. We will, if ye will have the patience to hear us. Upon this, a third man of their company made a large discourse concerning the person justified; and that every justified person was also sanctified, but came not (at all) to the thing itself. R. G. You have given a large description of the justified person; but have said nothing to the thing itself, nor given any definition of Justification, what it is. W. F. If they like not ours, let themselves give a definition. A reasonable motion this was, but such confusion arose among the people (many tongues going together) that no return was (at present) made: one of the company owning (I think) neither party, told them, they were both in the truth, and of the same mind, if themselves knew whereabout they were; and not long after, the same person (in midst of this vain jangling, for it deserves no better name) said; ye stand here peck, peck, and to no purpose; ye are all a company of Novices; for had there been any thing of the wisdom, and power of God in either of you, one side would have silenced the other before this: truly a home reproof to both parties though spoke after a rude manner; For there was little other than a confused multitude of words. Mr. Hall. After a long discourse, let us (at last) understand what you own, and where you are; do you acknowledge that Christ wrought out a righteousness for us in his own person? E. B. I do. Mr. Hall. And that he works a righteousness in our hearts, (who believe) by his Spirit? E. B. I grant this. Mr. Hall. And both these concur, and go together for making up our Justification? E. B. Yea, that is the thing I hold; it is that I own. Mr. Hall. And that is it, which we deny. After this E. B. Went on (according to his manner) with a large discourse concerning the persons Justified; and that they are perfectly righteous, and blameless before the throne of God, with much of the like nature. R. G. Justification is an act of God's grace obsolving, and acqiting the sinner (believing in Christ) from guilt and condemnation, through the redemption that is in Christ; and Sanctification is that work of grace brought forth by the spirit in the heart: Concerning the former, we grant that all believing in Christ, are complete in point of Justification, but not in point of Sanctification: they are completely justified, but not perfectly sanctified. W. F. Thou sayest that all are completely Justified. R. G. Yea, all believing in Christ. W. F. Are they so complete that they can never sin again after their being justified? R. G. They are perfectly justified, and shall never come into condemnation; but are not yet so perfectly sanctified, as to be free from all indwelings of sin in them; there are remainders of the flesh in the most upright; and in many things they sin; but from that word they may yet encourage their hearts; If any man sin, we have an Advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous, etc. john 2.1. W. F. If they are complete; then all their sins are pardoned. R. G. Yea, all the sins of them that believe in Christ are pardoned, and shall be no more remembered against them. W. F. Are they justified from all sins past, present, and to come? R. G. As to an eternal Justification with God, I grant it; but not in respect of actual Justification in their own persons, which is given forth only in time. W. F. An eternal Justification; then persons are Justified before they are; and their sin pardoned before committed. R. G. In reference to the decree of God they are, 2 Tim. 1.9. and also, in reference to the price paid, for Christ was the Lamb slain from the beginning of the world. W. F. went on making a great stir about the word complete; and thou saidst, we are completely justified. R. G. I said, and will prove, that all believing in Christ are completely Justified; Rom. 8.33.34: Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's Elect? it is God that justifieth; who shall comdemne? it is Christ that is dead, yea, rather risen again; etc. Those to whose charge nothing can be laid are completely Justified: and you see clearly, that the Apostle owns it concerning the elect (or all who believe in Christ) there is none can lay any thing to their charge. E. B. Christ hath fulfilled all righteousness in his own person, and he works a perfect righteousness in those who receive and believe in him whereby they stand faultless, and without spot before God. R. G. Now you clearly own Justification by inherent righteousness, and agree fully with your lelf in your former assertion; that no man is justified farther than sanctified. E. B. Inherent righteousness is no Scripture term, and we desire, ye would keep to the form of wholesome words. R. G. It is clearly employed, (if not expressed) in the Scriptures; and is not a term of any difficult understanding. E. B. Ye are Scholars, and read books; we are men brought up at the Plow-tayle, and understand not scholarly terms. P. T. My Friend (this was a digression, and the whole was little other:) There are three