Gods Grace whereby we are sanctified Further Discovery p. 17 18. Printed Anno 1694 If that in ward Principle whereby Men are sanctified were purchased by Christs Death and Blood what became of both Jew and Gentile before Christ's Death Were they without an inward Principle and unsanctified Himself shall resolve the Question anon In his Book stiled Truth Advanced Printed Anno 1694 he thus hath it It is not said that Cornelius had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile State although he had a great measure of Gentile Sincerity and Righteousness Nor is it any where to be sound that ANY received that Holy Ghost which Christ promised PARTICULARLY to Believers in him but such ONLY who believed in him even Christ crucified and raised again p. 70. And in the next Page That Holiness that is a Conformity unto Christ the second Adam and is the proper and peculiar effect of the new or second Covenant is far more excellent than any Righteousness or Obedience that is but the effect of the first Covenant or Ministration and is but a Conformity to the first Adam his Righteousness and maketh not Sons but Servants or if Sons but Sons of Hagar or the first Covenant And under this first Covenant Ministration the Spirit is called in them the Spirit of Fear and Bondage but the filial Fear and Love and other Gospel Vertues are the far more excellent And here the Spirit is called the Spirit of Adoption or Sonship that helpeth us to cry Abba Father And as the Spirit of God is called in Scripture the Spirit of Faith c. So it is called the Holy Spirit or Spirit of Holiness because it worketh a peculiar Degree and kind of Holiness in all true Believers in Christ Crucified c. above what the most upright Gentiles do Witness or Experience in their meer Gentile State The Law made nothing perfect and that Law was not only the Law without but even the Law WITHIN both in Jews and Gentiles until the Faith of Christ the one Offering come to be revealed by which one Offering he hath for ever perfected all that are sanctified p. 71. Let the Reader bear these things in Mind or recur to them upon occasion for on this hinge hang most of the Observations in the ensuing Quotations which belong to this Head Now before I bring his former Books in Evidence against him I think needful to Premise that I have not here delivered Mine or my Friends Sentiments pro or con for or against but barely wielded my Adversaries weapon against himself for his Writings abound with Contradictions as I have already observed in my Apostate Exposed and that other called People called Quakers cleared c. who though he could tell others that They are not so sincere as to own and retract in publick their Errors exposed in publick even lest such Retractation or Correction should lessen and abate their Honour and Esteem among their too credulous Followers and Admirers See Preface to Gross Error p. 2. yet himself is the Man that offends in that wherewith he unjustly taxeth others forgetting or at least little regarding what Paul saith Rom. 2. 21. Thou therefore which teachest another teachest thou not thy self c. For although he represented his very minute viz. Not touching any of the great Doctrines and Principles of the Christian Religion but relating to some Places of Scriptures unduly applied to prove or defend things that were Truths but did not really prove these Truths True Copy p. 18. and hath promised to correct and retract them p. 17. yet it remains undone to this Day which is above a Year ago If he be so unwilling to correct small faults what would he be to greater But before I have done with him I doubt not to evince he had no Reason to cast the first Stone especially against the Innocent when himself was so deeply culpable To that end hear him Light of Truth Triumphing Printed Anno 1670. thus That the new Covenant requireth doing is plain from Deut. 30. 14. But the Word is very near unto thee even in thy Mouth c. which Word the Apostle Paul expounds to be the Word of Faith and Righteousness of Faith Rom. 10. 8. which he preached and that was the NEW COVENANT p. 11. Hence I argue if the Word near be the Word of Faith c. be the New Covenant then who hear it and obey it are not under the first Covenant only held under the Custody and Safe-guard of the Law c. but the Word of Faith being closed in with the Faith is revealed And surely the New Covenant is Saving and Perfecting Page 15. He proposeth a few Queries to R. Gordon to shew as he alledgeth that the Nature and Light by which the Gentiles did the things contained in the Law and knew God was that of Christ 1. How could they do the things of the Law but by the Divine Nature of Christ seeing without him men can do no good thing And I Query Whether the Divine Nature of Christ whereby God is known be without the Holy Ghost or whether the Divine Nature of Christ did not even then make perfect for in Truth Advanced p. 70. he denies Cornelius c. had the Holy Ghost and p. 71. that the Law within made perfect before the one Offering came to be Revealed 2. How could they be excused but by Christ 3. How could they be without excuse who disobeyed if they had no Principle given them sufficient whereby to perform their Obedience 4. How did some of them PERFECT the Law and judged the Circumcision and was Jews inwardly and had Praise of God if not by Christ Could they perfect that Law that it self made nothing perfect Again is the Jew inward who hath praise of God by Christ without the Holy Ghost but a Son of Hagar Surely this Man had need have looked at home and retracted his own Errors before he had been so brisk upon others 5. How could they clearly see the invisible things of God but by Christ the Son seeing it is said None knows the Father but the Son and he to whom the Son reveals him And though these invisible things are clearly seen in or through the things that are made yet not without that which is to be known of God manifest in them which God had shewed unto them which gave them an Eye or Understanding to see his Invisible Power and Godhead in these things And now I query How doth the Son reveal these invisible things but by the Holy Spirit 1 Cor. 2. 