The Reviler Rebuked, Treatise · Part 2 · Head 1
1. Concerning the Scriptures.
Section 1.
I Had animadverted upon what they write, [The Scriptures are within them, and they own them in the life and ſenſe of them] that while they pretend to ſpeak all from the Spirit that ſpake the Scriptures, they are found in their aforeſaid Scripture-contradictions) to belye the Scriptures, and the Spirit of God alſo. R. F. lets this Section paſs without his controlment; and I believe ſuch as control the Scriptures (as R. F. and others have done) in their very life and ſenſe, touching the Spirits perſonality; the right way of Gods juſtifying a ſinner &c. will one day have their mouths ſtopt, and every tongue and pen that riſeth up in judgement againſt the Lord, and his Scriptures, and ſervants, ſhall be heaven-ſtricken, and ſelf-condemned.
Section 2.
WHereas I ſaid here, They deny the Letter of Scripture to be Scripture, and yet ſtick to the letter, Matth. 23. 8. 10. Call no man Father, neither be ye called Maſters, R. F. *Page 24.is ſo bold as to tell me this is one of my lies, but he proves nothing againſt me; For,
1. I did not deliver out their very words in this place (as if they ſhould ſay) we deny the letter of Scripture to be Scripture: but referred my Readers to the Pamphlet *Paper ſent into the world.where they ſhould finde the effect, and ſubſtance of ſuch a denial (albeit the Printer or my ſelf did unwittingly miſquote the Page, 19. for 2.) their words are theſe, They are ſuch teachers as tell people, that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John is the Goſpel, which are but the Letter, &c. we therefore do deny them. Whence I argue; They that deny theDenyal of written Goſpel, is denial of Scripture letter. written Goſpel to be Goſpel, deny the Letter of the Scripture to be Scripture; But theſe men deny the Goſpel written by Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, to be Goſpel; Therefore &c. The minor or latter propoſition followeth clearly from their denyal of ſuch Teachers, as call the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John Goſpel; and from their own exception [which are but the Letter] the major and former propoſition is thus evidenced; The Goſpel is a Good-ſpel, and as it is written, it is made up of good and gladſom tidings, delivered in letters and ſyllables, of which words are framed: deny the writing of Matthew &c. to be written Goſpel, and you deny the letters and ſyllables to be Goſpel-letters and ſyllables, making up ſuch words as do give forth a certain Goſpel-ſound, and conſequently you deny the letter of the Scripture to be Scripture: For Goſpel-letter and Scripture or written Goſpel is all one, and he that denies the Goſpel-letter, denies the Goſpel-Scripture, as he that denies the Scripture-Goſpel denies the Goſpel-letter. But they will ſay, *Paper ſent into the world. pag. 2.The Letter is the declaration of the Goſpel: If it be ſo, then it is Goſpel declared by writing, and then the Letter (in that reſpect, as written) is Goſpel, which was before, by theſe men, excepted againſt as no Goſpl
2. Their Self-contradiction in ſticking to the Letter, denyed to be Goſpel, I made to appear, from their urging the above mentioned place in Matthew, in the very Letter, Be ye not called Maſters. By this, R. F. would make the ſimple believe I have cleared them, and contradicted my ſelf.
Rep. But wherein, or how, no man can tell, unleſs accuſing them be clearing of them, and diſcovering of their ſelfcontradiction proves me one of them.
Thou art offended that they witneſs againſt thy deceit.
Rep. I am neither conſcious of deceit, nor ſhould I be offended at thoſe that diſcover it, were it diſcoverable from my words: but their ſticking to the Letter ſometimes, and at other times condemning the whole Scripture-letter; I witneſs to be an interfering with themſelves: And when the very Letter is urged againſt the ſenſe and intendment of the Spirit, I witneſs it to be a deceit in them that ſo urge it.
Thou cuts off thy maſter-ſhip by thy own Rule.
