Quakerisme the path-way to paganisme, or, A vieu of the Quakers religion being an examination of the theses and apologie of Robert Barclay, one of their number, published lately in Latine, to discover to the world, what that is, which they hold and owne for the only true Christian religion / by John Brown ...

CHAP. V. Of Mans Natural State.

1. WE come now to Examine the doctrine held, forth in the 4 Thesis, which though I finde a little more clearly expressed, as to the latine, in the se∣cond edition, than it was in the first; yet I finde it not helped, as to the matter: so that still I finde several mysteries, wrapped up in his words, which will not without some difficulty be unridled; for after the usual manner of that Seck of the Quakers, who speak ordinarily in a dialect, peculiar to themselves, the beginning of this Thesis is very enigmatical; and in all his discourse upon this The∣sis, in his Apology, he speaketh nothing that can contribute any thing to the cle∣aring of his Meaning to us, who are not much acquanted with his Mysteries; only he enlargeth himself on two maine Heads, of which we shall speak here∣after: And though he could not be offended, if we should only examine his doctrine, as to these two Heads, leaving the rest, which he shortly touched in his Thesis; yet, ••or the Readers satisfaction, we must take some notice of what he saith.

2. Passing that insufficient division of Mankinde, or the Posterity of Adam, which he maketh, when he saith, both Iewes and Gentiles, whereby he excludeth from this race of Adam, all that lived, before this distinction began to take place; that is, all that lived before Abraham, Isaac & Iacob, the posterity of whom (complexly considered) only did beare the name of Iewes; and that not so early; for the first mention we have of the word in Scripture, is Esther 2:5. & 2 King. 16:6. And all those, who lived before this issue appeared, or were known as such, can not be called Heathens, seing some of them, at least, worshiped the true God: I take notice, that he acknowledgeth and asserteth, that all Mankinde is Fallen, Degenerated, and Dead; but how, or upon what occasion, he expresseth not, in his Thesis, and giveth but a short hinte there∣of, in his Apology; of which afterward. That Man at first was living, and in a good state, he insinuateth, when he saith, that he is now fallen and degenerate; but wherein that good and happy condition consisted, he explaineth not: i•• may be, he forbeareth to do this, lest thereby, he should discover some secrets of their mystical Theology, which either is not fit, as yet, to be made known▪ or we are not in case to understand & improve aright. Some may possibly think▪ that he forbeareth to give an Explication of this, or to adde his Testimo••y to the orthodoxe Truth, in this point, because the Natural Light, that is in every man, cannot discover, or comprehend it? Natures Light, I grant, will ne∣ver discover, without the Revelation of the word, the Time when, the Man∣ner how, nor the Cause and Occasion, upon which this inundation took its original. I finde, that Mr Hicks in his 3 Dial. Pag. 40, 41. getteth no satisfac∣tion, as to this, from Will. Pen speaking thus in his book. Pag 29. Herein the•• contradicts thy self, abusest the Philosophers: and blasphemest the light. Thou grants the heathens knew, there was sin: If so, how could they be ignorant of sins coming into the

world? This, I say, is no way satisfying; for though Philosophers did see, and could not but see, that sin and misery had overflowed all; yet by all their Common Light, they cou••d not understand, how sin entered into the world, and death by sin; how Adam, as a publick person, was under a covenant obli∣gation, for himself and posterity; and how he did violate that Covenant, by transgressing the commandement, and thus brought-in sin and misery. And that, which Will. Pen addeth Ibid. saying, If thou meanest a clear and distinct ac∣count, that Adam and Eva were beguiled by the serpent, who tempted them, 't is no wayes to the purpose; not only helpeth not the matter; but discovereth also some further latent designe; for who seeth not, how necessary the knowledge hereof is unto the right understanding of the fall, and of the true cause thereof? If this were not so, as Mr Hicks well saith, why did the sacred Penmen give such a full and distinct account hereof, in the Scriptures? But it may be, they have a Parabolical sense and meaning to put upon that whole matter, as it is histo∣rically related, and upon all the passages of Scripture relating thereunto. It is also observable, that Will. Pen, in the forecited page, insinuateth, that the knowledge of this is not necessary unto salvation; for he saith. That which is sufficient to that faith, which concerns salvation, is to know that God is, and that he hath given M••n the knowledge of himself, and his will concerning him, by some inward law. Mr St••lham also showeth in his book against the Quakers Pag. 96, 9••, 100. that I: Nailer and R. Farnworth deny, That Adam was under a Covenant of works; and that he stood by the moral law written in his heart, and by the observation of the posi∣tive branches given him in command, aco••rding to that law, as we mentioned above. And if the matter stand thus, how can they give us a distinct account of the man∣ner and cause of the fall and degeneration?

3. He sayeth, that this Death and Degeneration is befallen all the race of mankinde quoad primum Adam, seu hominem terrestrem, that is, (or I know not what it is) concerning, or in respect of the first Adam, or earthly man. By which words it is manifest, that he pointeth out and declareth, in what respect it is true, that all mankinde is become dead and degenerate; to wit, in respect of the first Adam, or the Earthly man; and hereby he seemeth to point out the ex∣tent of this fall, death and degeneration; or rather a restriction, and limitati∣on of its extent; as if he had said; It reacheth all Mankinde, only as to the Earthly man, or the first Adam, But what he meaneth by this first Adam and ter∣restial man, I cannot well tell. His manner of expression will not give us ground to think, that he meaneth our forefather Adam, because of whose transgressi∣on this death came upon all his posterity; but rather that he meaneth something in every man, going, with them, under this name and this thing what ever it be is the only Subject of this Death and Degeneration: and so in opposition to this, there must be some thing in man, which, with them, will go under the name of the Sec••nd Adam, and of the heavenly man; and this whatever it be is not obnox∣ious to this death, nor is it degenerated and lapsed. This, to me, must be the native import of his words: But how we shall come to a right uptaking of his true meaning, I wish he had showne us. If we consider what other Quakers have said, it may be, that thereby we shall be able to make some pro••able

conjecture, concerning his meaning. Mr Hicks Dial. 1. Pag. 16. tels us that Georg Fox (a man eminent among the Quakers, and accounted by them infal∣lible) in his book called the great mystery Pag 6, 8, and 100. affirmeth the soul to be part of God, and of Gods being: And that it is without beginning Pag. 91. and also infinite Pag. 29. And when Will. Pen accuseth Mr Hicks of false dealing in this; Mr Hicks Dial. 3. vindicateth himself by citeing Pag. 20. &c. George Fox's owne words, thus [Ge••rg Fox in his Great mystery Pag. 90. speaks thus is not the soul without beginning, coming from God, returning unto God againe, who hath it in his hand, and Christ the power of God, the Bishop of the soul, which brings it up into God, which came out from him; hath this a beginning or ending? And is not this infinite in it self?] Againe says he [Georg Fox tels us Pag. 2). that Magnus Byne saith the soul is not infinite in it self, but it is a creature; and R. Baxter saith, it is a spiritual substance. Whereunto Georg Fox, replyeth, Consider what a condition these, called Ministers, are in: They say that, which is a Spiritual substance, is not infinite in it self, but a creature. That which came out of the Creator, and is in the hand of the Creator, which brings it up to the Creator againe, that is infinite in it self. The same Mr Hicks saith further, The Quakers are accused for saying, there is no Scripture that speaketh of an humane soul; and for affirming, that the soul is taken up into God. Hereunto Georg Fox thus answereth Pag▪ 100. God breathed into the man the breath of life, and he ••ecame a living soul; and is not this, which cometh out from God, which is in Gods hand, part of God, from God, and to God againe? Which soul Christ the power of God is the Bishop of: Is not this of his being? Yea Will. P••n in vindication of Georg Fox Pag. 66. (as Mr Hicks sheweth Dial. 3. Pag. 22.) saith, That all that can be concluded from Georg Fox's words is this; That God inspired Man with some thing of his own substance, bestowed something of his own divinity upon him, That God did inspire Man with the Holy Ghost.

