Some of the Many FALLACIES OF WILLIAM PENN DETECTED In a Paper called GOSPEL TRUTHS Signed by him and Three more at Dublin the 4th of the 3d Month 1698. And in his late Book called A Defence of Gospel Truths Against the Exceptions of the B. of Cork's Testimony concerning that Paper With some Remarks on W. P. his unfair and unjust Treatment of him To which is added A Synopsis or short View of W. Penn's Deism Collected out of his Book called A Discourse of the General Rule of Faith c. By GEORGE KEITH LONDON Printed for Benj. Tooke at the Middle-Temple-Gate in Fleet-street 1699. THE PREFACE Christian Reader THE following Treatise is not intended to be any direct or compleat Answer to the Book called A Defence of a Paper entituled Gospel-Truths against the Exceptions of the Bishop of Cork 's Testimony By William Penn. Printed 1698 that Work belonging not to me but to the Bishop of Cork who as I am certainly informed doth intend to give him a meet Answer to his Book In the mean while I hoped it would be acceptable both to the Bishop and to many good Christians thus far to interpose in the Defence of the Common Cause of the Christian Faith especially in the detecting of some of the greatest Fallacies W. P. hath used in his Book under a seeming Disguise and Vizard of Christianity really to undermine and destroy it I being of late Years better acquainted with W. P's Fallacious way of Writing than probably the Bishop of Cork is If this small Treatise comes to the Bishop's Hand before he publish his Answer to W. P. he will find that he hath been more charitable to him than indeed he deserved and that he had in his large Charity judged him more Orthodox than he really is although W. P. has made but an ill use of his Charity and has badly requited him with many uncivil as well as unjust Reflections some of which I thought it was but Justice that I should vindicate the Bishop from and the rather because I suppose the Bishop's Innocency and Station may lead him in great part to neglect them as not being so proper for him to notice as for another that stands by and beholds their mutual Treatment of each other which according to my best understanding and observation as fair as it hath been on the Bishop's part hath been as unfair on the part of W. P. who as he treats him not with the least due respect to his Station so nor indeed as a Christian Some of the many Fallacies of William Penn detected in a Paper called Gospel Truths c. Section 1. W. P 's Fallacy in calling the Illumination of the Holy Ghost which to him is nothing but the common Illumination given to all Mankind together with the Scriptures a double and agreeing Record of true Religion His false Notion of Heaven and Hell denying the Locality of them His abusive Reflection on the Bishop of Cork his keeping the true Hell to himself His Fallacy in pretending to the Bishop that he owned the Holy Trinity where as in his Sandy Foundation he hath expresly denied it and argued against it His denying that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem to be properly the Son of God His denying that the Body of Christ was any part of Christ and his agreement with G. W. and other Quakers in denying the Humanity of Christ to be any part of the true Christ Page 1. HE saith The Testimony of the Scriptures of Truth and the Illumination of the Holy Ghost are the double and agreeing Record of true Religion In this he is very Fallacious in the very entrance this Illumination of the Holy Ghost he will have to be that which is given to be a general Rule to all Mankind see his Discourse concerning the General Rule of Faith and Life Printed by T. Sowle 1699. But how is that together with the Scriptures a double and agreeing Record whereas that general Rule that he contendeth is given to all Mankind to wit that general Illumination as given to Infidel Jews Mahometans and the Heathen World is no Record to any one Article of the Apostles Creed or any one peculiar Doctrine of Christianity but only to some few Precepts of Morality and general Piety towards God Yea W. P. hath confessed see his Page 32 of that Discourse That neither he nor his Brethren have any new superadded Revelation concerning Adam's Fall and Christ's Birth Death and Sufferings c. and saith It is not necessary Therefore the Illumination that he sets up for the General Rule to Quakers and Heathens is not any Record agreeing with the Scriptures in any one particular Article of the Christian Faith or positive Precept of the Gospel peculiar to the Christian Religion as distinct from Deism and Heathenism Page 2. In his first Section the makes the eternal Reward of Happiness to be given to all them that fear God without the least mentioning of any Faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ considered as both God and Man towards the obtaining the eternal Happiness nor is there the least hint of any such Faith being necessary in all his Sections And whereas he saith They