Rep. Did I urge the Scripture as they do, my ſervant muſt not call me, Maſter; we have no ſuch ſervants as Abraham had, who gave him this note of reſpect at every turn, Gen. 24. 12. O Lord God of my Maſter Abraham &c. ſhew kindneſs unto my Maſter Abraham, ver. 36. And Sarah my Maſters wife bare a ſon to my Maſter when ſhe was old, and ver. 54. Send me away unto my Maſter; but the fifthMatth. 23 8. 10. cleared & vindicated. Commandement is not made void by Chriſts words, nor by the true ſenſe of them, which is, that we ſhould be far from affectation of Titles, from men; or ſuffering any to caſt their dependence, and lay the ſtreſs of their conſcience-determination upon us, in matters of faith, and ſalvation. In this very Section, I had diſcovered another of their ſelf contradictions: For J. Nayler querieth, which of the Saints had the witneſs of their ſouls to ſeek in the Letter? and with the ſame breath he quotes the Scripture-letter, for the believers witneſs in himſelf. This R. F. takes up as if they did not deny and croſs the Scriptures.
Rep. But my work was to ſhew how J. Nayler both denies, and grants the ſame thing to be in the letter, without any diſtinction. If he had ſaid, the believers witneſs is one way in the heart, or in himſelf, and another way in the Scriptures, he had not croſs-ſhind himſelf: Nor doth R. F. *Page 25.help to cure the wound, but makes it feſter and rankle the more with his railing words: Acknowledge thy lies, error and confuſion, and upon them own thy condemnation.
Rep. 1. He ſalves not J. Nayler: For the believer knows by the Scripture, and by that in particular, 1 Joh. 5.1 John 5. 20. vindicated. …0. that he hath the witneſs in him ſelf, and no generation of Saints ever (ſince that Scripture was written) refuſed to ſeek and run unto it for confirmation of their ſouls faith, ſeeing the Apoſtle addeth ſo plainly, ver. 13. Theſe things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God: Here the Believer hath both the riſe and furtherance of his faith and evidence from what is written; and if the evidence or witneſs in the heart be not bottomed upon what is in the Scripture, and proved agreeable thereunto; it is a falſe evidence though it lurketh within: as the faith which hath not Scripture for its warrant, and compurgator, is falſe alſo.
2. He makes the wound rankle the more, in that he would have me acknowledge truth to be error and lies; and faithful diſcovery, falſhood; and in that he requires, when I have acknowledged &c. thereupon to own my condemnation; whereas upon confeſſion of my fault, where I finde it, I am acquitted, as in Gods court, ſo in my conſcience▪ and though I will judge my ſelf for the root of unſeen failings (as for what in other things I ſee) yet he is near that… Joh. 1. 9. juſtifieth me, and I believe the Lord is faithful to forgive me my ſins, and to cleanſe me from all unrighteouſneſs.
Section 3.
HEre I pointed at J. Naylers conceſſion, The word nigh in the heart, and in the mouth, doth not oppoſe it ſelf, but is one with the Scripture; contradictious to what at other times they ſay; the Scripture in the mouth or in the book is not the word of God. R. F. takes no notice of this Section, nor how that which drops from their Pens oppoſeth it ſelf, or the Scripture, or from both ſometimes; what elſe is that which J. N. in his Few words, &c. Page 8.—thou needeſt not try the inward ſubſtance, by the outward declaration, the living by the dead, when as himſelf in page 7. had affirmed the outward declaration, or Scripture to be one with the word within, and this one with the Scripture; If the Scripture be dead, and yet one with the word in J. Naylers heart, then is his heart, and the word in it dead alſo; If the word which is nigh, in the heart, and in the mouth, be alive, and the Letter of Scripture be dead, then the word within and the word without are not one. If the word in the heart be alive, and the word in the Bible, and mouth be dead, then the word in the heart, and in the mouth oppoſeth it ſelf. It will put any man to his ſhifts to extricate, and winde off here from Self