10. Do Men see the Invisible Power and Godhead without it Or is that Administration that gives to see the Invisible Power and Godhead Evangelical or Legal Imperfect or Perfecting But fighting against Truth blinds Men. Again he tells his Adversary Thou secretly Labours to prove that the Name of Jesus Christ Redeemer and Saviour belongs only to the Word as it was manifest in that particular Body and Form of Man born of
proposed out of this Book the next that comes in course is The Way Cast up Printed Anno 1677. He there saith Paul takes notice of some among the Gentiles in the time of Heathenism who were a law unto themselves and did by Nature to wit the Divine Nature of the Word Ingrafted in them James 1. or by their own Nature restored and repaired by the Grace of God as Augustin Expounded that place the things contained in the Law And such was Socrates among the Grecians whom Justin Martyr in one of his Apologies did expresly call a Christian and classeth him with Abraham c. p. 44 45. Several things are Remarkable here one that in the time of Heathenism some Gentiles partook of the Divine Nature which hath been oft touched upon already 2dly That their Nature was repaired and restored by the Grace of God Qu. Was that Grace insufficient or imperfect Can Nature be restored or repaired by that which makes not perfect By any thing less than God's Holy Spirit 3dly That Justin Martyr classed such an one with Abraham and calls him a Christian 4thly That here he boggleth not at the appellation in this Book Printed Anno. 1677. Though he doth afterwards Anno. 1694. Saying in Truth Advanced p. 46. If they were real Christians they had some Knowledge and Faith of Christ the Messiah as he was to come in the Flesh But now the Man being altered no wonder that his Expressions vary If the Saints before Christ came outwardly in the Flesh had not Eat of the Flesh of Christ and Drank of his Blood they could not have had Life by him but they had Life by him and therefore c. p. 95. Christ hath Lived in all Saints as well before he came in the Flesh as to his outward Birth as since p. 100. Did he Live in them and did they Feed on him even before his outward Birth and yet the Law within Jew and Gentile not make perfect till after it Though the outward coming of the Man Christ was deferred according to his outward Birth in the Flesh for many Ages yet from the BEGINNING this Heavenly Man the promised Seed did inwardly come into the Hearts of those that believed in him and Bruised the Head of the Serpent and destroyed him that had the Power of Death that is the Devil the Stronger Man entering the House and dispossessing the strong Man and Casting him out p. 99. When the Head of the Serpent is bruised the Power of Death the last Enemy destroyed the Devil Dispossessed and cast out and the stronger enters Hath not the perfect Law the Law which doth make perfect taken place Again Thus the Word was made Flesh even from the beginning and dwelt in us as in ALL AGES and they beheld his Glory c. p. 103. Is this Indwelling where the Glory is beheld without the Holy Ghost or unable to perfect the Work Now I come to his Book Stiled Way to the City of God Printed Anno. 1678. where he saith Even at Mans Fall the Seed of the Woman was given not ONLY to Bruise the Serpents Head but also to be a Lamb or Sacrifice to attone and pacify the Wrath of God towards Man p. 125. Is this Bruising the Serpents Head attonement c. Witnessed where the Holy Ghost is not received Is not this State a Gospel State beyond Gentile Sincerity and Righteousness And where these Effects are wrought doth not the Seed of the Woman make perfect He tells us We are not too nicely to make a difference betwixt the Influence and effects of his outward and inward Sufferings but to understand them in a perfect Conjunction and that the End of his Sufferings in both was this viz. 1. Both to quench and allay the Wrath of God 2. to purify and Cure Men c. p. 139. Had G. Keith taken the Counsel he then gave he would not have so depretiated the Law within nor denied the receiving the Holy Ghost to the Conscientious Heathen to whom the outward was not revealed as he hath done of late His Book called Rector Corrected Printed Anno. 1680. Comes next There he denies not but that some rare and singular Gifts of the Spirit have been given unto some of these called Heathen some whereof have Prophesied of Christ and others uttered some Divine Sayings that could proceed from no other Principle but the same Divine Spirit that was in the Christians p. 50. Qu. Is this Divine Spirit the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Holiness which these had while to Cornelius he allows only a great Measure of Gentile Sincerity and Righteousness had these a Law within them that made perfect which of late he will not admit to Jew or Gentile until Christ the one Offering was Revealed For it seems they had the same Spirit the Christians had How should this be if the Holy Spirit was Peculiar to the latter Days to them who believed in Christ Crucified c. For that not being done the benefits Annexed and Apropriated thereto could not be received Again that these generally had so much as a belief that the Messiah should come and suffer and rise again is what will stick hard upon him to prove if he dare assert it especially considering that the Disciples who conversed with Jesus were even after his Resurrection so far from believing it either Explicitely or Implicitely a late phrase of his that they disbelieved it and it seemed to them as idle Tales Lu. 24. 