The Principal Controversies BETWEEN The Litteral Presbyters of the Kirk of Scotland, and the Illuminated Members of the Church of Christ, CALLED QUAKERS.  
Truly Collected, Stated and Opened, in a particular Reply (herein specified) for general Information and undeceiving the deceived.  
By an earnest Contend for the most Holy Faith, which was once delivered to the Saints. G. W.  1 Tim. 6.20. 
Avoiding profane and vain babbling and oppositions of science, falsely so called.  2 Pet. 2.12. 
But these as natural bruit Beasts,— speak evil of the things they understand not, etc. Vers. 13. Sporting themselves with their own deceive. Vers. 14. Having Eyes full of Adultery, and that cannot cease from sin.—  
Printed in the Year, 1672.   

A Brief Introduction.  
Reader,  
HErein is asserted the real sufficiency of Divine Illumination and Inspiration, together with the Doctrine of the Saints Perfection in Christ, and his Universal Light and Grace to Mankind; and thereby the real Use and End of the Holy Scriptures made known, and the precious Truths therein Owned and Vindicated, from the gross Errors, Perversions, Absurdities, Reproaches, manifest Confusions and Contradictions of some Rigid Presbyters of Scotland, to whom this Tract contains a brief Reply (in many short Paragraphs) which was thus occasioned. Viz.  
Some of the Presbyterian Priests or Teachers in Scotland, having some years ago writ a great bundle against us, the People of God, called Quakers, in a way of slighting and deriding some things of Truth, which above ten years ago I wrote, in Answer to a Paper (containing a pretended Answer to 26 Queries of Geo. Fox's, Junior) with some Queries written by one Edw. Jamison, in whose Name, (with two more) the said bundle, against us, was conveyed in Manuscript to divers hands (as a pretended Answer to mine) which providentially after a long time was brought to my hands about four years ago, which then I perused, and collected the principal Heads and Passages in it, both of Doctrine, seeming Argumentation, and their Objections, which I have here inserted, in their own very words (as I have their Book in Manuscript to evince) and I wrote a Reply to each particular, for the clearing the Truth, and to manifest his and their abuse thereof; and their gross perversion of the holy Scriptures, together with their self Contradictions, which are very apparent and easy to be seen by any unbiased: And not only their weakness and defection appears, but their enmity, against the Doctrine of Perfection (both as it relates to the truly Sanctified, and to their Faith and graces, which these Presbyters accuse, not only with Imperfection, but with Sin) Their darkness against the Light of Christ within; Their cruel partiality against the free extent of Saving Grace; their sinful unbelief against the Sufficiency of the Holy Spirits teaching; their gross ignorance and scorn against Divine Inspiration, and Immediate Teaching in these days; their carnal mindedness (for their Traditional Ordinances of men) against the Spiritual Dispensation of the Gospel, and New Covenant (wherein the Antitype of all, even the enduring substance, and heavenly things themselves are enjoyed by the clear sighted Children of the day, beyond and above all Types, Shadows, and outward Representations or Memento's whatsoever.) These and the like things are spoken to in my following Reply; A Copy whereof was sent into Scotland, for those concerned, soon after it was written; whereof (as I am informed) Edw. Jamison had a Copy; but since I had no further Answer nor Reply from him.  
And now, since some of our Friends in Scotland considering that there would be a service in making the following Reply more Public, and knowing that the said Edw. Jamison with divers more of his Brethren are of contentious and boasting spirits, and yet seem not ready or willing to take notice of such things as pinch them, while not made Public (as in this Case) divers of our Friends in Scotland have hereupon desired the Printing and Publishing of this my Reply; And, in Answer to their Requests, I have given them my first Copy thereof to divulge, desiring that all who Read it, may weigh the things therein contained, and that they eye and have regard to that Light of the Son of God in their Consciences, which manifests those things that are reprovable, and is able to endue the Creature with a Right Judgement, between those things that are of God, and those things that differ; and so to try all things, and hold fast that which is Good.  
London, the 22th day of the 6th. Mon. 1672. From a Real Friend to all who desire to know the Way of Life and Peace. George Whitehead.   

THE PRINCIPAL CONTROVERSIES BETWEEN The Litteral Professors of the Kirk of Scotland, and the Illuminated Members of the Church of Christ, called Quakers, etc.  
Here are the Doctrines and Principles of some of the Presbyterian Priests of Scotland; Collected out of a great Bundle in Manuscript; Subscribed, Edw. Jamison, with other two Names on the outside, viz. Oswald Harland, Edward Orde; Together with the Heads of many of his corrupt Reasons and perverse Arguments against the Truth and Scriptures, which are here detected, and the People of God, called Quakers, vindicated from his and their Aspersions, Calumnies and false Accusations therein.  The Priest. 
YOU Have renounced Learning as Antichristian.  Answer. 
That's false. For, not Learning in itself simply considered, do we renounce, but the absurd and corrupt Idolatrous Use of it, by men of corrupt minds, who have not Learned of Christ, but in their Antichristian Spirit deny his Immediate Teachings.  Priest, 
Absurd arguings against clear and abundant Scripture-Proofes, which have been held forth by far more able than I am. Therefore, that my Answers have not Converted you, is not to me either Strange or a Disappointment.  Answer. 
False again; I argue not against clear Scripture, etc. but against thy abusing and perverting of it, as will yet further appear; and much unprofitable labour thou mightest have spared and forborn; whilst thy end was not to convert us, what was it for, to insult and boast over us? And yet art far short of some that have dealt with us, if we were conquered and confuted before, hadst thou a mind to show thy valour over us, thou hast miss of this end also.  Priest, 
I have born witness to the Truth against your way.  Answ. 
Thou hast born witness to his work who is the Father of Lies, against the Truth, as will further appear to the shame of thee and thy confederates.  Priest, 
There can hardly be brought any absurdity grosser for defence of your Cause, than itself, etc.  Answ. 
Then it was gross and absurd in thee to make, raise and forge, so many absurdityes upon our Cause as thou hast done; though they be very groundless, light, frothy and frivolous, as in this sequel will appear; and become more obvious to the impartial spectators.  Priest, 
The Light, the Spirit, Kingdom within, are taken in a dangerous unsound sense (by Quakers) in an enthusiastic sense as communicate without Scripture.  Answ. 
It's both dangerous and unsound in thee and thy fellows, to oppose the Light and Spirits immediate teachings, and Kingdom within; which both teacheth sufficiently and opens the Scriptures, and leads into all Truth; and to Scoff at the true sence-hereof, though under the term Enthusiastic, or Enthusiasm (however ironically and reproachfully rendered by you) which if that be dangerous and unfound, then is divinely inspired unsound. Is this good Doctrine? For, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in quo Deus est, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Deus divine, inspired; Enthusiasmus, an Inspiration, it is the inspiration of the Almighty that gives understanding. Is this dangerous? No; unless to the Priests to discover their ignorance. And is not the Light, Spirit, Kingdom within, communicated before the Scriptures are truly understood and opened? What darkness and error hast thou here employed and signified? And doth not the Light and Spirit, bring to the right use and end of the Scriptures which was given by inspiration?  Priest, 
There is no man free from sin in this life, etc. Christ doth not totally subdue it in this life. For that place, 1 Joh. 3 of Christ's being manifest to destroy the works of the devil; if ye take it so, may as well prove that Satan shall not tempt a Child of God.  A●sw. 
This plainly enough shows thy confusion, and ignorance of Christ's manifestation and work; and of his Virtue and Blood; which destroys the devil's works, cleanseth from all sin, thoroughly purgeth them that believe and follow him.  
Secondly, Thy Inference is gross and absurd: To charge all with sin whom Satan Tempts; or to make his Tempting Gods Children, a reason of their not having ●n totally subdued; for Christ was Tempted, yet sinned not; for the Prince of darkness found nothing in him. And, he that abids in him, sins not. And we being made free from sin, and become the Servants of God, we have our fruit unto holiness. Was not this the good end of Christ's coming? What says Antichrist, Satan and his Agents and Sophisters to it?  Priest, 
Neither doth these Scriptures (1 Joh. 3.6. Whoever is born of God sinneth not. Or that ver. 9 He that abids in him commits not sin, and chap. 5.18. The evil one toucheth him not) prove any thing, etc.  
Do they not prove any thing? Sad Doctrine. Is this divulged in the Kirk of Scotland? Thus to oppose, not only Christ's work, but the words of plain Scripture, and say they do not prove any thing; when as they (Viz. 1 Joh. 3.6, 9 chap. 5.18.) prove that, Whoever is born of God sinneth not. He that abids in Christ sins not. The evil one toucheth him not. Doth this prove nothing? Doth not this equally reflect upon Christ's Apostles as well as us? And implicitly say, they should have been silent, and not so have pleaded Christ's manifestation, and the state of him that's born of God, against Sin, Antichrist, and Decievers; whereas they John wrote to were plainly cautioned, not to be decieved; For he that doth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous.  Priest, 
It's not the words of Scripture picked out which explain the sense, etc. This is nothing but a silly and gross cavilling, to insist upon bare words contrary to their sense.  Answ. 
Must we then go to the Priests for their sense, contrary to plain Scripture, where 'tis neither parable nor allegory, who pick out, and reject plain Scripture according to their own private imaginations and conceptions; and yet other while in contradiction to themselves, tell us the Scripture is the Rule; Life is to be had in it, and not communicated without it; but yet such Scriptures as apparently contradict their gross and Antichristian Principles, they can throw by and reject as proving nothing, as this corrupt minded man hath.  Priest, 
By this way a man may prove the grossest blasphemies, as the Polythrites saying, there are many Gods from, 1 Cor. 8.5. yet in the next verse, there is but one God, etc.  Answ. 
First, Not by our use of the Scriptures, both from ma● right mind and for a good end, namely, against sin.  
Secondly, And if in the next verse after, He that is born of God sinneth not, thou hadst proved that he doth Sin in that he is Tempted; thou hadst said something to thy business of accusing all God's Children with Sin term of life, but herein the Scriptures own thee not.  Priest, 
That 1 Joh. 3.6, 9 is to be understood in a limited sense, namely; that they do not continue in Sin wilfully and with delight, without repentance.  Answ. 
That's not john's sense but thine, which is as much as to say, his was not true; for do they continue in Sin, and yet Sin not? This is a contradiction, or do t●ey continue in it and still repent of it? Where's then the fruits and effects of true repentance? Or is there not a time of confessing, repenting, and time of forsaking Sin? And casting off every weight and burden, and of being cleansed from all unrighteousness.  Priest, 
They do not commit Sin with full consent, without controlling of the motions: The evil one toucheth them not to entangle them in such a way of sinning, etc.  Answ. 
As much as to say, they do commit Sin, and the evil one doth touch them, but th●y Sin not with full consent; which is all one as to say, John did not say true, when he said, Whoever is born of God sinneth not. The wicked one toucheth him not, etc. he commits not Sin; but we have ground to believe him before Satan's Messengers, who thus have contended and disputed for his work.  Priest, 
He is an Advocate for our Sins, is meant of the Sins present and to come.  Answ. 
Not that Sin should always remain in believers, but that they should be called and delivered out of it, and become God's Righteousness in him.  Priest, 
His saying, (if we Sin) implieth as much as (when we Sin.)  Answ. 
Is this thy Learning thou hast boasted of? Thus to pervert Scripture, and the very plain sense of words, as to make [if we Sin] as positive or absolute as, [when we Sin] so [if] in other cases may as well be taken for [when] as if we say, we have not sinned, we make him a liar, is as much as when we say, we have not sinned, etc. what an absurdity would this imply against the Apostles, according to thy sense of him; who but one impudent would not be ashamed thus grossly to abuse the Scriptures? Which else where thou seemest to lay such great stress upon.  Priest, 
We know in part, is an imperfect degree of knowledge, and so sinful.  Answ. 
As this intends the Apostle, it's a false and erroneous conclusion, it's ne●ther true morrally nor spiritually, degrees vary not the property of the thing, their knowledge they had by degrees was God's gift to them, and was spiritual from above, an effect of Life and Truth; which to say is sinful, so accuseth the cause of it which is blasphemous; and if the Apostles knowledge was sinful because in part, than what were their Epistles, Preaching, Testimonies, etc. which proceeded from (or were effects of) their knowledge they had of God: Were they sinful? If not, the cause and ground thereof could not be sinful, therefore away with such sinful stuff and false conclusions upon the Apostles as thou hast uttered. For the Wisdom which is from above, is pure, but yours is from beneath which is corrupt and sinful.  Priest, 
It's false absurdity put upon our Doctrine, that we by it strengthen the hands of wickedness. For,  Answ. 
Your bad fruits and those that follow you, who have learned from your corrupt Doctrines to plead and contend for Sin, both from the Pulpits to the Alehouses, Taverns and Playhouses, do manifest you guilty herein; and we not to have wronged you in saying, you have strengthened the hands of wickedness by your sinful Doctrine, and many of you by your corrupt Lives also.  Priest, 
For we teach that believers should be daily (by the strength of the Spirit) fight against the flesh.  Answ. 
That's but a cover, what encouragement give you them to fight against it, when you deny they shall ever overcome and be freed here.  Priest, 
Paul and Barnabas sinned, either both or one of them, in that sharp contention.  Answ. 
Not all their Life time, that contention held not so long as thy (and your) pleading for sin.  Priest, 
Who strengtheneth then the hands of wickedness? Whether you, who teach a believer may not only Sin, but fall away from Truth, Grace, etc. Or we who teach that we do sin; but that we cannot thereby fall wholly from Faith, from Grace, from God, etc.  Answ. 
Not we but you: We exhort to diligence and watchfulness, to keep the Faith, to make their Calling and Election sure, that they may never fall, as the Apostles did; and warn such as are not come to that growth, lest they fall and draw back to perdition, which tends to beget into more fear, watchfulness and circumspection, and not into a false security, ease and liberty, as your Doctrine doth, which is for Sin term of Life; and yet tell people they shall not thereby fall away from Grace, etc.  Priest, 
Dare any of you say, there is never any vain thoughts, etc. in Prayer, or anger against those that injure you? If you dare say so, your Light within is but mere darkness, etc.  Answ. 
The Controversy is not about our attainment, and for us to affirm what we have in that case would not decide it; but we do affirm, that state is attainable, through Faith in the power of God which purifies the heart; and our Light is not darkness, and the thoughts of the just are right; and you that are in your vain thoughts and having anger when you Pray; How do you fulfil God's Command, and the Apostles Doctrine? To hold up holy hands without wrath and doubting, Do not you offer up a cain's sacrifice herein? And is not your Light (or that which you put for Light) darkness?  Priest, 
There is need even for a David to say, cleanse me from my secret sins.  Answ. 
Not all his Life time, for than he received not an answer to his ●rayer, but h● testifies otherwise; That God heard his Prayer, and granted his requests; and commended the state of the undefiled in the way, who do no iniquity, etc. but to argue that because he prayed to be cleansed from his secret sins, and therefore was not clean so long as he lived (is all one to say) therefore God heard him not; which is gross and absurd.  Priest, 
The Commands of God are of use to a believer, that cannot fulfil them in his Graces; namely to convince him of sin, that he may be driven to lay hold on Christ for imputed Righteousness, for further supply of his Grace, etc.  Answ. 
The intent of God's Commands, were that they might be obeyed and fulfilled, through that grace and ability God gives for that end, and not to be broken and transgressed; for unbeleivers (yea the world) many times are convinced of Sin by the Spirit; so thou hast grossly wronged the beleivers, in representing their state here but as a convinced state, which many who are unconverted are come to; whereas they to whom God imputeth Righteousness (and not Sin) their Sin is covered, and in their Spirits is no gui●e, Psal. 32.1, 2. see thy error and confusion.  Priest, 
For Perfect Righteousness [Inherent] there is no promises to this sense, in all the Scriptures to any beleiver.  Answ. 
The work of God and his Righteousness (or Image which man was made in) is Perfect, and this Christ comes to restore into again, and God hath promised and made known him for this end. And I will wash them from all their filthiness, saith the Lord, etc. The word Inherent is not mine, but obtruded upon me from a false intent.  Priest, 
There are promises of a growth unto Believers, and of a fullness; but this is to be meant of such as is consistent with some defects and a body of Sin.  Answ. 
A growth and a fullness, and yet denies Perfection, and so the Apostles Doctrine, Eph. 4. A growth and a fullness consistent with a body of Sin: Is this the Principle and Faith of the Kirk of Scotland? Surely here's darkness to be felt, Who can raise an absurdiy and confusion from this, grosser than itself? Do●h not this growth and fullness consist by Christ and in him? If so; By whom consists Sin and its body? Do they consist together? Or is not the body of Sin put off, where the Circumcision of Christ is experienced?  Priest, 
Zecharias, his walking in all the Commands and Ordinances of God blameless: This Perfection was consisting with misbelief, Luke. 1.6, 20.  Answ. 
(A gross error again) his blamelesness was in his walking in all the Commands of God, but his mis-belief was after, and was reproved or blamed by the Angel; for he was smitten for it: But thy Doctrine tells us quite contrary, as much as mis-belief is blameless, because blamlesness consists with it as thou implyest; But this is like much more.  Priest, 
David, Job, Daniel, their failings are noted, which I might cite if I did not study brevity.  Answ. 
So are their deliverances noted, and if thou wert not partial, and of a wrong Spirit thou wouldst note them. How hast thou studied brevity, to stuff up near 10 sheets of paper with quarrelling and cavilling against us, in reply to so little as was writ to thee?  Priest, 
How shall they believe without a Preacher; Gods ordinary appointed Way for begeting Faith is by Preaching, and not by immediate teaching alone without Preaching.  Answ. 
God's appointed Way for begeting Faith is the Word of Faith, which is nigh in the heart, which the Apostles Preached; and the inward teaching of the Spirit, without which there is no true and effectual Preaching, which directs and brings to the Word: Christ the Word, is the Author of Faith, whom God hath appointed for Salvation; and he teaches both immediately and instrumentally; both inwardly and through Preaching openly, he is not limited, yet no Preaching is truly effectual without him who is the chief Teacher. For,  Priest, 
It might have been answered by one of your opinion; 2. Paul, your question is idle and vain, for most men believe without a Preacher; they shall believe the Light within teaching them.  Answ. 
If they cannot Preach except they be sent, than who must send them and give them power for that work but Christ?  
Secondly, Neither do we so accuse Paul's question with being idle, nor say that most men believe without a Preacher; especially if they believe the Light within teaching them; for that is Christ's Light who is the true Teacher, which brings to the substance of true Preaching and Teaching, which proceeds from the Light within.  Priest, 
The Scriptures Preached, or the things contained in them is the ordinary way of begeting Faith.  Answ. 
The things contained in them, seems a little to mend thy matter; which things contained, were before the Scriptures or Writings were, and extend farther; for some had and performed the things contained in the Law, which had not the Law (Viz. outward) and many in this day can testify, that the Spirit and Light within, hath manifested within, many things contained in Scripture before they read them outwardly there.  Priest, 
The whole council of God Paul showeth forth, Act. 20.27. yet no other things than those which Moses and the Prophets did say (the Scriptures) Act. 26.22.  Answ. 
All Paul's Preaching or his whole council from God, is no● Recorded there, but little in comparison of what he P●eached Recorded; he continued his Speech or Preaching till midnight, ver. 7. and talked even till break of day: Where is this Sermon Recorded? Many Scriptures and Books were writ by the holy men, which we have not in the Bible; were it not gross and false therefore to exclude them as no part of the council of God?  Priest, 
Is not that another Gospel, that all the world over are taught Christ and his Gospel?  Answ. 
It is not our Gospel, therefore unjustly charged against us; for not all the world over are taught, or are learned Christ and his Gospel, though all have a Light from him sufficient to teach.  Priest, 
In the use of Scriptures we are to expect he will beget Faith, by his inward Teachings and Workings on the heart.  Answ. 
the matter is somewhat mended, in confessing to his inward Teaching and Working on the heart, but in that it seems to be tied up or limited to the use of the Scriptures, this denies the sufficiency and extent of the Spirits inward Teaching, which many have who cannot read nor use Scriptures; and those who having not the Law, were a Law to themselves, and showed the works of the Law written in their hearts, etc. though the Scriptures of Truth, in their place we must needs own, in that Spirit that gave them forth; but whereas otherwhiles Preaching is made the cause but now the Scriptures; this is to make the Scriptures and Preaching all one, and ●hen people may spare their money they give to Priests for Preaching, and giving their Interpretations to the Scriptures, and only read them with expectation of Christ's inward teaching and working on the heart; which indeed ought to be inwardly and Spiritually expected and waited for.  Priest, 
He bid them search the Scriptures, for in them they thought to have eternal life; and they testified of him, Joh. 5.39. this thought could not be a delusion.  Ans 
If this thought of their having Eternal Life in the Scriptures was not a delusion, than they had Eternal L●fe according to their thought; but Christ testifies the contrary against ●hem in the following words saying, Ye will not come unto me, that ye might have life; so to affirm they had it in the Scriptures, is to affirm they had Christ in the Scriptures, and that their searching them was their coming to Christ, which is both contrary to their state and opposite to Christ's own words of them; that they would not come unto him that they might have Life: And this contradicts thy former, and much of thy stuff about Scriptures.  Priest, 
●f the searching and believing the Testimony of Christ given by the Scriptures, be not really to find Eternal Life but an error, etc. (such a thought as we blind Priests have) than Christ would have told them of that error, and bid them look for Life by following the Light within.  Answ. 