4. Now, if this man be of the same judgment with these mentioned, we may saifly conceive, or conjecture at least, that his meaning in these words now under consideration, is this. That the Body of man, which is of the First and Earthly Adam, was degenerat, and became dead; but not the Soul, which, being a part of God's substance and being, and having relation to the Second and Spiritual Adam, who is the Bishop thereof, was not obnoxious to this Death and Degeneration; for being eternal, as well as Infinite, it could neither die, nor degenerate, nor fall. But how blasphemous an opinion this is, every one may see. This is the old damnable opinion of the Gnosticks, Ma∣nichees and Priscillianists, and of Cerdo, See August. Lib. de Origine Animae c. 2. and De Haeres. c. 46. and 70. Aquin. 1. q. 90. Ar. 1. & Col. Conimb. ad 2. de Anima q. 1. Art. 6. and was owned by that blasphemous man Servetus, and of late also by the Author of Theologia Germanica, and of the Bright Star. See Mr Ru∣therf. Survey of Spiritual Antichrist. Chap. XIV. These hold that the soul was a part of God's essence. Though God's essence be most Pure, Simple and Indivi∣sible, and cannot be a part of any composed thing. If the Soul were thus of God and a part of God, God should be the forme of man; Because the soul is the f••rme of Man; and consequently: Man should be God; for the whole may be denominated from the forme. The Scripture tels us, that God is Im∣mutable,

and that there is no shadow of turning with Him; but by this opi∣nion, he should be Mutable, and change from Power to Act, from Ignorance to Knowledge, from Vice to Vertue, &c. and back againe reciprocally. Hence also it must follow, that either no souls can go to hell, or that a part of God must be tormented in hell; And what will they say of Devils? Either they must deny that there are any, or say that they are a part of God; for they are Spiritual Substances, being Intelligences: and with the Quakers foremen∣tioned, spiritual substances are parts of God, and are Infinite in themselves, they are no Creatures, and if no Creatures, they must be the Creator, or a part of the Creator. It is true, Man was created, according to the Image of God, which, as to the Soul, consisted, as in the spirituality of its substance, so chiefly in Wisdome, Righteousness and Holiness, Eccles. 7:29. Ephes. 4:24. Col 3:10, But the Scripture tels us, that as to this Image, it was lost, even as to knowledg, nothing being left but some rubbish of that once stately Fabrick, of which afterward: and that thus the soul was corrupted and dam∣nified by the fall, all the Powers and Faculties thereof being perverted; so that thereby Man became not only utterly Indisposed, but also Opposite to all that is spiritually good, and wholly Inclined to all evil and that continually, Rom. 3: vers. 10—20. Ehes. 2:2, 3. Rom. 5:6. & 8:7, 8. Gen. 6:5: And this is con∣firmed by what this Man addeth, in the Thesis, and prosecuteth at large, in his Apology.

5. If this be not his true meaning, let us try another Conjecture. They commonly speak of a Christ, within them (as Mr Hicks cleareth Dial. 1. Pag. 44. &c.) and taunt such, as beleeve in a Person without them, saying Christ is within, and that there is no other Christ, but that within every man. Mr Hicks there tels us also, that Crisp, one of their ministry, asking, what Christ he owned; and receiving this answere, That he did not beleeve any meer Principle or Spi∣rit in men to be the Christ; because that was not capable to suffer what Christ suffered, returned this reply, That this was blasphemy. And when Mr Hicks said further, that the Christ he beleeved was no other then that person, the Scrip∣tures speak of, The word made flesh—God and man in one person. Crisp. replied, that then he knew the beginning and date of his Christ: Moreover he tels us Pag. 45, 46. that Georg Fox in the forecited Book Pag. 206. saith, if there be any other Christ but he that was crucified within, he is a false Christ: and he that hath not this Christ, that was crucified within, is a Reprobat. And Pag 207. That God's Christ is not distinct from the saints, and he that eats the flesh of Christ, hath it within him. Pag. 201. Mr Hicks tels us also Dial. 2. Pag. 10. How G. Whitehead in his Dip. Plu. Pag. 13. saith, Christ Iesus, a Person without us, is not Scripture language, but the Anthropomorphites and Muggletonians. This language is very suteable unto the language of the Old Libertines: against whom Famous Calvin wrote, in his Instructio adv. Libertinos Cap 17. They made Christs sufferings to be a meer Hi∣strionick Action, or Comedie; and Quintinus used to be very angry, when any asked him, how he did? saying, How can it be ill with Christ. But yet, that they may put a difference, betwixt themselves and others. They use to say, as Mr Stalham informeth us Pag. 276. That Christ is in all, but none is in Christ, ex∣cept

themselves. Shall we think, that this is th••s Mans meaning; to wit, That man is Corrupt, Fallen, Degenerated and Dead, not according to that part in him, which is Christ, but according to that part in him, which is the Old man? As this should contradict, what he saith afterward, upon this account, that then it were manifest, that whole man did not fall, or became dead and was degenerate; so it could not be satisfying: for it would have but this im∣port; That man was Corrupted, Dead and Degenerated, in so farr as he was corrupted, dead and degenerated: and then we should be no wiser, than we were. Moreover, if we should ask how this Christ came into every man? The answer must be, that he was created in him; and as to this part of man, Adam did not fall. And if we should ask, what is this Christ in every man, Will. Pen, in his Innocency with open face P. 8. (as Mr Hick•• sheweth Dial. 2. Pag. 41.) answereth, It is God himself And He, with Nailer and Hubberthorn, in their Answer to the Phanaticque History Pag. 13. will say, it is the Light in us, and Burroughs Pag 9, and 149. will say, that he that was slaine upon the crosse, is the ••ery Christ of God, and the very Christ of God is in us. The same Mr Hicks in his postscript to the Dial. 1. Pag. 82. tels us, that Ed. Borroughs and Franc. Howgil said in the hearing of credible witnesses, That Christ was as really in every man, as he was in that Flesh, which suffered at Ierusalem.

6. But as yet, we are arrived at no clear discovery of the truth, in this mat∣ter, but rather further off from any clear understanding of his meaning, Shall we think, that it is some thing opposite to the Light, which he meaneth by this first Adam, and terrestial man? But what meaneth he, or they, by the Light, within? Others of them have wonderful notions about this. Mr Hicks dial. 1. P. 3: &c. tels us, that they use to call this light within, some times, Christ; sometimes, the measure of Christ; sometimes, the divine essence; sometimes, of the divine essence: and that G. Whitehead in a discourse, urged from Ioh. 1:4. That if the life be the divine essence, the light must be ••o also; for such as the cause is, such the effect must be: and that he affirmed, the light within to be God: and that to deny it to be so, is to deny the omnipresence of God: and that the divine life is Immuta∣ble. To say then the light within is not God, is to say God is mutable: and so concludeth, that it is blasphemy to deny the light within to be God. The same Mr Hicks in his Quakers appeal answered. Pag. 4, 5. showeth us, how Will. Pen in his Quakerisme a new nickname P. 9, 10. saith, that the true light in it self, is the Christ of God, and the Saviour of the World, which is God, n••t an effect of his power, as a created light▪ And that G. Whitehead Dip. Plun. P. 13. will not have it called a meer creature, but a di∣vine and increated thing. That G. Fox, Great myst. P. 10. will have it to be before conscience was, or creature was, or created, or made light: And P. 23. That a••l things were made by it, and it was glorifyed with the father before the world began. So P. 185:331. See further Mr Hicks there, citeing at large some sentences of G. Fox younger, out of a collection of several of his books, Pag 47, 49, 50, 51, 52. all to this purpose, concerning this Light within, This man also hath so me uncouth Notions, of which more particularly hereafter, when I come to examine his doctrine thereanent; only now I observe that Pag 84. he calleth it a real spiritual substance; and saith, that it subsisteth in the heart of the ungodly, even

while they remaine in their impieties: & therefore, as to this, Mankinde did not dege∣nerate; But what is that, in respect of which, Mankinde did degenera••e? we see it not distinctly explained whether it was a Substance, or an Accidens & if a Sub∣stance; whether it was a Real, or an Imaginary Substance; a Spiritual or a Corpo∣real Substance. However this must be his meaning, that only as to that, which is Opposite unto this Light, & beareth relation not to Christ the Second & Spiri∣tual Adam, but to the First & terrestial Adam, Mankind Fell, Died & was Dege∣nerate: But doth this take-in both Soul and Body? & if it did, what can remaine? if not, he would do well to tell us, which was free. Enough of this here.

