among them." Why should this be so remarkable, when he demanded what grounds Barclay had to assert such had appeared among them? Would any person rationally expect I should bring modern instances to prove an assertion made before they existed? Had I introduced any that arose after . the date of the Apology, he might properly have said they were impertinently alleged.

5. Page 64, he cites this passage from my observations, "Barclay's doctrine is, that the Holy Spirit communicates not a natural faculty, but itself to the faithful soul, and becomes to it a new principle wherein, or as an organ whereby, it is capacitated rightly to understand religious truths." My inadvertence in leaving an expression so short of my real intention, perhaps may have led my opponent to misunderstand my meaning. I must therefore request his leave to explain my own words, which should have been: "The Holy Spirit communicates not a natural faculty, but somewhat from itself, to the faithful soul, which becomes to it," &c. By this he might have gathered, that I intended not a communication of its essence, but its influence; like as the sun in the firmament doth not shed its body, but its radiance upon the earth; by the unveiling light and animating warmth of which the faculties of men receive a clearer and stronger perception, both of that glorious luminary itself, and also of what it reveals and discovers, than it is possible for them to do without its assistance, by all other means whatsoever. As to the word organ here, S. N. knows it is only a metaphor, a short simile in one word, often used in discourse, not as argument, but for illustration; and as no simile runs on all-four, it is not reasonable to expect it in this. I meant to be understood by the words, as an organ, its operating to like purpose as a corporeal organ, or a means of conveying intelligence from the Divine Essence to the soul of man, as an eye doth from the object to the understanding. I hope this explanation will sufficiently obviate all the inferences and reflections occasioned by my inadvertence.

6. Page 69 and 70, S. N. infers, that the Quaker notion of revelation seems to imply, that it must be a revelation of something not understood, or a communication of something to the mind, of which the soul has no conception; and that it is a manifest contradiction-no revelation at all," &c.

Barclay distinguishes revelation into objective and subjective, and sometimes he speaks of the one, and sometimes of the other. In order to show the propriety of this distinction,

let me observe, that the soul of man hath not only a faculty of cogitation, by which it ordinarily thinks, unites, divides, compares, or forms ideas, but also a latent power of internal sensation, or of perceiving spiritual objects by an inward and spiritual sense, when presented through a proper medium; which, till the beams of divine light shine upon it, it must be as totally unacquainted with, as the child in its mother's womb is with its faculties of sight and hearing. For, though in that situation, it may be completely formed, and possess every organ proper to corporeal sensation, yet it is not empowered to exercise them, or really to know it hath them, till it be brought forth into the medium necessary to the use of them, composed of the light and air of this world. Then it first finds the peculiar sense and exercise of those natural powers which, before its birth, it could not have the least understanding or proper use of. In like manner, the natural man must be delivered out of his natural darkness, into the luminous and quickening influence of that Divine Word, or Spirit, which is most emphatically styled the true Light or Life of men. Thus born of the Spirit, into this proper medium of divine knowledge, the soul is made acquainted with that spiritual sense it could neither discover, nor believe pertained to it, while in its natural state. This is no new natural faculty added, but its own mental newly opened, and brought into its due place and use.

power

Words are inadequate to the expression of this internal sense felt in the soul under divine influence. It can not be ideally conveyed to the understanding of the inexperienced; for it is not an image, but a sensation, impossible to be conceived but by its own impression. So true is that of the apostle, "Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him; but God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit."* It was upon this consideration that I said, divine light is the subject of inward sensation, "and is not to be communicated from one to another by reasoning, over verbal description," for should any person give the most clear and lively description possible of the light of the sun, to a man blind from his birth, it would only be communicating an ideal notion of the light, but not the light itself. It might be called a subjective revelation concerning the light to him, but not an objective one of the light itself. This no man can have

but by his own immediate sensation.

Divine revelation is a disclosure of something to the ration

1 Cor. ii. 9, 10,

al mind by the Holy Ghost, not in the mind's own power to discover. This the Holy Spirit doth, either by unveiling of itself by its influence in some degree to the soul, and giving it an internal sense of its presence; or by favoring it with the vision of other objects, real or representative, through the communication of divine light and power; or by giving the soul a clear sense of its own state and condition. All this being a discovery of objects is called objective revelation.

Subjective revelation is a disclosure of subjects, or things relative, through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, by which the mind is opened into the knowledge of the divine will concerning persons or things, led into the true sense of Scriptures, or into a deeper understanding of doctrines than it could ever reach without divine illumination. Of this kind was the original revelations of the Scriptures to those who penned them.

All this, both objective and subjective, is truly internal immediate revelation. What is now modishly treated as the only revelation still existing, and to exist, is rather the fruit of revelation than the thing itself, a scriptural record of things revealed; for they certainly were so to those to whom they were immediately disclosed; but the different senses put upon the many disputed parts of them, for many generations past, demonstrate those parts are not truly a revelation to those who mistake them; nor can they ever become such to them, till they know the holy Author to be their Interpreter. For, "No prophecy of Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time," or rather at any time, "by the will of man, but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.'