Believing the Testimony of Christ and searching the Scriptures, are to things, and the belief of which Testimony, comes not barely by s●a●ching them, for if it did; then all that searched them had that belief, and so Life, etc. which is contrary to the truth of what is apparent concerning many, and to Christ's own words of them, they thought to have Eternal Life in the Scriptures, and yet had neither heard the voice of God at any time, nor seen his shape, they not believing him whom he sent; nor would come to Christ that they might have Life.  Priest, 
The Fathers, before the Scriptures were written, had the things contained in them by Revelations, audable Voices, Visions, Dreams, etc. not by the Light within, your Enthusiastic Fancy.  Answ. 
Yes, It was by the Light within that they had the knowledge of those, and had Revelations, Prophecies, etc. For the Word of Prophecy was a Light to them; and the inspiration of the Almighty gave them understanding, when God spoke in a dream or vision of the night, etc. and God hath promised, to pour down his Spirit upon all flesh, that sons and daughters may prophesy, young men may see visions, etc. Joel 2. was this a fancy? Or to be mocked at as thou hast done? (Your Enthusiastic Fancy thou saist) what gross error and ignorance hast thou herein showed.  Priest, 
That Christ will now beget Faith, without the Scriptures Preached or known, it were as good an inference to say; because, that by faith in Jesus Christ to come in the flesh, the Fathers under the old Testament were saved, therefore though one should not believe that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, yea, though he should deny he is come he may be sav●d if he believe he is to come.  Answ. 
An unequal parallel, and false inference (and abuse against us) to compare the Scriptures with Christ's coming in the flesh, or to bring them in competition therewith; and how did the Fathers know he was to come, but by the Light or Spirit of Prophecy within? And how did the Saints truly and effectually know he was come, but by the understanding and Eternal Life he had given them? From whence Scriptures were given, and from whence they spoke and wrote.  Priest, 
1. You deny the main end of Scriptures, which is, that we by believing what is written of Christ. 2. In them may have Eternal Life, Joh. 20. 3. That we may find Eternal Life by searching, they testify of him.  Answ. 
Nay, the main end of Scriptures we cannot deny, whilst we own and testify to that Spirit which gave them forth; and to him whom they testify of, to wit Christ, by whom they are to be fulfilled unto the true believer, that reads them in a right mind and Spirit.  
Secondly, But where having Life in them (Viz. in the Scriptures) is laid down as following believing? This is an error depending upon the former, and a contradiction to the Scripture that saith, That believing ye might have Life through his name; he doth not say, in the Scriptures, nor by searching them, but through his name of whom they testify, and those to whom these things were written, that they might believe that Jesus is the Christ, etc. and have Life through his name. They were in some measure prepared (by the Spirit or Light of Christ already manifested) to receive those things which tended to the furtherance of their Faith, and confirmation of their Belief concerning Christ, that they might have life through his name.  Pr, 
Whoso holdeth this, denieth them really and interpretatively.  Answ. 
Is this thy proof of thy false accusation against us of denying the Scriptures, that we deny them interpretatively; so than our denying the Priest's Interpretations upon Scripture which are not Scripture, must be deemed a denial of Scriptures, as if they were either the same or of equal authority with Scripture; or when they tell us of finding Life in the Scriptures, we must take it for granted, that they mean in their Interpretations upon them, whereby in many things they contradict plain Scripture as hath been proved any times; so however, when they bid People search the Scriptures for Life Eternal (in them) they intent they should take their meanings along with them, and believe as they say, and so people must run into an implicit Faith, if they take things on their Authority and Credit; for by their meanings and Interpretations, they can sit as Judges over Scriptures (and tell people they must give the sense, and reconcile them) and over the Light and Spirit within, and tell them its but an Enthusiastic Fancy; but who are not so Ign●ble as to receive a Belief or Faith from them on such a dark, implicit and slender account as this of Priests? But wait in the Light of Christ within, for a right understanding of things that are Spiritual, relating to Faith and Salvation: Such find they have cause from the certain demonstration and testimony of the Spirit of Truth within, to believe Christ's Light and Spirit rather than the Priests meanings, and private Interpretations, wrest and perverting of Scriptures.  Priest, 
It is not about the expression of the Word of God that debate should be kept up, if in a sound sense granted, that they are called the Words of God.  Answ. 
So, Then the Scriptures are granted to be words of God, why then hold'st thou debate against us, but to show thy cavilling Spirit? For the Word was that, from whence words and Scriptures proceeded; and came to the Prophets and Messengers of God before they spoke the words to Write them.  Priest, 
Ye deny that Faith cometh by hearing of the Scriptures which is the Word of God; for that we receiving them by Faith are saved; which is plainly asserted, Joh. 5.39.  Answ. 
We deny that Faith comes barely by hearing the Scriptures, for if it did so come, than all that hear or read Scriptures must have Faith, and hear the Word, but we see the contrary; and Christ told the Jews they could not understand what he said because they could not hear his words, and yet they could hear Scriptures, and him speak outwardly to them: But this is a mystery hid from such as thou art; and there were those whom the Word Preached did not profit, b●cause it was not mixed with Faith in them.  Priest, 
Yourselves acknowledge that they are the words of God, than this or that particular saying is the Word of God; seeing there is a singular where there is a plural.  Answ. 
But Singular and Plural differs, and though there be a Singular included where there is a Plural, is it therefore good Logic to say that Singular includes Plural, or they are both one? Or to sa●, that because there are Words of God in the Scriptures, and where there are words in the Plural, there must needs be a word in the Singular; therefore these words are the Word and so are the Scriptures? Is this thy Learning and Logic? Surely thou art so far from knowing the Word which lives for ever, and was before either the Scriptures or words in it were given out, that thou art yet as one senseless and confounded in thy expressions, and cavilling against ●ruth.  Priest, 
The Scriptures in the Bible are called the Word of God, Mark. 7.13.  Answ. 
This is a very general expression of the Scriptures in the Bible being the Word of God, when they do not say so of themselves, whereas all the Scriptures in the Bible are so far from terming themselves the Word of God, in such an eminent expression, that they cannot all be truly termed his Words, there being in many places Recorded both words of Wicked men and Devils; though the Historical part that relates these things be true, as to the narration of them: And they, Mark. 7.13. that made the word of God of none effect by their Tradition, and rejected his Commandment, did really act contrary to the Word within, which Moses preached, and against the Law of God without, so that's no proof of the Scriptures in the Bible being called the Word.  Priest, 
That which maketh wise to Salvation, or maketh the man of God perfect, etc. is inspired of God, that is the Word of God which maketh wise, profiteth, 2 Tim. 3.15.  Answ. 
Here again hast thou fallen short of proof of thy matter, for where it is said, All Scripture is given by Inspiration of God, etc. [Is] is added: So it's, All Scripture given by inspiration: But if that must be called the Word of God in thy sense, than it may be read, All the Word of God is given by Inspiration of God: How will that sound and signify? Or, All the Word of God given by inspiration of God, etc. See thy ignorance and impertinency▪ for though we grant that all Scripture given by Divine Inspiration is profitable to the man of God; for the making Wise to Salvation, but it is through Faith, which words [through Faith] I find the● to have taken little notice of [if any] or of his being the man of God first, that knows the profit of the Scriptures which are given by Inspiration, that he may be Perfect, which the Priests deny in denying Perfection, and that he may be thoroughly furnished: And many things were written, and directed to the Saints and not to the world, etc. But what thou concludest from hence doth not follow.  Priest, 
Is there any Prophecy almost, or Book of the Scripture, but it calleth the things contained in them the Word of God. Thus saith the Lord, etc.  Answ. 
For, as was hinted, there are many things written in the Scripture, that can neither properly be called the Word, nor are they words of God, as what the Serpent said to Eve, Pharaoh to Moses, false Priests and Prophets, in the true Prophet's days, many things, and accusations which the Jews said to Christ, Were these the Word of God? Mayest thou not here see thy error and confusion?  Priest, 
There is nothing so much commendeth the necessity of the knowledge of Scriptures and Learning, as the horrid detestable absurdityes which men unlearned, etc. wresting Scriptures to their own perdition; however they revile Study of Scriptures and Learning.  Answ. 
There is nothing more discommendeth things, and the Priest's Way of Learning and Studying the Scriptures, as your perverting and abusing them for your own ends and turns, and the P●iest making a Trade of them by their Learning; and must people depend upon the fruits of your Study and Learning to know the Scriptures? And yet other whiles they must expect to find Eternal Life in the Scriptures, to be made Wise unto Salvation by them; What contradiction's here? But if the Scripture given by Divine Inspiration, be profitable to the man of God, and by the same Inspiration be understood, and make Wise to Salvation through Faith; and that the Spirit of Truth lead into all Truth, then we'll not be beholding to thee and such as thou art, for your Learning and Study, who deny the immediate Teaching of the Spirit, and so are but still unlearnd as to the things of God: And why dost thou vilify us as unlearned, and make a flourish as if thou art some Eminent Learned man? This shows thy Shallowness, Pride and Conceitedness, And were not Peter and John unlearned men, and so accounted by the Learned among the Jews? Yet were full of the holy Ghost and learned by it: Wouldst thou and thy Companions limmit the Gift of God, or a right understanding of Scriptures, to your natural drossy Learning and imaginary Study? O! The Lord hath raised up and brought to light that Life and Spirit, which has brought many to see thorough you and your corrupt Learning, and Babylonish stuff.  
And whereas thou dost vilify and jeer upon these words, Viz. That the word which the Bereans received with all readiness of mind, and the Scriptures which they searched are two things, and sayest, I purposely pass by that which follows Viz. Whether these things were so?  Answ. 
Are they not mentioned distinctly as two? The Word they received, etc. the Scriptures they searched to see whether these things were so. Now there was more in Preaching then bare words or Scripture, For their gospel came not in word only; but in Spirit and in Power, which when that had touched their hearts, and they had received a sense of the Spirit and Life which the Apostles were Ministers of; this prepared them for a further understanding, of things and matters relateing to the Testimony of Truth and of the Scriptures, when they searched them in that weak state wherein they were at first receipt of Truth, for a further or additional confirmation of their understanding of things declared upon Scripture account touching Christ; but if according to thy sense, the Word which they received with all readiness of mind, and the Scriptures▪ which they searched, to see whether these things were so, were but one thing; then, Is it good Doctrine to say, that when they received the Word with all readiness of mind, they searched the Word to see if those things in it were true, or to try the truth of them? How then was it received with all readiness of mind? Or was it the Scripture which they received with all readiness of mind, and th●n when they so received them, searched them to see whether those things where so? (Is this thy excellent Logic?) If so, than thy Doctrine runs thus; They received the Scriptrues with all readiness of mind, and they searched the Scriptures to see whether the Scriptures were so, or for proof that the Scriptures were true, they must search the Scriptures to prove them true by themselves; Will this be admitted of as excellent Logic in your Schools, to prove an assertion by the same assertion, and to beg the question in controversy? If so, then in all points asserted and disputed of, it is so because it is so, will serve for proof.  Priest, 
The Word you say is one, How can it be called those things?  Answ. 
If the Word which I say is one, cannot be called those things, th●n it proves what I said before, that the Word and Scriptures are two things, and that their receiving the Word with all readiness of mind was inward, but the Scriptures are outward, which they searched after they received the Word.  Priest, 
Are the things written in the Scriptures, and the Scriptures two things? What excellent Logic is this?  Answ. 
If they be not two things, and yet the Word (which is but one) and those things contained in them be two things, How are the Scriptures the Word, seeing the Word and those things are two? Yet here again thou showest very little Learning as professed by thee; for the Writing and the things written of, are two things as well as Scriptures, and the things contained in them, for there is the thing containing, and the things contained, according to the distinction of (them and) some of yourselves.  Priest, 
Or ye must take the Scriptures in the abstract, for the written Characters as distinguished from the things that are writ, so nothing can be either searched or found in a number of Characters.  Answ. 
I know of none that appear so ridiculous as to search them merely as a number of Characters, so abstract to prove things or matters, but to search them for those things or declarations contained in them which appear to the eye of the understanding, and not to the outward eye in the bare Characters; and yet (Scriptures) signify (Writings)  Priest, 
Whereas ye ask whether I think none hath Faith, so none shall be saved but those that hear the Scriptures by the outward ear or can read them? What God may do, or doth in an extraordinary is not the question; for his absolute Soveranity in his dispensations of Grace is not tied, &c,  Answ. 
Then God and his dispensations of Grace are not limited or tied as many other times thou, and others of you seem to tie up all now to Scripture for Life Eternal, for Faith, etc. other while to your Interpretations, Learning and the fruits of your study; but the way to God and Salvation is Christ, And no man comes un●o the Father but by him; nor none comes to the Son, but by the Father's drawings, which are known in the Spirit and Light, by which we have access to God.  Priest, 
The Scriptures search the thoughts as an Instrument, and Christ is the principal searcher.  Answ. 
That's Christ or the Word of God which is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart, that searches the heart; And it's the Lord God of hosts that telleth unto man what his thoughts are, and searcheth the heart, who both can and doth sp●ak what he pleaseth, both of things declared in Scriptures and without them, as he sees meet to the particular states of men and persons; and so to lay so much upon Scriptures which belongs to God and Christ, and is properly their Work is unsound: And Wh●re provest thou the Scriptures search the thoughts? And wher● say they so of themselves, when they do not speak and direct to any particular Person and show him his thoughts and actions particularly, which the Light doth? And the Spirit of Truth reproves and convinceth of the several evils whereof persons are guilty. It's the Lord that sets their sins in order before them.  Priest, 
It is false, That any have a sincere supernatural Faith of the Scriptures that are ignorant of Christ, etc. They testify of him.  Answ. 
So then they must have some knowledge of Christ, and from thence have a supernatural Faith of the Scriptures: But how doth this agree with much more of thy work, about searching the Scriptures for Life Eternal in them for begetting Faith etc.  Priest, 
The foundation of the Saints and household of God, are the Phrophets and Apostles, Jesus Christ being the chief cornerstone, Eph. 2.20.  Answ. 
Were not the Prophets and Apostles of that household of God? If they were, than they were their own foundation according thy to assertion here, but thou hast wronged the Scripture; for it was the foundation of the Prophet's and Apostles (mark of the Prophets and Apostles) they were built upon Christ Jesus the chief corner stone.  Priest, 
By the Prophets and Apostles that are the foundation is meant their Doctrine, contained in the Scriptures, not the persons.  Answ. 
Their Foundation was before their Doctrine or Scriptures: Another foudation can no man lay, then that which is already laid, which is Christ: But sure the Prophets and Apostles and Scriptures were not he.  Priest, 
The Scripture makes known inward sins, of thoughts and lusts, Rome 7.7. Is able to mak● the man of God perfect; if they did not search into the thoughts of the heart, discovering who are blind and carnal, How can they make Wise unto Salvation? Doth not the Scriptures make us Wise unto Salvation? Therefore Are they not able to save us? Christ as the principle cause of our Salvation, is said alone to save us.  Answ. 
Thou meanest Christ as the principle searcher or the Spirit, but the Scriptures as the instrument; and then thou shouldest have said, Christ makes known inward sins, the Spirit searcheth all things, And God Judgeth the secrets of men by Christ, according to the Gospel; without the knowledge of Christ, there's no supernatural faith of the Scriptures; nor can any be made Wise unto Salvation, but through that Faith: And that Christ and the Spirit makes use of (speaks and opens) things contained in the Scripture many times, Who denies that? For than he speaks (and opens) those things immediately; and thus the Law was made convincing to Paul, not before it came thus; and if on that account they be the instrumental cause, than its Christ, or the Spirit (by h●s own speaking or teaching and openings) that is the searcher and saviour: And then it were most proper to lay the stress upon him as the searcher and Saviour; and not thus often tell of the Scriptures being the searcher of the thoughts, and of having in them Life Eternal; lest also that ignorant persons go Idolatrously (according to the tendency of much of thy matter) to put them in the place of Christ, or seek to make them the Saviour, seeing that Christ (the principle cause of our Salvation) (as thou confessest) is said alone to save us, and if he alone save, its sufficient, people be directed to him for that end; for in him all sufficiency is, who can now immediately speak matters contained in the Scriptures, as well as when they were first given by inspiration; And it is the inspiration of the Almighty that giveth the true understanding, without which the right use and end of the Scripture is not known.  Priest, 
The Scriptures of Truth (not I) make four Saviour's, Viz. The engrafted Word, Faith, Scriptures, Timothy, etc.  Answ. 
To us there is but one God, one Christ, one absolute Saviour, one Faith, etc.  Priest, 
There is a Faith of the Scriptures that is historical, this is not sufficient, but this Faith may be of Christ as well, and yet they not be saved; but who has saving, unfeigned, Supernatural Faith of Scriptures, cannot wa●t it of Christ.  Answ. 
Well Then this saving Supernatural Faith of Scripture and of Chr●st, must come f●om a Supernatural Light, or Christ who is th● Light and Author of Faith.  Priest, 
How shall they believe without a Preacher sent, Joh. 20. verse last, They must have the Scriptures who have the knowledge of Christ; for without this they cannot be kept from hell.  Answ. 
Who must send them if there be no immediate Teaching or Revelation now? How provest thou thy Call from Scripture, and that thou art Comissionated by Christ to Preach? Thou shouldest rather have said, they must have Christ who truly know the Scriptures, and without him they cannot be kept from hell.  Priest, 
In th●se Commandments written is our Life, Deut. 30.15, 16.  Answ. 
The Word and Commandment was nigh them in their hearts, that they might obey it, and walk in the Commandments and live, see Verses 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. how herein thou hast diminished and wrested Scripture; and that Word which was nigh in the heart the Apostles preached: It doth not say, in the Commandments written is your Life.  Priest, 
But that all Nations have the knowledge of Christ; It's in an Enthusiastical Bible; &c These places, He enlightens every man that cometh into the world; and, hath no respect of Persons, are far wide from this conclusion, therefore all have the knowledge of Christ; all the Turks, Jews, Pagans, etc. Oh! What monstrous horrid Doctrine, etc.  Answ. 
It is not our Assertion nor Conclusion, that all Nations or People have the knowledge of Christ (herein hast thou abused us and our Principle;) for though he enlightens all, they all do not walk in the Light, nor believe in it: But all Nations and People that come ever to know Christ and be saved, must walk in his Light, Who is the Way, the Truth, and the Life.  Priest, 
Christ as he is God, equal with the Father hath planted some Light of a natural conscience in every man of the world.  Answ. 
In him was life, and the life was the light of men; And he was that light, which enlighteth every man that comes into the world; who is not natural, nor his Light that shines from him in the Conscience: And God is Light, who enlightens the World, and gave his good Spirit in the days of old to the Rebellious; and sent his Son a Light into the World, That whosoever believes on him, might not perish but have eternal life: And here is the power and sufficiency both for Believing and Salvation.  Priest, 
All men have a Light of a natural Conscience from him, which tells that there is a God, and somewhat of the nature of God, that he is Eternal; which they may read in the creatures, Rom. 1.19, 20. and of the moral Law, which yet is but very dark, etc.  Answ. 
Where do the Scriptures call it a Light of a natural Conscience? What great Ignorance is here, seeing Christ is the true Light that enlightens every man, etc. And that which might be known of God was manifested in them, which gave the knowledge of the Eternal Power and Godhead from the creatures; and of the Law of God in the heart, and that Light, or that which might be known of God which gave this knowledge, was not natural of a natural Conscience, as blindly is conceived and asserted; for the natural man with his natural knowledge, perceives not those Spiritual or Invisible things, nor can he know them; but he that's turned to a Spiritual Light and Principle within, where that which may be known of God is manifested.  Priest, 
But of Christ in his nature, and the nature of Faith, they cannot without the Scriptures, so far as it is Gods appointed Way.  Answ. 