7. His expression here, in respect of the first Adam and terrestrial man, would im∣port, That Adam in Innocency, or in the state of Integrity, had also a respect to the Second Adam, and Celestial man; and that as to this, he stood, and lived, and did not become degenerate: and hence it would follow, that Adam was under two Covenants, both under the covenant of Works, and under the Covenant of Grace; and that he fell, as to the Covenant of works; but stood as to the Covenant of Grace, But these things smell neither of Sense, nor of Religion. If he thinks, that I wrong him, in deduceing such Consectaries from his words, he must blame himself, that doth not express himself more clearly, and doth not speak in a language more intelligible. His doctrine, I confess, is strange; and his expressions are not ordinary; but it seemeth, an uncouth doc∣trine must be expressed in an uncouth dialect: that unstable souls, that have not their senses exercised to discerne good and evil, may be taken herewith; but such as are wise, and feare the Lord, will look about them.

8. He hath told us, that Mankinde is Dead and Degenerate, but as to the true and full meaning hereof, we are left in the dark: This fall and Death seem∣eth not to be absolute, being, as we see, restricted unto a certane particu∣lar respect: and what that respect is, and how far it Extendeth, or what in Man answereth it, whether all of Man, or only a part, and if only a part, what that Part is, we ••now not, but are left to conjecture. He hath three general expressions, whereby he would point forth unto us the nature of this Change and Catastrophe, when he saith, that Mankinde is Fallen, is Degenerat, is Dead; and a right explication of his meaning hereby, and of his sense of these words, would give great satisfaction and clearness. It may be his following expressi∣ons are added as a commentary; let us therefore consider them. Being depri∣ved (saith he) of the sense or touch of this inward Testimony and Seed of God; and sub∣jected to the power of Nature, and Seed of Satan, which he did sowe into the hearts of men, while they remaine in the natural and corrupt state. Could we understand this commentary, we should be in better case, to judge of his sense of the Fall: but the truth is, these words rather darken, than cleare the matter: and I fear, the words are not more uncouth and unusual, than the thing, he understandeth thereby, is obstruse and hid. He speaketh here of a Testimony, saying the sense or touch of this Testimony; and the relative this, hujus (if pertinent,) saith, it is a testi∣mony, formerly by him mentioned; but where, or when, we are left to con∣jecture He calleth it an Inward Testimony, but what is this? It is true, in the foregoing Thesis, we heard him speaking of an Inward Testimony of the Spirit,

and in his second Thesis, of Inward Revelations and Illuminations: Shall I think, that by this Testimony, whereof he here speaketh, he meaneth the Inward Te∣stimony of the Spirit, and the Inward Revelations and Illuminations, of which he spoke above? If indeed he doth meane the same, and no other; I would faine know, How all Mankinde, Jewes and Heathens, (as he speaketh) was depri∣ved of the sense and touch of this Inward Testimony; seing himself told us above Thesis 2. that by this Inward Testimony or Revelation, and only by this, the knowledge of God was revealed to the Sones of Men, to the Patria••chs, Pro∣phets and Apostles: and we heard (and shall heare more of it, out of this Man hereafter) that they make the Light within, which is their great and only Tea∣cher, common to all men? Is there a difference with them, betwixt this In∣ward Testimony and that Light, which enlighteneth every man, that cometh into the world? But it may be, he meaneth some special distinct thing, by this Sense or Touch of this Inward Testimony (wherein he would seem to come near to Plato's sensation, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in Th••aeat.) But what can the touch or sensation of a Testimo∣ny import, if not the receiving the Impression of it? and what can the receiving of the Impression, or Touch of a Testimony be, but a receiving of information by it? And when all that knew God, received illumination by the Testimony of the Spirit, did they not receive its Information, and its Touch? and were they not made partakers of its Sensation? and seing this was common to all from the beginning, as he endeavoured to prove above, as we heard, where was this deprivation of this sense and touch, which he speaketh o••▪ It is true, by the fall, mankinde was deprived of that sweet and intimate Communion with God, which formerly Adam was addmitted unto, and all the communications, which Adam after the fall, and his posterity did meet with, were in and thorow the Mediator, and according to the Covenant of Grace: But he maketh the Testi∣mony, which was before and after the fall, the same; and that by the fall, man was deprived of the Touch of the same Testimony, which yet he would make us beleeve, was common to all, from Adam to Moses, and from Moses to Christ &c.

9. When he saith, that Mankinde by the fall was deprived of the sense and touch of this Inward Testimony, He supposeth that th••s Inward Testimony (which with them is the same with the Light within, and seed of God) still remained, even in Mankinde; only man was deprived of its Sense and Touch; hence it would appear, that, according to this Mans Theology, Mans Understanding was not hurt by the Fall, nor his Capacity to receive impressions from the Light within, or Inward Testimony; but only, there were not Emanations of Light and Information from that Testimony, and great Teacher: or that th••s Light and Divine Particle still remained in man, but was only Dormant and Overcloud∣ed, But the Scriptures giveth us another account of the Degenerat and Natural state of man, as to Light and Knowledg, saying, that such are in darkness 1 Thes. 5:4. 1 Ioh. 2.9 and walk in darkness Ioh. 8:12: and 12:35. 1 Ioh. 1:6. and 2:11. and are of darkness 1 Thes. 5:5. and under the power of darkness Col. 1:13. See also Act 26:18. 1 Pet. 2:9. Esa. 9:2. Mat. 4:16. But further, This Inward

Testimony being a Light within, or a Seed within, it must be seated somewhere in the soul; and it, being Light, can no where be seated more properly, them in the Intellect: and if there be light in the intellect, how can the man be deprived of the Touch and Sensation, of this Light? Meaneth he by this Touch & Sensation a Reflective knowledge, or such a reflexive act of the Soul or of Conscience, whereby we know that we know? But then, he still supposeth, that the Light; & Knowledge direct, is not impaired by the fall, (contrary to the Scriptures a fore¦cited, & many others, which might be cited; see Eph. 4:18.) but only the Refle∣xive knowledge: and thus Adam was as understanding & knowing after the fall, as before it, only he did not know it: And indeed the common & first duty, which these Quakers presse upon all, is that they would lookin, and reflect upon what is within them, & so be Wise, & Understanding: yea, in this one thing, they seem to place all Grace & Vertue, as if they had been trained up in Plato's school, who in the place before cited (as Mr Gale in his Court of the Gentiles part. 2. Pag. 291. showeth) Taketh all true science, to be this Sensation, & in his Timaeus Fol. 103. he called all prudence a good Sensation 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉: and in his Alcibiad, fol. 133, 134. He saith, that he that reflects upon himself, his owne soul and wisdom, thereby beco∣mes as it were omniscient; whereas they, who know not themselves, know not what is good, or evil for them, nor yet what belongs to themselves, or other men. How like this is unto the ordinary discourse of Quakers, such as heare them ordinarily, can best know: the Scripture mentioneth an 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, but not as common to all Phil. 1:9. and 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Heb. 5:14. which are rare.

10. This to me is further confirmed by the following Expression, which he hath, and of the Seed of God; of the touch and feeling of which also, (if it be any thing distinct from the foresaid Inward Testimony) Adams posterity was depriv∣ed by the fall: for these men use to speak much of this Seed, and Seed of God Mr Hicks dial. 1: Pag 16. tels us, that some of them call it a measure of God; others call it Christ, and the Spirit; Some call it that, which obeyeth the light, con∣tradicting the former, for it cannot be both the Light, or the Spirit and Mea∣sure of God, which giveth sensations and touches, and the soul, or that which obeyeth and receiveth these touches and sensations. And Dial. 2 Pag. 84 he says some call it, the Witness of God in our consciences; and P. 66. that G. Keith Immed. Revel. P. 77.78. calleth it, that which the work of the ministry is to point hearers to and P. 75, 76. he maketh it Christ the light in man: and this same Man Pag 82.83, 84. maketh this seed the same with Grace, with the word of God, with the light, that enlighteneth every man, and makes it a certane spiritual substance, and not an accident, as we shall hear afterward: and thus it is manifest, that according to this mans doctrine, Adam by his fall lost not Grace, nor the Word of God, nor the Light within, nor this Seed, but only the Touches thereof: and what Scripture, I pray, teacheth him this? or by what Scripture, shall we be help∣ed to understand this? the Scriptures, which we have, speak far otherwise of the fall, and of the sad Consequences thereof, as is known.