or Scripture-contradiction. How much better or worſe is that which followeth? Page 9. The Saints witneſs the word from Gods own mouth in Spirit, and revelation in Spirit, but never any in the Letter; Let Saints indeed perpend and weigh ſeriouſly; is it ſo as J. Nayler ſuggeſteth? Gods mouth then, is not in the Scripture; he ſpeaks not, breathes not there at all, by this mans doctrine; but then let him tell the world how the Scripture came to be the outward declaration of the minde and will of God; and ſalve himſelf from Self-contradiction, who had ſaid before, the word in heart and mouth, is one with the Scripture, and now, there was never any word from Gods own mouth in the Letter; and as he ſubjoyneth, That faith which is in Chriſt, ſtands not in volumes; he means, of Gods book, or letter, of which he ſpake immediately before; If it be ſo as he ſaith, then the faith of his heart is not built upon Gods Teſtimony in the Scripture; He hath a faith, and a Chriſt too, which is not to be found in the Scripture, and then he oppoſeth himſelf, who granted at firſt, the word nigh in the heart, was one with the Scripture. I hope the wary, and humble Saint will never pin his faith upon J. N. his ſleeve, nor ſuffer it to ſtand upon his Few words, or his multiplyed pamphletical volumes, who thus rejecteth the Law of Gods mouth in the Scriptures, while he would but ſeemingly make Gods Law and the heart, to be one with it. Another of this mans Self contradictions (though common to his fellows) I noted in this Section crying up Thou and Thee to a particular, as Scripture-language, and yet crying down the Letter as no Scripture that is the mouth of God, the word of God, or a binding Rule. What J. Nayler means by that, *Few words page 14.Thou wilt neither make Scripture thy Rule, nor ſuffer them that would, let R. F. well conſider; for if J. Nayler would have it to be a rule, R. F. and others would have it to be none, much leſs a ſtanding rule, as hath appeared in 1. Part, Section 1.
Section 4.
THe Scriptures (ſay they) were given us by inſpiration, and by inſpiration are to be underſtood again. In this paſſage there is coucht another of their Self-contradictions, which R. F. neither approves nor condemns, but paſſeth it over un-toucht, un-anſwered. The Reader may pleaſe to peruſe what was ſaid for diſcovery of their claſhing Principles, in my former piece: This I ſhall adde, The Spirit of God, who breathed forth the Scriptures, muſt give us the ſpiritual underſtanding of them, (if we have it at all) but this he doth in another way, then that whereby he inſpired the Pen-men of the Scriptures. They were ſo inſpired when they wrote the holy Canon of Scripture, as men rapt up with an extatical motion, 2 Pet. 1. 21. The word there tranſlated [moved] ſignifies a forcible acting of the Spirit2 Pet. 1. 21. foreign. upon them; they were mightily born away by the impetus and impulſive power of the Spirit. The ſame word is uſed by Luke, Acts 2. 2. in the deſcription of the viſible pouring forth of the Spirit, by a ſound from heaven, as of a ruſhing mighty wind; this ruſhing power of the Spirit inviſibly acted the holy Men of God, who wrote the Scriptures in a way immediate, when they had not a letter of Gods Book before them. But thus the Scriptures come not to us, nor the underſtanding of them: we have the Book and Canon written down, and by providence, printed, tranſlated into our Mother tongue, and preached to us: Now then, they that profeſs they own the Scriptures, and they own the reading of them, and they own prayer for the underſtanding of them, &c. and yet when it comes to the upſhot, they diſ-own and deny all actings of the Spirit upon them, by means of ſecond cauſes, inſtruments, and ordinances, by which we are to get underſtanding, and by which he gives it forth; it plainly appears, that as the beaſts that have no underſtanding, they kick down the good pail of milk beforegiven by fruſtration, and neglect of Gods gift of the Scriptures, and exerciſes about them, thereby to come to the knowledge of them, under the conduct of the Spirit.
Section 5.