Christ is God's appointed Way, etc. This high and general opinion of the Scriptures, depends upon the former conceit, of finding Eternal Life in them, by searching of them; but that's answered and contradicted by this our Antagonist himself, over and over: Supernatural knowledge and Faith of Scriptures, being not had without the knowledge of Christ; but there are many search and read Scriptures, that are both out of this knowledge and Faith, so that 'tis evident, that the bare reading Scriptures doth not attract supernatural Faith, Knowledge, Light, Spirit, etc. but it is the supernatural Light and Spirit, that brings to the serious reading and supernatural knowledge of Scriptures: And it's also confessed in contradiction to much more (however) that the Light in all men teaches them of the moral Law; and, Is not that Scripture or things contained in it?  Priest, 
The Light wherewith Christ enlightens all, all Nations had before Christ came in the flesh, as well as now; and yet, Who will say that they all knew Christ?  Answ. 
It is not our saying nor assertion, that they all knew Christ, though some by his Spirit or Light then, had a foresight of his coming before he so came, though since he has given a more full demonstration and discovery of his Light.  Priest, 
If all men are taught to know Christ by the Light within them, Why sent he Apostles to all Nations, to make them disciples? Mat. 28.20.  Answ. 
All men are not taught that knowledge by the Light, because all obey it not, but many love darkness rather: The Apostles were sent to turn them from darkness to the Light, that therein they might know their Doctrine fulfilled, and be Christ's disciples.  Priest, 
Why did he give gifts to apostles, Pastors, Teachers, which should continue till we all come to that unity of the Faith; and fullness of the Stature of Christ? Was that Light within dim in those times, that it needed the help of outward Light? How was it a mystery hid from Ages?  Answ. 
The dimness was in the Persons that were to be turned, and directed to the Light, not in the Light itself; and the Apostles went by virtue of the Light and Gifts in them, for the help of people and not the Light, for their sufficiency and help was in it, and from it, which was not outward nor natural; and having confessed Gifts, Teachers, etc. to continue till we all come to the unity of the Faith, and fullness of the stature of Christ. How obviously hast thou herein contradicted thy former Doctrine, for imperfection and sin till death? etc.  Priest, 
You have made the visible Church very large, who have taken all the men of the world that ever hath been into it. If the Lord has given Grace and Knowledge equally to all men, Wherein stands the freedom of his Grace towards them that are saved?  Answ. 
These are both forged and false accusations, depending upon the former against us, for neither did we ever make the visible Church of that largeness, nor is it our Principle, that Grace and Knowledge is given equally to all men; that's but thy false inference against us, whereupon thou hast grounded much of thy caviling against us; like one that loves to fight with thy own shadow, or a man of straw of thy own making, to make and forge lies against us, and then go to confute them. Unprofitable and vain.  Priest, 
Never did the greatest Enemy of free Grace, so tie up and limmit God in the dispensations of Grace as you, that with good words and fair speeches (would) deceive the Souls of the simple.  Answ. 
Nay, Thou and such like, go about to tie up and limmit God in the dispensations of Grace, who would tie it up only to a few, and deny its universal extent to all, and as those Priests of Scotland, that formerly cursed all them that held Grace is free; and that with good words and fair speeches, we would deceive the hearts of the simple, is a slander against us, and against our end and intentions, and contrary to the tendency of our words and speeches.  Priest, 
Judas got as much from God as▪ Peter did, but he rejected it, but Peter made better use of it.  
Your free Grace, that all men have received alike, doth not exclude boasting; but say, Well was it with us that made better use of that, which others in hell got as well as we.  
Thanks to our diligence, and good intentions and tractableness, in harkening to the Light within, which all the damned got as bright shining, as well as we; but for Christ, we have no cause to thank him more than the damned have. This is the Language your Doctrine of free Grace teacheth men to say in their thanksgiving.  Answ. 
Here-upon several of thy false conclusions and inferences against us, thou hast thus vaunted and made a false Language of our Doctrine, contrary to the very nature and tendency of it; Who but men in hardness and impudent boldness, would go to confute, and raise absurdityes on our Principles when they do not know them, but are yet to learn as thou art with thy companions? For it is not our Principle, nor the Language of our Doctrine that all have the knowledge of Christ [equally] and that Judas got as much from God as Peter, nor that free Grace all have received alike, nor that the damned got the Light within as bright shining as we; but that God is no respecter of persons, in that he gives liberally to all, so much of his Grace to every one as is sufficient; yet, not that all have received alike, or the same degree of Grace and Knowledge, etc. for all receive not (or accept not) that measure of Grace given to them to obey it. But whereas we are sco●● at for saying, the cause of sums condemnation is their rejecting the Light, and their disobedience stubborness, etc. this is according to the Scripture Language as might be proved are large: For the fault is not to be laid upon God, but upon man for his disobedience, when he is consumed because of iniquity, which is stubborness, rebellion, etc. For God willeth not the death of sinners, but rather their return that they may live; and, O man thy destruction is of thyself; But thy help is of me saith the Lord: so as God is clear when he judges. Now we can thank God without boasting, that he hath shown such Love, Mercy, and Good will in Christ unto us; and Christ that he hath shown us Power, Life, and sufficiency in himself, both to believe, obey, and give diligence; and the name of God we may praise, for all his Mercies and Blessings he attends us withal, in the way whereunto he hath called us, and indeed all Nations are called to praise the Lord, which if all do not, the fault is not Gods, nor to be charged upon him, or his free Grace, but theirs that reject it; And have treasured up unto themselves, wrath against the day of wrath; and on the other hand, they that count God a hard Master, and they that blaspheme against him in their Torment and Anguish, are but the slothful servants, and such as have not received the truth in the love of it; but have had pleasure in their unrighteousness: And thereby have incurred displeasure from the righteous God, whose severity follows on them that reject his Love and goodwill: So these have not the Light as bright shining as we; These being condemned from the presence of the Lord, and from the Glory of his Power.  Priest, 
How comes it that there is none among all these persons throughout the Nations (where the Scriptures have never been heard) that have Written in the defence of the Christian Faith, and against the Paganish worship, & c.? Traveller's should have given some account of it, etc.  Answ. 
As if the Scriptures were not only the cause of Life, Faith, and Salvation (according to thy former stuff) but of all Writing in defence of the true Faith, etc. Then what was the cause and ground of Scriptures? However, it appears thou art no great Traveller, nor haste had much acquaintance with such Travellers as we know have given account of more Christianity among divers of the heathen that have not Scripture, then is among many in England and Scotland, professing Christianity; besides we find in divers of the heathens (so called) their Writings many things both Moral and Divine, both favouring of Christianity and of some spiritual sense, several of them had of the Nature and Life of Christianity which in itself is against all Idolatry of Pagans and others, though not in your borrowed terms and expressions of Religion and Christianity: And further, why should the Apostle make use of some of the heathens expressions, and Gentiles experiences for proof, if they had no tendence to Christianity.  Pr. 
But the best of those Nations and wisest, were the greatest Enemies to the Gospel.  Answ. 
How provest thou that (for we deny it) and the ground of this thy peremptory censure and judgement, against all them that had not Scripture? Many of whom we believe were better than thyself; and hast thou known the best and wisest of them, that thou art thus positive against them?  Pr. 
You have no warrant to say, that deaf persons to whom the Scriptures have no way been known, shall be saved.  Answ. 
As much as to say, They that know not the Scriptures, know not Salvation, or shall not be saved; thou shouldest have said. They that know not Christ, or come not to him fall short of Salvation, the coming to whom, is through the Father's drawings, who draws by his own Spirit; and darest thou say, that deaf and blind persons shall not be saved, because they cannot hear and read Scripture.  Pr. 
Before the Scriptures he taught by audible Voices, Revelations, etc. but now you make all to be the Light within.  Answ. 
No Revelation is truly known without the Light within, for what may be known of God is manifest within.  Pr. 
We deny that the Power of God is immediate (Viz. in his people)  Ans. 
You may as well deny its being in his people, and their inward Communion with it, and therein you deny the very tenuor of the new Covenant, and hereby limmit that power to mediate teaching, Scriptures, etc. what in you lies, which tends to eclipse and detract from that Glory, Sufficiency, and Prerogative that is in God's Power; this is very gross and ignorant.  Pr, 
We grant it is true which the Metaphysitians and Divines say of God, that he concurreth in all works of creatures, immediatione vertutis & suppositi, but this ye know not what it meaneth.  Answ. 
This makes against yourselves if rightly considered, and falsely thou hast said of us (or of me) for I do know what that phrase means, both as to words and matter; but, and if we did not know what is meant, why didst thou use thy Latin phrases and Scholastic terms, to such as thou deemest so illiterate? Hast thou not herein showed thyself a Bravado.  Pr. 
He told us, he will exercise his power for us, and in us.  Answ. 
He will exercise his power in us, and yet not immediate; What contradiction's here?  Pr. 
Why the Grace of hope should be Christ's more than the Grace of faith, etc.  Answ. 
Ch●ist is the Grace of all our Graces, and our all, a mystery hid from thee and those of thy spirit.  Pr. 
Faith is a habit and an imperfect creature, for all habits are in the category of quality, which is an accident and so an imperfect creature.  Answ. 
What Scripture have you Priests of Scotland for that? Of Faith being a habit, an imperfect creature, or accident; and, Is accident and habit all one? Where learned'st this Philosophy to define Faith? True Faith is not natural, nor a natural habit however, for thou hast granted a supernatural saving Faith, but 'tis but a habit, an imperfect creature, whereas Faith is a fruit of the Spirit which is pure and perfect, and the mystery of it is held in the pure conscience; but if thou meanest imperfect creature as to the kind or quality, its false Doctrine, and its being received by degrees doth not prove it; for it's as truly and purely Faith and that of God, and supernatural in the least degree (yea if but as a grain of mustardseed) as in the greatest measure of it.  Pr. 
It is as impossible it should be otherwise, as it is that a man abiding a man should essentially be a beast.  Ans. 
Is it as impossible Faith should be otherwise then an imperfect creature as for a man to be essentially a beast? Sad Doctrine! This is worse and worse: Faith overcomes the world purifies the heart, justifies, the mystery of it is held in a pure conscience, yet not possible for it to be otherwise then an imperfect creature: Darkness, Confusion, and Contradiction to Truth.  Pr. 
The Grace of hope is imperfect, Christ is the hope of glory.  Answ. 
These are one opposite to another, but Christ is perfect, who is the Grace and Life of all the Saints Graces.  Pr. 
Christ's Word was his audible Voice speaking his mind.  Answ. 
Other whiles his Word is the Scriptures (with thee) as if the Scriptures and his audible Voice were both one, which if this be true, all that read them hear Christ's audible Voice; Is this Authentic Doctrine? But Christ's own words shall stand against it, for, Joh. 8.43. Why do ye not understand my speech, even because ye cannot hear my word, and we know, that who hear the Son heareth the Father also: But this is a mystery hid from the Carnal minded who Idolatrously pervert the Scriptures.  Pr. 
Though Christ and the Spirit be one, yet he is not Christ's Word, for Christ is not his own word.  Ans. 
They that hear Christ's Word and receive it, receive of his own Virtue and Life in, and the words he spoke unto his are Spirit and Life, thou hast here but cavilled, which thou mightest as well have done against several Scriptures and against John's saying, In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God, &c,  Pr. 
I call the Scriptures the Word of God, and the Gospel the Word of Reconciliation: The Word of God is distinguished from the Word of Reconciliation.  Answ. 
Otherwhiles the Scripture is the Gospel (and the Word of God with thee) now they are distinct, the Word of God distinguished from the Word of Reconciliation; What confusion's here? Is not the Word of Reconciliation Gods? God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself.  Pr. 
The Gospel are a part of the Scriptures, and may be called one with them; the Gospel is contained in the Scripture.  Answ. 
The Gospel is the power of God to salvation to every one that believes, it was preached to Abraham, and was before the Scriptures, and is everlasting; but thou hast spoken blindly here as before; for, Is the power of God contained in the Scriptures? Then all that have the Scriptures have that power in them (or from them) which is not true.  Pr. 
Rom. 16.26. The Preaching of Jesus Christ according to the Revelation of the Mystery which was kept secret since the world began, and by the Scriptures of the Gospel, according to the Commandment of the Everlasting God, made known to all Nations, for the obedience of Faith.  Answ. 
But thou and such do not so preach Christ, nor are so commissionated to preach, at the Commandment of the Everlasting God, who deny Revelation, and his immediate Teaching now, and this contradicts much of thy dark stuff; for here the Revelation of the Mystery is preferred before the Scriptures, and the Preaching according to them, was from that Revelation of the Mystery which the Apostles had in them, but, were the Scriptures that Revelation, and kept secret since the world began? The Revelation of Christ was the Mystery, Christ within, the hope of glory, a mystery hid from Ages, etc. How was it by the Scriptures made known to all Nations for the obedience of Faith, if in many Nations there be nei●her the knowledge of Christ nor Scripture, according to thy former? And of that Rom. 16.26. which thou sayest is the Scriptures of the Gospel; thou hast wronged the Scriptures herein; for it is the Scriptures of the Prophets, etc.  Pr. 
The Gospel and Mystery of Christ, is made manifest by the Scriptures of the Prophets preached to all Nations; not by a Light within: If it were not in the Scriptures, How could it be manifest and made known by the Scriptures?  Answ. 
If not by the Light within, How by the Scripture without it? Have all that hear Scripture read or preached, the knowledge of the Mystery of Christ without the Light within? How then doth the Apostles speak of the Revelation as before? Did nor he preach from the Light within, or Revelation of the Son in him? Gal. 1.16. How ignorant hast thou showed thyself in this matter?  
Again, the Mystery was not made manifest by the Scriptures alone, or barely, for both Revelation and Preaching is mentioned before; and to tell of the Gospel and Mystery being in the Scriptures, is as much as to say, the power of God or Christ is in the Scriptures.  Pr. 
Doth not Mark. chap. 1.2. call what he wrote, the Gospel? Where he saith, The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, etc. Have you a forehead that cannot blush, that tells us that the Gospel is not Scripture? What a feared conscience and shameless boldness have ye attained to?  Answ. 
It is not from any feared conscience, nor shameless boldness for me to assert the Gospel was before the Scripture; and if Mark intended his Writing (or what he writ) to be the beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, than it follows, that the Gospel of Jesus Christ did not begin before Mark wrote that Revereulation, and then how doth he mention what was written in the Prophets, and tell of the Gospel of Jesus Christ? And did not Jesus Christ show forth his power and preach the Gospel, before that of Mark was writ? But seeing thou hast taken the liberty, both to give thy meanings to Scriptures, and pretends to compare one Scripture with another, I may have liberty to tell the other Scriptures in this case, as in, Luke. 1.1. he saith, Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things, which are most truly believed amongst us, and ver. 3. It seemed good unto me also, etc. And, Act. 1.1. The former Treatise have I made O Theophilus: So what they writ, it was a Treatise or Declaration of things spoken, done, and believed, and much of which relates to the historical part of things and matters; but if the written Declaration, Treatise of things, or Scripture without, be the Gospel, than hireling Priests may be silent, and let people read them, without spending their money of them for their various meanings, traditional Interpretations, etc. for the Gospel ought not to be added to, nor another preached; howbeit there is a difference between true Preaching, proceeding from the immediate Spirit and Power of God; which Paul was a Minister of, and the Scriptures or Writings outward, without the Spirit or Life; for Paul was not a Minister of the Letter, but of the Spirit, and New Testament.  
And is not a living Ministry and Voice, especially where it lives by virtue of the Power of God, from whence it immediately comes of more force and authority than the Letter, or Writings, which Scriptures signify? Yea I do further affirm, that the same Words or Declarations, as immediately proceeding from the Power or Spirit of God, is of more force and effect then the same words would be as spoken only from Scripture without. Deny it you Priests if you can, I can in the Name of the Lord, largely demonstrate it against you.  Pr. 
The Scripture is Everlasting, Viz. what is contained in them.  Answ. 
Confusion, Are they both one? This is like much more.  Pr. 
Is not the Gospel written by the Prophets, the Scriptures written by them.  A●sw. 
Th●n Marks Writing was not the beginning of it, here's contradiction and error: again the Apostle calls them the Scriptures of the Prophets, but speaks of the Gospel, Revelation and Mystery before, see, Rom. 16.25, 26. where its very plain he makes a distinction between them and the Scripture.  Pr. 
I deny any immediate Teaching by God.  Answ. 
Then thou deniest God to Teach his people himself, when he dwells in them, wherein thou hast denied the truth of the Gospel and New Covenant.  Pr. 
Christ's Immediate Teaching will no way follow, for his opening the understanding to know the Scriptures; for he doth by the same supernatural influence shine on the understanding, and Scriptures, Luk. 24.32.  Answ. 
Doth Christ by a Supernatural Influence shine on the understanding, and yet deniest thou his immediate Teaching, What a Labyrinth of Confusion and Distraction art thou fallen into! And it appears, without this Supernatural Influence shining on the understanding, the Scriptures are not truly known nor opened.  Pr. 
That Christ was first known himself, or he gave the knowledge of the Scriptures. The Apostle Paul, Rom. 16, 26. denies your consequence.  Answ. 
Have any a Supernatural knowledge or faith of the Scriptures, who have not a knowledge of Christ? It seems thou hast forgotten thy former words; and the Apostle doth not deny my consequence; for he had a knowledge of Christ before he Preached him, or writ Epistles concerning him, and his knowledge of the Son of God, was by his Reulation in him, besides the very Order, Tenor, and Matter of the Apostles words cited by thee, makes for me against thyself, see, Rom. 16.25, 26. for they run thus, Now to him that is of power to establish you, according to my Gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the Revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began: But now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the Prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith, etc. this thou mayest peruse again to thy own contradiction.  Pr. 
The Cause indeed must be before the Effect, and yet not always in order of time, but of nature, etc.  
If there be a Pryority, or Posteriority of Christ in the Soul, certainly the Scriptures hath it in the order of nature; though the Lord in the communicating the knowledge of them, he is in his being first; because, the Cause must be before the Effect; so the giver of knowledge before the knowledge given.  Answ. 
This being rightly considered, we find both contradiction and Ignorance in them; for, Is the Cause before the Effect always in order of nature, not of time, and yet, have the Scriptures the priority in the order of Nature? Where learnedest thou this distinction? not from the Scriptures nor from Christ; Surely Christ hath the Priority in order of time, for he is in his being first, and if the Cause must be before the Effect, always in order of nature; then he hath it in both; for he was the cause both of Scripture, and communicating the knowledge thereof, as thou confessest; as also, that the Cause must be before the Effect, so the giver of knowledge before the knowledge given: And indeed, He was before all things, and by him all things consists, and in all things he is to have the pre-eminence, and priority: Who is the First and the Last, the Foundation, the Beginning and the End. But thy saying if there be a Priority, or Posteriority of Christ in the soul, certainly the Scriptures hath it in the order of nature; in this thou comest off but very saintly and dubiously, and bringest the controversy to no result nor clearness, but art confused; for if there be a Priority of Christ in the ●oul, than it is not of the Scriptures, it b●ing a Priority of Christ, who also doth by a Supernatural Influence shine on the understanding, etc. But in these matters much might be said, which time would fail thoroughly to treat of.  Pr. 
The Judicious will think you a pitiful object, who expose yourself to shame and ludibrie, etc.  Answ. 
Thy censure an● scorn herein I value not, it will fall upon thy own head, and theirs that have taken thy part herein.  Pr. 
Without the Sanctifying knowledge of Christ, one may understand the Scriptures without error and ●angling.  Answ. 
This is both erroneous, and contradicts much that thou hast said before and after, which I need not very often repeat.  Pr. 
Most men, have both preached the Truths in the Scriptures, and maintained them by Writing, who never had any Sanctifying Knowledge of Christ.  Answ. 
This is like the former, and that [most men have preached Truths in Scriptures] is too large a word, and contrary to what thou saidst before of other Nations; but what do these things tend to, but to set up unsanctified persons, to be Preachers or Priests: But too many there are of such already, for of them and their pollutions many are grown sick, and the earth will vomit them out, and all that seek to maintain them against Christ and his Kingdom, which he is setting up.  Pr. 
For Judas, he preached the Truths, etc. The Scribes and Pharisees that sat in Moses seat preached Truths; whereas Christ bade hear them, Mat. 23.2, 3, 4.  Answ. 