11. He addeth the other part of this Degeneration, saying, that Mankinde became subject to the power of Nature, and to the seed of Satan. Neither of which

are Scriptural Expressions, and what sense to put upon them, so as they shall agree with what he hath said, and with what we shall heare out of his Apology, I do not know: only this would seem evident, that he must hereby meane some thing directly Opposite, or Contrary to the Testimony and Seed of God: And so, as the Seed of God, to him, is a Substance, so this Seed of Satan must be a Substance also: And as before the fall, man was under the Touches and Sensations of the Seed of God; so after the fall, he came under the Tou∣ches and Sensations of the Seed of Satan. And thus we see, that this man, among other Errours, hath drunk-in the errour of Flacius Illyricus, who said, that the image of God, and Original righteousness, was a Substance, and an Es∣sence, in Demonstr. Fol 21. and 38. and 40. as also that Original sin, was not an accident but a substance: and so this man, and his party, must revive again the old condemned opinion or errour of the wicked Manichees, who affirmed that there were two Principia. Now either this Man must say, that this Seed of Satan, being a Substance, must be of God, or of the Devil: if of God, then God must be the Author and Creator of sin; if of the Devil, than the Devil is the creator of some substances. But I would enquire, whether this Sub∣stance, which he calleth the Seed of the Serpent, be one and the same thing, with the Man, or with his Soul and Body; or not: If not: then the Man must have another Substantial and Essential part, beside the Soul and the Body; which is contrary both to Scripture and Reason: If it be the same thing, then Adam before the fall had the Seed of Satan in him, for he had ••he same Substantial Soul and Body, both before and after the fall, what will he say of Christ, who took upon him the nature of the Seed of Abraham, and so became true man having a soul and a body? Took he upon him Original sin? or came he under the power of the Seed of he Serpent? And yet this must be said, or we must say he took not upon him the Seed of Abraham: or that the soul and body of the Seed Abraham was not original sin? and so that Original sin is not the same substance with Mans soul and body.

12. But came this change upon the whole Nature, or Race of mankinde, immediatly after the fall? Or did the posterity of Adam come under this power of Nature, and of the Seed of Satan, so soon as they had a being, and a Soul and a Body? He will not grant this but expresly denyeth it, in the end of this same Thesis, and giveth his reasons, in his Apology, which shall be examined, in the next Chapter. When then doth Satan sowe this seed? It is (says he) while they abide in the Natural and Corrupt state. But how come they into this Natural and Corrupt state: And under the dominion of Nature, and Seed of Satan? Come they into this state, before Satan sowe this seed in their hearts? These things seem somewhat mysterious: but what else can we expect of them but unex∣plicable and untelligible fantasmes, who will not regulate their judgment, in the matters of God, by his Word? Further I would know, whether such of the posterity of Adam, as have not yet the seed of the Serpent sowne into their hearts, are deprived of the touches of the Testimony and Seed of God, or not? If they be not, then the beginning of his Thesis is false, where he said that Tota posteritas Adamica, the whole posterity of Adam, was fallen, degenerat, dead and

deprived of the sense and touch of this inward testimony and Seed of God: If they be, then his conjunction Et, saying, and subject to the power of nature, and of the Seed of the Serpent, is non-sense; for thereby he would tell us, the positive part of the sad Consequences of the Fall, as conjunct with the Negative or Privative part, and yet by this Concession, these parts are separable, and not conjunct, in all the posterity of Adam, but in some only, and these some must be in a distinct stare from the rest viz. under the Privative part, but not under the Positive part of this sad consequence of the Fall. Thus we have no clear account of his doctrine.

13. He proceedeth, and tels us, that hence it is, that not o••ly their deeds and speeches, but all their imaginations, are perpetually evil in the sight of God, because proceeding from this depraved and malignant seed: And from this, I think, it is clear, that before men have Imaginations, let be Speaches and Actions, they are possessed of this depraved and malignant Seed; for the Efficient Cause is alwayes in being before the Effect, and the Fountaine is before the Streams: How then can this man say afterward, that this Seed of Satan is not imputed (that is, as he said above, sowen in their hearts, else he speaketh gibberish) unto Infants, untill they actually sinne? For if Infants must first actually sinne, before Satan sowe this seed, in their hearts, then it is false, that all actually sinne, be∣fore Satan can sowe his seed in their hearts; then it is false, that all actual sinnes proceed from this corrupt seed; for the Cause cannot proceed from, nor yet follow the Effect. How he shall reconcile this Contradiction, I see not: But his Religion, as it seemeth, is made up of Contradictions: we have met with several already, and we will have occasion to observe moe, ere all be done.

14. He addeth, Therefore man, in so farr, as he subsisteth in this state, can know nothing aright of God; yea his thoughts and conceptions of God and of divine things, until he be disjoyned from that evil seed, and adjoyned unto the divine light, are unpro∣fitable both to himselfe, and to all others. Here are some moe mysteries: what meaneth that, in so farr as he subsisteth in this state? This quatenus, in so far as, can not have the same import, with quamdiu, so long as: What meaneth he then hereby? Is a Natural man, who is dead and degenerate, under a two fold respect, under one whereof he can know something aright of God? But his following donec, until, cleareth the matter, you will say. Well, be it so: But what meaneth that, being disjoyned from the evil Seed &c? Is this divine Light, and evil Seed in him both at once? And is it in his power to disjoyne himself from the one, and joine himself to the other? And what is that, to be adjoyned to the divine light? And what is this evil Seed, and divine Light? I know the Man will smile at these questions; and possibly say, as some of the Quakers love to speak, that I manifest my owne darkness, and am in the Imagination and Witchcraft, if not worse; But I cannot helpe it, and I love not to be adjoined to their Light, (though they are pleased to call it divine) that I may come to understand these mysteries; for as these Mysteries are Mysteries of iniquity; so their light is not spiritual, nor are their Expressions such as the Holy G••ost teacheth: And what reason I have to propound these questions, the Reader may understand, by what I have said before.

15. Then he deduceth another Consectary from his doctrine viz. That hence

the errours of the Socinians and Pelagians are rejected, who exalt the Light of Nature as also of Papists and many protestants, who affirme, that a man may be a Minister of the Gospel, and do good to souls, without the true grace of God. Good Man! As con∣cearning this last, he promiseth to speak more fully to it hereafter, and therefore we shall attend him where he is pleased to handle this matter more fully. But as touching the first, I must needs say, that This Man doth either promise to himself none but ignorant Readers, that know not what the Socinians and Pe∣lagians maintaine, nor what the Quakers hold; or he must speak, he knoweth not what. Alas, Poor Man, doth he think, that his saying he exalteth not the Light of nature, and that he rejecteth the Socinians and Pelagians, will make wise men and acquanted with these controversies think otherwise, than that he and his Fraternity are as great enemies to the grace of God, and as great exalters of the Light of nature, as ever Pelagius or Socinus were? Thinks he, that his calling the dimme Light of corrupt Nature by, and holding it forth to us under the name of Grace, or Light, or whatever other name, he is pleased to name it by, will make us think, that it is in truth the true Gospel-grace of God, and not to be what it is indeed, the meer Light of Corrupt Nature? Did he never hear, how Pelagius, to escape the Anathema of a Synod, called that which he pleaded for Grace? and was he lesse, what he was, an enemy to the grace of God, for all that? never one white: and so is it with this Man: we are confident, ere all be done, to finde him as great a Pelagian and Socinian and Iesuite, in this point, as any: and I judge it intollerable E••trontedness or shame∣less Ignorance, in him, to place the Pelagians, Semipelagians, Socinians, and some Papists, one the extreme, as to his Opinion, as he doth Pag. 54. of his Apology; but of this more afterward.

16. When he cometh in his Apology to explaine his Thesis Pag. 54. forbearing to speak of the State of Adam before the Fall, because, forsooth, in his judg∣ment, these are but curious notions? as the Arminians thought before him Apol. Cap. 5. and yet I judge, his plaine expressing of his Opinion in this matter, would have contributed not a little to our understanding of his meaning, as to the Nature and Consequences of the Fall: But it is true, the full explication of the State, of Adam's righteousness th••rein, and of the Covenant, under which he, and mans Nature in him, stood, would have marred all this Mans Pelagian and Socinian designe; and have made him and the rest, whom he patro∣nizeth, too too naked.