books which I read in chief, (and I think, I may speak the same for others) The book of the Scriptures: The book of my own heart, and experience; thirdly, The book of Christian observation; And I have observed, this day, on both sides, much of selfishness, and this mixed with some degree of passion; there are few (if any) can say I am free; some discovering it in words, others in carriages. E. B. Did (after this) multiply many words, concerning our own works being weak, and imperfect; but the work of Christ perfect, and glorious; and that we are not Justified by our own works of righteousness, but by the work of righteousness which Christ works for us. R. G. You hold Justification to be by those works of rigteousness which Christ works in us; directly contrary to what the Apostle affirms, viz. That we are justified by faith, not by works. E. B. I utterly deny all our own works and righteousness, in the matter of Justification. R. G. The Apostle denies all works according to the Law whatsoever, Rom. 3.28. Therefore we conclude, that a man is justified by Faith, without the Works of the Law. W. F. Dost thou deny all Works in point of Justification? R. G. We are Justified by Faith without the Works of the Law. W. F. Thou sayest we are justified by Faith, and yet deniest all Works in the matter of Justification; is not Faith a Work? R. G. Faith Justifies only instrumentally; it is not the meritorious, but the instrumental cause of our Justification: neither doth it Justify instrumentally, as our work, or a work wrought in us by the Spirit, but with respect to its object Christ. And let me here add a word or two, (not then spoken.) 1. Justification by Grace, by Christ, by Faith, is all one and the same Justification; unto which all these concur as several causes respectively. 2. We must distinguish between the merit or proper debt of Works; and the bare performance of something called in the Scripture by the name of a work: The former, the Scripture every where denies in the point of Justification; but concerning the latter, the performance of something called, and owned in the Scripture under the name of a work, it doth not deny; yea, it expressly calls Faith a work, John 6.29. and this is required unto Justification. 3. Faith hath a hand in this business of Justification, no otherwise, than instrumentally. 4. Faith doth not Justify instrumentally by virtue of any inherent worth, or excellency in itself, (more than in Love or any other fruit of the Spirit) but by virtue of divine Institution, as God hath appointed it to serve for this end, John 6.40. W. F. I shall prove, and according to Scripture; that we are justified not by Faith only, but by Works also; And it may be, if I read the words out of the Scripture, ye will have the more patience to hear me. And reading certain verses in the latter part of the second Chapter of James, he with much carefulness, notes that in vers. 24. Ye see then, how that by works a man is justified and not by Faith only: having read to the end, he than carries on his Discourse. Ye see they are the very words of the Apostle, and I hope, ye will not deny them; we speak no other than according to the form of wholesome words; that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only; (but thou sayest by faith only) and to prove this truth, the Apostle (ye all see) brings too eminent examples; the one of Abraham, the other of Rahab: what can be spoken more plainly, and proved more strongly, that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only? so was Abraham, so was Rahab justified; and so are we justified (at this day) by works and not by faith only: By works, not our own works according to the Law, but the work of God in us; our own works which we ourselves have wrought, or do work, are weak and imperfect, but the works of God in us, are all perfect and glorious, yea meritorious; we are not justified by aught ourselves have done, or can do; all our own work of righteousness is worthless and imperfect, but the works of God in us are of infinite virtue and worth. Mr. Hall. Will you own that the works of righteousness, which are wrought in us by the Spirit are meritorous? W. F. I say, it is a perfect, and a glorious work, which God works in us. P. T. And you said meritorious: no farther reply was made to this; it was (it may be) no more than a slip of the tongue, I judge it no worse. R. G. The Apostle, in this latter part of the Chap. dealing with some who turned grace into wantonness, and boasted of their faith without works; endeavours to convince such of their great mistake, and proves that true faith is never separated from works of righteousness; For though faith alone justifies; yet that faith which is alone doth not justify; true faith being ever fruitful, and working by love. W. F. The Apostle speaks plain; Was not Abraham our father justified by works? ver. 21. likewise also, was not Rahab the harlot justified by works? ver. 25. P. T. The Apostle speaks of the Justification of our faith before men, not