But doth this prove that Judas had no sanctifying knowledge of Christ? Herein hast thou erred; for Judas had part of the Ministry, from which by transgression he fell, Act. 1.17, 25. So transgression was the ca●●e of his fall from the Ministry, and that Scripture, Mat. 23.2, 3, 4. proves not that Christ bade them hear the Scribes and Pharisees, nor that they were true Ministers of Christ; though wherein they sat in Moses seat, and read or preached his Precepts (when in force) they were to be obeyed, but Christ reprehends them in many places for corruptions got in amongst them, contrary to the Law, and for their vain Traditions and Precepts of men; and therein they were not true Ministers of the Law, much less of Christ.  Pr. 
Some preached Ch●ist out of envy and strife, and not out of love, etc. yet preached Christ and the Scriptures without errors, Phi. 1.15, 16, 17. Shall we say they had the Sanctifying Knowledge of Christ who had not love to him, who hath not good will to him?  Answ. 
Thou hast not proved that they preached Christ and the Scriptures without Errors who were in Envy and Strife; for they were guilty of Error in the ground (Viz. Envy and Strife) and where that is, there's confusion and every evil work; in that Christ was preached and his Name published in those days, the Apostles rejoiced; but not in the Envy and Error, of such as preached him out of Envy, who were not sanctified for such a work.  Pr. 
Your reason that without Christ we can do nothing, is to be meant in a Supernatural way.  Answ. 
Is not that in a Supernatural way, which is without Error and Jangling, and good and acceptable to God?  Pr. 
If they believe them to b● true, do they not know them.  Answ. 
No, All that believe them to be true, do not know them; for thou hast granted an historical Faith of Scripture.  Pr. 
He that hath heard, and learned of the Father, cometh to him, Joh. 6.44.  Answ. 
But all that have read and heard Scripture, have not heard nor learnt of the Father; nor come to Christ.  Pr. 
None can know the Truths of the Scriptures without the Sanctifying Knowledge of Christ.  Answ. 
This is according to what I say, and overthrows very much of thy matter according as hath been largely proved before.  Pr. 
He will lead believers into all Truths, this is the meaning; That is, he will keep them from a total and final defection from Truth's necessary to Salvation; and lead them into Truths, which are thus necessary, etc.  Answ. 
This acknowledges in part to the truth of what I have said, also, to the Spirits leading into all Truth; yea, into all Truth's necessary to Salvation: And then the Spirit of Truth is sufficient for us to depend upon, for this leading and preservation.  Pr, 
The Disciples, all of them (except Judas) had received the Sanctifying Spirit.  Answ 
How hast thou excepted Judas from the Sanctifying Spirit, when he had part of the Ministry, which his transgression was the cause of his falling from?  Pr. 
They were all ignorant of the Resurrection, and mistook the nature of Christ's Kingdom; as if it had been of this world, Luk. 24.21. Act. 1.6. The Galatians who had received the Spirit, yet were they led into Error.  Answ. 
If they that had received the Spirit might err in these matters, much more they that had no Sanctifying Knowledge, which contradicts thy former; of their preaching of Truths without Errors.  Pr. 
He did not tell them ye err not having the Spirit, but not knowing the Scriptures.  Answ. 
The Scriptures they could not truly know without some Sanctifying Knowledge of Christ, as before confessed, or of the power of God to salvation; so their ignorance of the Scriptures in a Supernatural sense, was from their ignorance of the power of God, which unvails the heart to read and understand them.  Pr. 
For what ye say we plead for sin, it doth more duly fall on the Doctrine that saith, believers may totally fall, as you say Peter by his denial did, and David likewise by, etc.  Answ. 
Nay, To say there are believers that may fall from Grace (who are not yet come to an established and grown state in the Truth and Power of God) is no pleading for sin, as your Doctrine contending and disputing for sin in all, term of Life, especially, whiles we exhort all to watch and look diligently to Grace received, and withal warn them, etc. that such a falling away may be prevented; for it was no pleading for sin in the Apostles, to warn the Churches by the example of some that fell, or of such as made shipwreck of faith and a good conscience; or of such as drew back to perdition, denied the Lord that bought them, and such whose latter end was worse than their beginning. But to charge us with saying, that Peter and David fell totally; this is a slander and forgery against us, as there are many more in thy bundle.  Pr. 
If our peace stood in our inherent Righteousness, etc. in our good works, etc.  Answ. 
[Inherent Righteousness] are thy own words obtruded upon us, in thy own sense (as imperfect) and so in that sense not Gods nor Christ's; for in God's Righteousness, received in Christ by faith, our peace stands, and of this, the true believers are partakers in them, they being in that living Faith, the Righteousness whereof is not divided from it.  Pr. 
David's Peace stood not in the freedom from all sin, but in that God did pardon his sin; and did not impute the same, Rom. 4.6, 7, 8.  
Secondly, If none ever had, or shall have Peace here on earth, but such as are in this Life free from all sin; than you alone may boast of it, etc.  Answ. 
He whose Transgression is forgiven, The man unto whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, in his spirit there is no guile Psa. 32.1, 2. And David bid, Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright; for the end of that man is peace. And blessed are the undefiled in the way; they also do no iniquity, etc. And in this state stood David's Peace, contrary to what thou hast Erroneously spoke of him here.  
Secondly, And what thou hast said of our being free from all sin, that we alone might boast of it; this thou dost not believe of us, and therefore hast ironically Scoffed and Jeered, contrary to thy own thoughts and intentions: And in implying none on earth free from all sin, hast again erred, and art herein sufficiently confuted already, thou having herein employed, none here ever born of God, none here to abide in Christ, or come to perfect Holiness; or to be washed from all sin by the Blood of Christ: So thy Doctrine is contrary to the Apostles.  Pr. 
For none either of the Prophets, Apostles, or Saints, that we find in Scriptures, ever were thus qualified for Peace.  Answ. 
This seems to be a large and general charge against the Prophets and Apostles, who generally contrary to this Doctrine testified unto the Peace of God, which is perfect, which attends the Righteousness (or heavenly Image) of God, which is also perfect, and known in the new Covenant, whereby he takes away sin, and establisheth his people in Righteousness, and the Prophets could testify that the Lord was their Righteousness, who wrought all their works in them, and to the true Apostles, Christ was made wisdom, righteousness sanctification; so thou & you have shown yourselves ignorant of the Scriptures, and of the Prophets and Apostles states and qualifications; and what sin or sins they all had, which they (or any of them) were not freed from before death, is not yet proved by any of you, who are found in the work of the old accuser of the Brethren.  Pr. 
Sin is remaining in part in all the faculties of God's Children, etc. except ye had made appear, that Paul's Will, and Affections, and Mind, were perfectly against sin: Some stain and inclination to sin, by the contrary corruption still remained in some degrees in his Will, Mind, and Affections, etc.  Answ. 
This is a sad accusation against all God's Children again, and what is this but a pleading for sin, and tending to strengthen the hands of evil doers? What, all the faculties of God's Children, having sin and corruption in them? The Priests were wont to tell of a Regenerate part; What part is it? No faculty clean, sad news! Thus to accuse Paul's Will, Mind, and Affections, as having corruption remaining still in them; whereas his Will was to the good, his Mind and Affections, were on things above (when converted, and victory obtained) and the vi●e affections and desires mortified, which they that are Christ's have crucified; and his saying, With my mind I serve the law of God, but with my members the law of sin; related to the state of his Warfare, and shows an opposition in his mind against serving sin: But thy Doctrine signify thus much, as if he had said; with my Mind I serve sin, and with my Members I serve sin, yea; with my Mind, Will, and Affections I serve sin, and the Law of God both; this were a serving two Masters: And then where's the contrariety and opposition thou speak'st of afterward.  Pr. 
I said, There was Flesh and Spirit in him, so that neither the operations of the Flesh or Spirit were complete and perfect, because of the opposition they have one to the other, the Flesh and Spirit are contrary one to another.  Ans. 
Thy making the opposition between the Fl●sh and the Spirit, and their contrariety one to the other, thy reason to prove that neither the operations of the Flesh or the Spirit were complete and perfect, it proves the quite contrary; for the Spirits opposition to the Flesh, and its contrary operation, proves that the Spirits operation is pure and complete against that which lusts against it; and so against the fruits and works of the Flesh, which are (absolutely) also opposite to the fruits of the Spirit, yet they through the Spirit, came to mortify those deeds and works of the Flesh which were corrupt.  Pr. 
Ye cannot do those things that ye would; because he could not Will them perfectly.  Ans. 
It's God that works in the believer, both to will and to do, and his Work is perfect; and to whose Will, man's Will ought to be subject.  Pr. 
If all the imperative faculties of the Will and Mind, and (inferior) of the affections, be fully and strongly joined for any action, the members of the body cannot but be obedientially, etc.  Ans. 
Then such as have the mind of Christ, whose Wills and Minds are subject unto his, as theirs whom he calls his Brethren, and whose affections also are set upon things above, such have unity with Christ and in their faculties (as thou callest them) and therefore their members must needs be obedientially subject, as theirs who are sanctified throughout, in Body, Soul and Spirit.  Pr. 
What part of him did sin dwell in, if neither in his Mind, Conscience Affections, etc.  Ans. 
He said, In his flesh dwelled no good thing, but it was not all his life time of continuance.  Pr. 
If you can find out any other faculty of the Soul, which can be a seat for sin to dwell in, than these three; the Schools will be beholding to you for your new Philosophy.  Ans. 
We may therefore see what Schools and Discipline you have, that would be beholding to us, to find out some other faculty of the Soul for sin to dwell in; but methinks thou shouldst intend better than thy words import, and have said: You would be bebeholding to us, to show you another, which is no seat for sin, and that you should not seek for more room for sin, for it hath as much room amongst you as you can afford it, in all the faculties, both superior and inferior, both in the Wills, Minds and Affections: But so it had not in the Children of the Light.  Pr. 
The pure Protestant Religion, which is held out from Scriptures.  Answ. 
Is that your pure Protestant Religion, that pleads for sin in all the faculties of the Soul? An impure Religion and Doctrine of the Ministers of sin, pure Religion where it is, there's a keeping unspotted of the world.  Pr. 
There is a Righteousness of Christ's Sufferings and Merit imputed, etc. which begets Peace, which may consist with sin in a believer, though thereby no Condemnation to him.  Answ. 
Christ's Righteousness is known to be pure and perfect, and not to consist with sin, for they are inconsistent, and the believer that's come to a fellowship of Christ's sufferings, and a conformity to his death, to know his Righteous Will by faith imputed; he walks after the spirit, not after the flesh, and to such there's no condemnation, Rom. 1.8.  Pr. 
Cleanse thou me from my secret sins.  Answ. 
Then let not secret sin remain in me all my Life time, let not sin and corruption remain in all the faculties of my Soul so long as I live,  Pr. 
There is a Righteousness which is the same with Sanctification which is not perfect and complete, therefore no man by this inherent Righteousness is Justified.  Answ. 
What Righteousness (and whose) is it, which is the same with Sanctification, which is not perfect? Is it Christ's yea or nay? And, Is Sanctification imperfect in this Life? And, Is this that thou callest inherent Righteousness? In this thou hast but acted the part of Satan's m●ssengers, as hore-tofore, and contradicted the Apostles Doctrine, who preached to present men perfect in Christ, and exhorted to purge themselves, from all filthiness both of flesh and spirit (and so) to a perfecting of holiness in the fear of God: And, Was not Christ made unto them, Righteousness, Sanctification, and Redemption? And is he divided or imperfect in what he is to the Saints? What gross and fa●se stuff hast thou employed and vented? And it was they that were washed and sanctified; that were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the spirit of our God. See, 1 Cor. 6.11.  Pr. 
You do not admit of this Doctrine. Your new Light you pretend, is nothing but old damnable Popery.  Ans. 
Our new Light (as thou callest it) is the Light of Christ, the same the Apostles preached and bears witness to their Doctrine against thine and the Priests who oppose it: And its Blasphemous and Damnable in thee, to deem this our Light, nothing but old damnable Popery; it will appear that thou art nearer Popery than we, in thy contending for sin term of Life, but only thou tellest us not of a Purgatory.  Pr, 
Paul had victory begun but not completed, except from the the Condemning Power of Sin, but the Reigning Power and Defiling, was not subdued totally, etc.  Ans. 
Confusion: And contrary to Paul's Doctrine and state, to tell of victory, and yet the Reigning Power and Defiling not subdued totally; as much as to say, his Enemy was conquered and yet Reigned still; whereas he said, He had fought the good fight of faith, and had kept the faith; he was more than a conqueror through Christ that loved him. And they to whom there was no condemnation were in Christ, and walked not after the flesh, but after the spirit. And was there not such as were complete in Christ to whom Paul wrote; and dost not believe that he had attained to as high a growth as any of them to whom he writ or preached; consider it.  Pr. 
In the present time, I am sold under sin, That good that I would do, I do not; if he had spoken to their capacity as weak, he would have told them, he had been under such a condition, but he was delivered from it: When Paul speaks of a condition wherein he was, he does not say, I am, etc.  Ans. 
Paul did speak unto the Romans after the manner of men because of the infirmity of their flesh, Rom. 6. He did also signify the several states which he had passed thorough, as how it was with him before the Law came, and how when it came, and his warfare, as also his deliverance; so that I say again and still affirm, that Paul could not be in all those states he mentions, or represents to the Romans at one and the same time (when he so writ, as in the present time) as thou very blindly hast asserted, argued from hence, and caviled against the truth of what I said, and the most stress of what thou sayest for reason, or proof against me, is as much as a Child might say that has learned his Accidence, Viz. that the present Tense is not the preterperfect Tense; whereas if it must be taken for granted from thy feeble reason, that Paul was in all those states at one and the same time, than he was both carnal sold under sin and yet spiritual, a faithful Apostle that could preach in the fullness of the Gospel; as if carnal sold under sin, and spiritual, made free from the Law of sin and death, by the Law of the Spirit of Life were both one, but, to be carnal sold under sin was miserable bondage, not consistent with his Saintship and spirituality: And when he said, With me to will is present, but how to perform that which is good, I know not; if that was his present condition, than (as thou arguest) because spoke as in the present Tense; Then what did Paul at that time in writing that Epistle? Did he perform that which is good, yea or nay? If he did, Then knew he what he did? Or, did he do he knew not what in it? Surely thy Doctrine doth strangely misrepresent and wrong Paul, that Servant of Christ, and the Lords-Freeman, who knew the Mysteries of Christ, though sometimes, he became as weak to the weak, etc. But if it should be objected, as some vainly have done, that there was an unregenerate part in Paul, of which he speaks in those cases; then this would make much of his Epistles to proceed from an unregenerate or carnal part, which were gross and contrary to their own Doctrine. And to that saying, if he had spoke to them as weak; he would have told them he had been under such a state, but he was delivered from it; to the very same purpose he did speak to them, Rom. 7.5. For when we were in the flesh, the motions of the sins which were by the Law did work in our members, to bring forth fruit unto death; but now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held, that we should serve in newness of spirit and not in the oldness of the letter. So that its plain, he told them both of his captivity and of his deliverance, speaking in the forepart of the chapter plainly in several things, with relation to what he was in the flesh in the time past, and also how he was delivered; and so, both the body of sin and death, and the law of sin, he came to be delivered from by the law of the spirit of life in Christ; through whom also he was more than a Conqueror.  Pr. 
How bold are you, charging the present time for the bypast, for which you have neither passage in that, nor any other Scriptures, the sense of the words being all along in the present time, etc.  Answ. 
This is but like the former, from ignorance both of the Scriptures and the Apostles states, concluding them in all those sta●es wherein they personated themselves, either to represent what they had gone thorough, or the condition of others to whom they wrote or spoke; but from this man's Argument, where Paul said, Christ came into the world to save sinners of whom [I am chiefest] and the Apostle James; with the same tongue bless we God, curse we men, these things ought not to be; this being spoken in the present time when they writ; from this man's Argument, Paul was then the chiefest or greatest of sinners; How was he then counted faithful and put into the Ministry? Or was he the greatest or chiefest of sinners when faithful? Then who are the least of sinners if the faithful, such as are saved by Christ be the chief; And was the Apostle James one that did curse men, when he exhorted against it, or what he said, had relation to them (or some of them) to whom he writ? And Paul's being the chiefest of sinners, to his being injurious and a persecutor before converted, or if the chiefest of sinners after conversion, and counted faithful; What was he before conversion? Or if it was before; Then did he not amend and become better when he came to be converted, to receive Grace and Apostleship?  Pr. 
As for that by gone state before he was begotten; Was he groaning under a body of death? Was he giving thanks for victory through Jesus Christ? Yet all these are knit together.  
Secondly, If ye say it was a state after he was begotten of God, ye grant all that we affirm; that a Believer ever after he is begotten of God, is not free from Sin.  Answ. 
This still depends on thy former errors and absurdities against Paul, for groaning under a body of death for deliverance or victory, and giving thanks for victory through Jesus Christ, are two differing states, and not knit together as if they were one and the same condition; How blindly and sottishly hast thou reasoned herein?  
Secondly, If we say it was a state after he was begotten, Viz. that he was groaning for deliverance, we do not grant therefore that a Believer ever after is not free from Sin, as falsely and absurdly thou infe●rest upon us; as if a Believer had no growth nor increase in faith and victory after begotten of God, which if it be thy belief, according as thy words imply, it is not ours; for we know and believe a growing from strength to strength, and a revelation of God's Righteousness from Faith to Faith in the true Beleivers, and that by Faith victory is obtained by degrees, with such as are begotten and born of God, whom the wicked one cannot touch; and through Faith in the Power of God, Everlasting Salvation comes to be attained to by them; such as keep the Faith, and hold fast the profession of it without wavering.  Pr. 
They do not so perfectly mortify, as that there are no lusts in them; otherwise it were to no purpose for Peter to exhort the believing Hebrews to abstain from their lusts.  Answ. 
Nay, Herein thou hast erred and perverted, and wronged Peter's end and intention, which is clearly against such as thou art, who plead for continuance of sin and lusts in them, which if they always be to continue here, and cannot be abstained from as thou intimatest, then to what purpose was it for Peter to exhort them to abstain from them, especially if he had been of thy faith that they could not, or had not power to abstain from lust, etc. But herein thou hast sufficiently discovered whose servant thou art.  Pr. 
When they are Believers and begotten, they are so freed that the evil one cannot touch them.  Answ. 
Much less lead them into Sin, or keeps up the reigning power of it in them so long as they live: This contradicts all thy corrupt Pleas and Arguments for Sin.  Pr. 
They do not fulfil its Lusts, as to continue in Sin wilfully and deliberately without repentance; yet they are not freed from Sin wholly.  Answ. 
Yes wholly, when the wicked one hath not power to touch them. But thy saying they do not fulfil its Lusts, as to continue in Sin wilfully without repentance; now may not this be taken that they do continue in Sin, Lusts, but not wilfully without repentance; But do they Sin wilfully with repentance? Hast thou cleared God's Children herein? Whereas, such as walk after the spirit, shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh; but are in that which mortifyes the vile affections and desires, and subjects the whole man to the will of God, Viz. to Righteousness and Holiness.  Pr. 
In many things we offend all.  Answ. 
But not in Christ the one thing; for, he that abides in him sinneth not.  Pr. 
To be unblamable; Is that Grace? Is universal in all parts of the renewed man, though not absolute, etc. to be unblameable and unreprovable, may stand with Sins of infirmity.  Answ. 
To be unblameable, is to Live as the Grace teacheth; namely, To deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and to live godly and soberly in this present world: For Sin and Ungodliness is unblamable and reprovable wherever it is, it being contrary to the Grace and its teaching, which is absolute as well as universal in the renewed man, and is not consistent with Sin, nor imperfect as you Priests of Scotland have rendered Grace, Faith, etc. as they among you formerly, that cursed every one that saith, Faith is without Sin, and would have all the people to say Amen to it; wherein your blind zeal outruns your understandings, and made you discover your folly and madness, to set people on cursing; yea, to curse such as held the Truth, contrary to that Doctrine, bless and curse not.  Pr. 
In the Book of Common Prayer, there is a promise, To forsake the Devil and all his Works, the vain Pomp and Glory of the world, and Sinful Lusts of the flesh, and be led by God's Spirit to keep his Commandments: Many of those who promise may do this, and keep it in the sense the Scripture holds, that is; that they shall disallow, purpose and endeavour against those ills.  Answ. 