17. But behold the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 of ••his Impudent man just now he told us, that he was neither Pelagian nor Socinian: and yet within a few lines he tels us, that the death threatned Gen. 2:17. was 〈◊〉〈◊〉 and death, or the dissolution of the 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Man, which is the same that Pelagian and Socinian both hold, that they may the better maintaine that Principal Errour viz. the Non imputation of Adam's sin to Infants; which is also a Cardinal point of this Mans Religion. That the Pelagians were of this Opinion, Augustine tels us Lib. 1. contra posterior. Response jul. c. 66. say∣ing, you will not say, that because of sin, death passed upon all originally▪ lest you be forced also to confess, that sin did passe upon all; for you know, how iniquous it is to sa••, th•• punishment passed without the merite. And though Pelagius himselfe as the Synod in Palestine, did

dissimulate herein, as Augustin sheweth Lib. 1. u••tani Operis contra jul Cap. 65. & Lib. 2: C 113. yet julianus, and others still maintained, that Adam was so creat∣ed, that though he had nor sinned, yet he would have died; not as punished for sin, but by necessity of nature. And Orosius Apol. de Arbitrii libertate advers. Pelag. Pag. ••37. tels Pelagius, that his disciples, that had sucked poison out of his brests, affir∣med, that Adam was made mortal, and suffered no dammage herein by his trans∣gression. See Vossij Hist. pelag. Lib. 2. par. 2. P. 188.189. That the Socinians main∣taine, that Man by nature was mortal before the fall, is manifest out of their writings. See Socin. prael. Cap. 1. and contra Puccium Cap. 5. Volkel. Lib. 3: Cap. 11. and 14. Socin. de Servatore part. 3: c. 8. Item ad articulos Cutenj. The Arminians Apol. c. 4 so express themselves in this matter, as not to displease the Socinians. This is also the opinion of Anabaptists, who deny original sin. Hence already appeareth one cause, why this man would not speak anything of the state of Adam before the fall; for if he had he behoved so to have explained that ex∣cellent sta••e, as that it might appear, how notwithstanding thereof Adam was obnoxious to death, and dissolution, which is inconsistent with such a state of full felicity Eccles. 9:4. But the Lord, when he came to passe sentence upon Adam, according to the commination, because of his transgression Gen. 3:19. tels him, that his outward man must be dissolved, and that he must return unto the ground, and unto the dust. So the Apostle holdeth forth death, or this dissolution of the outward man, as a just punishment, and as the wages of sin Rom▪ 5:12, 21.806:23. 1 Cor. 15:21, 56. So doth the Scripture elsewhere Hos. 13:1. Ezech. 18 4. 1 Cor 11 30. Deut. 30:15, 19. Ier. 21:8. Psal. 49:14 & 55:15. I••m 1:15. what else importeth the law for putting of so many sorts of sinners unto death Exod. 21:29 & 35:2. Levit. 19:20. & 20:11. Numb. 1:51. & 3:10, 38. & 18:••. & 35:30 Levit. 24:21. Deut. 13:5, 9. & 17:6, 7. & 21:22. & 24:16. Ios. 1:18:2 Chron. 15:13. & is not death called the last enemy, which must be destroyed? Esa. 25:8. Hos. 13, 14. 1 Cor. 15:26, 59? Yea nature teacheth this truth Rom. 1:32. See further Ier. 31:30. 2 Chron. 25:4. Ezech. 18:20. Amos. 9:10. with many moe.

18. what is his reason, why natural Death is not here to be understood? for (says he) as to this death, he did not die till many yeers afterward. But was he not made Obnoxious thereunto, by vertue of that Threatning? Threatnings properly declare only the dueness of punishment; and say that the transgressour is worthy of, or deserveth the punishment threatned, or is liable and obnoxi∣ous thereunto; and not alwayes, the certanty of the execution, as to the event: other wise this man must say, that by death here is not to be understood the ever∣lasting separation of soul and body from God, and the paines and torments of hell; for neither was that presently executed upon Adam. And then I would faine know, what he understandeth by this Death: If he s••y, that this was begun to be executed, that same day, in testimony whereof he was cast out of pa∣radise, that same day. So shall I say, that the bodily death began to be exe∣cuted, that same day; for it was said to him Gen. 3:17.-in sorrow shall thou eate of it (the ground) all the dayes of thy life. 19 In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground Will this Man say, that Paines, Sicknesses,

and temporal Calamities, that attend us from the womb to the grave, in one measure or other, are not the due fruits of sin? Then he shall contradict mani∣fest Scripture Lam. 3:39. 1 Cor. 11:30. Deut 28. & Levit. 26. with many moe. If he dar not say this, he must yeeld, that Adam, upon the fall, began to die, in being made liable to so many Miseries, which he was to conflict with, untill the day of his dissolution, and from which he was ••ee, so long as he stood, in his integrity; for he cannot be so unreasonable as to think, that Sickness, Infirmi∣ties, Paines, Torments, Griefs &c. can be punishments of sin to us, and yet that they were no punishment of sin to Adam, especially, seing these were denunced against Adam by God, the Righteous Judge, upon conviction of his crime.

19. When he giveth us his mystical Interpretation, of the Lord's thrusting man out of paradice, and placeing at the east of the garden of Eden cherubimes, and a flamming sword, which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life Pag. 55. he mentioneth the spiritual Communion and Communication, which the sain••s enjoy with God through Jesus Christ, to whom these cherubi∣mes give place, and to all, that enter through him, who calleth himself the Door. Now I would ask (this comming in our way here, though we have de∣signed the Next Chapter for this purpose) If he thinketh Infants are capable of entring in at the door, Christ; and of enjoying Communion with God through Christ? if he say yes, then he supposeth, that they are excluded by nature from this Communion, as well as others: and will not this prove the Imputation of Adams Guilt unto them, seing they share of his Punishment, and were with him, and in him, cast out of Paradice, because of this transgression? but more of this hereafter.

20. Thereafter he cometh to prove that Adam and his Posterity, after the fall, did retaine no Will nor Light capable to discerne (this he should say, and not to manifest) spiritual things; and for this cause citeth Gen. 6:5 & 8:2••. Ier. 17:9. & Rom. 3:10.-19. And here who would suspect but the Man meaned honestly to represent the deplorable Catastroph, that sin brought into the world: But he is like the man, of whom Salomon speaketh Prov. 26:25, 26. He that ha∣teth, dissembleth with his ••ips, and layeth up deceit within him. And therefore, when he speaketh fair, or, maketh his voice gracious, we must not beleeve him, for there are seven abominations in his heart: And in the very entry, we have some dis∣covery made to us of his disperat Designe: for (says he) what ever good man doth in his Nature, that doth not proceed from him; but from the divine Seed in him. Whence we may see, that Man, in his nature, that is, as I suppose, in his Natural State, can do good; and this would seem to contradict what he is about to prove: but to prevent this he tels us, that all that good doth not proceed from him, though he doth it; but from the divine seed in him: So that, notwithstanding of the fall, there is a divine Seed, which remaineth in every man, as an active prin∣ciple of good. But was not this divine seed in man before the fall? no doubt. Was not this divine seed a Principal part, at least, of the Image of God? Sure, it could not be otherwise. Then it seemeth, that man by his fall did not lose all the Image of G••d, nor the Principal part thereof: and, if this Seed of God

remained, he was not wholly dead, as to a spiritual life, and as to Communi∣on with God, which yet he understood by that death threatned, upon the eat∣ing of the forbidden fruite. Hence we may have some more clear discovery of th•• Mystery of this mans Religion, and of his Conceptions concerning the fall, and of these things formerly hinted by us §. 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. & 14 for we see here clearly, that the fall was but in a certane Respect, in respect of Nature, But not in respect of the Seed of God: But I pray him to tell me, how Adam did any good before the fall? was it only by Nature, or was it by the divine Seed! If only by nature, then the divine Seed was idle and useless; and then why, and for what ends, had he this divine Seed? If by the divine Seed, then the fall caused no change, for this divine Seed remained, and remained Operative, and man by it did good. One thing further I would observe. Here he grant∣eth, that persons in nature can do good, by vertue of the seed of God, and in so far as they do good by the seed of God, or divine seed, they are not de∣prived of the Sense and Touches of the Seed of God; and yet he told us, in the beginning of his Thesis, That all the posterity of Adam was deprived of the sense and touch of the divine seed: I know not how he shall liberate himself of this Contradiction unless he say that, howbeit the good, that a natural man doth, proceed from the seed of God, yet the man hath no feeling nor Touch of this Seed; and so it is not the Man, but the Seed that worketh, and doth good; and then it will follow, that all that good, which is done by man in nature, is purely and immediatly the work of the Seed of God, and is no Humane Ac∣tion, but Divine, wherein the natural man is purely passive, or rather as a shope, in which a Man worketh; and consequently they must be all Perfect, Holy and Divine Actions; and so their actions shall be better, upon many accounts, than the most gracious actions of the truely regenerated children of God, Now let any judge, what this man thinketh of the fall, and of the Natural State of Man..