ANother of their Self-contradictions I ſhewed to be this, That they profeſs to own the Scriptures to be true in themſelves, &c. but do not own them in their true ſenſe and meaning: I gave inſtance of their interpreting 1 Cor. 14. 35. Husbands at home, to be Chriſt in the heart; and I referred to all the other inſtances of their Scripture-contradiction, for conviction of their diſ-owning the true ſenſe. R. F. *Page 25.would make the world believe I had confuted my ſelf, and cleared them, becauſe I granted, they ſaid, That they owned the Scriptures, &c. whereas this doth evidently make the more againſt them; that they will pretend ſo much to the Scriptures, and yet rend the ſenſe of them all a pieces. And although that ſenſe put upon the fore-mentioned place in the Epiſtle to the Corinthians, be broached by no man more then by R. F. in another Pamphlet by it ſelf; and he entitleth this Piece of his I now deal with, The Scriptures vindication: yet he doth not in the leaſt undertake the vindication of this place, either when I alledged it againſt them before, [Part 1. Section 6.] or now; onelyonly he ſpeaks his wonted ſwelling words of vanity,
Thou art under the guilt, and the pit which for others thou diggedſt, thou art faln in thy ſelf, and catcht in thy own ſnare and craftineſs, take notice of that, and ſee how thou haſt contradicted thy ſelf.
Rep. But that I deſire ſome may be convinced of the folly and falſhood of this man, and of his Sect, I would not ſpend time, and waſte paper, to tranſcribe ſuch empty ſtuff If it be proof enough for him to accuſe and recriminate, I cannot be innocent; who ſhall, in the like caſe? That which hitherto I have charged him, or other of this way withal, I have not given words, but Arguments, for proof and demonſtration of the Charge.
Let me give another inſtance, R. F. *Page 2.in anſwer to my firſt Section, Part 1. ſaith thus, That the Scriptures are words that proceeded from the Spirit of truth, we do not deny, but own, and ſo they are words of truth. Now hear what *An untaught Teacher, p. 2.Th. Lawſon judgeth of this matter, To ſay that the word of truth is called the Scripture, or that the Scripture is called the word of truth, that is a lye. I ask the ſimple honeſt hearted Reader, whether Th. Lawſon puts not the lye upon his brother R. Farnworth? or, whether theſe men do own the Scripture of truth? (as it is ſtiled Dan. 10. 21.) or rather, whether they do not contradict it, and themſelves alſo?
Let it be obſerved alſo, that R. F. doth not quit himſelf of that other Self-contradiction of his (which I cloſed this Section with) by bare words, *Page 25.Thou haſt manifeſted the ſame, therefore take thou the ſhame.
Rep. It ſeems R. F. will take none, as one paſt ſhame, and bluſhing. Where I have manifeſted my ignorance of the life of the Scriptures, and of the Letter, (as he lets fly againſt me) I am willing to ſee it, and bear my own ſhame: but will he be as the unjuſt, Zeph. 3. 5. that knoweth no ſhame, when his ſinful folly, and ſelf-conceited Contradictions are detected? The words that R. F. hath in his other Pamphlet *Light out of darkneſs▪ p. 18are theſe, Herein you ſhew your ignorance in the life of the Scriptures, that are ignorant of the Letter, which is without life. This he chargeth upon three Miniſters, for asking a queſtion to this effect; If the light wherewith every one is enlightned be Chriſt, what then is become of the perſon of the Mediator? Muſt they be ignorant in the life of the Scriptures, who acknowledge not every mans light to be Chriſt? and muſt they be ignorant of the Letter of the Scripture, who do not underſtand it as he doth? But that which I inferred from his words, was, If there be life in the Scriptures, as he grants there is, then the Letter or Scripture is not without life, as he ſaith it is: nor are they ignorant of the Letter, who knew before he ſpake it, that the Letter declares of life, unleſs he will enwrap himſelf in the ſame ignorance: But as he is ignorant of the Scripture-letter, who denies it to be a means of coming to life; ſo he contradicts himſelf, who ſaith, The Scriptures have life in them; and yet with the ſame breath, ſaith alſo, They are without life, as R. F. doth. What if the life, from which the Scriptures proceeded, be not the Letter, or Scripture; yet the Scripture is the Scripture of life, given from Chriſt, who is life. The chief ſubject matter contained therein, is Chriſt the light of life, (not by the works of the Law, by which way the unbelieving Jews thought to obtain life eternal, but Chriſt ſhut the door againſt them that way) and he directeth them to himſelf, John 5. 39. as revealed in the Scriptures, and more then that, as conveyed by the Scriptures to a ſoul: For albeit, Chriſt ſaith, They are they that teſtifie of me; yet he doth not ſay, They do but teſtifie of me: This [but] is R. F. *Light out of darkneſs., page 18.his additional gloſs to corrupt the Text, to diſparage the Scriptures, and never a whit the more to advance Chriſt; for he is the more honored among men, and ſavingly owned, as he is known to be that living Savior, that Way, Truth, and Life, who is teſtified of in the Scriptures; and is come unto, or believed on by the Scriptures. Wherefore Chriſt blameth them, John 5. 40. that they would not (taking the Bible and ſearching for him) come unto him by the knowledge and faith of the Scriptures.