So, Here thou hast justified these promises, and many of those who promise as keeping it, that is (sayest thou) they shall disallow, purpose and endeavour against those ills, as if that purpose were a forsaking the Devil and all his Works, etc. the Sinful Lusts of the flesh, a keeping Gods Commandments, etc. when as thou hast denied that any may attain to such a state, but they must purpose and endeavour after it; when as the promise is absolute, to forsake all sin, Viz. all the Works of the Devil, and to walk in the Commandments of God all their life. What a medley hast thou made here, like the time-serving Priests; that vindicate the Common prayer and Episcopacy, after they have denied it, and many of them covenanted against it: We thought that the Priests and Kirk of Scotland, had been more zealous and sincere in their way against the Episcopal Traditions, than thou hast here appeared: Will the rest of thy Brethren of the Kirk of Scotland own thee in this matter? Or art thou their mouth; that thou takest upon thee, to be such a contend for the pure Protestant Religion (as thou callest it?) But is that any part of your Religion to tell of Godfathers and Godmothers? And to cause t●em to promise and vow in the Infant's name, and for the Infant (as its surety) to forsake the Devil and all his Wor●s, etc. all ●he Sinful Lusts and desires of the flesh, and to keep G●ds holy Will and Commandments, when you do not believe it possible so to do in this Life.  Pr. 
As many who are commended for keeping his Commands, their Sins and Failings are notwithstanding recorded.  Answ. 
Sins and Failings are not consistent with keeping Gods Commandments, Sin being a transgression of the Law; which, when transgressed and failed of keeping, it is not kept then, nor the blameless state stood in.  Pr. 
You with gross subtlety bear out this sense; That he who at his death is made holy, is made holy sometimes before his death.  Ans. 
He is sometime a dying before dead, if at their death, be upon their death or dying (as thou sayest) yea, some are many hours, having the symptoms and pangs of death upon them, before they are dead, and in this sense I supposed thou intendest, by saying at their death they are freed, etc. that it was upon their dying, when the throws or pangs of death are upon them; or, when we commonly say a person is a dying, when he breathes very weakly, faintly, and sometimes with short breathe, a little before breath is quite gone, and then there must needs be a little space in this Life, before the person is quite dead.  Pr. 
You might as well infer, if one should say, that at his death his Soul aod Body are separate; that he said, they are separate sometime before his death; at his death is meant immediately upon his dying.  Ans. 
A false inference put upon my words, which doth not at all follow; for when the Soul and Body are separate, or the Soul is gone out of the Body, this is after death, now upon dying is not after death; for when the Body is without the Spirit it is dead; so, if thou wilt have it, that when the Soul and Body are separate, the Beleiver is then free from sin; 'tis not in this Life, and then; Where's the Pope's Purgatory? And who is now guilty of damnable Popery? Is this your pure Protestant Religion?  Pr. 
I never found but that they (Viz. our Brethren) said, Beleivers Souls either at their death (which is immediately upon their death) or after death, are made perfectly holy and received into glory.  Answ. 
Upon dying, and after death are two things, so it appears still you are divided somewhat in this point; s●me of you saying, upon their dying, Beleivers are made perfectly holy, others say, after death; however by this we may observe that your Doctrine tends to make people serve the Devil (by living in sin) so long as they have any time and strength, to do any service for him; that is, till they can serve him no longer.  Pr. 
They may mean and understand, that the perfect holiness of both Soul and Body is not to be till the Resurrection; which is nothing differing from that which I say; I do not say that the Body in the grave is capable of holiness till it be raised.  Answ. 
If this doth nothing differ from what thou sayest, it's very strange, didst not say a little before [upon his dying?] What's done upon his dying? Is he made wholly free from Sin yea or nay? If thou meanest only the Soul, that that's only freed from Sin at death or upon dying, and not the Body till it be raised (as thou sayest) Than what becomes of the Sins and impurity of the Body in the mean time, or the defilments and pollutions thereof? Doth it die with the Body (seeing the Soul is pure when it ascends to God?) Or if the Body be not capable of Sin in the grave; Then where is the being of unholiness and corruption to be done away, so long after death as is imagined? Or to say that perfect holiness of both Soul and Body, is not till the Resurrection; (how long after death you know not) Doth not this make for the Papists imagination of a Purgatory? For if the being throughly purged from all unholiness be not till after death, it must be some where; but this your Doctrine is contrary to the Apostles, who said; How can we that are dead unto sin, live any longer therein? And being made free from sin, etc. He hath washed us from our sins in his own blood, etc.  Pr. 
From Pro. 24▪ 16 It cannot be so properly said, The godly fall seven times into trouble and ri●e again.  Answ. 
Yes, The godly falls into many troubles and afflictions; but God delivereth them, out of them all. And he is with them in six troubles, and in seven he will not forsake them. And its plain from that of Pro. 24.15, 16. that the just man's falling sev●n times and rising again, is of another nature than the wickeds falling into mischief; for in verse. 15, 16. its said, Lay not wait (O wicked man) against the dwelling of the righteous: spoil not his resting place: For a just man falleth seven times and riseth up again: but the wicked fall into mischief. It is not said (as many of you have wronged the Scripture) that the Righteous man sins seven times a day; yea, some of the Priests and Professors, have not only said so, but have also said; that the most Righteous man that is (or ever was) sins seven times a day, which is a deceit and corruption put upon Scripture.  Pr. 
As for my saying a day, it was a mistake of the citation of the place, though it's not contrary to sense; for Christ saith to Peter that he should forgive his Brother seventy times seven times, which implieth that a Brother may offend in the day time.  A. 
If he who is a Brother may offend in the day time; Doth it therefore follow that all the godly or brethren do fall into sin seven times a day? And wilt thou (to serve thy perverse and corrupt end) say, in that a Brother may offend seventy times seven, therefore he Sinneth seven times every day all his time? Surely thy implicit consequence, is a mistake and error (and thou hast wronged the Scriptures) as well as thy citation of the place mentioned. But we see thou wilt stand by the Devil's Cause, though thou comest never so feebly off; yea, and fall with it.  Pr. 
I grant that the Child of God cannot Sin totally and finally and whoso doth it, is of the Devil.  Answ. 
Herein again thou hast wrested and added to the Scripture, as often before, Totally and Finally are thy own words, and not the words of John, who affirmed, That he that's born of God sinneth not; neither can he: To say he that commits Sin Totally and Finally is of the Devil; Is this all the distinction of the Devils Servants and Children, from the Children of God? How miserably hast thou pleaded God's children's cause? Surely they have no Reason to be beholding to th●e, but may justly exclude thee for wronging of them.  Pr. 
In the sense ye imply it, that he who Sinneth at all, or in whom their's any defect; thus none living then ever knew or saw him: Those who are commended for knowing him, Sinned.  
Secondly, Job cursed his day, David, what sad falls he had is known, Jeremiah, the Apostles; all of them.  Answ. 
That [he] that Sinneth and is of the Devil, and that [he] that Sinneth not who is of God are two contrary births (and that which is born of the spirit is spirit, as that which is born of the flesh is flesh) which if thou knewest the difference of, and were separated from the evil and joined to the good, thou wouldst not go about to confound them, nor grossly to pervert the Scriptures and to accuse God's Birth, or Child as thou hast done.  
Secondly, And why dost thou not tell us of their deliverances as well as their falls, and of their conquest which (by degrees) they obtained in their Life time? But this would make against thee and thy ill cause for Sin and Satan, whose work thou art in.  Pr, 
You say a Believer is free from all Sin, which we suppose you meant of a Believer from the very instant that he begins to be a Believer; as ye said, that the Spirit cannot be united unto Sin.  Answ. 
Nay, It is not our Principle that a Believer, from the very instant that he begins to be a Believer, is free from all Sin; thy supposition herein and much of thy matter grounded upon it is false, thou hast gone about to overthrow our Principles, when thou art yet to learn what we hold in this matter: For a man is a Believer whilst in the faith he is war●ing against Sin, and waiting to obtain victory over it, and to come into the glorious liberty of the Sons of God: The victory is not obtained at the very first beginning of God's work in a Soul, but by degrees through Faith, which purifies the hearts of them that believe, and receive power in the Light of Christ and Spirit of Life, to become the Children of God and of the Light, which hath no unity with Sin; nor can have with persons, but as they forsake Sin and come out of it.  Pr. 
As you contradict yourself, so you do the Truth; For can Sin be in any man, and the actions flowing, and the man not be Sinful? If Sin be in a man, doth it not defile him?  Answ. 
If the actions of Sin be flowing from a man he is sinful, but there is a time when the Beleiver warreth against Sin, and can say as Paul did, It's not I that Sins; but Sin that dwelleth in me. And there's a time wherein there be Sins that do easily beset; and when Sin is presented in the Temptation, when it is not yielded unto but withstood, and by degrees overcome by Faith, in the power of Christ: But this is hid from all blind contenders for Sin.  Pr. 
Neither doth that passage which ye abuse (it's not I but Sin that dwelleth in me) imply any thing of that kind that he doth not Sin.  Answ. 
What is this less than to say, Paul said not true, when he said, It's not I that sin but sin that dwelleth in me? But to distinguish between the two S●eds and two Births, that which did not Sin, and that which did Sin, it appears thou knowest not, but art very ignorant, and blindly cavillest in many things.  Pr. 
God judgeth of his Children that are thus divided, according to the better and sounder part, as is that of the Spirit which is most prevailing with them, and unto which they do adhere; and not according to the Flesh which they renounce, and unto which they resist; and which by little and little they overcome.  A 
The Spirit most prevailing in God's Children, they adhere to it, and resist and renounce the Flesh, and yet the Flesh have the better; What Doctrine is this, and what contradiction? And how doth this oppose the Spirits sufficiency, and the end of their adhering to it; which is, that they may be thoroughly sanctified both in Body, Soul, and Spirit.  Pr. 
Indeed you make yourself a Patron of Sin, in saying, that the Children of God when they come short of the good they would, and when they do the evil they would not, they do not Sin: Now whether you, or th●se you rail against, deserve to be accused as defenders of Sin: You say that a Believer, when he doth the evil he would not, he Sinneth not: No more vile defence of Sin imaginable, then to say, that Peter's denial of Christ with a curse, was no Sin; and David's adultery: Whether he that acknowledgeth Sin is in the godly, or he that sayeth the foulest Sins are not Sins; because forsooth they may be warring against them?  Answ. 
Herein hast thou abused me, and sought to render me odious for that which is none of my saying, touching the Children of God; neither did I ever say, that doing evil is not Sin, nor yet grant thy universal Charge against God's Children, of coming short of good and doing evil; nor that all that Paul writes of himself in that kind; Was then his present condition: Herein hast thou but begged the question, and belied me in several things grounded upon thy misrepresenting our Principles before; and so the Patron and vile defender of Sin thou art, and not I; who to defend it, hast in general accused all God Children with Sin term of Life. Neither did I ever say, Peter's denial of Christ, and David's adultery, are no Sins; as here I am belied and slandered, by one in impudence, and the spirit of lies: And as for Peter and David; Where ever did they commit those Sins after they had repent of them? Surely this instance is no proof that God's Children must have Sin (or dare Sin) all th●ir life time: Howbeit Paul was no defender of Sin in saying, It's not I that Sin, but Sin that dwelleth in me [by all which Sin is still acknowledged to be Sin] and when they knew the warring against Sin, and the travel in order to obtain victory, and coming into the state of the perfect Birth (that's brought forth in the Image of God) they knew the difference between the two Seeds in them, and a going on in the work of faith, till the old man with his deeds were put off, and the new man put on.  Pr. 
Neither that of 1 John. 2. I write unto you that you may not sin, prove that they were free of Sin so as they did not Sin; for then why doth he subjoin (but if we sin, we have an advocate with the Father) thus you have wickedly separated what God hath joined, Christ was given for an advocate for the Sins of those whom John calleth little Children, and his own, which therefore were to be.  An. 
John's writing unto them not to Sin, surely was contrary to thy pleading for Sin, for the very tenor of thy doctrine is contrary to his in this case. And what is it God hath joined that (thou sayest) we have wickedly separated? Is it Believers and Sin, or the advocate and Sin? This were blasphemous to suppose or assert; how grossly hast thou showed thyself in this matter: And surely thou hast drawn but a bad consequence from John's saying, If any man sin we have an advocate, that therefore john's and the little children's Sins were to be, or that the Devils work in part, remains un-subdued in the Children of God; for John doth not say little Children you have an advocate, and therefore your Sins are to be, or the Devil's work must remain in you unsubdued all your life time, but I write unto you that you sin not, and if any man sin (which is not every man is to Sin) we have an advocate with the Father; this is he that was to call and help them out of Sin, and whose blood did cleanse from all Sin, for John proposed a way and a remedy for them, to bring them out of all sin, but thou hast proposed a way tending to keep all people in Sin all their days, who thus hast contended for the Devils work, made such a sad consequence both of John's words, and of Christ's being an advocate, that therefore Sins are to be. A monstrous inference.  Pr. 
That the Devils work in part remains un-subdued in the Children of God, appears by that Paul saith to the Romans, The God of peace shall tread down Satan under your feet shortly, Rom. 16.20.  An. 
That the God of peace should tread down Satan under their feet shortly, is a proof against thy s●lf, and contradicts thy Doctrine for the Devils work remaining in the Child of God; for where Satan is trodden down under foot, dominion is obtained over him and his work.  Pr. 
We have peace, our peace stands in our justification, yet there are remains of Sin within us which we are to mourn for.  An. 
The Saint's peace stands in Righteousness, which is not consistent with Sin, which is the cause of mourning where it is not done away; but thou hast confounded the state of peace, and the state of mourning, like one ignorant both of true peace, and of the effect of true sorrow and mourning.  Pr. 
We are all compassed about with infirmities and subject to passions as was Elias, who had the Spirit of God and peace to, and yet had matter of groaning even in those passions.  An. 
The Apostles instance of Elias being subject to like passions, was in the case of praying for the sick, to show how prevailing the effectual fervent prayer of a Righteous man is, Jam. 5.15, 16. which proves quite against thee, whilst thou accountest passions in the general as being Sins, for passions are sufferings which may be of divers sorts, as that of sickness and others; as also it is not true that Elias was subject to that the Priests are, whilst thou takest passions for Sins, neither was he so passionate in that kind as to pled and contend for Sin as you do: Moreover where it's said, that Paul and Barnabas said unto them (that would have done sacrifice to them) We are men of like passions with you, Act. 14. they could not intend by passions, that they were men of like Sins and Transgressions with those heathens, as being such Idolaters, or subject to cry up and worship men as Gods, or to sacrifice unto them as they did to Paul and Barnabas, whom they termed Mercurius and Jupiter; so in this thy error is sufficiently detected, who upon such a false ground (rath●r than be silent) hast pleaded for the work of the Devil.  Pr. 
Here is another Arminian and Popish error, that Believers fall away from Grace totally.  An. 
Thou mightest as well have charged the Apostles with an Arminian and Popish error, who held the same that we 〈◊〉 touching, falling away from Grace, which many have been 〈…〉 (though not all Believers) and therefore both Peter and Paul and others, did warn them in their Epistles to the same purpose as we do, and both Paul to the Corinthians, and Peter in his second Epistle, Chap. 2. as also that Epistle to the Hebrews, do largely prove our Doctrine in this matter.  Pr. 
Evil Works come not from Faith in the Believer.  An. 
If evil Works come not from Faith, than Peter and David stood not in the Faith wh●n they fell; and this proves what I said of them, which thou hast reviled me for.  Pr. 
Christ said to Peter, when thou art converted, where you say, that Peter was never converted before his repentance, but only convinced, which contradicts that you said he erred from the Faith: It's against Christ's prayer, saying, I have prayed for thee that thy faith may not fail: if he had not Faith when Christ spoke these words to him, When thou art converted strengthen thy Brethren; only do signify when he should be fully recovered.  An. 
Here thou fightest with thy own shadow, for it doth not follow that Peter had no Faith, when he was convinced before fully converted, and the words, When thou art converted strengthen thy Brethren, are Christ's own words to Peter, about which thou hast thus wrangled against me, which plain enough imply that there was something which was not of Faith, that Peter was to be converted from; and Faith is given in measure in the convincement in order to a through conversion, as also thou grants that these words, When thou art converted, do signify when he should be fully recovered from the sad breach his fall made on his Soul; what a full recovery and yet the Devils work remaining all his time; what confusion's this? And is the full recovery called conversion as thou sayst? Then you that contend for sins remaining all your Life time, remain all your time in the unconverted state; and that the Desciples had some Faith b●fore they we●e thus fully converted, is the thing which I have confessed, which still makes for what I say; that there is a possibility of falling from the Faith, before this work of conversion is fully wrought, and therefore the more need of being watchful and exercising that little Faith received; so that I do not maintain Satan's work, or say that he overthrew Peter's Faith ●s falsely I am accused.  Pr. 
It is not sad Doctrine (as you say) but comfortable, that a Believer may fall, as David and Peter, whereas he doth not fall wholly away.  An. 
Is this Doctrine counted Authentic or Orthodox in the Kirk of Scotland, that it is not sad Doctrine but comfortable, that a Believer may fall, as David and Peter did? And do you propose this to your Auditors as matter of comfort? Surely if you do, you are misserable comforters; for to be comforted with telling them they may fall, as David and Peter did, is to be comforted with denying Christ, and commiting adultery, as it may be probable, too to many of your Kirk take comfort in such things; which whilst they do, your Stool of Repentance will not absolve them, nor prove them to be in the Faith, howbeit a few line● before, in contradiction to thyself, thou confessest that Peter's fall did weaken his Graces and cloud his comforts very much, and surely it was matter of Sorrow, and bitter Lamentation to him, as also was David's fall to him; for which he suffered the Terrors of the Lord, and great Sorrow and Tribulation, as at large in his complaints and prayers may be proved.  Pr. 
What a brave Patron of your Cause are you, when in defence of this, that a Believer may not Sin; ye say he may fall wholly away from Grace.  An. 
Here thou hast grossly perverted and wronged my words, for that some Believers may fall, is not my defence to prove that they may be fully restored and perfected, so as not to sin; but that there is a state in which 'tis possible for some to fall away from G●ace, wh●ch is before they come to that perfection and safety that answers the end of their Faith and Praying, etc. This cuts off much of thy cavilling frothy false accusation.  Pr. 
Ye ask if I can instance in Peter or David any thing (Viz. Sin) before their death (which they were not freed from before their decease)  Answ. 
Though I could not instance gross falls of such a foul nature, yet they have their failings; Esiah an old Prophet, subject to like passions that we are; Peter walked not with a straight foot, David saith, if thou enter into Judgement, etc.  An. 
Here thou hast gone about to accuse David, and Elias, and Peter with failings till their death, but in proving thy charge com●s very faintly off, for that of passions is answered before; and what thou sayest of Peter not walking with a straight foot; Was that till death? Or did he so walk all his Life time? Surely thou hast herein greatly wronged Peter and the rest of them, and though there be a time and a state wherein, if God enter into Judgement who can be justified, yet there is a state wherein his people are Redeemed through Judgement, and purged, by the spirit of judgement and burning.  Pr. 
You maintain that a Believer from the first Sinneth not.  An. 
Thy accusing of me with maintaining that a Believer is freed from all Sin, from the first time he is a Believer, is a falsehood and an abuse put upon me; for he is a Believer before he obtain victory, and is taught to believe in the Light, that he may be a Child of the Light, and so become born of God.  Pr. 
You do symbolise with the Papists, saying Believers are freed from all Sin; which yet they do not hold of all Believers, but of some of their Perfectionaries. Ye say ye do not hold Merit or Purgatory.  An. 
Nay, Thou hast symbolised with the Papists, who hast pleaded for sin till death, and said also that perfect holiness both of Soul and Body, is not to be till the Resurrection, when that shall be thou knowest not, which (as before was answered thee) makes for their imagination of a Purgatory; but if the Papists hold that some Believers are free from all Sin and perfected in this Life, therein they outstrip thee and the Priests, who would exclude all Believers from perfection and freedom in this Life.  Pr. 
Ye say that all men have a like Light and Grace, some do attain to salvation, others not, which proceedeth not from any difference of Grace given by God, but that others have better improven the Light given to all, which improvement must indeed come from free will. Ye hold Merit. You are not so ingenious as Papists.  An. 
Concerning Grace being given alike to all, if thou intendest in measure or quantity, thou hast vainly made repetitions without ground against us; but as for the improvement of the Grace it comes not from free will, as falsely thou hast said, but from the capacity the creature is put into by the Grace itself; for man's will is not made free of itself, but by the Grace or Power of God, which worketh in man to will and to do: But and if sums not attaining of salvation, is because it's either from a difference of the Grace given by God, or for want of sufficient Grace given by him; according to thy Doctrine, than this charges the fault upon God as being partial, and the occasion of some men's destruction, contrary to that saying of the Prophet, He willeth not the death of a sinner, but rather his return, etc.  Pr. 