the Justification of our persons before God, fruitfulness in works of righteousness is a proof of a true faith; & the Apostles design in this latter part of the Chap. is to show the difference between a true, and a counterfeit; a dead, & a living faith. W. F. The Apostle affirms, that both Abraham, and Rahab the harlot were justified through works. R. G. I shall make it appear from Scripture that Ahraham was justified by faith before his going about to offer up his son Isaac, which is that eniment work the Apostle here makes mention of. W. F. And was Rahab the harlot Justified before her righteous work of receiving the messengers, and sending them out another way? R. G. I speak of Abraham; and in the same way, that Abraham was justified, was Rahab justified also, viz. by faith which was declared by works. And concerning Abraham; it is said, Gen. 15.6. He believed in the Lord, and it was counted to him for righteousness: Here is Abraham's Justification by faith clearly asserted, and owned by the Apostle, in opposion to Justification by works according to the law, Rom. 4.2.3. And this was, before Abraham had ever a Child, which will clearly appear, if you consult the Scriptures: So that Abraham was justified by faith before he went to offer up his son Isaac; he was before that act of obedience, a justified person; therefore not justified hereby, but only declared to be a true believer; his faith was hereby clearly manifest; and no more can be drawn from this of the Apostle James, if we do seriously weigh ver. 18, 19, 20. and compare what follows with these going before. And here ended this confused dispute about Justification; in which point it is feared by some, that those, called Quakers, if all of the same mind with E. B. and. W. F. have a Pope in their belly; if so, I hearty wish the Lord would show them their error, recover their feet out of the snare, and deliver them from the delusion. I have (since this Dispute) met with a Book, called, A Standard lift up for all People; The Author, this E. B. there are three passages, which I took notice of in it, relating to JUSTIFICATION. I. PAge 3. Chap. 1. towards the end of the Chapter it is said, God Justifieth the Righteous, and condemneth the Wicked. If by justifying be meant Gods owning, approving and accepting the Righteous; and that the same God doth not accept, but disown the Wicked in their wickedness; then is it a Truth of the same stamp with that, Psal. 5.4, 5. But if by justifying be meant that of absolving, and acquitting from guilt and condemnation, which is that the Apostle so often calls Justification; how will it agree with that in Rom. 4.5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, etc. II. Page 11. Chap. 8. It is the new man that is justified, not the old. If by justifying be meant (as before) God owning and accepting with delight; so it is true, God accepts, owns and delights in nothing, but the new Creature in us; for what is after the will of the flesh, or the old man in us, is the object of his loathing, and shall be destroyed. But if by justifying be meant (in the second sense) an acquitting and absolving the sinner from guilt and condemnation; then how can the new man (which never sinned) be said to be justified (vix. from sin?) or to be acquitted from guilt and condemnation which it was never under? III. Page 11. Chap. 8. lin. 3. And such as are taught by Christ, and guided by him in all the ways of Truth and Righteousness, are justified by him, and none else: not in any word or work whatsoever, but in what they are led to fulfil by him. What strange contradiction in the two last clauses, as if what they are led to fulfil by him were not a work? And here again; If by being justified in what they are led to fulfil by Christ, be only meant a being accepted and owned of God in the thing done: It is granted, that God accepts of nothing from us, but what is the work of his own Spirit, and Grace in us: but if by being justified in what they are led to fulfil by him, be meant, that Justification which himself calls (lin. 11. of this Chapter) A being cleared from condemnation in the sight of God: What could the Pope himself have spoken more plain for effecting Justification by inherent Righteousness, or the work of the Law wrought in us? For what can that clause (in what they are led to fulfil by him) relate to, but a conformity to the righteous, holy, and good Law of God? And if this be our Justification, to what purpose was the death of Christ? For a perfect conformity to the Law of God in our own persons, though not wrought in our own strength, but in the strength and power of Grace, the Spirit working all in us, and for us, is no other than the Righteousness of the Law: And (as to this Point) ye cannot be ignorant of what the Apostle saith, If Righteousness be by the Law, than Christ died in vain, Gal. 2.21. Several other Passages I have taken notice of in in this Book, some contradictory, others dark and doubtful, as to what is the Authors aim in them. PAge 