Section 6.
THis and the following Section R. F. returns no Anſwer unto at all. I had noted what Ed. Burroughs ſaith in his warning to the Inhabitants of Ʋnder-barrow, page 2. "That he came not to them with enticing words, neither what he had gathered out of the Scripture, from without him, but to declare the word of the Lord, and not to ſpeak his own imaginations and conceivings: How croſs is this to themſelves? They uſe frequently to call the Scriptures the Declaration of the Word; and if he came to declare the Word of the Lord as he affirms, he either came with what he had gathered from Scripture, which he denies, or he came with his own imaginations and conceivings, which he denies alſo; but both his Negatives cannot be true; if there be any truth in his book: for that is a Collection of above an hundred places of Scripture, quoted in the margent, and transſcribed in the line. The words he had from the Scripture, the miſ-applications he did not indeed learn from thence, nor from the Spirit of God, who never teacheth any man to miſ-apply his own Letter; therefore it was not, in true ſenſe, the word of the Lord that he declared (if he ſpake the ſame doctrine for ſubſtance that he writes) but the viſions of his own brain: And if I ſpeak a lie (ſaith he page 8.) let me be accounted as accurſed for ever: But he that compiles a book out of Scripture-collections, and yet preacheth not what he gathered out of the Scripture, deals falſly in one of theſe ways, and ſpeaketh a lie, and therefore he is found not onelyonly as a ſelf-contradictor, but as a ſelf-curſer. And to do him no wrong, I would know the meaning of that paſſage, page 9. [He that hath the word of the Lord from the mouth of the Lord to declare unto you, him you revile and mock, &c. but he that ſpeaks the imagination of his own heart from the Saints conditions, him you own and hear.] If he intends by the Word of the Lord, Chriſt onelyonly, what intends he by the mouth of the Lord, but the Scriptures which are the Declaration of his word, by their own confeſſion? If he had the Scriptures to declare Chriſt unto the people by, then he ſpake what he had gathered out of the Scriptures, which is contrary to what he ſaid before: If the Scriptures be not the mouth of the Lord, how are they a declaration of his word? if they be a declaration of his word, why are they denied to be the mouth of the Lord? Again, if he ſpeaks of the Saints conditions, as diſcovered in Scripture, and chargeth him that ſpeaks from them, to vent the imagination of his own heart; he blaſphemes the Scripture written for our inſtruction and conſolation, Rom. 15. 4. If he condemneth another (as he doth page 22.) for preaching that which is gathered from without, by imagination, and conceiving upon that which the Prophet propheſied, or which Chriſt ſpoke, &c. and judgeth it carnal and heatheniſh, never commanded by the Lord; and yet makes mention of the Saints conditions himſelf, and gloſſeth upon Scripture, according as his fancy worketh, he alloweth that which he condemneth, as he condemneth what God alloweth; not, that God alloweth the working of every mans fantaſie but in a ſanctified way; if his worketh otherwiſe, God condemneth what he alloweth.
Section 7.Section 7, 8.