that fear him not shall be turned into Hell as the Bishop of Cork did well observe What W. P. means by Hell by that Paper no one knows but elsewhere what he means either by Heaven or Hell he hath sufficiently told us in his Rejoinder to J. Faldo p. 179. viz. To assert the Locality of Heaven and Hell is too Carnal indeed Mahometan Seeing them W. P. doth not own any place without us to be either Heaven or Hell it is easie to understand what Heaven or Hell W. P. is for to wit the Light within that 's his only Heaven and Darkness within his only Hell which is the old Ranters Notion that is destructive to the great Fundamentals of Christianity such as that Christ is bodily ascended into a real Local Heaven without us which Heavens all the Saints shall after the Resurrection in their glorified Bodies he taken up into and the Bodies of the Wicked together with their Souls shall be cast into Hell that is a place of Torment as really as the other is a place of Joy and Felicity It is prodigiously Shameful and Astonishing in W. P. that though he knew in his Conscience he did not mean Hell in the common sense of Christians which without doubt is the Bishop's sense to wit a real place of Torment without us yet that he should so treat the Bishop and so rudely and unchristianly reflect upon him by a consequence as false as it is foul and dirty saying in his Page 40 either one of these is an Article of his belief or else he keeps the true Hell to himself Page 2. In his second Section though he professeth to express his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture Words that there are Three that bear record in Heaven the Father the Word and the
Propitiation in order to remission of Sins can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion so by good consequence contrariwise whoever believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians to wit as outwardly Crucified Dead and Raised again c. can hardly believe any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion but W. P. believes not in Christ as a Propitiation in order to remission of Sin c. in the true sense of Scripture generally received by all true Christians therefore W. P. hardly believeth any fundamental Article of the Christian Religion to wit as peculiar to the same The first proposition is proved by the Rule of contraries from W. P's assertion as I think he will readily confess the second proposition which is the Assumption is fully proved from what is above at large quoted by me out of his former Books never to this day retracted by him And though he reckoneth up the Doctrine of the Trinity viz. of the Father of Christ the Son and of the Holy Ghost the Doctrine of Heaven and Hell the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust to be Fundamental Doctrines yea and the main of Christian Doctrine yet from what is above proved out of his Books he hath plainly opposed the true Christian Doctrine both of the Holy Trinity and of Heaven and Hell and as plainly he hath opposed the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust in their respective Bodies as I have fully proved in my third Narrative and so have his Brethren G. Whitehead Richard Hubberthorne and others only at present I shall quote these following passages out of some of his former Books in his Reason against Railing in answer to Tho. Hicks P. 138. he thus plainly argueth against the deceased Saints looking for any future Resurrection of the Body which Tho. Hicks argued for Is the Joy of the Ancients saith W. P. now in Glory imperfect or are they in Heaven but by halves But why must the Felicity of the Soul depend upon that of the Body Is it not to make the Soul a kind of Window to be without its beloved Body a better sort of Purgatory Again P. 134. If a thing can be the same and notwithstanding changed for shame let us never make so much stir against the Doctrine of Transubstantiation for the absurdity of it is rather out-done than equalled by this carnal Resurrection Again in his answer to J. Faldo called the Invalidity of J. Faldo's Vindication P. 369. It 's sown a Natural Body It 's raised a Spiritual Body and I do utterly deny saith he that this Text is concerned in the Resurrection of Man's carnal Body at all but the States of Men under the First and Second Adam Men are sown into the World Natural but they are raised Spiritual through him who is the Resurrection and the Life and so they are Sons of the Second Adam Nor need any to wonder why W. P. and his Brethren should disbelieve all these fundamental Doctrines of Christianity which now he professeth to own and that as Fundamental but still quite in a most differing Sense from all true Christians for with what certainty can he or they believe them they acknowledge not the Holy Scriptures to be the Rule of their Faith in any of these things or indeed of any others they have no certainty of the Truth of any of these he now calls Fundamentals from the Rule of Faith