That the Light that Christ enlighteneth all men with, is sufficient for the knowledge of the mysteries of the Kingdom, is contrary to Scriptures.  An. 
Nay, It is not contra●y to the Scriptures, that the Light of Christ in men, is sufficient for the knowledge of mysteries of the Kingdom savingly, in that 'tis sufficient for believing, leading out of darkness and to receive the Light of Life.  
And they from whom God hath hid those mysteries, are such as disobey the Light, and shut their eyes against it, as Christ said, Their eyes have they closed, etc. lest they should see, and be converted and I should heal them. All which doth evidence the defect and fault not to be in the Light of Christ, but in them that disobey it.  Pr. 
The natural man cannot know the things that are of God, he hath no sufficient Light to know that which he cannot know.  An. 
That therefore he hath no sufficient Light, is no true consequence; for then by this, none have Light sufficient whilst in the natural state, which all are in before they are made spiritual; thy consequence had only held to prove the Light insufficient, if thou couldst have proved that they that are in the fallen and natural state cannot be changed, nor restored into a spiritual state [but this were gross to affirm] for as man is natural he cannot know the things of the Spirit, bu● the spiritual man doth.  Pr. 
The Jews that had the outward means shut their eyes against it, neither doth it mean of the Light of Christ within, except only the Light of nature.  An. 
The Jews had not only an outward means, but also an inward Light, the good Spirit of God given to them though they Rebelled, and the Word nigh them, in their heart's, &c. which was not a Light of nature; Herein thou hast greatly erred; And would Christ have reproved any for shutting their eyes against that which is natural and insufficient, and made that the cause of their not being converted and healed? See Mat. 13 15. Thine and the Priest's darkness and ignorance in this matter; How great is it!  Pr. 
The Kingdom of God being Righteousness, Peace, Joy in the Holy Ghost, no man that hath not the Sanctifying Spirit, hath it or had it within him; no peace nor joy in the wicked.  An. 
The Kingdom of heaven was in the Pharisees or Jews as Christ said, The kingdom of heaven is within you, Luk. 17.21. when they were unsanctifyed▪ though they were not come into it, nor to attain to the righteousness and peace of it, for that's attained to by such as are translated out of darkness into the Light, for all that have a true Light and Seed in them are not in it.  Pr. 
The Light of the Scriptures is a Light shining in a dark place, 2 Pet. 1.  An. 
The Light that Peter directed them to, was the more sure Word of prophecy, 2 Pet. 1. And was that the Scriptures of the Prophets? Or did that Light come from them (or from Christ?) If so; then, Why were they not directed to the Scriptures of the Apostles? Or, Were the Scriptures of the Prophets more sure than the Apostles writings? Surely the Light which leads to the day star arising in the heart, thou art exceeding ignorant of, and thy darkness may be felt.  Pr. 
How gross Pelagionisme is that, the same Light which was Sanctifying to others that obeyed, was Condemning to Judas and Cain: Is Gods revealing of those things and hiding of them, the same Sanctifying Light and Illumination?  An. 
God who reveals those things to the obedient that he hides from the disobedient; this plainly contradicts thee and thy former words, for God is still the same Light, and it is the Spirit of Truth that Sanctifyes and Justifyes the Righteous or Obedient, that reproves the world of sin, etc. And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world and men love darkness rather than light, etc. Joh. 3. So in this matter thou hast showed thyself ignorant of the Scriptures.  Pr. 
Where there are many Words of God, being taken together they are called the Word of God.  An. 
Thou mightest as well say, that many words and one word are both one; Where provest thou thy assertion? For in contradiction to this presently after, the Scriptures call Christ the Word of God in some places, and sure the Scriptures and Christ are distinguished; they are not Christ.  Pr. 
K. 8.46. That there is no man liveth and sinneth not. It doth not say, there is no man liveth and hath not sinned.  An. 
He that abideth in Christ the second Covenant sinneth not but is redeemed out of that state in which there is no man that sinneth not, and John said, If we say we have not sinned we make him a liar, etc. 1 Joh. 1.10.  Pr. 
Their begetting is in order of nature before their faith.  An. 
Whe●e provest that? Is begetting in the unbelief then, and not in the Faith whereas the Word which begetteth is the Word of Faith and profits not where 'tis not mixed with Faith within.  Pr. 
Those of your way have held out to the world, that to have Hebrew Greek and Latin, is a mark of Antichrist.  An. 
Thou hast often wronged those of our way, as thou hast in this, wherein thou art answered at first.  Pr. 
Those who tell us of a faith in Christ without the Scriptures, have no Light in them.  
Secondly, There are many things which we think and desire against the Law, which the Light within would never have discovered if there had not been the knowledge of the Law contained in the Scriptures.  An. 
Are all unbelievers then, and have no Light in them but who have the Scriptures? Thy blindness in this is detected before: And, What contradiction is it to tell of some having no Light in them, when before thou hast confessed all men to have a natural Light, or the Light of a natural Conscience in them?  
Secondly, And was it the Scriptures or the Law as it is in the Letter that discovered to Paul his sins and desires, or the Law inward? For he had the Law outward, before he knew or was turned to the Law in his mind, or was clearly convinced in himself.  Pr. 
Did ever the Prophets or Apostles try the Doctrines of persons deluded by Satan, with the Spirit without the Scripture, Deut. 13.  An. 
The Prophets and Apostles had the Spirit, and knew its sufficiency before they gave forth Scriptures, and these were not deluded by Satan as falsely thou hast accused us to be.  An. 
Have not some of your way been so blasphemous as to aver Jesus Christ to be a type, as to call themselves the Messiah to whom Hosanna should be said.  An. 
I know none in our way, that either calls themselves the Messiah or that own such a thing, but confess to Jesus Christ as b●ing the substance, and the end of types shadows and figures; but as for those whom thou hints of, about their saying Hosanna, they were not in our way but testified against, and some of themselves came after to see, confess and repent of their error, so to upbraid us with any ones failings or miscarriage, especially when 'tis both disowned and testified against by us, this is both unequal and unjust; and wouldst thou be so dealt by if I should go to reckon up how many drunken and whoring Priests th●re be, and should charge all of you and your whole Kirk with their wickedness; Wouldst thou take it well? Which indeed I might better do, whilst such are owned and upheld as teachers of others among you, th●n thou mights accuse us with persons and actions, that are cast out from amongst us.  Pr. 
What is the Rule whereby the motions of the Spirit are to be tried whether they be such, or the motions of Satan and our deceitful hearts? Ye answer the Spirit is the Rule, but this cannot be; for the Spirit hath given the Scriptures.  
Secondly, Neither is that place which ye cite to the purpose, (Viz. The Anointing teacheth all things) for though he teach it is by this Rule.  An. 
Yes, The Spirit of God is sufficient, a Rule sufficient both to try the motions of Satan, and your deceitful hearts, it searcheth all things; The Lord searcheth the hearts and trieth the reins, telleth unto man his thoughts. And if the Anointing within teacheth of all things; Must the Scriptures be a Rule to the Anointing, that thou seemest to tie it to the Scriptures? Or, Is not the teaching of the Anointing Scripture, as well as it was in them that spoke Scripture from it? Or, Must not people believe the Anointing, till they have searched the Scriptures to try it by them? If so, then when the Anointing would tell and show them their particular states, and thoughts, and motions, which the Scriptures do not tell them, nor particularly charge upon them, than they are not at all in such cases to believe, nor follow the Anointing according to thy Doctrine; and what is this but to set up the Scriptures above the Anointing, and the Letter above the Spirit, which is a gross error, and bespeaks great ignorance.  Pr. 
In the Synod at Jerusalem, Act. 15. the Apostles searched the Scriptures for what they determined, before they said, it seemed good to the holy ghost and us.  An. 
Where provest thou that they searched the Scriptures for what they determined, before they said, it seemed good to the holy ghost and us? Doth not this plainly confute thee, that what they said was from the holy ghost? And, Was not its teaching their Rule then? And, What Scripture had they then to forbid Circumcision as they did? Nay, Had they not Scripture ra●her for it? If then they had not Scripture to forbid it, they should not have denied or forbid it, nor have believed the holy ghost in this case; by thy Doctrine, what silly work hast thou made on't; and, How hast thou broken the neck of thy own cause?  Pr. 
The gift of discerning of Spirits was a peculiar gift given but to some, but this was not for trial of Doctrine: None who had that gift of discerning of Spirits did try any Truths or Doctrine, or practice, but by the Scripture.  An. 
This is a strange Doctrine, that they must only try Spirits by the gift or Spirit of Truth, and not any Truths or Doctrine; Whether is greater, the trial of Spirits or of Doctrines? Whereas the Spirit search●th all things, and is a Spirit of true Judgement, that giveth true understanding; but according to thy false Doctrine that none who had discerning of Spirits did try any Truths or Doctrine, or practice, but by the Scriptures: Then by this, when the Apostles in their Epistles writ divers things that were not before in the Scriptures, they were not to be believed by them in the Churches that had the gift of discerning, and when the Spirit of Truth shall lead to speak or prophesy concerning a particular Place, People or Nation, that which they have no Scripture for, this therefore is not to be believed for want of Scripture to prove it by. Thy ignorant and sottish stuff which also excludes all those Books and Prophecies of the holy men of God spoken of, which are not recorded in the Bible. And those of our Friends, which foretold of the late calamities befallen the City of London, both that of the ●lague, and that of the Fire, which were both fore-seen and foretell, yet they had no Scripture to prove it; but alas, such as thou are silly and shallow in these matters, being but as those Seers and Watchmen that are blind, who would insinuate into people, that both Prophesying, Visions and Revelations are ceased, and lay all upon the Scriptures; and then how know you the Doctrine contained in them to be true without the Spirit.  Pr. 
Ye say; Must the Scriptures be the Rule to discern or try false Spirits when they speak Scripture?  Ans. 
When the Devil spoke Scripture to Christ, he confuted him by Scripture, which showed he had perverted them; and so he confounded the Scribes and Pharisees always.  An. 
But could not Christ discern the Devil's spirit without the Scriptures? What gross error and ignorance is employed and couched in this thy impertinent answer! Thou tellest us Christ confuted him by the Scripture, which was when the Devil brought Scripture words to back his Temptations withal, which is not an answer; besides the Devils tempting Christ in these words, Command that these stones be made bread; and, Cast thyself down, etc. were not Scripture, but he falsely went about to have backed them with Scriptures, contrary to the end and intent of the Scriptures.  Pr. 
You answer blasphemously, that they thought to have Eternal Life in the Scriptures, as if our Lord Jesus Christ was fomenting them in a deceit of their own hearts, in bidding them search the Scriptures, for to find him in them, and so Eternal Life.  An. 
Thy charge against my answer is false, and I value it not, that Christ should bid them search the Scriptures to find him in them; this is a strange Doctrine and worse than the former, to lay that upon Christ which he never intended nor spoke; his words were not that they might find Christ in the Scriptures, nor Eternal Life, but in them ye think to have eternal life, whereas they would not come to him that they might have Life; and so, Dost thou think that Christ that died at Jerusalem, was to be found in the Scriptures?  Pr. 
That Christ has paid a ransom for those that wilfully trample under foot the blood of the Son of God, those places are understood by you, of every individual person in the world, that he tasted death for them is false, contrary to the Scriptures, and maketh the death of Christ to be vain, and exalteth free will.  An. 
what we understand of those places of Scripture, is neither false nor contrary to the Scriptures, as falsely and erroneously thou hast accused us; for that Christ died for all that were dead in sins, tasted death for every man, gave himself a Ransom for all, is the propitiation not for our sins only, but for the sins of the whole world, is plain in the Scriptures, which ignorantly thou quarrels against.  Pr. 
If Christ did pay a Ransom for the Soul of Judas, he hath Redeemed him; those for whom he hath given himself, he Redeemed from all iniquity, but the damned and reprobates are not Redeemed: Those for whom Christ came, he is a Saviour unto, and saveth them from their sins: How are they lost if he came to save them? But this argueth either defect of wisdom, that he did not foresee such an intention of his death would prove frustrations, or else want of power to effectuate his intention of saving them.  An. 
Christ's absolute intention and will is not made void, nor wants he power to effect it, but such an intention we did not lay upon his death to save all: And as for the death of Christ and his intention of saving, being made vain and frustrations, either from defect of wisdom or want of power, these are both false; for his intention therein, consists with his good will and freeness towards all, for I did not say that his intention was absolute to save all, but I do say, it was an intention of good to all, according to the good will of God towards all, who willeth not the death of sinners but rather that they may return and live. But Christ in his suffering and death was passive, and the putting forth of his power to save such as are saved, stood not barely therein, though his good will therein appeared, but we are saved by his life. But are the damned and reprobates such, because ordained of God so to be, or because Christ, died not for them (according to thy Doctrine?) And so; Must the cause of their destruction be laid upon God and Christ, or upon them for rejecting free Grace, resisting the council of the Lord, not liking to retain God in their knowledge, and trampling under foot the blood of the Son of God (as thou hast confessed before) to thy own contradiction, who so much haste cavilled against us, for confessing to the free Grace of God, and Christ's dying for all (or every man?) But this is like your pitiful narrow, and partial Presbiterian Spirit and Principle; that would so limit God in the dispensation of his Grace, and tie it up in such a narrow compass; and, What was the cause of Judas his fall? And, Who was the Author of his Transgression? Was God or he to be blamed therein? And, Had not he Grace given him before, seeing that by Transgression he fell? Will thy telling us so often of Judas clear thee or confute us? How silly a●d weak hast thou showed thyself in this matter?  Pr. 
Those [all] for whom he died cannot be meant of every individual person, for they live to him, and not to themselves; but the wicked that perish live not to Christ. Secondly, Neither would Christ ev●r give himself, his blood a Ransom for them, for whom he would not pray; but he saith, he prayeth not for the world, Joh. 17.  An. 
Thou hast herein wronged the Scripture, and erred; for it is not all for whom Christ died that live to him, for, 2 Cor. 5. chap. & ver. 14, 15. If one died for all, then were all dead, and that he died for all, that they which live should not henceforth live unto themselves, but unto him which died for them, and rose again.  
Now they which live unto him, are not those (all) for whom he died.  
And Christ praying not for the world at that time, 2. John 17. is no argument that he did not give himself a Ransom for all; for though at that time he prayed not for the world, but for the disciples or such as were chosen out of the world (who were in the world before they were chosen out of it) yet at other times he did pray for his persecutors, and such as were of the world; as also exhorted his to pray for their enemies and persecutors, etc.  Pr. 
Judas never got saving Grace, nor that same Grace that Peter got, and therefore could not reject it.  An. 
Judas had part of the Ministry that the other Apostles had; and, Did not that proceed from saving Grace? Or, What Grace? (How blind art thou!) And wherefore was Judas condemned then; Was it because God refused to give him saving Grace, or for his own transgression?  Pr. 
The Scriptures import that Christ is a propitiation for all the Elect which are called all the world.  An. 
John said, He is the propitiation for our sins (and were not they the Elect) and not for ours only, but for the sins of the whole world. Must we believe thy meaning contrary to the very words of Scripture, or were the whole world all the Elect? How hast thou wrested plain Scripture herein?  Pr. 
Who is it, that hath put the difference betwixt Peter's believing, from Judas misbelieving? Whether it be God's Grace to Peter denied to Judas?  An. 
Where provest thou it was denied to Judas, or that Judas had no part of the same Grace? For before thou sayest wicked men have the common work of the Spirit (but in contradiction sayest) which is not supernatural, from Rom. 2.14. Were th●y then wicked men spoken of there, Which did by nature those things contained in the law, and showed the work, or effect of the law written in their hearts? What then are they that Rebel against the law, if they that obey it be wicked? Whereas the Apostle saith, before, That the doers shall be justified. See how thou hast brought forth one error and falsehood upon another.  Pr. 
Is not the Father distinct from the Son and the Spirit, in the personal subsistence?  An. 
Where learnedest thou these words (the Father distinct from the Son and Spirit in the personal subsistence) these are not the words of Scripture, or the words of Scripture clearly conferred together, as thou sayest after, but in contradiction after, thou sayest, although the Scripture doth not in so many words make mention of three Persons, who are one God, and three distinct Persons, and that these cannot be three, if they be not distinct; for where there is no distinction, there is perfect oneness, etc. What's the consequence of this, but that therefore there is not perfect oneness in the Deity or Godhead; because, three distinct Persons (or three distinct one from another in personal subsistence?) Is this good Doctrine? Is not that oneness between the Father and the Son perfect? And, Did not Christ say, I and my Father are one, and prayed that his might be perfect in one, as he and his Father were one? And though thou hast said, you disallow all Traditions, or any written rule which is not Scripture, and yet thou wilt use words and distinctions, which are not Scripture according to thy own confession; (What confusion art thou ●n!)  
For whereas I answered thee, that we own what the Scriptures of truth assert of the Godhead, Viz. That there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Spirit, and these three are one, etc. (and thou thyself in the next Page sayest, that both the Father, the Son, and the holy Ghost, are a Spirit) howbeit, my honest answer in Scripture words would not satisfy thee, but thou hast villifyed and abused me in this matter, in several reproaches and slanders, as with shameless railing and deriding, etc. with gross evasion, with not being able to answer thee, with not owning what the Scriptures assert, and with blaspheamous fancies, blaspheming Jesus Christ, etc. All which accusations I utterly deny as thy malicious lies and slanders against me (and thy bundle is stuffed with many more of like nature) and if thou didst not propound any of those quarrels as not knowing the answer of them, as thou sayest, etc. then, Didst thou propound them to cavil, and get some advantages to carp at? For thou hast showed thyself in prejudice against us, and hast reckoned me (or us) as wanting Learning, &c howbeit thou hast showed such Learning as thou hast to confute me, with broken School phrases and words, with some few fragments, and traditional distinctions patched up together, which we can have no Scripture for, but thy consequences, which much might be said to show the weakness and shallowness thereof.  Pr. 
Those who had Christ the living bread, yet were partakers of the outward bread, as the disciples were; Were not the Corinthians Saints? etc.  An. 
That the disciples had outward bread; Who denies? But that it was to continue always of necessity, as an Ordinance after Christ, the Living Bread and Life was received in them, (which is the substance) that's not yet proved, that the disciples were to show forth the Lords death till he come in the observation of the Bread and Cup (or supper) I grant: Now what, and when that coming was, is the matter in controversy. Christ came after, when he was arisen, was apparent; he also spiritualy came, and was more fully revealed within the Saints, and was their Living Bread and Life (as thou grantest) now when he was with the disciples at supper (before he was Crucified) he intended by his coming, a third coming, till which they were to do it, which coming not being in their days, nor is yet (by your Doctrine) this is no where proved in Scripture as we know.  Pr. 
Were not the Corinthians Saints, called in Christ? And yet the Apostle, 1 Cor. 11. he gave them the Bread and Cup which Christ gave to his disciples, the night he was betrayed.  
Secondly, And whereas ye say, that Christ's coming again was when he rose again; how false is this and absurd, etc.  An. 
That's very strange Doctrine, that the Apostles gave the Corinthians, the Bread and Cup which Christ gave to his disciples the night he was betrayed; Where was it kept in the mean time, that they both should have the same Bread and Cup, the one so many years after the other? Where hast thou learned this, amongst the Popish Traditions and Relics? But 'tis probable thou meanest otherwise then thy words import.  
Secondly, And Is it false and absurd to say, that Christ's coming again was when he rose again? Did he not come again after he rose? And must that be reckoned for no coming? And a third coming which is not yet; and, Was that an outward coming till which the disciples and Corinthians were to continue the Bread and the Cup, whereas that coming is not yet according to thy Doctrine? The Apostle to the Corinthians told them what Christ did and spoke to the disciples in the case, but we read not that he imposed it upon them, to continue it all their time, or till a supposed coming of Christ, which is not yet come, for he said to them, The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ, the bread which we break is it not the communion of the body of Christ, And, Was not this the substance? Where then remained the necessity of the shadow, or outward Representations (or Mementoes as some calls them?) And, When was the Church to show forth the Life of Christ, and by what, if all their time they must needs (and people still) show forth or represent his death, and him as suffered (as thou sayest) by Bread and Wine? Doth not the substance end the shadows? And, Where have you any example in Scripture, for the manner of your administering Bread and Wine at certain times a year, and calling it a Sacrament, The Lord's Supper? etc.  Pr. 