11. Yet if that were granted that all these had this belief of the Messiah that he should come c. Yet if he will believe himself which he hath small cause to do Considering his windings and twistings of late they could not have that holy Spirit which the Christians had that Holy Spirit being as he saith peculiar to believers in Christ Crucified not in Christ to be Crucified In the same Page he quotes a saying of Seneca thus There is a Holy Spirit in us that Teacheth us as we Treat him So here 's a Heathen hath outstript G. Keith by confessing to more than a great Measure of Gentile Sincerity and Righteousness even to the Holy Spirit in the Gentiles And that G. Keith may find to his Sorrow one Day Again God gave his Holy Spirit to instruct them and the Spirit in the Jews made them to believe in Christ as well before he was Born in the Flesh as since and therefore he is called the Spirit of Faith as being the Author of it in all them that believe p. 150. Is this Consonant to his saying Truth Advanced p. 70. Nor is it any where to be found that any received that Holy Ghost which Christ promised particularly to the Believers in him but such only who believed in him even Christ Crucified and Raised again Will he distinguish between Gods Holy Spirit and the Holy Ghost or make two Holy Ghosts He queries Was not the Spirit of Christ in Moses And Christ the Lord
was that Spirit as Paul hath taught p. 187. Now I query Seeing Christ was not then offered up whether that Spirit were the Holy Ghost or no And also whether the Spirit made him perfect yea or nay In Truth 's Defence Printed Anno. 1682. He thus hath it When I say the Spirit is the Rule there is no absurdness therein for if we mean by the Spirit THE HOLY GHOST Christ and the Holy Ghost are never seperated or divided in what they Speak or witness in the Souls of Men Christ himself in Scripture is called the second Adam the quickening Spirit the Lord is that Spirit p. 170 And in p. 107. he tells us Paul Expounds Deut. 30. 14. of Christ and that Clemens Alexandrinus and others of the Fathers so understood those words of Moses if so the Jews by having Christ for their Rule had the Holy Ghost for their Rule even before he was Crucified and Rose again This he inforceth in what follows If Enoch Noah Abraham had the Spirit to be a Rule unto them it is no less a Rule unto all now who have the SAME FAITH which they had seeing the SAME SPIRIT is given to Believers now which they had which Spirit is one as Paul hath declared And it is most Rational that as the Faith is one IN ALL AGES of the World and the Spirit ONE So the Principal Rule of Faith should be one also p. 114. If the Spirit be one the Faith one the Rule one in all Ages of the World How came Cornelius not to have the Holy Ghost when his Prayers and Almes came up for a Memorial before God Or had he that one Spirit Rule and Faith which Enoch Noah and Abraham had and that one Spirit not the Holy Spirit not the Spirit of Holiness not the Spirit of Adoption or Sonship Is not this to make two And to the Levites P. 121. He allows the Spirit of God to the right interpreting the Scripture Now Christ not being yet Crucisied and Raised again I query Whether that Spirit were something besides the Law within which of late he hath said made nothing Perfect His Commanding them to tarry at Jerusalem until they received the promise of the Father which was the Spirit to wit in GREATER MEASURE than formerly it was given unto them did not oblige c. p. 141. Had he kept to this distinction in his latter Writings he would not have told of Cornelius and the Gentiles not having the Holy Ghost before they had Faith in Christ Crucified c. A more plentiful Effusion of the Spirit being no part of the Controversy but granted But still it is the same Spirit same Faith same Rule as himself once acknowledged and was instanced even now In the next place he having of late asserted that the Law within did not make perfect till c. Let us hear how he here defineth perfection He who is Faithful in every respect to the measure of Grace which he hath received is indeed a perfect Man and doth please God although he be not equal in his attainment unto others who have more given them saith G. Keith p. 212. But can any one be perfect by vertue of a Law that doth not make perfect And if there were this deficiency even in the Law within during the first Covenant Administration how could any be perfect then And yet to shew that he abounds with Contradictions he hath allowed it to many as in above-cited Way to the City of God p. 125. which I made the Title of this first Part. And now I come to G. Keith's Book of Divine Immediate Revelation Printed Anno. 1684. which I Read not till of late by means of his citing it in his answer to me of which anon Speaking of Cornelius he saith Do not Peters words plainly imply that there were many such good honest Men who were acceptable to God through Christ although they had not heard of Christ as yet outwardly Preached See p. 26. 