21. He layeth down this exception, before he enlarge upon Gen. 6:5. and the other places formerly named; But one thing he hath not adverted unto, viz. That none of those places give the least hint of this Exception; yea, That himself commenting upon them, taketh in their most large and comprehensive sense, and interpreteth them absolutely, and not respectivly, telling us, that all the thoughts of the heart of man, without exception of any, (this he tels us, and would have us observe the emphasis) are only and alwayes evil: now where is that exception and limitation, (which he foisteth in here) of its owne nature, or of it self, or as it proceedeth from his heart? Shall we think, that God's con∣troversie against the wicked world, was only this, that howbeit Man did good and much good, by vertue of the Divine Seed that was in him; yet all that good did not proceed from his Nature, and from his owne heart? How absurd is this? And doth Ieremiah Chap. 17:9. give any hint of this Exception or Limi∣tation? Doth he say, that the heart of man in it self is deceitful above all things; but not the heart of natural men, as under the touches of the seed of God? Doth Paul Rom. 3. speaking positively enough of man in his lapsed and corrupt state, make any exception of actions done in them by the divine Seed? Why doth this

man then obtrude his fancyful notions upon us, without all ground or shew of proof? Doth he, take us all for credulous Quakers?

22. But what can be this mans designe, in all this? It is indeed a most despe∣rat designe: for it is no lesse, upon the matter, than to Overturne the whole Gospel of the grace of God: why so? You will say. Because (as we will see more fully afterward) his maine designe in this, is, to Evince, that all the good, that is found or heard of to have been, or yet to be, among Heathens, Turks or Barbarians, who never heard of the Gospel, or of Christ revealed therein, was as much of the Grace of God in Christ, and the fruit of Christ's merite and intercession, and the Blessing of the New Cove••ant of Grace, as the Holiness of such as are united by faith unto Christ. and crucified with Him, and have Him living, and working in them by his Spirit: So that if we come the length of some Heathens, who have walked more closely to the Principles of Nature, than others; and have bin more Moral, as to some things, in their outward carriage, than the common rabble of Men, we have attained the Gospel Holiness and Sanctification, (at least, as to kinde) which these men intend; and to that measure thereof, which will ensure our Salvation. Now, what a desperat designe this is, to bring us no further length, than to polished Heathenisme, let every Christian judge; and see if the title of my book be not true, that Quakerisme is the path way to Paganisme; But the sequel will more con∣firme this.

23. For further manifesting of this wickedness, let us consider what he say∣eth further, Pag. 56. toward the end, He bringeth-in this Objection, That the Apostle sayeth Rom. 2:14. that the Gentiles, who had not the Law, did by na∣ture the things contained in the Law: the meaning of which words, as we adduce them, is not to prove (as he falsely here insinuateth, and expresseth) that such by nature can do that which is good and acceptable, in the sight of God; but to prove, (as shall be made manifest afterward.) That there are some Notions of God, and of Moral honesty, as relicques of that noble image of God, with which man was endued, at the beginning, left in corrupt man, whereby he, through the dim light of nature, may see something of the Law of nature, pointing out his duty to God, to man, and to himself; and may do, upon the matter, something of that, which the Law of nature requireth; and yet when he hath improven Nature to its yondmost, shall never do that, which is well pleasing in the sight of God, who, since the fall, only accepteth of that, which is done in the strength and grace of Jesus Christ and by one reconciled unto Him, in and through Christ. Let us now see what he Answereth, This nature (sayeth he) neither may nor can be understood, of mans proper nature, which is corrupt and fallen; but of spiritual nature, which proceeds, from the seed of God, as he hath receiv∣ed a new visitation of divine love, and is thereby quickened. For answere, I would know; whether he understandeth this Spiritual Nature, of that which is com∣mon to all the Gentiles, or of that which was peculiar to some. If he under∣stand that, which is common to all, then, according to his divinity, every heathen, let be, every Christian, hath this Spiritual Nature, and Seed of God, in him, and what good they do, in Natural or Moral actions, proceeth from

this seed of God, and spiritual nature; And consequently, the thoughts of their heart concerning the being of God (which is good, because true, and accord∣ing to the Law writen in every mans heart) must flow from this Principle, and from no other; and so, the devils, who beleeve that there is a God, Iam. 2:19. must be partaker of this Spiritual Nature and Seed of God, Observe, Reader, whither this Mans Religion will bring us, and what the Grace of God, and that Spiritual Nature, is, which this man would lead us unto: Even that, which is common to devils. If he meane that, which is peculiar to some; I would enquire, who these some are? Doth he meane the Gentiles, who were converted by the Gospel, and become Christians? These, we grant, have a spiritual Nature▪ but sure, the Apostle is not speaking of such, as the whole scope of his discourse cleareth. If he understand this of the Heathens, who did better improve the light of nature, than others; we know no spiritual Na∣ture, that such have, for all their advancement in Nature: because they are yet out of Christ, whose members only are made partakers of this new spi∣ritual Nature, according to that Gospel, which we hope to be saved by: And his contrary opinion confirmeth us of their anti-evangelick Principles, and paga∣nish designe.

24. He addeth a reason from vers. 15. where the Apostle saith, that they shew the work of the Law written in their hearts: and this, says he, the Scripture witnes∣eth to be a great part of the dispensation of the New Covenant. Wherein the Man, who would faine make us beleeve, he had no fellowshipe with the Socinians, join∣eth with Smalcius the Socinian, writing against Frantzius disp. S, Pag. 419. who, upon this same ground, alledgeth, that Paul speaketh here of Gentiles, who were under the New Covenant, and not of such who lived before Christ came: while as it is manifest from vers. 10. that Paul is speaking of the Gentiles, in the general, in opposition to the Jewes, who made their boast of the Law; and is hereby shewing, that they will be without excuse in the day of judgment (of which he speaketh vers. 16.) howbeit they wanted that Law, which the Jewes had, because they had the Law of nature, which they transgressed, ingraven in their mindes and consciences; as he further cleareth by their consciences bearing witness, and their thoughts accusing or excusing, &c. (2.) Where read we, that any do by nature the things declared in the New Covenant? (3.) How can such, as are under the New Covenant, be said to be without a Law, as these here? (4.) Is not the New Covenant alwayes opposed to the Law? See Gal. 2:16. Rom. 3:27, 28. and several other places. (5.) How can such, as are under and within the New Covenant, be said to sin, and to perish, without Law, as here vers. 12•• (6.) How can such, as are under the New Covenant, be a Law unto themselves, as here? (7.) Where in all the Scripture, is the matter of the New Covenant, called the work of the Law? He would do well, if he thought good, to consult Calvin, Pareus and other Commentators on the place. (8.) This Man told us above, homologating with the Socinians, that the New Covenant had no place under the Law, and yet even then, we hear of the Law in hearts, Psal. 40:9▪ & 37:31. Esa. 51:7. (9.) Had not Adam, even after the fall▪ the Law in some measure fixed and

written in his h••a••t, when his conscience accused him of his transgression, and he did run to hide himself? By this accusing of conscience, Paul proveth here, that the Gentiles had the Law in their heart. (10.) He would know, that there is a twofold writing of the Law, in the heart: One is, whereby the knowledge of the Law is so fixed in their mindes, as that it cannot be utterly delet, howbeit their wils cannot and will not comply therewith; and of this the Apostle is here speaking; for the Heathens have this Law of nature so im∣printed, and fixed in their Mindes, as to several things concerning God, and their carriage and walk in the world, that they cannot but see a difference betwixt Righteousness and Iniquity, Honesty and Dishonesty, in several particulars, and in their judgment preferre the one to the other, though their hearts and wills be not reconciled thereunto, and made to comply therewith, even accord∣ing to th•• measure of their Knowledge and Judgment. The Other is whereby the whole will of God, revealed in Law and Gospel, is by the Spirit of God deeply imprinted in the soul of Beleevers, so that, as their Mindes know it, and their Judgments approve it, so their Wills imbrace it with love and desire▪ and their native Endeavour is after Full, Pure, Sincere, and Spiritual conformity thereto, in the strength of the same Spirit; and it is their griefe and matter of unfaigned sorrow, when, through the workings of a remanent body of death, they come short of what is commanded, whether as to Matter or Manner, or End intended &c. If he shall evince, that Paul speaketh of this here, he shal do more than all the Socinians (no persons else ever dreamed of this) ever have been able to do, to this day; But the truth is, I apprehend, all this is a riddle to this man, who understandeth no other writing of the Law in hearts, than the first: for as he is an enemy, so is he a stranger unto the Gospel of the Grace of God: as will evidently enough appear, ere we have done.

