Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…

Rada granteth these Conclusions, 1. Theologia secundum se est verè & propriè scientic. 2. Theologia Dei respectu eorum quae funt necessaria secundem se, est verè & propriè scient•a. 3. Theologia in beatis est propriè & verè scientia quoad omnes. 4. Conditiones scientiae. Yet this eighth Conclusion is that Theologia prout est in nobis viatoribu• non est propriè & strictè scientia. And the great Argument to prove it is, prout est in nobis est inevidens, quia principia nostrae Theologiae sunt tantum Credita, so that all the weight is laid on this inevidence Briefly, my reasons for the Evidence of the Object of Divine Faith, are these. 1. If it be evident that Deus est Verax, & Deus haec testatur, that God is true of his Word, and that this is his Word or Revelation, then Faith hath evident principles. But the Antecedent is true; therefore▪ Into these principles we resolve all points of Faith: Whatsoever God witnesseth is true; but the Doctrine of the Resurrection, judgment, &c. God witnesseth or revealeth; therefore; That God is true, we have the same Evidence as that he is perfectly good, and that is, that he is God: and that there is a God, I take to be as evident a Truth as any in Nature to Reason, though God himself be so far above our comprehension. That this is a Divine Revelation, hath also its evidence, in evident miracles sealing it to the first witnesses; and in Evidently Infallible Tradition delivering down to us the Records with the seals. I doubt not to affirm that some humane Testimony affordeth such a Certainty as is unquestionable, because of the Evidence of that Certainty: as that King James was King of England, &c. and of the matter in question we have as great, and in it self far greater. But of this elsewhere. 2. If Divine Faith give us a Certainty without objective Evidence, then it is miraculous or contrary to nature, or at least above it (not only as rectifying disabled nature, which I grant, but) as moving man not as man, or the Intellect not as an Intellect, which knows naturally no other Action but upon fit objects, and what is wrought by them: It knoweth no apprehension of truth, but as it is apparent or evidenced truth. To understand this Axiom to be true, All men shall be Judged, and to see no Evidence of its truth, are contradictions. 3.