27 Again Cornelius received the Spirit Immediately and yet obtained it FURTHER by means of Peter's Preaching p. 63. Qu. Was not then the Spirit he received before and after Peter's Preaching the same Spirit Again We no where Read in all the Scripture that Noah Preached to all Mankind in the Old World but we find expresly that God by his Spirit did strive in those Men which most plainly sheweth that they had some inward teaching given them from the SPIRIT OF GOD for against what did they Sin but that Law Published by the Spirit of God in their Hearts seeing they had no written Law They had that inward Law which as Paul affirmed the other Gentiles had Rom. 1. See p. 54. The word of God was rare in respect of its being outward preached yet it was near and within in the Hearts of both Jews and Gentiles as Paul did affirm Rom. 10. compared with Deut. 30. p. 55. Whence I Query What Spirit this is What Law Published thereby What word this that Paul and Moses Speak of And whether they that received it and obeyed it received the Holy Spirit and were thereby made perfect especially seeing he further saith p. 79. All the Faithful under the Old Covenant were immediatly taught of God yet not by vertue of the Old Covenant but of the New which New Covenant in some degree had place in the time of the Old and was to be further revealed in Gospel Daies c. Surely if the New Covenant had place in some degree in the time of the Old the New Testament promised I will put my Spirit within you Ezek. 36. 27. had also a place during the Old Covenant Administration even where the word of Faith was closed with And what Spirit is this if not the Holy Spirit In p. 55. After having desended R. B's sense with respect to God his never changing his way or manner of Teaching and Enlightning his People by his Spirit inwardly working in them and his Continuing the same in all Ages before the Law after the Law and also after the coming of Christ he adds p. 56. that The inward Preaching Speaking and Illumination of God by his Spirit did ALWAYS remain in some degree more or less in the true Church and in ALL its Members Qu. Were the Gentiles who did by nature the things Contained in the Law none of these For if at any time the outward Preaching was little or none God did supply that outward defect inwardly by his Spirit c. In the same Book viz. That part which is â—n answer to Geo. Hicks he alledgeth p. 154. Clemens Alexandrinus is so for from thinking that only the Prophets and Apostles â—riâ— by divine Inspiration that he plainly declareth that not only Plato but also many others Preached and Declared the only true God by his Inspiration And in p 158. ' That Justin Martyr expresly saith That the innate Word or Reason declared of James 1. 21 Was in the Philosophers Poets and Historiographers who
by the impulse thereof spoke some things excellently And they who live with or according to the Word are Christians as among the Grecians Socrates Heraclitus c. But I query How could that be if the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Christ without which none are his Rom. 8. 9. be given to none but Believers in Christ Crucified c. Or that the Law within both Jews and Gentiles made nothing perfect till the one offering came to be revealed Yet that he may appear as he is Contradictory in every Branch in the following Page he bids us Note That whereas Justin Martyr called Socrates and others who lived in Conformity to the Divine Word in them Christians it is to be understood in part according to that General Revelation although we find not that Socrates had the knowledge of Christ as he was to come in the Flesh and suffer Death c. Now compare this with what himself hath said Truth Advanced p. 46. up on this very assertion of Jus tin Martyr's viz. If they were real Christians and were worthy of that Honourable Name they had some Faith and Knowledge of Christ the Messiah c. As he was to come in the Flesh c So one while this wavering Man restricts Christianity to a belief in Christ come Crucifie and Raised again and allows the appellation to Socrates and the rest only upon Condition that they so knew and believed in Christ nother while admits them to be Christians part conform to the Divine Word while supposeth them not to have had that Knoâ—ledge Yet whether Men who live in Conformity to the Divine Word can be said to be wholly Strangers to the Holy Spirit himself will do well to consider In his Plain Short Catechism Printed Anno. 1690. He saith by way of Question and Answer Qu. Is the Seed or Principle of the second or New Covenant after some manner in all Men A Yea Qu. And is that Seed or Principle Christ the Word of Faith A Yea p. 9. Now I Query Whether Christ the Word of Faith the Seed or Principle of the New Covenant in all Men were always saving and perfecting IN ALL MEN where embraced Or since Christs Ascension only He queries again Q. Is that great Mystery greatly I suppose it should be generally revealed in all A Nay Q. Did not God reserve the more full Revelation of it in a more general way to the time after Christ should suffer Death for Mens Sins and rise again A Yea Q. Was not therefore Christ the Mystery hid from Ages and Generations until the fulness of time and that both as to his inward and outward coming for most part A Yea ibid. By these words more full Revelation more general way for most part he seems to allow the Mystery was not hid from all Now I query Whether they to whom the Mystery was revealed before Christ suffered Death for Mens Sins were under the Law within