Apologift, and his defender, without any proof, ap plying fuch expreffions as these to their inward prin ciple; "the pound;" Luke xix. 20. "the light which "fhineth in a dark place; 1 Pet. i. 19. and "the "knowledge of the truth." I Tun. ii. 4. So John Reeve, and Lodowick Muggleton, applied the third and following verfes of the eleventh chapter of Re velation, to themselves; affirming, with infpired confidence, that they were "the two witneffes," which were there mentioned. People may apply any parts of the word of God to their own inventions, in this manner; but there is no juftice or argument in it.

The Obfervator, and the Apologift, Obferv. P. 64. evidently mistake this paffage, "To whom God would "make known what is the riches of the Glory of this "mystery among the Gentiles, which is Chrift in you, "the hope of Glory." Col. i. 27. What now is this "mystery, which had been hid from ages and

generations?" Undoubtedly, the calling of the Gentiles-That the Gentiles fhould be fellow-heirs, "and of the fame body, and partakers of his pro

mife, in Christ, by the Gospel," Eph. iii. 4, 5, 6. But, according to Barclay, they were equally fo before they heard the Gospel.

This was "the riches of the Mystery," that Chrift "fhould be freely proclaimed among the Gentiles, to give them "the hope of" eternal "glory:" Which gracious proclamation was received by the Coloffians, to whom Paul wrote; and Chrift, no doubt, dwelt and reigned in their hearts, by his Spirit, through its purifying influence. But did Paul mean to affert, that Chrift fo dwelt in the hearts of all mankind univer→ fally, whether they knew and believed Paul's Gospel or not? Mr. Phipps himself, I apprehend, cannot

think fo.

Barclay, and his friend, tells us alfo, Obferv. P. 58. "That the truly approved believer has the witnefs in himself:" Quoting for this a paffage in

John's

John's first Epiftle, Ch. v. 10. But let any reader perufe the verfe, and thofe which go before and after, and then afk, "what witness," teftimony or record And a following verfe, Ver. 11. will be an answer : And this is the record," or witness (the fame word in the original) "that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.' Nor is there any genuine believer, without this teftimony in his mind, because it is the doctrine of the Gofpel, moft plainly expreffed, and abundantly confirmed, in the New Teftament.

Mr. Phipps feems to apply alfo "the Gift of "God," Obferv. P. 70. which our Lord fpeaks of to the Samaritan woman, John ii. 10. to his " inward ແ Christ;" but with what propriety, let the reader judge, on perufing the paragraph. Likewife "that Law of the "Spirit of Life," mentioned by the Apoftle Paul, Rom. viii. 2. is afferted, by Barclay and his defender, Obferv. P. 68. to be their "inward light, or fpirit, "a ready inftructer, manifefted within every man, for their information and help."

If this be true, there is a great deficiency in the New Teftament writings; for Jefus and his Apoftles never fo much as intimated any fuch thing, either to those who seemed not difpofed to receive their doc trines, or to any whom they first addreffed upon the grand fubjects of their religion. "The law of the

Spirit of life in Chrift Jefus," appears to me, as it has to many ancient and modern commentators, to be a periphrafis for the Gofpel, which Paul had experienced, defcribed in his writings, and preached in various countries. He calls it, "a law," because it governed him; "of the Spirit," in oppofition to the fleth, or, if you will, because it was that by which the Spirit of God influenced him; "of life," in oppofition to "the law of death," mentioned in the fame verfe, for by it he received the life of hope and holiness; and declares it to be "in" or "by Chrift

-B b

"Jefus,"

"Jefus," because the "grace and truth" of the Gospel are in Chrift Jefus, and " came by him :" John i. 17. But, whether this be a proper interpretation of the paffage or not, it can, in no fenfe what ever, prove, that every individual man has the Spirit of God favingly influencing him; for Paul is here only speaking in the first person.