A

Pages 75 and 76, S. N. argues, that the immediate internal revelation of the Holy Ghost is not in all sufficient to save, because Barclay allows, that some who have once had it, may be, and have been damned; to which I answer, if all were saved, it would be a certain proof that God is able to save all, but are we therefore warranted to deny or dispute the ability of Almighty Power to save all, because all are not saved? flowing spring is certainly sufficient to quench my thirst, if I drink sufficiently of it; but if I refuse, the insufficiency is not in the spring, but entirely owing to my refusal. But Balaam is adduced as an instance quite in point; because he had internal revelation, yet taught Balak to seduce the Israelites to sin. That he sometimes had internal revelation, is true, and while he adhered thereunto, it preserved him from teaching * 1 Peter i. 20, 21.

seduction. It was when he departed from it, or suffered himself to be so far overcome with a love to the wages of unrighteousness,* that the Holy Spirit departed from him, as an illuminator and preserver, that he joined Balak in his evil purposes. This has been the case of all apostates, the grace of God is all-sufficient, but they disobey, divide from, and thereby prevent it from operating sufficiently to their sal

vation.

CHAPTER XV.

1. S. N.'s Inconsistency with our Savior's Expression, Matt. xvi.-2. The Possibility and Necessity of attaining a spiritual Sense of the Spirit of God, preached by Paul to the Pagans.-3. A false Inference from my Words obviated.-4. The Pagans not void of God's saving Grace, nor led by it into Polytheism, &c. The rude Absurdity of charging us with Paganism. -5. Impious Idolaters, &c., not in Christ; but he appears in them as a swift Witness. To whom he communicates saving Knowledge. A Piece of manifest Abuse repelled.-6. The Gospel comes not in Word only, but in Power, and Christ not only came outwardly, but also appears inwardly, and by the powerful Operation of his Spirit effects all our Works in us. He is the real Efficient of all Good in Man.-7. The Gospel sensibly preached in every Man. The Office of the Spirit of Truth.-8. The Light not unintelligible, though undefinable, as to its intimate and peculiar Essence by the Wit of Man, to which natural Things are equally so.-9. My Belief respecting S. N.'s Note.-10. His Mis-Information and Impertinence concerning our Terms of Admission.-11. A Day, or Time of Visitation to Man demonstrated.-12. My Intention in styling the Relief he expresses a notional One.-13. What Deism is. The Quakers not Deists, nor such Enthusiasts as their Opponent would render them.

1. PAGE 104. “We pass over his new discovery, that the rock on which Jesus will build his church, is the immediate revelation of Christ by the Father." What he calls my new discovery, is our Savior's old discovery, as ancient as the New Testament; and what he styles passing over it, is stopping to contradict it. The answer of Christ to Peter is, "Blessed art thou Simon Barjona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father, which is in heaven." In opposition to this S. N. saith, "It is at least highly probable, the apostle learned the truth he confessed from our Lord's conversation and instruction, or from the Baptist's testimony, however the Spirit of the Father influenced him in receiving it." I take it, the truth Peter confessed, was not the mere truth of a proposition, but a sense of the reality

* 2 Peter ii. 15, and Jude 11,

of Jesus being the Christ. This our Lord saith, the Father revealed to Peter; but S. N. saith it is at least highly probable he did not, but that either Christ himself or the Baptist did it, and intimates that the Father only aided toward the apostle's better receiving their report. I do not see why this truth is not as likely to have been spiritually revealed to Peter by the Father, as it was to Paul, who declares, that by revelation the mystery of Christ was made known to him, and that it was likewise revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit.*

2. "Neither shall we dwell upon his ranking, p. 41, the feeling after God, and finding him, mentioned by Paul to the Athenians, Acts xvii. 27, as an equal proof of his point, with the prophets being moved by the Holy Ghost, 2 Pet. i. 21." The point I brought this scripture in proof of is, that a spiritual internal sense of God is not impossible to be known. I therefore first observed, that Paul told the Athenian pagans, "God made of one blood all nations of men, not only to live upon the face of the earth, but that they should seek the Lord, if haply they might feel after him and find him." Hence I inferred, he then must certainly be to be found and felt by man; and as he is a Spirit, it must be after a spiritual manner. We can not consistently suppose the apostle was bantering the Athenians here, by putting them upon feeling after and finding what was not to be felt nor found by them." To this argument my antagonist answers not, but recurs to evasion, and charges me with invidious reflections and designing perversions, for no better end than I can see, but to cover his imbecility.

3. Page 106, he cites me as follows, Observations, p. 44, "The confidence of a true Christian, is not in what he hears, or reads, but in what he feels of the Holy Spirit." Hereupon he says, "Now this sets aside the real use and importance of a written revelation, to all intents and purposes, for its contents can not now be known but by either reading or hearing."

The real use of the Scriptures is to afford instruction and comfort, and their chief importance is to recommend to the Spirit of Christ whence they came, that his people may be enabled rightly to put their trust in him. The apostle declares, God had given them the earnest of the Spirit, therefore they were always confident. Was not their confidence then grounded in the the earnest of the Spirit given them of God? And, is a trust in this Spirit, and a belief of the contents of Scrip* Eph. iii. 3, 4, 5. † 2 Cor. v, 5, 6.