that made nothing perfect according to Truth Advanced p. 71. Or were of the Many who were saved and attained unto perfect Peace and Reconciliation with God in their Souls according to Way to City of God p. 125. Or whether he will undertake to reconcile those two Passages Hitherto I have opposed his former to his latter writings now let us see whether in one and the same Book he be not as Contradictory to himself and that in his Truth Advanced Printed Anno 1694. as a kind of System of G. Keith's Divinity He asks Who can say with understanding that Moses Samuel David and the Prophets and John that came after were not in that Kingdom as well as any now for they had the SAME Righteonsness Peace and Joy in the HOLY GHOST as any now have and therefore if by the Kingdom we understand Christs Kingdom of Grace in the Hearts of true Believers surely John and all the holy Prophets and other Holy Men and Women were in it as well before Christ came in Flesh as since c. And a little lower All this doth not in the least infer that the Prophets were not true Believers in Christ as well as any now and had not by true Faith an entrance into Gods Kingdom as well as any now for it is absurd to suppose with the Papists that when they dyed they went into a Certain Limbus or Prison where they were detained and had not an entrance into God's Kingdom until Christ rose from the Dead And it is as absurd for any to Imagin that Believers generally since Christ came in the Flesh after Death have a greater or higher place or are greater in the Kingdom of Glory that is to come than the prophets have for it is most clear from Scripture that Abraham Isaac and Jacob and all the Prophets are in that Kingdom of God Luke 13 28 29. And none can enter into the Kingdom of God hereafter who have not known some beginning of entrance in to it here in this World See p. 136 137. This affords much matter to comment on and compare with what he hath delivered elsewhere particularly in this very Book 1. Moses the Prophets and John were in the Kingdom had Righteousness Joy and Peace in the Holy Ghost as well as any now They and other Holy Men and Women were in the Kingdom of Grace as well before Christ came in the Flesh as since How can that be If Christ promised the Holy Ghost PARTICULARLY to Believers in him to such ONLY who believed in him â—ven Christ Crucified and Raised again as he â—sserts p. 70. Could these Holy Men and Woâ—en believe in Christ Crucified and Raised aâ—ain before he was so If not How came they â—y that Gift which was annexed to such quaâ—â—fications as they could not have 2. They â—ere not detained in a Limbus or Prison it an absurdity in the Papists to suppose so or at they had not an entrance into God's â—ingdom until Christ rose from the Dead â—ith he here But in p. 71. that the Law thin made nothing perfect until the Faith Christ the one offering come to be revealed by which one offering he hath forever perfected c. Is an entrance then administred into the Kingdom of Grace by a Law that doth not make perfect Or can Men have that before the one offering which perfects be Revealed which is only to be had by the Revelation of that one offering 3. Whereas he asserts now that none can enter into the Kingdom of God hereafter who have nâ—â— known some beginning of entrance in this World I ask Can they enter by an imperfect Law It is hard for Man to come up to the height of the Ability given but can any advance higher If the Law be weak are noâ— they weaker Again if Men must know some beginning of entrance here then those Conscientious Gentiles such as Cornelius was before Peter Preached to him either had it herâ— and can that be without the Holy Ghost or they must have it there If
this Seed is This Seed and the Birth thereof by the Springing up of these Heavenly Powers and Vertues can and doth truly represent the Divine Power and Godhead being the express Image of God Ibid. Will he upon second thoughts divide the Holy Ghost from the Godhead as he must do if Men be allowed to have the one not the other That the Seed which truly represents the Divine Power and Godhead should spring up in Men and they without the Holy Ghost in the mean while Again By Vertue of what Covenant had the Gentiles this Priviledge Of that which made not the comers thereunto perfect Or of that whereby Grace and Truth came And what was the Effect of this Visitation to the Gentiles before Christs Incarnation where embraced would it bring them no further than the first Covenant to be Sons of Hagar c. Not to the filial Fear Love and other Virtues suitable to the Child of the New Covenant or free Woman Which he of late Appropriates to Believers in Christ Crucified c. Sarah said of old The Son of this Bondwoman shall not be Heir with my Son with Isaac Gen. 21. 