There are feveral other paffages that the Apologift has preffed into his fervice, the mifapplication of which are too visible, to need any particular obfervations. We have examined the principal Scriptureproofs he enlarges upon, and prefume to think, that every reader, who judges of their fenfe by the connexion, will pronounce them altogether inconclufive. They appear to us, fo far from refpecting the Quakers "light within," that they mean fomething totally different from it, and on a fuppofition this was the fubject of them, the whole context confines it to those who had outwardly heard the Gospel.

By these specimens of their application and interpretation of Scripture, the reader may also judge, whether it was the intention of the infpired writers to describe such a fyftem of religion, as the Apologift, and his friend, contend for: They relate to thofe texts which they, with the greatest confidence, dwell upon in their controverfies, and abundantly evince their attention to the fcope and connexion of the facred writings. However Mr. Phipps may think upon this fubject, his opponent is fully convinced, and the truth affects his confcience, that he cannot be guilty of a more atrocious crime against his God, than defignedly or knowingly to pervert, or mifapply, the fenfe of any Scripture, though it be to fupport a favourite noftrum, or a religious party, which he is connected with and refpects. If Mr. Phipps be at all influenced by the fame principle, and views the iniquity of fuch a practice in the fame light his opponent does, he will not be contented with artful evafions

evafions and perplexing obfervations, when the fenfe of a paffage of Scripture is in queftion, but will difcover a dread of perverting the words of the Holy Ghoft, and rejoice to think, even with his opponent, whenever it appears to Mr. Phipps's own confcience, that he is faithfully fetting forth the genuine meaning of the facred writings. Should he be actuated by this thought, when he perufes the interpretations of Scripture which have been given in this treatife, we prefume to think, he will fee himself, and his friend the Apologift, in not a few inftances, mistaken,

CHAP. VIII.

Concerning the operation of this fuppofed light within, and its pretended faving efficacy and fufficiency: It is demonftrated to have nothing to do with the inclination, choice, determination, or will, of man, in his firft Submitting to this light, and is therefore neither effectual, faving, nor, in a proper or moral fenfe, fuffi

cient.

U

PON reading this chapter, Mr. Phipps feems to have been moft fenfibly touched, and he has ufed every artifice of evafion, to avoid the force of the reasoning it contains. With the greatest severity, he has fcrutinized every expreffion, and, in one inftance only, he has difcovered a defect, which we fhall endeavour to rectify. But this mistake, however, is far from proving the main drift of our reafoning inconclufive, and, in no refpect, helps the caufe of Barclay.

The fubject of this chapter, the reader will obferve, is purely of a moral nature; by which is meant, that which refpects the state and operations of the human mind. If any thing be effectual, or fufficient

Bb 2.

to

to fave it, it must have such an influence on its ftaté and operations, as will eventually change them into a courfe of right action: Without this influence, it is not effectual; without this alteration of its views and tendencies, it is not faving; and without a proper measure of it, to fecure this in the event, it cannot be fufficient.

To fay that "the light within" is effectual, if men bore to refift it; or that it is faving, if perfons would fuffer it to fave them; or that all men have a fufficient measure of it, if they would but improve it; is to fay, in other words, that its efficacy, faving virtue, and fufficiency, depend upon man's being or doing fomething without it, and therefore, that it is not, in fact, faving, effectual, or fufficient, of itself.

When we fay, that a medicine will certainly be effectual to fave a man, if he will but take it, we are' defcribing a cafe not fimilar to that before us, unless we connect with it, fome power or ability, which is exerted, to remove the averfion of the patient, and to enfure the proper application and ufe of the medicine.

If the foul be not difpofed to be paffive, or to receive and obey the "light within," instead of its being effectual and fufficient for its falvation, it is rather ef fectual and fufficient for its more dreadful condemnation: Thefe obfervations muft, we think, be plain and obvious, to every attentive reader.

Mr. Phipps obferves, P. 79. " According to our "Author's reafoning, unless he actually faves all to "whom he offers falvation, thofe who refift, as well 66 as those who accept him, he is no Saviour at all." He will give me leave to add, to those who are not faved by him, he is no Saviour at all. This is all he can draw from my reasoning, and is moft affuredly conformable to fcripture and common fenfe. Whether he was not able, or might not have faved all, if it had feemed good in his fight, is another queftion, which

I never