4. Chap. 2. And this Christ Jesus the Son of God is the light and life of the World, and hath enlightened all mankind; every one that cometh into the world is lighted by him with the true light of life, or condemnation: And page 22. Christ Jesus the second Adam lighteth every man, and all mankind that cometh into the World with the true light. How do these agree with that Page 25. Chap. 19 Man's state in the first Adam in transgression is a state of perfect enmity against God; and Death reigns in every man; and he is possessed with blindness, ignorance and unbelief, & c? I say, how do these agree? unless there be granted a general restauration of all men, which yet you seem to deny in Page 10. Chap. 6. where you acknowledge some to be in a state unreconciled to God, and having no part nor portion in these things which belong to their peace. Page 10. lin. 1. Many profess them in words, what others enjoy of these things, but have not felt in themselves the working of the eternal Spirit, neither have the witness in themselves of being restored again. From this latter clause a twofold question ariseth, for your words speak not forth your meaning clearly. 1. Whether none are restored again, but those that have the witness in themselves. Or secondly, Whether all are restored, but some want the witness of this in themselves? which you mean is doubtful. Page 10. Chap. 7. in the three last lines: This Religion and Worship stands in Christ Jesus the second Adam, who hath lighted every man that comes into the World, that all men through him might believe, etc. Hence this question ariseth: Whether that light, which is in all and every particular man is sufficient (without any thing farther of special grace superadded) to bring up every man to believe in Christ unto salvation; or to believe in God by means of Christ, 1 Pet. 1.20. Pag. 5. Chap. 3. This is the testimony of the Spirit of God, and it leadeth into all truth, and out of all evil, all that are guided by it; and it is given to be the guide, and rule of life to the Children of God. Whence this question (for in these things he speaks darkly, and doubtfully.) Whether the Spirit is so given to be the guide, and rule of life to the Saints, that they have no more need to attend upon the Scriptures. Chap. 19 After many other things, it follows pag. 28. towards the end; And the light of Christ in every one shall give testimony to it; unto which I do only commend myself, and these truths to be witnessed. Can these be witnesses to you, and of the truth in you, who are (as you say Pag. 6. Chap. 4.) ignorant of the life, power, and wisdom of the Creator, to lead, guide, and preserve them, following the counsel of their own heart, which is evil altogether, etc. or, can such judge between light, and darkness, between truth, and falsehood; who are possessed with blindness, igorance, and unbelief; and wholly imperfect to receive the things of God's kingdom, or to act any thing for God acceptable to him; pag. 25. Chap. 19 Pag. 17. Chap. 13. It is truly said; That the word of God was in the heart, and mouth of the servant of God, and that from it, they spoke forth the Scriptures: and then follows, As they were moved by the holy ghost through the eternal Spirit. Do you make the Holy Ghost, and eternal Spirit two? or what do you mean by Holy Ghost? it is, indeed a usual word among us (though there be little to bear up the use of it, more than long custom) but by Holy Ghost, we mean the holy, and eternal Spirit: what you mean wants an interpreter to find out, and make known, who seem to make them two, because you say, by the holy Ghost through the eternal Spirit. Pag. 10. Chap. 7. This is true religion etc. where is given forth the same description of true Religion for substance, with that of the Apostle, James 1.26.27. and towards the end of the page, it is said; This is acceptable, and well pleasing to God above all words, and outward conformity, and set times, and days, and observances, etc. This is subscribed to as honest, and true; and yet may a snake lie in this grass; The question therefore offers itself, viz. Whether a doing the greater things of the law is acceptable, where the less are neglected? when it is said, I will have merry, & not sacrifice (or mercy rather than sacrifice, which is the meaning) God did not so require mercy, as wholly to take off from Sacrifice; only hereby is declared, that God prefers that before this; which is true unto this day; God requires to speak the truth, and do the truth in all things; to do unto all men, as a man would be done unto; to love God with all our heart, and our neighbour as ourselves, etc. But hence will not follow an abolition of all institute Worship, consisting in the use of such Ordinances which Christ hath appointed, and which were in use among the Saints in the primitive times: God indeed, prefers the former before this, but still requires us to mind, according to that of Christ: These things ye ought to have done, and not to leave the other undone. FINIS.