THey call (as I noted here) the Scriptures, the Worlds Touchſtone; and yet as appeared [Part 1. Section 1.] Some of them at leaſt, will not have the Scripture to be the Word of Truth to the world. If it be not the Word of Truth to the world, how can it be the Worlds Touchſtone? This interfering of men of his way, R. F. undertakes not to cure or touch at with the leaſt of his fingers; and beyond my skill it is to ſalve the Contradiction, onelyonly I heartily deſire of God, that the diſcovery hereof may prove good eyeſalve, to let them ſee the ſhame of their nakedneſs.
Section 8.
IN the ſecond Section of this ſecond part, I noted down two of their Self-contradictions: the latter of them might have there been ſpared, and entirely ſpoken to here, where I toucht at it again, a little more plainly: But R. F. though he glanced at it there, took it not off; nor doth he any more here then paſs it over in ſilence, which of the Saints had the witneſs of their ſouls union to ſeek in the Letter? thus querieth J N. in his Few words, page 11. I ſhall now to what was diſcovered as contradictory to himſelf, in Sect. 2. or here adde his other words in the ſame page, viz. The Spirit, it opens and brings all that is ſpoken in Scripture to remembrance: this is ſo a truth, as it croſſeth his Negative implyed in the Interrogation, viz. That none have their witneſs to ſeek in the Letter, and what he addes expreſly, He that believeth hath the witneſs in himſelf in Spirit, and not in the Letter: had he ſaid and not in the Letter onelyonly, it might have ſalv'd the contradiction; but as it is contrary to the Scripture to ſay, the Saints have not comfortable teſtimony of their union, and intereſt in Chriſt, in and by the Scripture-letter; ſo 'tis contrary to himſelf to deny the Believer hath his witneſs in the Letter, and yet grant that the Spirit opens and brings all that is in the Letter to remembrance: for to what end doth he bring it to remembrance? not onelyonly for explication of Scripture by Scripture, but for conſolation of our ſpirits, by the good words of the Spirit of God. When heavineſs makes the heart to ſtoop, a good word, ſeaſonably remembred as ſpoken▪ makes it glad, and he that ſlights the turning over of the ſacred Pages of the Bible, after he hath got his evidence within, may be glad of crums one day, after his high Feaſtings; and well, if ſeeking the Spirit where he loſt him, his comforts return at laſt upon him. Many loſe the Spirits comforts, by ſlighting his Love-letters in the Scriptures, where the Spirit is, and whereby he giveth forth himſelf: Such a paſſage I had in my former piece, That the Spirit is in the Letter, and given by it, which R. F. hath excepted againſt once and again heretofore, but now in its due place, where it was ſpoken, he lets it paſs. I promiſed in the firſt part of this Reply, to clear it further for his conviction, if it may be, or for the Saints edification. Firſt, The Spirit is in the Letter, or the whole Scripture; for ſo theſe men comprehenſively uſe the term [Letter.]How the Spirit is in the Scripture-Letter.
1. As he owneth what he dictated to his Secretaries, the Pen-men of Scripture. He is in all their writings with the ſubſcription of his own hand, as it were: they ſpake and wrote as they were moved, and inſpired by the Holy Ghoſt. Rev. 1. 10. John is in the Spirit, viz. he is rapt up by the Spirit, and the Spirits impulſe is more then ordinarily upon him, when he is commanded to write; and of all that John writeth, the Spirit beareth Teſtimony, that it is himſelf that ſpeaks it. Rev. 3. 22. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit ſaith unto the Churches: what wretched men are they who will not ſuffer the Spirit to be where he ſpeaketh?
2. If the Spirit was in the Pen-men, he is more in the matter and contents of the Scripture penned down: None will deny but he was in the Pen-men, more then ordinarily, when they wrote from his mouth or inſpiration; and therefore he is in what they wrote, much more: for the word written is of greater Authority, and Spirit then the Writer or Secretary. They were holy men of God who wrote, but that which is written, is the holy Truth of God: They were imperfectly holy, but Gods word, as written from the Spirit, is perfect in all degrees of holineſs.