The Apostle telleth that the Corinthians were to show forth his death till he came again, so it behoved to be such a coming again as was yet future, and unaccomplished in the Corinthians time: the Bread and Cup spoken of to the Corinthians, behoved to be outward Bread as showing forth his death.  
Secondly, Because it was the same that Christ took and divided, and gave to his disciples.  An. 
What confusion's here! Were they to use the outward Bread and Cup after they were dead then? If they were to observe it to a coming unaccomplished in their tim●. And if it was the same that Christ divided and gave to his disciples; Was that the outward bread so given to both? Or, Was there not more in Christ's words then the outward observation? What was his Body and his Blood, and the Cup of the New Testament in his Blood, and the f●uit of the vine in the kingdom; Was it not spiriritual, a mystery, which the outward Bread, Cup and Passover were but as signs or shadows of?  Pr. 
There is no such passage written, that Christ appointed it to be taken away by his suffering.  An. 
As oft as they did it, it was to show the Lords death till he came; What coming, and when was it, or is it to be he intended? Was't a first, or a second, or a third? And was it inward or outward?  Pr, 
Neither is the Bread and Wine a shadow.  
Secondly, For he being present, and it representing him (as suffered, it cannot be called a shadow as of things to come)  An. 
Is the Bread and Wine the substance Then? this is popish, thus to deny the ●read and Wine to be a shadow, and worse than the Episcopals that tell us of their Sacraments being outward and visible signs, of an inward and Spiritual Grace.  
Secondly, If Christ's being present makes Bread and Wine no shadow, or not figurative, then by the same reason the Passover which the disciples prepared (to answer that part of the Law) was not a shadow, nor Circumcission, Offerings, etc. when done either for Christ or in his presence, which to affirm and make that the reason, were gross and absurd, whereas the mystery, substance, or end, was not so fully manifest, when Christ was outwardly present (before his being offered up) as after when they were endued with power from on high, received the promise of the Comforter, came to eat his flesh and drink his blood, which saying, the disciples for a time (when he was with them) were troubled at, and counted hard.  Pr. 
It concerneth all who own the Doctrine contained in the Scriptures, though they be for baptising with sprinkling, to propound a query to men that do with sacrilegious boldness, take away the Ordinances instituted by Christ unto believers.  An. 
Is it not then sacrilegious boldness for thee and the Priests to teach (or impo●e) sprinkling Infants, which is neither a Doctrine contained in Scriptures, nor a baptising believers, howbeit, such a great stress hath been laid on the Scriptures before as being the rule and means for Faith, and Salvation, revealing the Mystery, for receiving Life Eternal in them, Christ in them, etc. yet we find not sprinkling I●fants in the Scriptures neither by command nor practice, though so much pleaded for by one here that tells us, Pag. 35. they disallow all Traditions or any unwritten rule which is not Scripture; but sprinkling Infants is not Scripture but only a Tradition of men: And one main plea for it is, that Infant's baptism was approved and practised in the Orthodox Church of Christ, etc. which is just like the Papists and Jesuits plea, to believe as the Church believes (taking it for granted that the Church is pure (as he saith) Orthodox in all her Traditions) whether they be Scripture yea or nay; whereas before, all Traditions or any unwritten rule which is not Scripture are disallowed, but instead of Scripture for proof in this matter, we have mention made of the Teachers and Guides of the Church (as he calls them) as Tertullian, Cyprian, who lived about 247. after Christ, and Lactanctius that lived about the year, 317. As also the latter sound Fathers (as he calls them) as Augustin, Jerom, Bassil, (Viz. their being for Infant's baptism) but what proves all this from Scripture (if it be as he says they did) Must we take it up upon an implicit faith, because such and such approved of it? And yet at other times, lay such a stress on the Scriptures as the perfect rule of obedience of faith, etc. How hath E. I. undervallued the Scriptures in this matter, and spoilt his own cause touching them? And, Do not the Papists plead for their Traditions and Ceremonies against Protestants and others, in like manner as he hath done in this cause? And, Would he be willing to accept their Arguments against Protestants, when they are of the same nature, and bear the same face with his in this point?  
Pr. That the Covenant Abraham and his Seed was under, was the same in substance, with that which believers now and their Seed are under; and therefore the Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant as abraham's were.  An. 
Where provest thou by Scriptures, that sprinkling Infants is the Initial Seal of the Covenant? (Or that ti's so called) thou herein dost but beg the question, and takest it for granted that it is the Initial Seal of the Covenant of Grace, (which I deny) and then from thence fallatiously draws thy inference and conclusions, for its being to Believers Seed as Abraham's Children (to wit the males were Circumcised) and that the Covenant Abraham and his Seed was under, was the same in substance with that which believers now, and their Seed are under: But what of this; if it be granted, it was God's Covenant or Promise; Must they therefore be under man's tradition? which sprinkling Infants is, (To plead for it from believers being baptised, is to ground it upon that, you (Priests) are out of the practice of) so as to that it's not pertinent to dispute with such about it, who own it not in practice, but only talk of it for a cover to a popish tradition, and thereby show their hypocrisy the more; and, Must now sprinkling Infants stand for the substance, or antitype instead of Circumcision? Or, Was Circumcision the type of Infant's Baptizme (so called?) Whereas sprinkling Infants hath neither the true form nor matter of Baptism [outward] in it, for in the next page it's confessed, that the word in the first Language signifying Baptism is rendered washing, Mar. 7.4, 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, afterwards it's said, that being washed all over, best signifies our inward renovation and burial with Christ, and thus contradictions and confusions are heaped up in many places.  
And to my saying, that it's not commanded under the New Covenant to Baptise Infants, thou repliest the Apostle Peter, Act. 2.38, 39 says, That those to whom that promise that God would be their God, and the God of their Seed, should be baptised, but to Believers and their Seed, he saith that promise belongeth, etc. Now let the Reader but peruse that Scripture mentioned by thee, and compare thy fallacious arguing from it; for Peter said, Ver. 38. Repent and be baptised every one of you, etc. Were they Infants such as the Priests sprinkle, that he bid repent? How grossly hast thou perverted Scripture! And Ver. 39 The promise is to you and your Children, and to all that are a far off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. Now, What can be inferred from hence for sprinkling Infants? Were all they whom God should call Infants when called? Or, Did Peter intend they should all have their Children sprinkled before they were called? But in contradiction afterward thou sayest, though there be no express command, yet it's of divine institution and warrant, if it be drawn from good consequence from the Scripture, indeed I have seldom met with any that have appeared so Impertinent and Ridiculous in their consequences, as thou hast done in this matter, though thou countest thy consequence of Divine Authority, as well as express commands; But they bear no such Authority with us, who see thy perverting and abusing Scriptures to maintain, and patch up a popish tradition and humane invention, which thou hast no express command for; and then thou hast in this doubly confuted thyself, for is there some command of Divine Authority now which is not Scripture, when before thou laid such a great stress upon Scripture and deniedst Revelation Immediate teaching, etc. from the Light within and hast dirided it under the name of Enthusiasm, when now thou pleads for something being of Divine Authority which is not Scripture viz your sprinkling Infants, which in Page 37. thou sayest brought to the Church, is the ordinary way of putting on Christ, and ordinary means for Salvation; and sayest we are Baptised into Jesus Christ and his death, from, Rom. 6. and 3. whereas before, the Scriptures were cried up as the ordinary way and means, etc. But now, that which no where the Scriptures repuires, and that of, Rom. 6 and 3. So many of us as where baptised into Jesus Christ, were baptised into his death; how impertinent is this for thy turn, as if sprinkling did Baptise Infants into the death of Christ, or as if the Apostles and Believers than were so baptised, when Infants (as thou pleadest) which is absurd to imagine, and I should think thou canst not really intend such a thing in this proof as sprinkling Infants, which thou wouldst also make us believe is a standing Ordinance of Christ to continue till the end of the world from, Mat. 28. and, Mar. 16.16. where they are commanded, To teach all Nations baptising them. And, He that believes and is baptised shall be saved. But did th●y go to teach Infants of a week old? Or, Were such the Believers that were Baptised? How blind, sottish, and ridiculous hast thou appeared in this matter, as also in counting it one while the ordinary means for Salvation, or that which Baptizeth into the death of Christ; another while as in the thirty eight Page that which signifies our putting on Christ, inward washing, etc. so here it doth but signify inward washing, and therefore is not the putting on Christ; not that which brings into the Church, neither doth it really signify inward washing, for thou speakest, as that being washed all over best signifies our inward Renovation; and one while, pleads for this thy pretended great Ordinance, as belonging to the Seed of Believers, and of such as have received the Spirit; another while the Children of which are profane, and drunkards that profess the Gospel, whom thou sayest are in this sense accounted Believers, and thirty ninth Page reckons it not needful for Ministers to be persuaded that they are Righteous, so it appears such Ministers as thou art will be easily satisfied for their own ends, and upon slender grounds receive men as Believers, if they do but profess the Gospel though they be drunkards and profane and thus the Parish Priests of the Presbyterian gang have deceitfully daubed their hearers, and acted like hypocrites towards those whom they knew to be drunkards, profane, and so really unbelivers, unholy unrighteous, etc. yet if they will from their teeth outward, say they believe and profess the Gospel, though they be known to the contrary, the Priest will not deny them their Seal of the Covenant to their Children [though they deem them unholy also] which other whiles they deem as such a sacred thing, as only belongs to the Seed of Believers, and such as are within the Covenant.  
And another sorry shift and come off, in the thirty eight Page is concerning the Jews that fell into gross sins, who all drank of the Rock, which was Christ, from hence thou sayest, that to profess Christ is called a drinking of Christ, and where provest thou that Doctrine, that to profess Christ is a drinking of Christ, this is a very easy way thou hast prescribed for drinking of Christ if to profess him be it, and then all that profess him drink of him by this Doctrine, the falsehood whereof we need not say much to.  
But whereas thou sayest concerning those Israelites, That ate the same spiritual bread, and drank the same spiritual drink, that drank of the Rock which was Christ, howbeit thou confessest they fell into gross sins, as is cleared from the History of the Books of Exod. Levit. Numb. Deuteronomy, and 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. and that many of them were Idolaters, lustres after evil, committed fornication, tempters of God, murderers (as thou sayest) by all which thou hast sufficiently confuted thyself, and given a deadly blow to thy own Cause, and proved a falling away from Grace, which before was an Arminian and Popish Doctrine with thee, or Damnable Popery; for, Was not that spiritual meat, and spiritual drink; and that Rock spoken of, saving Grace?  
And thy saying for Infant's Baptism, that it is the Seal of the Covenant, and to be given to those that are within the Covenant; but, Are Drunkards, profane Persons and their Seed, and whole Parishes within the Covenant? Compare thy matter together: Yet thou hast confessed the Spirit is the inward Seal, but sayest Baptism is the outward Seal, and then instead of proof, askest why may not the Covenant now have outward Seals joined with the inward Seal of the Spirit; How faintly comest thou off here? And, Where provest thou sprinkling Infants a Seal of the New Covenant, or that the Covenant hath two such Seals as thou implyest, and how knowest thou that its joined with the inward Seal of the Spirit upon the Children of drunkards and profane persons, or on such as turn drunkards, swearers, etc. who come under this thy Seal, which hath no impression of Scripture or Divine Authority in it; but now seeing that to gloss over thy groundless Tradition and Confusion uttered in maintaining it, thou hast often made use of divers Scriptures, which the Baptists were wont to bring for Baptising or Plunging such as repent or believe; I have not entered here into controversy with rhee about that point, it being not thy own, but only thou wouldst make it serve for a cover; yet when thou turnest Baptist, and intendest to be real in pleading for Plunging believers, thou mayest let me or us know, and that point probably may be treated of, as whether or no it be of necessity to Salvation, and so of continuance to the true Church: But however, under the sense of the Baptism of the Spirit which baptizeth into one body, we do know present sattisfaction, and do acquiess in our Spirits above the Traditions of men and Rudiments of the world.  
E. J. Thy Book came but to my hands this summer, it seems it was delayed in the hands of some, otherwise, I had answered it long ago.  
G. W.   

The DOCTRINES, CONTRADICTIONS, INCONSISTENCIES, and VARIATIONS of the Presbiterian Priests of Scotland, as they were collected (in their own words) out of the said bundle, subscribed by Edward Jameson, etc. together with brief Observations and Notes upon them; evidently showing the confused body of their perverse work and babylonish structure, to the discredit and overthrow of their own corrupt cause, by their many and apparent Incosistencies and self Confutations which are here made obvious.  
THere is no man free of sin in this life.  
Christ is manifest to destroy the works of the Devil.  
Then is Christ manifest to destroy sin and free from it, which they that plead for, know not his manifestation.  
Christ doth not subdue sin totally in this life.  
Whosoever is born of God sinneth not, he that abides in him commits not sin.  
Then he that's born of God, and abideth in Christ knows him to subdue sin totally in this life.  
That Christ is manifest to destroy the work of the devil, if you take it so, may as well prove that Satan shall not tempt a Child of God.  
The evil one toucheth him not 1 Joh. 3. ch. 5. (but this doth not prove any thing) the evil one toucheth them not.  
To say these do not prove any thing is false and against plain Scripture, and they whom the evil one cannot touch, his tempting them hath not power to lead them into his work, for all are not evil doers whom Satan tempts.  
This saying [if we sin] implies as much as [when we sin.]  
We teach that Believers should be daily (by the strength of the Spirit) fight against the flesh.  
The strength of the Spirit of God is greater than the devil or sin either, and they who truly war by it, overcome; and John's words were not (when we sin) but (if we sin) which implies not the same.  
We know in part, is an imperfect degree of knowledge and so sinful.  
There are promises of a growth unto Believers, and of a fullness.  
Which fullness is neither imperfect, nor is any degree of true knowledge sinful.  
David, Job, Daniel, their failings are noted, which I must cite.  
David said, cleanse me from my secret sins.  
And surely then David's prayers were heard, and his requests granted, and David, Job, Daniel, and others, their deliverances are noted as well as their failings, and that in their life time.  
For perfect Righteousness, there is no promise in all the Scriptures to any Believer.  
There are promises unto Believers of a fullness.  
God's everlasting Righteousness is promised which is perfect, and the fullness of Christ, Eph. 4.13. wherein is neither want nor imperfection.  
Christ bade them search the Scriptures, for in them they thought to have eternal life. This thought could not be a delusion.  
Preaching is Gods ordinary appointed way for begetting Faith, not by immediate inward teaching alone, without peaching.  
See the confusion of these Priests, one while (with them) the Scriptures are the ordinary way; another while Preaching; another while, all immediate teaching by God is denied; but another while, it's not by immediate inward teaching alone; another while, a supernatural influence shining on the understanding is owned.  
We may find Eternal Life by searching the Scriptures.  
You deny Learning, study of Scriptures, and deny them interpretatively.  
Now the Priests interpretations are set for (and over) Scripture, which come not from the true and spiritual learning and study, but from Babel.  
They must have the Scriptures, who have the knowledge of Christ, for without this, they cannot be kept from Hell.  
God's absolute Soveranity in his dispensations of Grace is not to be tied.  
Then neither to be tied to the Scriptures, nor the Priests preaching, nor yet to their confused meanings or uncertain interpretations.  
The Light within is your Enthusiastic fancy.  
Christ enlighteneth every man that cometh into the world has planted some Light in every man of the world.  
It's no less than blasphemy to count Christ's Light a fancy; for his life is the light of men, which we bear witness of.  
I deny any immediate teaching by God.  
Begetting faith, is not by immediate inward teaching alone without preaching.  
Then if immediate teaching be of use in part, it is not all to be denied.  
The Scripture maketh known inward sins, thoughts, maketh us wise to Salvation, able to save us.  
Christ is said alone to save us, none have a sincere Supernatural Faith of the Scripture that are ignorant of Christ, there is a faith of the Scriptures that is hystorical, which is not sufficient.  
And surely the Scriptures are not Christ, without whose knowledge, and Supernatural Faith in him, the Scriptures are not rightly known and believed, but hystorically.  
Without this (Viz the Scriptures) they cannot be kept from Hell.  
Christ as the principal cause of Salvation, is said alone to save us.  
And surely he that alone saves, can alone keep man from Hell.  
But the best of these nations and wisest, were the greatest enemies to the Gospel.  
All men have a Light of a natural conscience f●om him, which tells that there is a God, and somewhat of the nature of God, that he is Eternal, and of the moral Law.  
The Light of Christ in all men is not natural but spiritual, and those in all Nations that were led by it, were not enemies to the Gospel.  
We deny that the power of God is immediate (Viz. in his people)  
He told us he will exercise his power; for, and in us.  
Then his power is immediate in us, and works immediately in us many times, to our strengthening, comfort and refreshments, when we hear no man speak or preach to us.  
Faith is a Habit, and an imperfect Creature, and it's as impossible it should be otherwise, as that a man abiding a man should essentially be a beast.  
Saving, Supernatural, Enlightening and Sanctifying Faith is the Gift of God.  
What then, Are men Saved, Englightned, and Sanctified by that which is imperfect? What gross Ignorance and Contradiction is this!  
The Grace of Hope is Imperfect.  
Christ is the Hope of Glory.  
The Grace of Christ is perfect, and he is the Grace of all our Graces.  
I call the Scriptures the Word of God, and the Gospel the Word of Reconciliation, which are distinguished.  
The Gospel is the Scriptures written by the Prophets; what Mark wrote is the Gospel, the beginning of the Gospel; the Gospel is a part of the Scriptures one with them, contained in them.  
If the Scriptures and Gospel be one; How are they distinguished? And, if the Gospel and Mynistry of Christ be one, How is the Scripture it? And if Marks declaration was the beginning of the Gospel, How are the Prophet's writings the Gospel? Is not manifest confusion, variation, and inconsistencies in these passages?  
That Christ was first known himself ere he gave the knowledge of the Scriptures; the Apostle Paul denies your consequence.  
It's false, that any have a sincere Supernatural Faith of the Scriptures that are ignorant of Christ, etc.  
Then 'tis not false that there must (in some degree) be a Supernatural Knowledge and Faith of Christ, before the Scriptures be truly known or believed.  
I deny any immediate teaching by God, Christ's immediate teaching will no ways follow.  
Christ's opening the understanding to know the Scriptures; for he doth by the same Supernatural Influence shine on the understanding and Scriptures, Luke. 24.22.  
Christ's opening and shining by a Supernatural Influence, plainly proves immediate teaching, as we called Quakers do hold; and against the Priests of Scotland's denying it, who thus confute themselves.  
If there be any Pryority, or Posteriority of Christ in the Soul, the Scriptures hath it in the order of nature.  
The Lord in the comunicating of the knowledge of them, he is in his being first; the cause must be before the effect, so the giver of knowledge before the knowledge given.  
So that he that is the first, and cause of true knowledge, hath the Priority and Pre-eminence in all things, without whom the Scriptures are not known; and if it be a Priority of Christ (as is said) than Christ hath it.  
Without the Sanctifying knowledge of Christ, one may understand the Scriptures without error and jangling.  
None can know the Truths of the Scriptures, without the Sanctifying Knowledge of Christ.  
So then, without that Sanctifying Knowledge, none can understand them without error.  
We may find Eternal Life by searching Scriptures, they thought to have Eternal Life in the Scriptures, this thought could not be a delusion.  
He that hath heard and learned of the Father, cometh to him (Viz. to Christ) he (to wit the Spirit of Truth) shall lead believers into all Truth.  
So then the Father is to be heard and learned of, that the Son may be come to, and the Spirit to be followed to lead into all Truth, and this way was before the Scriptures.  
Sin is remaining in part, in all the faculties of God's Children (Viz. in the Will, Mind, and Affections)  
Cleanse thou me, from my secret sins; Peter exhorted the believing Hebrews to abstain from their lusts.  
Then let not sin nor sinful lusts, always remain in believers.  
If you find out any other faculty of the Soul which can be a seat for sin to dwell in, than the Schools will be beholding to you for your new Philosophy.  
When they are believers and begotten, they are so freed that the evil one cannot touch them; many are commended for keeping his Commandments.  
If the evil one cannot touch them, much less hath he power to lead them into sin all their time, or to uphold sin in all their faculties; and the Schools that would have more place for sin, allow Christ no place.  
Believers are not freed from sin wholly till death.  
To be unblamable, is that Grace which is universal in all parts of the renewed man.  
Unblameable is inconsistent with sin, for sin is unblamable where ever it is.  
A believer ever after he is begotten of God is not free of sin, they do not perfectly mortify lusts in them.  