set up by them which is the Light within them with respect to its ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind but none of these Fundamental Doctrines above mentioned fall within these ordinary Discoveries as W. P. hath confessed for they belong to extraordinary Revelation And if he should affirm they did belong to the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind he cannot prove it What obscure Knowledge any of them called Heathen Philosophers had of any of these great Mysteries W. P. cannot prove they had it from the Light within but Traditionally either from the Jews and ancient Patriarchs and Prophets or from some among themselves prophetically inspired as it is reported of the Sybils the which report were it true doth not prove that the Knowledge and Faith of these great Fundamentals did fall within the ordinary discoveries of the Light within given to Mankind in general Section 5. His uncivil Treatment of the Bishop as if he did render the Text 1 John 5. 7. defective whereas the Bishop only charg'd the Defect on W. P 's Confession which though given in Scripture words yet not in the true Sense of Scripture His Fallacious Argument against the Holy Trinity answered His Fallacy and Equivocation about his calling him who was born of the Virgin Mary Jesus Christ and the Son of God whereas he hath denied him to be properly so And his abusive Treatment of the Bishop on that Head IN his Page 30 he proceeds in his unchristian and uncivil Treatment of the Bishop unjustly charging him as if the Text 1 John 5. 7. were defective with the Bishop and as if he did render the Text it self short which saith W. P. with submission I think is a bold Attempt in one of his Station If he believes the 39 Articles But all this is nothing but a Scandalous Reflection on the Bishop and a Shuffling and Cover wherewithall to hide his own Error and Incredulity The Bishop might well enough without charging any defect on the Text as he doth not in the least charge a defect on this Confession of W. P. and his Brethren because though given in one Scripture Text yet he had just cause to question not to be given in the true sense of that Scripture for most that are unsound as touching the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity even Socinians as well as others will profess yea and have professed to give their Faith in the Text yea and all other Texts of the like nature who yet are professed Unbelievers of the true Doctrine of the Holy Trinity And though W. P. and his Brethren will frankly confess they believe that the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost are one God one in Substance and Essence and thus think to clear themselves of Sociniansm yet he and they at the same time are grosly guilty of Sabellianism acknowledging no distinction betwixt Father Son and Holy Ghost other than Nominal or at most in Manifestation and Operation ad extra and with relation to the Creatures So that W. P's Notion and Faith of the Holy Trinity which he calls the Scripture Trinity but it is not the Scripture Trinity but the Sabellian Trinity is no other than this that as the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit are one God one Essence and Being so the Father is the Son and the Son is the Father and the Holy Ghost is the Son and the Son is the Holy Ghost for as I have quoted him above in his Sandy Foundation he disputeth not
only against their being Three Persons but against their being Three or Three He 's arguing That if the Father be God the Son God and the Holy Ghost God then unless they are Three distinct Nothings they are Three distinct Substances and consequently Three distinct God's Which is as weakly and Sophistically argued by W. P. as if he had argued If the three Dimensions of a Body be three distinct Dimensions then unless they are three distinct Nothings they are three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct Bodies which I only bring to shew the silly Sophistry of his Argument but not that I think this glorious Mystery of the Trinity can be duly represented by this Similitude or any other natural Similitude whatsoever though it is a certain truth that the distinction of the three divine relative Properties in the divine Essence prove them no more to be Three Gods than the distinction of the three Dimensions in a Body prove that they are three Bodies And had W. P. given the Profession of his Faith in all the other Texts of Scripture that are commonly understood by true Christians to prove the true distinction of the Father Son and Holy Ghost in their relative and personal Properties Yet seeing as hath been fully proved W. P. hath quite another sense of all those Texts than the true Scripture sense received by all true Christians the Bishop might well enough charge W. P's Faith with being defective for his imposing a wrong sense on the sound Scripture words as he hath done and which it is like the Bishop had just occasion of