10. And Abraham is commanded to hearken to her Voice ver 12. but G. Keith seems to think they may in some Revolution or other though they dyed Sons of Hagar To an Objection How can the Gentiles be either rewarded or punished seeing they have had no Law given them he saith The Apostle Answers that they had the Law inwardly though not as the Jews had it in an outward Administration and according to this Law they should be Judged and Accused or Excused according to their evil or well doing they had that inwardly made manifest in them which God had shemed unto them whereby they were condemned who did Evil and justified who did Well p. 28. And a little lower It is Evident that this Inward Principle was the very Principle of the Gospel in them in that Paul saith that God will render to every Man according to his Deeds in the Day when God shall Judge the secrets of Men by Jesus Christ according to my Gospel i. e. the Gospel which he Preached Now if the Gentiles shall be judged according to the Gospel then the Gospel behoved in some measure to be manifest unto them for no Man shall be judged according to that which is not made manifest p. 28 29. Query Was this Gospel made manifest with or without the Holy Ghost Did it make perfect Is the Law within another or diffinct thing from the Gospel For he is very nice in his Distinctions yet all will not do his Contradictions are so thick and palpable Moreover the Apostle proceedeth to shew how the Gentile who followed not after Righteousness had attained to Righteousness even that of FAITH and yet the Jews missed of it p. 36. Is the Righteousness of Faith saving In p. 25. He desires the Reader to observe that the Grace held forth both in this place and all others aforesaid is the very Grace that is Evangelical being the Word of Faith and the Light which is to be believed in And what is Evangelical is perfecting I hope For I read not that the Gospel was weak though the Law was My Spirit shall not always strive WITH Man he renders IN Man calling it The very Salutiferous Spirit of God himself which created Man and ALONE hath Power to save or destroy him p. 52. and p. 53. It may still be understood saith he of that inward striving of the Spirit of God by which God did strive with them to CONVERT them that they might not be destroyed but saved Now let me ask him What Spirit is this Salutiferous Spirit This Spirit that brings Salvation Is it the Holy Ghost or not For Christ was not yet offered up in the outward Were those Ante-Diluvian Times without the Holy Ghost who obeyed that Salutiferous Spirit which strove with them Or were the Converts of those Days under no Law inward or outward that made perfect What converted them then Or what were they converted to G. Keith having set down the Opinion of the Arminians and Papists goes on thus We in Opposition to these Opinionists do aver this Universal Grace to be that very Evangelical Gospel and Saving Grace and not another through which it being closed with in Faith and Love Salvation is obtained p. 94. This he saith of the Grace but of the Law within both in Jew and Gentile he of late said it made nothing Perfect until the Faith of Christ come to be revealed c. Are they two That predicable of the one which is not of the other In his Looking Glass for Protestants Printed Anno 1674. wherein he Labours to shew the Quakers are the truest Protestants he compares W. Tindals Faith with ours in several respects His Fourthly is thus His Faith was that the Heathen once had the Spirit of God and that Pharaoh before his Heart was hardned had the Spirit of Grace and this is OUR FAITH saith G. Keith p. 28. Query Whether it be his Faith now Who must either distinguish between the Spirit of God the Spirit of Grace and the Holy Spirit and so make them two which are but one or else retract his saying the Gentiles had not the Holy Ghost who believed not in Christ crucified and raised again Now I come to his Book of Immediate Revelation c. Printed Anno 1668. and Reprinted with an Appendix Anno 1676. which tells us The Light reveals the whole Will of God he needs not go forth to seek a Law without him the Word is near in his Heart and in his Mouth and this is the Word of Faith to which Moses pointed the Jews and Paul the Romans p. 77. It seems then it was one and the same Word of Faith which Moses who was before Christ came in the outward and Paul who was after his Ascension pointed to the Work the same viz. it revealed the WHOLE Will of God And surely what reveals the whole Will of God doth it not enable to perform it according to Phil. 2. 13. and is not that Saving and Perfecting But he Queries What was this FOUNDATION of the Church of God before ever the Scripture was writ before Moses and the Prophets c Was it not Jesus Christ the Word which was in the Beginning Had it ANY OTHER Foundation And what gave them the Knowledge of this Foundation and builded them upon it when they had no Scripture And whereupon was their Faith founded By the hearing of what Word did they come by their Faith seeing then the Scripture was not writ It was even saith G. Keith the Word which came from God himself and taught them immediately p. 103. I may now Query Had the Church then a Foundation Were they built upon it even in Moses and the Prophets Days And was that Foundation Jesus Christ the Word And did they by hearing it come by Faith in Christ before the
Christ Jesus of Nazareth without us is nothing of Christ and calls it a blasphemous Assertion and Consequence which follows not from his Words Answ The Friend gave G. Keith his Words not his own which as I have stated more fairly than himself hath done I leave with the Reader whether the Consequence be forced not natural or whether it proveth that the Friend placeth all on the Light within nothing on Jesus of Nazareth without us Or whether G. Keith had ground from hence to insult that his Opponent had neither Learning nor good Exercise of humane Reason but had better kept working at his Mill as well as that I may put G. Keith in Mind what he once said that a Docta Ignorantia or a learned Ignorance is more safe and to be preferred to an uncertain Knowledge or Science falsly so called See Truths Defence p. 77. G. Keith goes on Seeing that he would infer from my Words That Jesus of Nazareth cannot be something else than the Light Power and Spirit within