25. He addeth a second reason for his Interpretation Pag. 57 saying, that if nature here be understood of the proper nature of Man, then the Apostle should contradict himself, who elsewhere saith, that the natural man cannot perceive the things of God; but among these things of God, the Law is comprehend, seing Paul Rom. 7:12, 14. calleth it ••oly, just and good and Spiritual, and calleth himself carnal, which must be understood, as he was unregenerat. I answere (1.) Paul no way contradicteth himself, except in this mans dreaming fancy; for these spiritual things, where∣of the Apostle speaketh 1 Cor. 2:14 are not the things of Nature, or of the Law or Light of Nature, But the things of the Spirit of God, which must be spiri∣tually understood vers. 14. which none can know, without they have the minde of Christ vers. 16. which concerne Christ and Him Crucified vers. 2. the same which Paul preached in demonstration of the Spirit and of Power vers. 4. which was Wisdom among such only, as were perfect vers. 6. and which only the Spirit, which is of God, did reveal, and not the Spirit of the world vers. 11, 12. and which eye had not seen, nor eare heard &c. vers. 9. It was the preaching of the Crosse of Christ, which even the Wise and Understanding, and such as had not only Natures Light, but the Light of the Law, could not know. It was that, which even to the Jewes, was a stumbling block, and to the wise Gre∣cians

was foolishness: Chap. 1:16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23. Hence we see, the Law, which was written in the hearts of the Gentiles, is not among those things, whereof Paul speaketh 1 Cor. 2. (2.) It is tru••, the Law both that which is written in the heart of the Gentiles, and that which was more clearly and amply declared and explained by God to the Jewes, was Good, Holy, Just, and Spiritual, yet was it not the same, with the things of God, whereof the Apostle spoke 1 Cor. 2. (3) This man must have a strange antipathy at ••ruth, and against the Orthodox, for he will joyne with any, before he take part with them; we heard, but just now, how he joyned with Smalcius, the Soci∣nian▪ and here, in interpreting Rom. 7:14. &c. he deserteth the or••hodox, and joyneth himself with Pelagians, Arminians and Socinians, who will have the A∣postle there speaking, not of himself, but as assumeing the person of one in na∣ture, not yet regenerated, as if such were not wholly ••in, and wh••l••y flesh; or had an Inward man delighting in the Law of God, or ••ad a Law in their minde contrary to the Law in their members; or were capable of this captivity, when they are willing slaves, or could groan under a bo••y of death; and account themselves miserable upon that account; or thank God, through Jesus Christ, because of the begun delivery, and certane expectation of the full victory; or as if they with their minde could serve the Law of God. (4.) His sole reason, viz. because the Apostle said, he was carnal, proveth nothing; for what the Apostle speaketh in a certane respect, must not be understood in an absolute sense: He was, it is true, carnal (as all ••egenerat persons are) not abso∣lutly, nor wholly; but in part; in so far, as the old man remained, in which respect, the best have a Law in their members warring against the Law of their minde, and have the flesh lusting against the Spirit, as they have the Spirit lust∣ing against the flesh Gal. 6.17. And the Apostle calleth even such babes in Christ, carnal, in a certane re••pect 1 Cor. 3:1.

26. Thereafter he tels us, That when we are urged with this testimony by Pelagians an•• Socinians, and by them (so ••hat we see, with whom he and his party are birds of one feather) we use to answere, that there were some rem∣nants of the spiritual image left in Adam. But sayes he, this is affirmed without probation. In which he either speaket•• a••ainst his Light; or he ••a•••• ne••er read, what hath been said upon this, by the orthodox, against Socinians and Arminians, and such as would defend, that there were some speculative Atheis••s, unto whom this Mans assertion doth no small service as we may shew hereafter. But next he saith, that hereby we contradict ourselves, and destroy our own cause, Why so? For (saith he) If by these relicques▪ they could fulfil the law, then either Christ's coming was not necessary, or men could be saved without him, or that these (th••ugh they keeped the Law) were damned because ignorant ••f Christ to come, which the Lord had made impossible for them to know, Answere (1.) We never said, that they could fulfil the Law, by these relicques; nor doth the Apostle say so: It is true, they did and could do by nature somethings, contained in the Law, (and this was sufficient for the Apostles designe) not all: Even Paul, though many stages above many heathens, while in the state of nature, did not know, till the written Law told him, that Concupiscence was sin Rom 7:7. And when they did

the things contained in the Law, they did them not perfectly; nor doth the Apostle say this, but the contrary; for he addeth, that their consciences did ac∣cuse them. (2.) Though we should suppose, that they both could and did ful∣fil the Law, (against all Reason, Scripture and Experience) yet we, who do not, with this man, deny Original sin, might assert a necessity of Christ's coming; for, all their future obedience, make it never so perfect, being but their duty, could make no satisfaction to divine justice for Adams sin, whereof they were guilty. (3.) Hence he may see, that we need not say, that any can or could be saved without Christ. (4.) Nor need we say, that such should have been damned for being ignorant of Christ to come, but for their trans∣gression. But absurdities deduced from an impossible supposition, are but ab∣surd probations▪ fit only for Quakers.

27. What he saith §. 3. to the vindicating of 1 Cor 2:14. from the exception of such, as would have 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 meaned of a Brutish man, an animal, not of a Na∣tural man, doth not concerne us; but therein, unawars, he contradicteth himself: for if man now, in his fallen condition, can know nothing of God, of his Being, Nature, or Government of the world, nor nothing of the Prin∣ciples of common Honesty & Morality, nor nothing of the things of the Law, as he went about to prove, as we heard; then let him tell me, wherein a man, in his Natural state, differeth from a Brute? And how he can then make use of this answere? Againe when he sayeth, that the Apostle doth demonstrate, through that whole chapter (he should have added the first Chapter too) how the wisdom of Man is an uncapable judge of the things of God. Let him tell me, if he thinketh that the wise men, such as the Grecians of old were, (as he granteth here) could not judge of any of these particulars, held forth in the Law of God? If not, wherein appeared their Wisdome? Or wherein were they to be called Wise? If they could judge, in some matters of the Law, which was written in their heart, then let him reconcile this, if he can, with what he said above. But, as we have frequently alrea••y observed, this Man regairdeth so little what he sayeth, that may he but have occasion to contradict Truth, he cares not how often he contradict himself, as is usual with such, who are carryed away with a prejudice against Truth, and know not well, as yet, were to settle.