suspicion he had done in some of his books Doth W. P. think that if a suspected Papist to clear himself of being free of that Popish Error of Transubstantiation should profess his Faith in that one Text of Scripture Take eat this is my Body would this justly clear him of that Suspicion seeing he may be guilty of that Error for all his Scripture Confession it being the common Policy of the greatest Hereticks to profess their Faith in Scripture words while by their other words they have made it appear that they have a Heretical Sense as in the present case is fully evident In Page 31. To excuse his Equivocation about his owning Jesus Christ to be the Son of God he tells the Bishop we call him the beloved Son of God the only begotten of the Father And in Page 32 and 33 he tells they have called him Christ who was born of the Virgin Mary and Conceived by the Holy Ghost again and again yea that they have not confessed his Name less than nine times in that Paper And from this takes occasion to blame the Bishop with uncharitableness and being beside the business And if we have said so saith W. P. must not the Bishop be extreamly beside the business His uncharità bleness is as obvious I will not say his Untruth What shall I say to his Story of some of our Friends whom he makes to affirm that Christ is not ascended into Heaven he is in us Can it touch us or should he have said it and not have proved it Is that fair and candid Is it charitable supposing it were true which does not appear Or is it just to insinuate upon the People as dubious But let it be never so true saith he it cannot conclude the People if not the Act of the People The Church of England has Doctors of very different Sentiments would the Bishop think it fair the common Belief of the Church should thereby be concluded And in Page 35 he saith So that though we did not dwell upon Points but were concise in our Expressions yet whatever is implied or is implicable from any Assertion Justice as well as Charity always grants and so would the Bishop have done had they been uppermost in his Mind when his Pen run so fast against us It is prodigious Fallacy and Presumption in W. P. thus to treat the Bishop or any Christian Man when he did know in his Conscience how far both he and his Brethren for all his seeming fair Confessions were and still are guilty in both these things in which the Bishop very modestly doth but blame them for not expressing those Matters more fully and clearly to take away Suspicion out of the Minds of some who might be jealous of their Sincerity as they have but too great ground so to be For as to the first viz. Whither he that was born of the Virgin Mary and dyed c. was the Christ and the Son of God truly and properly To this W. P. hath expresly opposed in his Serious Apology p. 146. That the outward Person that suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny It 's true W. P. hath called him that was so born Christ and the Son of God yet that will not prove that he believed him so to be truly and properly The Socinians call Christ the Son of God and yet deny his eternal Generation And so W. P. and G. W. and others of them call the Man that was born of Mary Christ and the Son of God by some Figure because the Son of God the true Christ was in that Man as the thing containing gets the Name of the thing contained by a Metonimy But still they deny that that Man was properly the Son of God or that he was God And accordingly G. W. hath found fault again and again with that Expression of Christ his being God-man calling it unscripture Language and alledging it is no where to be found but in the Pope's Canons Hence it is that they deny that Christ hath our Nature in Heaven or that he consisteth of a Humane Nature or Body though they grant he had a Body but deny that he consists of it as any part of him as a Man may have a Coat or Garment but doth not consist of it The Foundation of which Error is that they do not believe the Hypostatical or Personal Union of the two Natures so as to constitute one Christ they will have Christ to be nothing properly but the Godhead and that is the Father and the Holy Ghost as well as the Son as I have plainly proved in my third Narrative especially And as concerning their denying Christ's Ascension into Heaven first seeing W. P. denieth the Locality of Heaven as well as of Hell he must needs grant that Christ's Body is either no where ascended or is every where which last he seems to be for p. 35. quoting Eph. 4. 10. that he ascended far above all Heavens that he might fill all things Then saith he he is in Man certainly But as he was the Divine Word he did fill all things and was in Man before he ascended but this Text doth not prove that his Body filleth all things for the Question is not Whither the Godhead is present in all things which yet is well known some of the Quakers have denied and some of them in Pensilvania charged me