In the Book of Common Prayer, there is a promise to forsake the Devil and all his Works, the vain Pomp and Glory of the world, and sinful lusts of the flesh, and be led by God's Spirit to keep his Commands; many of those who promise may do this and keep it.  
What greater promise can there be of freedom from sin, then to forsake the Devil and all his works, to be led by God's Spirit to keep his Commands?  
Your new Light you pretend, is nothing but old Damnable Popery.  
The Spirit of truth will lead believers into all truth. He that hath heard and learned of the Father cometh to him. Viz. to Christ.  
Our Light is the Light of the Spirit of Truth, which cometh from Christ, and guides both to hear and learn of the Father; and this Light was before the Scriptures were, and its blasphemy to call it Damnable Popery.  
In the present time, I am sold under sin, that good I would do, I do not. Groaning under a body of death: It was not a bygone state Paul speaks of, in the present time [I am]  
Paul was giving thanks for victory through Jesus Christ (yet all these are knit together)  
Victory, and being sold under sin, are two differing states, as warring, and being more than a Conqueror are: Paul spoke to the Romans after the manner of men, because of the infirmity of their flesh, and therein condescended to their capacities, below his own present state and enjoyment.  
Perfect holiness, of both Soul and Body, is not to be till the Resurrection, Viz. after death.  
Believers at their death, which is upon their dying, are made perfectly holy.  
Perfect holiness ought not to be put off, neither so long after death, nor till death, for what time do you allow Christ to reign in man, and to serve him, if all your life time sin must remain, and so long the Devil be served?  
The Godly falleth into sin seven times a day; Christ saith to Peter, that he should forgive his brother seventy times seven, which implieth, that a brother may offend often in the day time.  
As for my saying a day, it was a mistake of the citation of the place. That of the Spirit is most prevailing with God's Children, as unto which they do adhere; the flesh they renounce and resist, and which by little and little they overcome.  
It had been well thou hadst confessed thy mistakes as ingenuously in other things, the controversy had been the less; but, Do the Brethren sin all their days? When then do they overcome? What gross confusion art thou in!  
While we live, we must put on the armour of God and war against sin, which is not to be ended till we lay down this Tabernacle.  
We are cleansed from all sin by the Blood of Christ, in Justification when we do believe.  
If believers be cleansed from all sin when they do believe; How have they it to war against, till they lay down this Tabernacle? Surely they believe before.  
Our peace stands in our Justification by Faith, and yet there are remains of sin in us, which we are to mourn for.  
There is a perfect cleansing from the guilt of sin.  
What, a cleansing from the guilt of sin, and not from the sin itself; this is quite contrary to Scriptures.  
Christ was given for an advocate, for the sins of those whom John calls little Children and his own, which therefore were to be.  
That of 1 Joh. 1.12. I write unto you that you may not sin. Page. 30. Christ Redeemeth from all iniquity, is a Saviour and saveth them from their sins. Math. 1.21. Luke. 19.10.  
Christ being thus a Redeemer, a Saviour, an Advocate, therefore sins are not to be; and there was young Men and Fathers as well as little Children.  
The Devil's work remains unsubdued in the Child of God, appears by that Paul saith to the Romans, The God of peace, etc.  
The God of peace shall tread down Satan under your feet shortly, Rom. 16 20.  
And sure, when Satan is thus trodden down under foot, his work cannot remain unsubdued; for both his power and possession is taken from him by a greater than he.  
We have peace with God, but are all compassed about with infirmities and subject to passions as was Elias.  
We are cleansed from all sin by the Blood of Christ.  
A●l passions are not sinful passions; for passions are sufferings for it could not be that Paul and Barnabas were subjects to the like sins with those idolaters, Act. 14.13, 14, 15. when subject to like passion with them.  
Here is another Arminion and Popish error, that believers may fall from Grace.  
A believer may fall, Peter and David sinned foully.  
Surely their sinning so foully was not in the Faith, but when they were turned from it, which required their repentance.  
That Peter and David fell from Faith, is an Arminion, and Popish error.  
Evil works come not from Faith.  
Then the evil works they did, were out of, and against the Faith; and had they stood in the Faith, they had been kept from those evil works.  
Peter and David had their failings, Viz. (till death) Eliah an old Prophet, subject to like passion as we are, etc.  
Christ said to Peter, I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not: When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren. Doth signify when he should be fully recovered.  
And surely Peter was so converted or fully recovered, as to strengthen his Brethren before his decease; and like passions were like sufferings, which may relate to sickness, Ja●. ●. 13, 14. or other afflictions, for Paul and Barnabas were not subject to the like Sins or idolatry with those heathens Act. 14.15.  
It is not sad Doctrine as you say, but comfortable, that as believers may fall as Peter and David, whereas he doth not fall wholly away, but hath still the Seed of Grace remaining in him p. 24.  
The sad breach that Peter's fall made on his Soul, did weaken his Grace and cloud his comforts very much. There are remains of sin within us which we are to mourn for.  
If sin did very much cloud his comforts, and be the cause of mournings as it was both to David and Peter; then for you to plead for sin term of life cannot be a comfortable Doctrine, unless to such as be hardened in sin, and take pleasure in it.  
Which improvement of the Light within, must indeed come from free will, and consequently ye hold Merit.  
We must put on the whole armour of God, and war against sin. pa. 23.  
Do not they improve the Light who war against sin; and this is not of, or from man's will in the Fall, but from the power that converts, and works in him to will and to do.  
There are remains of sin within us while we live here, which we are to mourn for.  
The kingdom of God is Righteousness, Peace, Joy in the holy ghost. Twenty sixth Page.  
Therefore sin which is the cause of sorrow, hath no place in the kingdom of God, which the Saints attain to here.  
Faith is an habit, and an imperfect creature.  
Saving Faith is given of God, and is a saving enlightening of the Soul, to know Christ, Faith, is a Sanctifying Light.  
What strange Doctrine is this, that an imperfect creature is a Saviour, an Enlightener, a Sanctifier; and doth the Kirk of Scotland receive this for Orthodox: The Gift of God is perfect, and every good and perfect Gift comes from God.  
Those who tell us of a Faith in Christ without Scriptures, have no Light in them. pa. 28.  
Twenty sixth Pag. The Jews wilfully rejected the Light, and shut their eyes against it; wicked men, who rebel against the Light, have the Light of a natural Conscience, and the common work of the Spirit.  
Then they had the Light, and the work of the Spirit is not natural, but no Light in them excludes natural Light, as well as spiritual from being in them, whereas in that, Isa. 8.20. it should be no morning in stead of no Light.  
Jesus Christ, bid them search the Scriptures, for to find him in them.  
They might have Life by the true spiritual knowledge of Faith, these who believed and had Life did own the Light within, and who denieth that is Christ, showeth by the Spirit of Revelation and Wisdom within.  
Now Supernatural Knowledge, Light within, Spirit of Revelation and Wisdom within is confessed; but another while immediate teaching, power etc. is denied by those who think to find Christ in the Scriptures; but, Is that Christ that suffered at Jerusalem to be found in the Scriptures? How blind are you Priests of Scotland.  
The Child of God cannot sin Totally and Finally: There is no man liveth and sineth not.  
Those for whom Christ hath given himself he Redeemeth from all iniquity.  
How, from all iniquity, and yet sin so much contended for by you.  
These all for whom Christ died, cannot be meant of each individual person of the world how are they lost if he came to save them; this argueth defect of wisdom to foresee want of power to effect his intention pa. 31.  
He died for all, some have wilfully rejected the Grace given, that wilfully trample under foot, the blood of the Son of God.  
There is neither defect of wisdom nor want of power in Christ, but wilfulness and rebellion in man that lets; he died for all his Grace is freely tendered that they may believe and be saved: But this is not by absolute compulsion and force, as if therefore he were absolutely intended to save all; but Love and Good Will is showed towards all, many wilfully reject and trample upon it (as is confessed)  
Motions of Satan and our deceitful hearts are to be tried, it is comfortable Doctrine, that a believer may fall as David and Peter.  
Those that got a new heart from God, and his fear put in them, they do not depart nor revolt.  
It is the deceitful hearts that are comforted with such Doctrine, that is for falling as David and Peter did, and not the new heart in which Gods fear is put.  
The Scriptures do reveal the Mysteries. pa. 27.  
Jesus Christ showeth by the Spirit of Revelation and Wisdom within. pa. 30.  
The Scriptures testify of the Mysteries, but then Christ by that Spirit within Reveals them.  
The Scriptures (being many words of God taken together) they are called the Word of God. pa. 25.  
The Scriptures calleth Christ the Word of God in some places.  
Christ the Word was before the Scriptures, or the Words, besides, one word is not many words, nor many words properly to be taken for one word.  
Is not the Father distinct from the Son and the Spirit in the personal Subsistance. pa. 31.  
Both the Father and the Son, and the Holy Ghost are a Spirit. pa. 33.  
Both (●or all) a Spirit, and yet distinct in personal Subsistance; Where learned you this Doctrine? Not from the Scriptures.  
Ye do not own what the Scriptures assert, but your own blasphemous fancies (Viz.) about the Deity; three Persons distinct in the personal Subsistance. pa. 32.  
Ye say ye own what the Scriptures of Truth assert of the Godhead; That there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the word and the spirit, and those three are one.  
Then we own what the Scriptures assert of the Deity o● the Father, Word and the Spirit which are one; this is no blasphemy no fancies as maliciously we are accused.  
Except ye call all the words of Scriptures clearly conferred together a cavilling, Viz. touching three distinct▪ Persons in the Deity, etc.  
Although the Scriptures do not in so many words make mention of the three Persons, etc. who are one God; we disallow all Traditions, or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture.  
Then three dictinct Persons in the Deity, distinct in the personal Subsistance, are not the words of the Scriptures but a Tradition, and why do you then allow of that which is not Scripture, but that There are three that bear record in heaven, and these three are one is Scripture.  
The Apostles telleth that the Corinthians were to show forth Christ's death till he came again: The Bread spoken of to them, behoved to be this of outward Bread, etc.  
It behoved to be such a coming again as was yet future and unaccomplished in the Corinthians time.  
Were the Corinthians then to eat and drink outwardly after their time, or so long after their deceases? What absurdity and grossness is here!  
Infant's Baptism was approved by the Orthodox Church, and the Renowned Teachers and Guides thereof, and sound Father, as Tertullian, Cyprian, Lactant, Augustine, Jerom, Basil, etc. It's derived from the Church when pure.  
We disallow all Traditions, or any un-written Rule which is not Scripture, whether they be under pretence of Revelation, which Enthusiasts hold; or Traditions as Papists in this agree.  
Then Infants Baptism not being Scripture (but a popish Tradition) is therefore to be disallowed of.  
Children of believers should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant as abraham's were.  
Circumcision was the Seal of the old Covenant, and it was administered on Males only, page, 35.  
Circumcision of the Males only, was in its time Commanded of God, which is no proof of sprinkling Infants both Males and Females, which was never cammanded of God.  
pa. 38. The Fathers or Isralites, who fell into gross sins, professed the same Doctrine of Salvation; to profess Christ is called a drinking of Chr●st. &c  
Abraham and his Seed under the old Covenant, had the same Mediator which is Jesus Christ, he was the same yesterday to them, that he is to day to believers.  
Their having the same Mediator Jesus Christ the same, etc. And drinking of Christ was more than to profess him, or the Doctrine of Salvation. And, Did such fall into gross sins? What fell they from if not from Grace  
Ye say thereiss no express command for sprinkling of the Infants of believers. pa. 36,  
But we disallow all Traditions or any unwritten Rule which is not Scripture. pa. 35.  
You ' have confessed what I said, that there is no express command for sprinkling Infants, therefore in allowing of it you contradict yourselves.  
Though there be no express command, yet it's of Divine Institution and Warrant (if it be drawn by good consequence) from the Scriptures.  
Truths and Doctrines is to be tried by the Scriptures, so far as can be found in the Scriptures, page, 29. Christ bid search the Scriptures, they reveal the [Mysteries, page▪ 27. I deny any immediate teaching by God, page. 14.  
Although a great stress and necessity is laid upon the Scriptures, and immediate teaching so confidently denied, yet no Sprinkling Infants to be found, or required in Scripture (and whilst any immediate teaching is denied) How is it of Divine Institution? Surely Edward Jamisons consequence herein is not Divine, who denies any immediate teaching.  
pa. 37. If I had said it Viz. Infant's Baptism brought them to the Church, those places and many others do hold it, as, Gal. 3.27. it's the ordinary way of putting on Christ etc.  
I said not that it did bring them into the Church, but that it is a Seal of our entry into the Church, page. 26. sprinkling of water is enough to signify inward washing.  
If it doth not bring into the Church, it is but a sign of inward washing, it's not a putting on Christ; neither can the Scripture prove it when there is no Scripture for it, and were the Scriptures deemed the ordinary way and means, but now sprinkling Infants; What ignorant and gross contradictions are these!  
Ye say Baptism doth not bring them into the Church, it's a bold Sacrilegious usurpation, in detracting from the words of the Book of God, which shall be punished with all the curses of that Book.  
Though there be no express command (for sprin●ling Infants) yet it's of Divine Institution if it be drawn by good consequence, pa. 36.  
See what Curses these Priests have laid upon them that deny the Infant's Baptism (their Scripturles Tradition) to bring into the Church, and are not they herein evidently Guilty of Sacrilegious usurpation, and adding to the words of the Book of God by their false consequence.  
Baptising of Children or others, a standing Ordinance of Christ, which he hath appointed to continue to the end of the world, Mat. 28. and ordinary means for Salvation, Ma●. 16.16.  
There be no express commands for sprinkling Infants, Act. 2.38. repent and be baptised. Mark. 16.16. He that believeth and is baptised shall be saved.  
They to whom Repentance and Faith was preached, were not Infants (such as the Priests sprinkle of a few days old) which is not the Baptism that saveth, but that of the Spirit, or the answer of a good conscience is saving.  
Page. 37. That many Ministers baptise the Children of those who are profane and drunkards, and so not believers.  
They that profess the Gospel, though they be not sincere believers, yet they are in this sense accounted belivers.  
Page. 85. The Children of believers, should be under the Initial Seal of the Covenant, to believers and their Seed that promise belongeth; those to whom that promise, That God would be their God and the God of their Seed; should be baptised, Viz. Infants who are in the Covenant with God. Page. 36.  
It seems these Priests can make believers at an easy rate, whilst they can take the profane drunkards for believers, upon their professing the Gospel; but surely God is not the God of the profane and drunkards, nor are they in God's Covenant (as true believers are) but under Satan's power, and their taking it for granted that the sprinkling Infants is the Initial Seal of the Covenant is false, and but a beging the question.  
Those who are under the profession of the Gospel, are to be reputed as in Covenant. pa. 39  
Unbelievers who have a profession, and yet have not sincere faith, etc. are not Righteous nor Holy, etc.  
Then it is not the profession of the Gospel that makes them believers or in Covenant with God.  
An Arminion and Popish Doctrine, that believers may fall from Grace.  
The Fathers, many of them fell into gross sins as is cleared from the Histories of the Books of, Exod. Leu. Num. and Deut. and, 1 Cor. 10.1, 2, 3, 4, 5. They cat the same spiritual bread, and drank the same spiritual drink, drank of the Rock which was Christ, yet many of them were Idolaters, lustres after evil thoughts, committed Fornication, Tempter's of God, Murderers, etc.  
See how fully these Priest have proved the falling away from Grace, for which they have so much accused us with Popery and Arminianism (what a Babel are they in) and, Was not that spiritual Bread and Drink, and Rock, which they did eat and drink of saving Grace?  
Baptizm (Viz of Infants) brought them to the Church is, an ordinary means for Salvation, pag. 37. We are baptised into Jesus Christ and his death, Rom. 6.3. and it's Instituted for the remission of sins, Act. 2.38.  
It's that which signifies our putting on Christ, our renewing by the Spirit, our washing by remission of Sins, our being buried with Christ, etc.  
Then it's not the Sign nor Shadow, but the Substance that brings into the true Church that saveth, that Baptizeth into Jesus Christ and his death, and this is that one Baptism of the Spirit.  
Infant's Baptism or Sprinkling, approved its the Initial Seal of the Covenant, which the Children of believers ought to be under.  
The Apostle Peter says, Act. 2.38 39 That those to whom the promise is, should be Baptised, and verse 38 repent and be baptised, Mat 28. Go teach all Nations Baptising them, Mark. 16.16. He that, believeth and is baptised shall be saved. And, Rom. 6.3. We are baptised into Jesus Christ and his death, pag. 37.  
Those that are capable of such teachings (repenting believing) are not Infants of a week old; and teach baptising into the Name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, was by the Power and Spirit that went along with their Teaching and ministering.  
pag. 28. They have no Light in them, who speak not according to the Law and the Testimony, and tell us of a faith in Christ without the Scriptures.  
pag. 31. Wicked men who rebel against the Light, have the Light of a natural conscience spoken of, Rome, 2.14. and the common work of the Spirit.  
The Work of the Spirit of God in the hearts of wicked men, convicting them, is not natural nor from a natural Light, for it is the Spirit that so worketh in them, (which you call common) but your confessing a natural Light in them, contradicts your saying they have no Light in them; but the Law is Light, and the Testimony of Jesus the Spirit of Prophecy, which the true Prophets spoke from, and they that spoke not according to this Light, there is 〈◊〉 morning to them, but they are in the dark, where the Light 〈◊〉 before it shine out of darkness.   

Some Queries of Alexander Skein, sometime Baily of Aberdeen, upon his forsaking the public Worship there, and joining with the People of God in scorn called Quakers.  
Query I WHether or not should any Act of God's Worship be gone about without the motions, leadings and actings of the Holy Spirit.  
Query TWO If the motions of the Spirit be necessary to every particular duty, Whether should he be waited upon, that our whole acts and words may be according as he gives utterance and assistance.  
Query III If every one that bears the name of a Christian or professes to be Protestants, hath such a uninterupted measure thereof, that at any time they may without waiting, go immediately about the duty.  
Query IV If there be an indisposition and an unfitness at some times for such exercises, at least as to the spiritual and lively performance thereof; Whether the duty ought to be performed in that case, or at that time?  
Query V If any duty be gone about under pretence that it is in obedience to the external command, without the spiritual life and motion necessary; Whether such a duty thus performed, can in faith be expected to be accepted of God, and not rather reckoned, as bringing strange fire before the Lord, seeing it is performed (at b●st) by the strength of natural and acquired parts, and not by the strength and assistance of the holy ghost, which was typified by 〈◊〉 Fire that came down from heaven, which alone behoved to 〈◊〉 the Sacrifice and no other?  
Query VI If duties gone about in the mere strength of natural 〈…〉 parts, whether in public or in private, be not all really 〈…〉 matter an Image of man's invention as the popish worship, (though it be not so gross in the outward appearance) and therefore as real superstition to countenance any worship which is of that nature, as it is to countenance popish worship, though there be a difference in the degree.  
Query VII Whether it be ground of offence, or just scandal to countenance the worship of those, whose professed Principle is neither to speak for edification, nor to pray, but as the holy ghost shall be pleased to assist them, in some measure less or more, without which, they will rather choose to be silent, then to speak without his Influences?   

ERRATA  
Pag. 10. lin. 8. for Polythrites, read Polytheites pag. 16. lin. 21. for: to: read two: pag. 18. lin. 30. for, to write read, or writ. pag. 31. lin. 9: for, Christ's, read Christ pag. 32. lin. 12. read in it, for spoke, read speaks pag. 33. lin. last, for Revelation, read relation. pag. 41. lin. 20: for imperative, read Superior. pag. 53. lin. 14. read subjoin. pag 56. lin. 37. for Answer, read. reply. from pages. 56. and. 66. the pages are misfigured. pag. 62. lin. 33. read Pr. An. pag. 64. lin. last, read Pr. An. pag. 72. lin. 27. not, read nor l. in. .32 for which. read, such as. p. 80. l. 9 del. which p. 81. l. 33. r. a perfect cleansing p. 82. l. 5. r. work in part. p. 83. l. 1. f. that as. r. that a. p. 84. l. 5. f. is r. jesus. l. 33. r. your deceitful. p. 85. l. 31. del. 31. l. 30. r. p. 35. l. 37. r. and cup. p. 87. l. 5. r. such a great. l. 7. f. any r. all l. 19 r. we are not. 29. r. their infants p. 88 l. 8. f. 85. r. 35. l. 17. f. the r. their. 24. f. the. r. their. 39 del. the.  
FINIS