28 Thus have we examined what this Quaker saith, upon this Head: and because he alleiged, we spoke without Rea••on, when we said, that there were some reliques of the image of God left in the natural man, whereby he may know some things concerning God's Being and Nature, and Government of the world, his duty towards God, his Neghbour and Himself; we shall shortly mani∣fest the truth of this, to the end, that it may the better appeare, that this Quakers Theology, which he pleadeth for and driveth at, is but Paganical, borne with e∣very corrupt son of Adam, and far different from that, which is Saving, and is manifest by the Gospel, which hath brought life and immortality to light. The Socinians deny, that there is any inuate knowledge of God, in man; or that by nature, he knoweth any thing of God: so Socinus himself praelect cap 11 So Ostorodus Institut. P. 1. & 10. & Smalcius contra Frantzium disp. 8. though others, as Crellius, and Schlichtingius, be of another judgment: our Divines, on the

contrare, Maintaine, that there is some Imperfect, and as to Salvation Insuf∣ficient (though sufficient for Instruction as to several duties, and to render the transgressours Unexcusable) knowledge of God, implanted in corrupt nature, so that, man, even in his natural condition, coming to the use and exercise of Reason, by a natural instinct, sense and force, cometh to know, that there is a God, that is Optimus & Maximus, Powerfull, Good, Wise &c. & Govern∣eth all the world; that we ought to Worshipe & Serve him; that we ought to do Right to all; that Punishment abideth evil doers; and several things of this nature: and what our Divines say, they confirme by Scripture and Reason: passages of Scripture are these Rom. 1:19. because that which may be kn••wn of God, is manifest in them, for God hath shewed it unto them. This 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 was not mani∣fested unto some few of them, as to their chiefe Philosophers; but in all, who were ungodly and unrighteous, and held the truth in unrighteou••ness vers. 18. So vers. 21. it is said, that they knew God, even they, who did not glorify him, as God, neither were thankful, but became vaine in their imaginations &c. So vers. 23. They changed the glory of the incorruptible God: And therefore had some notions of this incorruptible and glorious majesty. And vers. 25. they changed the truth of God into a lie. So vers. 32. They knew the judgment of God, that they, which commit such things, are worthy of death: And so could no•• be ignorant of God, of his Law, of the Equity thereof, of their Obligation to obedience, and of God's Righ∣teousnes in Iudging and Punishing transgressours So Rom 2:14, 15. (of which we spoke above) The Gentiles, who had not the written law, did by nature the things contained in the Law, and did shew the work of the law, written in their hearts, having their consciences bearing them witness, and their thoughts ac∣cusing or excusing, according as they observed, or transgressed the said law. So that, having this law implanted in their hearts, they could not be ignorant of God, whose law this is, and in whose name, it calleth for Obedience; nor of their own Obligation to obedience; and their Consciences did preach forth the same, for it judgeth and accuseth as God's Deputy. See likewise Act. 14, 15, 16, 17. & 17:24, 25, 26, 27. As for Reasons evinceing this; They ad∣duce the Workings and Stirrings of the Conscience, which natural men have, and which they cannot get shaken off, which manifestly evince to them, That there is a Supream Judge, God, in whose name, Conscience giveth sentence, and vexeth and tormenteth evil doers night and day; for as Menander said, con∣science is a God to all mortals. And this took vengeance on that monster of men▪ Caligula, and so haunteth evil doers, that they alwayes think they see their Pu∣nishment before their eyes; hence some Great persons, without the reach of Inferiours, have been made to tremble and quake, at thunder claps; yea and put violent hands in themselves. Philosophers, Historians and Poets declare this at large: yea common sense and experience confirmeth it, so that every rational person cannot but assent to the truth of this, so soon as he heareth it, and knoweth what is said, That God is. It carryeth alongs with it such rayes of light, that without any difficulty it is seen and understood, and mans Minde and Judg∣ment, of its own accord, by a natural Impulse an Instinct, imbraceth it.

The constant practice of all Nations, setting up and maintaining some kinde of Religion confirmeth this: whence was this, that they thought Religion so ne∣cessary, that there could be no Common wealth established without it, but from the innate Apprehensions of God, and of their Obligation to serve and honour Him? How this is further confirmed by the testimonies or Heathens themselves, and of the ancient Fathers, see Hoornbeek against the Socinians lib. 1. cap. 7. Pag. 142. &c. and D▪ Owen de Natura &c. Verae Theologiae Pag. 23, 24. &c.

29. There is another debate with the Socinians, to wit, with Socinus himself & Ostorodiu•• (though ••thers of them are of another mind) who deny, that any knowledge of God can be acquired by considering the works of Creation and Providence and so they deny that persons, strangers to the Gospel, living in Nature, can attaine to any knowledge of God, by the contemplation of na∣ture. But our divines manifest the contrary from Psal. 19:1, 2. where the Psalmist tels us, that the heavens declare the glory of God &c. That magnificent workman shipe preacheth forth the Wisdome, Power, Goodness, and Glory of th•• great Maker, and that to all Nations, so as they cannot be ignorant thereof. So from Rom. 1:19, 20. we see, that God manifested to the Heathens, that which might be known of him, the invisible things, his eternal Power and God head, by the Creation of the world, and things that are made. The fonde imagina∣tion of Socinus dreaming, that the Gospel is here to be understood, is abun∣dantly confuted by D. Hoornbeek, in the forecited book Pag. 157. &c. The same is proved also from the forecited places Act. 14, 15, 16, 17. and 17:24, 25, 26, 27. And likewise from Psal. 8. throughout, & 104. throughout, and 145:4, 5, 6, 7. & 147:7, 8, 9 Esa 40:12. Iob. 12:7, 8, 9, 10. & 38. & 39. & 40. Chapters Psal. 69:35. & 103:22. & 107. & 104. throughout. Other arguments to this purpo••e may be seen, in the forecited book of D Hoornbeek Pag. 164-172. which for brevities sake I passe by.

30. Our divines likewise, in dealing with such, as would assert that there are some formal and direct speculative Atheists, are careful to assert, and maintaine these Innate and Fixed Notions of a Deity, and particularly the learned D. Voetius de Atheismo Pag. 140 &c. where he asserts, that there is an Innate Theo∣logy, Innate Notions, or a latent Natural Seed of Reason and Religion, that is like the habite of principles, that in adults is brought forth into act, without any previous demonstration, by the very perception of the words and termes, without labour or study, or the force of arguments: and that the most flagiti∣ous person that is, can not come to think, and be perswaded directly, that there is not a God, though he could wish, there were not a God, or that he himself had no sense or perception of a God; and that by these reasons: for (1,) Then it would follow, that there were no 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, nothing which might be known of God, imprinted in the heart of every man that cometh into the world, and that by nature, contrare to Rom. 1:18, 19. & 2.14, 15. that Con∣uate and Congenite Divinity can no more be separated from man, than his rati∣onal Intellect. (2.) Then some men should be without the Law of Nature, & a natural conscience, which cannot be. (3.) Then Men should be Inferiour

to devils, in whom these sparks are not exstinct Iam. 2:19. (4.) This were a∣gainst the universal Experience and Consent of all Nations (5.) Then some should really have some excuse, contrary to Rom. 1:19, 20. (6.) This would much confirme Atheists, and weaken our arguments against them (7.) It would also gratifie Socinians. By all which this our Quaker may, if he will open his eyes, see how dangerous his opinion is, who deny••th these Inbred Innate and Imprinted Notions of a Deity, and of his Nature and Attributes; and of his Relations to the world, and to each in particular, as their Creator, Conser∣vator, and Benefactor; and of our Obligation to Love, Worshipe, Serve & Obey Him: Though hereafter, we will finde him, after his usual manner, againe contradicting himself, in this.

31. However this Quaker say and unsay the same thing, yet we stand here, and maintaine these Natural Anticipations, as Cicero calleth them, and Inbred Notions, of what is naturally goo•• an•• honest, manifested by the very Lawes of Nature an•• Nations, and the Natural Notions of the being of God, that being true, which Cicero saith 1. Tuscul. quaest. For there is no Nation so barbarous as not to confess, there is a God, so that men would rather have and owne a false God, than none at all: so deeply doth the sense of a Deity sinck into our hearts. It is true, there was much difference among the Nations, concerning the nature and number of the Gods, and concerning the way of Worship; yet all agreed in this, that there was a God, and that he was to be Worshiped. Withall let the Reader observe, that we are far from asserting, that all this knowledge, improven to the highest pitch, that the primest of Natural Philosophers, after all their study and diveing into Nature, could reach unto, can prove saving to any soul: whatever discoveries may be thereby made of God's Nature and Attributes, or of Moral Honesty, and such things, as belong to the humane and bodily good of Mankinde, within or without societies, and these lesser or greater; Yet hereby no discoveries can be made of that, which floweth solely from the will and good plasure of God, and dependeth upon Immediat Revelation; of which kinde is the mystery, which was hid from generations and ages, Col. 1:26: and keeped secret since the world began, Rom. 16:25. but now is made manifest, and by the Scriptures of the Prophets, according to the commande∣ment of the everlasting God, made known unto all Nations, for the obedience of faith, Rom. 1••:26. The mystery of his will, according to his good plea∣sure, which he had purposed in himself, Ephes. 1:9. Even the mystery of Christ, Ephes. 3:4. the mystery of the Gospel, by which Life and Immortality is brought to light. But of this, we will have occasion to speak more here∣after, when we come to see, what use this Quaker maketh of these Natural Notions common to Heathens.