Christ to every Man so by W. P's Confession it hath not revealed these things to him or his Brethren for he grants they belong to extraordinary Revelation and fall not within the ordinary Discoveries given to Mankind and are none of the absolute Necessaries of Religion and that such Revelation is not necessary and yet without such internal extraordinary Revelation of these things they cannot have the certain Faith of them as he confesseth Section 4. His Fallacy in pretending to own the Doctrine of Justification by Christ the Propitiation the Doctrine of the Holy Trinity the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead to be Fundamentals of Christianity whereas he doth not in truth own any one of them His ill use of the Bishop's Charity by his own Argument retorted on himself it is proved he hath denied all the Fundamental Articles of Christianity The chief reason why W. P. and his Brethren believe not the Fundamentals of Christianity is That they deny the Holy Scripure to be the Rule of their Faith and set up the Light within to be the Rule which yet they confess doth not reveal to them any of those Fundamentals BY all which it plainly appeareth how disingenuous and fallacious W. P. hath been not only in the Paper called Gospel Truths published by him and his three Brethren but in his Answer to the Bishop of Cork on that Head yea and on all the other Heads it were easie to shew his Shuffling and Equivocation as well as his unfair and uncivil Treatment of him To detect which a little further let us consider W. P's words in answer to the Bishop of Cork p. 25 and 26. I am of opinion saith W. P. If he viz. the Bishop had well considered the Force and Comprehensiveness of our Belief concerning Christ That pleaseth him so well he might have saved himself the trouble of what he has published to the World upon the rest of them for whoever believes in Christ as a Propitiation in order to Remission of Sins and Justification of Sinners can hardly disbelieve any Fundamental Article of the Christian Religion Since every such Person must necessarily believe in God because it is with him alone Man is to be justified To be sure he must believe in Christ for that is the very Proposition he must also believe in the Holy Ghost because he is the Author of his Conviction Repentance and Belief he must believe Heaven and Hell Rewards and Punishments and consequently the Resurrection of the Just and Unjust For why should he be concerned about the being freed from the Guilt of his Sin if he were unaccountable in another World So that acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a Propitiation in order to the Remission of Sin comprehends the main Doctrine of the Christian Religion And as so many Lines drawn from the Circumference to the Center they all meet and center in Christ And indeed it is as the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion Were this confession of W. P. as sincere as it is seemingly fair it would prove that his Doctrine were indeed Christian and no doubt might and ought to give to the Bishop or any other that were doubtful in the case good Satisfaction of the Christianity of his Doctrine But that all this is meer paint and equivocation what I have above quoted out of his Books fairly and fully doth sufficiently prove That the profession W. P. made of his belief in his Gospel Truths pleased the Bishop so well whereof W. P. takes such particular and great notice and thereby takes occasion to blame his disingenuity as well as his troubling himself with publishing what he hath done to the World Yea W. P. makes it next to impossible that it was the first time the Bishop hath heard of that Doctrine among them viz. the acknowledging the necessity of Christ as a propitiation in order to the remission of Sins and Justifying them as Sinners from Guilt I say that this his profession pleased the Bishop so well did proceed from the Bishops great Charity and Moderation Charitably believing that W. P's Heart and Pen did go along together but as W. P. hath made an ill use of the Bishop's Charity and Judgment thus impertinently to reflect on him so it is fit the Bishop should be better acquainted with W. P's equivocations and double dealings with him which he may easily find out by an indifferent search into his former Books W. P. in his above mentioned confession professeth his belief in Christ as a propitiation and this he would seem to make the Navel of Christianity and Characteristick of that Religion But what doth W. P. mean by Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such doth he mean the same that the Bishop meaneth and all sincere Christians Nay nothing less Christ within as he is the Light and Life as he offers up himself within his Children in the Nature of a Mediating Sacrifice the Lamb within but not the Lamb without the High-Priest within is the Propitiation and his blood as shed within which is the Life and the Life is the Light within as he hath both printed and