3. The Spirit is where there is, with perfect holineſs, perfect Truth and Majeſty in the Matter, and in the very Stile; and where is ſweet Harmony in all the parts put together: In the Scripture-letter there is not one Iota or Tittle that ſhall fall to the ground, to eclipſe the Glory, Truth and Majeſty, or ſpoil the Harmony of it.
Secondly, the Spirit is given by it, in this ſenſe.How given by it.
1. As his minde is given out by it, whether the words be proper or figurative, the Spirit hath his proper intendment, ſcope and ſenſe in the whole Letter, and in every part of what is written; and as by his words he makes known his minde, he is where his words are.
2. As his work is given by it; even what work he pleaſeth,See ſecond part, Section 10. of Conviction, Inſtruction in Righteouſneſs, Conſolation, &c. If the Scripture convinceth gainſayers, and ſinners, evil livers; if it inſtructeth the ignorant, comforteth the feeble-minded, it is as the Spirit gives out himſelf thereby. He is there indeed as a free Agent, ad placitum, not tyed to work, or manifeſt himſelf, or put forth his power and grace; but as the wind bloweth where it liſteth, ſo he worketh, where, when, and upon whom he pleaſeth.
3. As the Promiſes of the Scripture are his Chariot to convey him whither he pleaſeth to go; into the hearts of the Elect, that they may believe; and after they have believed, that they may be eſtabliſhed. Thus, according to his promiſe, he will fill a Believers ſails of endeavor, in reading, meditating, &c. with gales of grace, and advances towards glory. To conclude, that the Spirit is in the Letter, and given by it, daily experience doth demonſtrate: For ſuch as forſake the Scriptures authority, and own not the Spirits dwelling in the Letter, as truly as in the heart, they loſe their faith of the Spirits preſence with them, in the reading and meditation of it, and loſing this faith, they run to other Doctrines and Goſpels. The ſpirit of error is in all mens doctrines which have not the Spirit in them, that breatheth in the Scriptures. We may eaſily diſcern whether R. F. his ſpirit be not in his writings, and whether much of the ſpirit of Error, not conveyed and given out by his and other mens Pamphlets of the ſame ſtamp. And ſhall the ſpirit of Satan, the father of lyes, be in Seducers books; and not the Spirit of God, and of the Father of truth, be in, and go along (according to his free mercy) with his own bleſſed Books of the Scripture? Yes verily, and James Naylers words import as much, when he ſaith *Few words by J. N. p. 11., That the Spirit opens, and brings all that is ſpoken in Scripture to remembrance; which if R. F. denies, he contradicts his fellow; if he grants it a truth, he muſt recant his frequent deſcants upon that which I aſſerted, and judge himſelf as erring, becauſe he knew not the Scriptures, and the Spirit and power of God dwelling in them, and acting by them.
Section 9.
WHat anſwereth R. F. to this Section? where I evidenced another of their Self-contradictions concerning the Scripture, which was this; He that believeth is born of God without Scripture; and yet, Let all ſee if we do not ſet the Scripture in the heart of every one. Why, this is his anſwer *Page 25.,
1. So ſaith the Scripture, 1 John 5. And that the word of God is nigh in the heart, is witneſſed, Rom. 10. 8. And he that believes and is born of God, knows the ſeed of God within him, 1 John 3. 9.
Rep. Do any of theſe Scriptures bear witneſs againſt themſelves? or ſay, That he that believeth is born of God without Scripture? yet dare R. F. put it forth in the front of his anſwer, So ſaith the Scripture. The Scripture ſaith the full truth, He that believeth is born of God; but the Pamphlet I quoted *Anſwer to 7 Prieſts, p. 13ſaid more then the Scripture; that the believer was born of God without the Scripture; and R. F. pretends to anſwer to what their Pamphlets hold forth, but cannot in his anſwers ſalve his own, nor his fellows contradictions.
Anſ. 2. He is not born of the Letter as thou wouldſt have him, yet he is begotten by the immortal word, which endureth for ever, which the Letter declares of, and that doth not contradict the Scripture.