it is plain that it is both their Sense and his that Jesus of Nazareth is nothing at all of Christ without us which is a plain Contradiction to themselves and to himself in the following Words Thus far G. Keith But how will he prove our Sense and his to be that Jesus of Nazareth is nothing at all of Christ without us if that sense be so immediately Contradicted in the following words This shews he wants candour and would take things by the worst handle to fasten an imputation not only upon the Friend himself but his Brethren also which he confesseth is contradicted by him Who had he not sought an occasion to misrepresent us mought have entituled us at least to what he calls the contradictory Sense Now C. Pusey his Words were these upon G. Keith's saying The Light is Christ but the Man Christ is something else he queried Whether the Man Christ be become something else besides Christ And adds but to wave such Comparisons which shews his were not Assertory but argumentative ad hominem a Comparison G. Keith drew him to To this I say The Man Christ who was made or became Flesh John 1. 14. who said of himself I am come a Light into the World Chap. 12. ver 46. is not something else besides Christ And seeing himself hath said Way cast up p. 102. That it is not the outward Flesh and Blood that is the Man but the Soul or inward Man that dwelleth in the outward Flesh or Body that is the Man most properly such as Christ was even from the beginning I ask Whether the Maâ— Christ that was even from the beginning be become something else besides Christ And seeing God hath said I am the Lord and beside me there is no Saviour Isa 43. 11. Whether this infers a denial of what Christ who is thâ— Light did and suffered without us in that prepared Body c. And that the Friend himself did not believe that Jesus of Nazareth is nothing at all of Christ without us as unduly aspersed by G. Keith hear him in his Modest Account p. 16 17. where he thus hath it Though we cannot yield to G. Keith in these his Terms That the Light is not able of it self and consequently that God by G. Keith's own Words who saith the Light is God is not able to save because we believe Beside him there is no Saviour yet we do not in the least Question but dearly own and acknowledge and believe the Way and Means that the Lord was pleased out of his infinite Love and good Will to Mankind to take in order to redeem him from Sin and Death as sending his only begotten Son into the World not only as a Light but also as Man in the prepared Body to offer up himself a most acceptable Sacrifice for the Sins of the whole World which Offering the Lord was pleased to accept of and by his Spirit and Power it is made Effectual for the Reconciliation and Salvation of all those that repent of their Sins and truly believe in his Name And that God doth not save any without respect to that great Offering we all grant and truly believe c. This as it is a full Vindication of the Friend that he did not undervalue but highly prize what Christ hath done without us so it needs no further Comment than a Reflection upon his Adversaries Disingenuity who kept this back while he laboured to suggest the contrary thereto as the Friends sense and ours He saith further He C. Pusey so mingles my words with his own that no Man can distinguish the one from the other c. And I think he is unwilling rightly to distinguish that he may pervert them For whereas the Friend had said And that God doth not save any without respect to that great Offering we all grant and truly believe For as G. Keith saith The Lord having ordained it so to be how can or dare we say therefore That he was or is not Sufficient by his Light Power and Spirit to save without something else Surely this seems to me too Presumptuous an Expression for was not that Body prepared of God And what was done in it Is it not said God did it by him G. Keith in p. 6. leaving out And that God c. and beginning with For as G. Keith saith lays Forgery to the Friends Charge as if having ordained related not to God's saving by that great Offering but to the following Query Concerning the Sufficiency of the Light which is a poor insult From hence he taketh occasion to infer the Necessity of God's Saving by Christ and that he could not save us without respect to the Man Christ in the outward otherwise he could or should contradict his own Ordination c. which is granted him even by the Friend But whether antecedently to Gods purpose he would have saved us without the Death of his own Dear Son a thing he tells us Exact Narrative p. 25. is above Mans Capacity and that he wholly waves that Dispute is what I shall wave insisting on yet with this Caution which the Friend also gave him in his p. 18. viz. Let us not undertake to argue as if there were any thing that God by his Light Spirit and Power is not sufficient to do and we need not debate any longer about it What follows relating to Matter of Fact transacted beyond Sea whereof I can pretend to no certain Knowledge and their Relations do so vary I must leave to the Persons concerned to Answer if they see meet not being willing to undertake a Defence of what I am not Privy to nor to justify them if in ought they have exceeded though I dare not trust his Evidence Yet his alledging that he Printed nothing about their retaking a sloop till a considerable Time after twenty eight of the Ministers had excommunicated him to which Sentence some that gave the Commission did put their Hands is