preached is that Propitiation And certainly did he mean that Faith in the Man Christ without us as he outwardly was crucified was necessary to Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion and that the acknowledgment of Christ as such was necessary to constitute a Christian he would not plead that a meer Just Man who has no Faith in Christ as the Word Incarnate is a Christian and that he who believes in God believes in Christ because Christ is God as he has argued in his address to Protestants And did he really think that to believe and acknowledge Christ to wit as outwardly crucified and raised again to be the Propitiation was the Navel of Christianity and the Characteristick of that Religion he would not have excluded that Faith from the absolute necessaries of Religion as he hath plainly done in his discourse concerning the general Rule of Faith and Life Nor would he have set up the Light within every Man with respect to its ordinary discoveries of Moral Piety and Justice without any Revelation of Christ as he came outwardly in the Flesh to be the general Rule of Faith to all Christians as well as to all Heathens which is making Deism and Christianity but one and the same thing tho' now he seems to distinguish them by calling Christianity that Religion whereof the Faith and acknowledgment of Christ the Propitiation is the Navel and Characteristick But seeing W. P. doth so Grosly prevaricate and equivocate about Christ the Propitiation and Faith in him as such and that it hath been proved he hath not the true Faith of Christ the Propitiation nor so much as a true notion of it 't is fit to apply W. P's words against himself and to Argue from his words by the Rule of contraries As whoever believes in Christ as a
Opponents as guilty of Blasphemy for denying the sufficiency of the Light within to Salvation without any thing else Seeing that Light within is Christ for it is as much as to say Christ is not sufficient to Salvation And thus some of them have charged me in particular to whom I have answered that seeing Christ is truly Christ without us as well as within us and much more gloriously manifested in the Flesh without us If it is no blasphemy to say Christ without us cannot save us without his being in us as they will readily grant so nor is it Blasphemy to say Christ within us cannot save us without Christ without us And with respect to Christ's inward Teaching and Illumination they grosly and fallaciously prevaricate in stating the question as whither the Light within to wit the Word God is a Light sufficient to Teach or Guide every Man the way to Eternal Salvation Thus they think to have their Opponents every way at a disadvantage and to catch them in their Dilemma if they say Yea the Quakers have gained the point as they imagine If they say Nay they are guilty of Blasphemy against Christ the word God within them as not being sufficient But this Sophistical Dilemma is easily discovered and answered for by the sufficiency of the Light within every Man to guide to Salvation is not meant what Christ the Word God can reveal to and in every Man for who questions that that he can do it abundantly but the true state of the question is What he doth reveal to and in every Man that is or may be a sufficient discovery to him for his eternal Salvation W. P. and his Brethren hold the affirmative the Bishop and all true Christians Yea all but meer Deists hold the Negative viz. That Christ considered as the word God doth not reveal to and in every Man As for example not to any of the Quakers or any others here here in England all that is sufficient to their Salvation by the common Illumination without special superadded Illuminations of Christ by the Holy Spirit that is more excellent than the common in the use of the outward means to wit the Doctrines of the Holy Scriptures outwardly Preached or at leastwise read to us or by us If they say it doth then let them not only tell us but prove to us intelligibly to convince our Natural Rational Faculty which W. P. calleth the Eye or Sight whereby the Soul of every Man is capable to discern what the Light within sheweth that the Light in them by its common Illumination without all outward means of Instruction from or by the Holy Scriptures hath taught them one or more of the Twelve Articles of the Apostles Creed according to the true sense of Scripture and generally received by all true Christians If they confess it hath not taugh them any one of them it evidently follows that they think not any one of them is necessary to their Faith or Christianity i. e. their Deism for Salvation And yet it is strange that W. P. should be so fallacious as as to affirm that the Doctrines of God of Christ of the Holy Ghost of remission of Sin and Justification from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation the Resurrection of the Dead are Fundamentals of the Christian Religion none of which the Light within them without Scripture