Rep. 1. How would I have him that believeth born of the Letter? my words were theſe, If the Scripture be in the heart of every one, ſure he that believeth is born of that ſeed; even of the Scripture-promiſe ſet into the heart by the holy Ghoſt; hence, he that is born of the Spirit, is born of the word, written and preached, which the Spirit uſeth as the inſtrumental means of our regeneration; as upon that place in Peter, 1 Ep. Chap. 1. ver. 23, and 25. hath been cleared heretofore, Part 1. Sect. 5.
2. The Scripture-promiſe, declaring Chriſt, is the more apt means by which the Spirit begets a ſoul to Chriſt, or formeth him in the ſoul.
3. That the Letter declareth Chriſt, doth not contradict the Scripture; but it contradicteth the Scripture to ſay, the declaration of Chriſt is not a means of begetting a ſoul to Chriſt.
4. To ſay, Let all ſee whether we do not ſet the Scripture in the heart of every one, and yet to deny the Scripture to be a means of the new birth, or that the believer is born of God without the Scripture, is to ſay and un-ſay.
But R. F. *page 26.would retort this upon my ſelf, and why? I have not the ſame minde with them, and know not their meaning, and ſo raiſe lyes (as he chargeth upon me) by my imaginations.
Rep. 1. If I have the minde of Chriſt, as it is in Scripture, I ſhall not be ambitious of, nor much regard their meaning: but as I know it to be croſs to the minde of Chriſt, I have (according to the grace given unto me) witneſſed againſt it, and yet ſtudied to put the moſt candid and favorable conſtruction upon their words.
2. If their ſenſe, of ſetting Scripture in the heart of every one, be nothing elſe, but telling people they have a light of Conſcience within them, and ſtirring up that light which every man hath that cometh into the world; Firſt, they delude poor people, who never heard that Light called Scripture before; yet this is, more then probably, their beſt Scripture for their Tenents and Doctrines, (as might be gathered from the anſwer that J. P. a yong ſtripling, who came into this Town laſt ſummer, gave to a weak re-baptized woman, ſhattered by his diſcourſe; whoſe queſtion was, But may I not read the Scriptures? The anſwer was, Read thy heart woman, (as ſhe told me) that was all ſhe could get of him.) There is a book of Conſcience to be read indeed, but is not the book of the Scriptures, and Gods Statutes to be read? according to which (beyond the book of every mans Conſcience) all that have that written rule ſhall be judged.
Secondly, If every mans light be the onelyonly Scripture, in the minde that theſe men are in, why doth R. F. *In his Book entituled, A true teſtimony, &c. pag. 53.appeal to that which is the alone, proper, perfect Scripture in our judgement, and which he calls for, to ſtand as judge betwixt them and 42. Miniſters? Will he ſtand to the judgement of the Prophets and Apoſtles, as it is the minde of Chriſt the word of God? Will he not appeal (when all is done) to a higher Court, of immediate Teachings in the heart? If the Scripture be judge, it muſt be ſo from its own light, that is ſuperior, not onelyonly to every mans light, but alſo to the degree of light that is in every Saint, and that is ſuperior to our meanings and theirs; for the Scripture muſt judge by its own words and meaning together; and from its own rule, we muſt not ſeparate the Letter of the Law, and the true interpretation of the Letter. The Law-makers, we ſay, are beſt able to give the right ſenſe of the Law. The great Lawgiver gives out his ſenſe of one part of Scripture by another. Can any Law judge of Hereſie but the Law of God? ſaith R. F. in the Book and Page laſt referred unto in the margent. If he intends there any Law of God, but the written word and text of the Bible, Gods great Lawbook, he contradicts in heart what he pretends to in words. If he underſtands by the Law of God, the holy Scriptures of God, (called the Bible) then he pretends to that acknowledgement of them as a ſtanding rule, and a more ſtanding rule then viſions and revelations; and if he intends what he pretends to, then he muſt recant what he wrote in the 3. and 4. Page of his imaginary Scripture-vindication, or elſe lie ſetter'd in his Self-contradictions.