hath taught him to believe as I think he hath plainly confessed and yet it hath taught him all that is necessary to his Salvation without Scripture he having denyed that the Scripture is the Rule of his or their Faith as touching any of these matters and consequently not so much as the Instrument whereby the Holy Spirit has wrought that Faith in him therefore what Faith he or they have of these things is but Historical and Uncertain and as the old Heavens that must pass away and which hath already passed away from them seeing they pretend they are come to the new Heavens already And yet he is so fallacious to say P. 97. It is generally thought that we do not hold the common Doctrines of Christianity but have introduced new and erroneous ones in lieu thereof This I have sufficiently proved to be true here and elsewhere and so have others done the same But what followeth Whereas saith he we plainly and entirely believe the Truths contained in that called the Apostles Creed Yes say I just so as he may say they plainly and entirely believe the Truths in the Turks Alcoran which may be supposed to have some Truths though many more falsities This saying of his seems to have a mental Reservation as if there were some things in that Creed that were not Truths W. P. would do well to tell us plainly what they are Section 9. Several places of Scripture rescued from his Perversions None are saved by the common discoveries of the Light within without special Revelation and Illumination which yet renders not Salvation impossible to virtuous Gentiles His Ignorance and Error about the Nature of the Light within considered as the Word God In his shewing what the Light within teacheth every Man he leaves out the chief matter that was necessary to his Argument to prove it sufficient without any thing else AND as for the places of Scripture which W. P. hath brought to prove the sufficiency of the Light within with respect to the common Illumination for every Man's Salvation without any super-added special Illumination and all external Light of the Holy Scripture which are these following John 8. 12. John 1. 9 14. Titus 2. 11 12. Eph. 5. 13. John 16. 7. Prov. 1. 20 to 24. John 8. 24. they are all one or two at most excepted that may be understood of the common Illumination as John 1. 9. to be understood of the Special Illumination given to Men under a Gospel-Ministry as is evident by the due consideration of them as for John 1. 9. allowing it to be meant of the common Illumination and diverse other places of Scripture that might be brought to prove that there is such a common Illumination from the word God in all Men as a preparatory Ministration this doth not prove that that common Illumination is sufficient without the special that is given to the Faithful And whereas he saith in his 6th Article or Section of his Gospel Truths They that turn not at the reproofs thereof to wit the Light within with respect to its common Illumination and will not repent and live and walk according to it shall dye in their Sins and where Christ is gone they shall never come Tho' there be a Truth in the words he has here set down yet he quite misapplies that place of Scripture John 8. 24. and fallaciously leaves out the foregoing words which are these For if ye believe not that I am he ye shall dye in your Sins and as it is in v 21. And whither I go ye cannot come by which words it is plainly evident
that for their Sin of not believing in Christ God-man without them especially they were to dye in their Sins And as fallacious he is in interpreting John 16. 7. that the Comforter which Christ promised to send was the Light within or the Word God with respect only to his common Illumination reproving for common Sins whereas it 's plain from v. 9. that the Sin of which especially the Comforter viz. The Holy Spirit should convince Men should be the Sin of unbelief viz. For not believing that that very Man that spoke unto them was the Christ of God the promised Messiah the Redeemer and Saviour of the World Now unless W. P. can show that the Light within allowing it to be the Word God with respect to the common Illumination and by the said common Illumination universally given to Mankind without any superadded special inward Illumination of the Divine Word and without all external Revelation of Scripture-Light and Doctrine doth convince all Men of the Sin of not believing in the Man Christ Jesus that was born of a Virgin who spoke those words John 8. 21. 24. and John 16. 7 8 9. he but beats the Air and argueth to no purpose that the Light within every Man giveth a sufficient discovery of the way to Eternal Life and Salvation by the common Illumination without all special Illumination and external Revelation as aforesaid Why God hath not given the External Revelation of the Gospel Doctrine concerning Christ the Propitiation as he outwardly dyed for the Sins of Men nor the special Illumination nor conviction of the Spirit that ordinarily accompanieth the outward Preaching of the Gospel to many parts of Mankind belongeth to the depth of his most righteous Judgments against which we have no cause to dispute but to cry out with the Apostle Paul Rom. 11. 33. O the depth of the Riches both of the Wisdom and Knowledge of God how unsearchable are his Judgments and his ways past finding out and also with Holy Admiration and Thankfulness to bless God that he has given us the Light of his Gospel both by the Doctrine of it outwardly and by the special Illuminations of his Spirit and Divine word inwardly which he has not given to many others though we were not more worthy of it than they So that what the Psalmist said concerning the Jewish Church of old may be well and fitly applied to the Christian Church and Nations in Christendom where the Gospel is preached Psal 47. 19 20. He sheweth his word unto Jacob his Statutes and his Judgments unto Israel he hath not dealt so with any Nation and as for his Judgments they have not known them Nor doth all that I have said on this Head render Salvation impossible to these parts of Mankind to whom the Light of the Gospel hath not shined outwardly by any external Revelation of it seeing God can supply that defect by ways and methods unknown to us who worketh by his Spirit when where and how he pleaseth it is sufficient to us to know that the ordinary way and means that God hath provided for Mens eternal Salvation is by outward means of Instruction to wit the Doctrine of the Gospel as outwardly delivered us in the Holy Scriptures which is always accompanied with the special Illumination of Christ by the Holy Spirit to all that shall obtain eternal Salvation and that there is no other way or name under Heaven whereby Men must be-saved but the Name of Jesus nor no Promise of Salvation to any but through Faith in that Name even of Christ as outwardly he came and was and is a Propitiation for our Sins And though God can Save and hath saved some without the outward means of the Word as outwardly preached yet this will not prove that ever any was or shall be saved by the meer common Illumination given to all Men which yet is W. P's and his Brethrens great Fundamental and Evangelium eternum their everlasting Gospel from which they exclude the Doctrine of Salvation by Christ Crucified and by Faith in him from being any part of it because not falling within the ordinary discoveries given to Mankind that Doctrine is none of the absolute necessaries of Deism is very true but that any were saved by meer Deism without all knowledge of Christ and Faith in him the great and only Propitiation for Sin which is W. P's great Fundamental he hath not proved and the Greek Calends will sooner come than ever he or any for him can prove it In his Page 21 he tells us The Nature of this excellent Principle the Light within every Man is to discover Sin reprove for it and lead out of it all such as love and obey the Convictions thereof That the Principle of the Light within even with respect to its common Illumination to and in every Man is excellent is granted and I do not think will be denied by the Bishop or any true Christian but he derogates greatly from the Excellency of it to tell us the Nature of it is to do so and so as if it were a natural and necessary Agent as it is the nature of the Fire to burn of the Sun to give light I ask W. P. Is it the nature of the word God to Create as a necessary Agent If it is the nature of the Divine word to Create he could not but Create otherwise he should change his nature as because it is the nature of the Fire to burn if it did not burn it should change its nature And if it be the Nature of the word God to discover Sin and reprove for it and lead out of it then that Divine word can do no otherwise and consequently is he not a necessary and not a free Agent It had been better and more Sound and Christian for W. P. to have said It is the good will and pleasure of the Divine word to reprove for Sin and also of the Spirit who bloweth where he pleaseth according to the old Latin Translation and which the Greek well beareth and was generally so understood by the Ancients both Greek and Latin Spiritus spirat ubi vult The Spirit breatheth where he willeth and pleaseth in all to discover and reprove for Sin and yet not in all absolutely to bring them out of Sin or to work that Obedience in all so as to be brought out of Sin It had wont to be a Doctrine among the Quakers that God giveth a Day of Visitation which may expire and pass over some before they dye and yet even such after their day of Visitation is expired have that Light in them which reproveth for Sin And as the Visitation of some may be expired so the Visitation of others may be yet to come the outward Sun though a natural and necessary Agent yet shineth not to all at once when it is setting to some it is rising to others and when it is midnight to some it is mid-day to others that is an Emblem