answered and a new one raised ver 35. to which in ver 36. Paul replied Thou Fool c. The one said there is no Resurrection the other disputed inquisitively about the Modus or Manner of it how And with what Body And were distinctly answered So that in this G. Keith grosly errs and needs Correction as he once told the Rector of Arrow But the Translation with what Body doth not please him who seems to think well of nothing but what himself hath a Hand in He would have it with what quality why not rather what kind of Body and adds this their querying was a sort of arguing against the thing it self p. 16. First he imposeth his own Version then a Dogmatical Inference without Proof which as such I reject as I do also his slander against us a little below that we argue against the Resurrection of the Body it self from the Manner of it Against C. Pusey's having shewed G. Keith his contradictory Assertions to be as little reconcileable to Reason as the Popish Doctrine of Transubstantiation G. Keith alledgeth that professing to hold a Resurrection of the Body but not of that same Substance falls in with the Popish Transubstantiation Answ Surely to say It is no more a Body of Flesh Blood and Bones but a pure aethereal or heavenly Body and yet that the Substance remaineth the same that it was on Earth which G. Keith hath confessed to p. 4. is more like their Doctrine who say The Form of Bread remains yet it is the real Flesh and Blood of Christ than our saying with the Scriptures Thou sowest not that Body that shall be but God giveth it a Body as it hath pleased him and to every Seed it s own Body 1 Cor. 15. 37 38. For as he hath said in another Place we have good Company even the Apostle Paul on our side which he hath not for himself What follows as a Charge against G. Whitehead and W. Penn That the Saints get the Resurrection immediately after Death and that they both argue against the Deceased Saints expecting any Resurrection of the Body c. He not offering to prove upon them out of any of their Poâ—ks I lightly pass over as knowing G. Keith too well to trust to his general Accusations and them better than to Credit such Evidence against them Nor shall I engage in what he further offers p. 17. relating to their differences in America whereto I am not Privy Yet may say that a free and bold laying open of our Sufferings when hardly and illegâ—lly dealt with as in the Case of W. Penn and W. Mead their Tryals bears no Proportion to giving a Magistrate ill Language and provoking Terms for we have not so learned Christ Neither need G. Keith ask his Opponent p. 18. a Proof that he is a Man of a wrong Spirit adding What oâ—e evil thing hath he proved against me in all his Book either in Doctrine or Conversation For any that compares the Book and Answer together in a right Spirit will see there is sufficient to detect G. Keith to be of a wrong Spirit And what is wanting there himself hath made up since in bitterness in envy in reviling and slandering Gods Heritage which I pray he may be sensible of before too late In p. 18. G. Keith makes a general Reference to what C. Pusey gave in several Pages out of his Truths Desence p. 169 170 171. And upon the whole saith he remains in the same Mind still that he would have nothing urged nor pressed as Articles of Faith but what is delivered to us in plain express Scripture Words which he saith is the Substance of that large Citation Answ The Substance of that Citation was more comprehensive than so as who so please to read it in the Original cited above may find wherein he declares that Charity and makes those Proposals of Concord with the otherwise Minded as suits not with his late Actions Yet from what he hath here given as the Substance of that large Citation the Friend Objects p. 53. that this Advice could not find Place with G. Keith when so often desired and queries What Uncharitableness is this when we offer to express our Faith in Scripture Words for you to say we have another Sense than what we speak see his p. 54. G. Keith makes Answer It is false in him to say that this was so often desired but could not find Place I said again and again We shall take your Confession in Scripture Words provided ye will condemn your Errors that are contrary to express Scripture Words But this saith he they would never do And perhaps they held no such Errors as he charged them with and so had none to condemn say I However this being true that such an offer was made by Friends and thus replied to by him which is so far from never refusing that it includeth a refusal in tying them to such Terms as no Innocent Man can comply with without an implicit acknowledgment of Guilt the next thing I observe is that whereas his Opponent queried How know ye that we have a Sense contrary to Scripture Words G. Keith Answers They have sufficiently discovered it not only by one or two unsound Expressions but Multitudes of them as their Letters and Manuscripts there and the Printed Books here sufficiently prove Answ This Reference is wide enough What is in their Letters and Manuscripts there we know not nor are we like for ought I see though he hath long threatned us with them Again what Printed Books here doth he mean What is their Title In what Page Who the Author Surely he thinks his Credit is great that the Reader must take all from him upon trust without Examination But at length he comes to one particular Case by which we may give a guess of the rest It is in haec verba We need go no further for a Proof saith he than the most gross and Antichristian Expressions and Sayings of Caleb Pusey himself in this very Treatise for whereas he hath plainly affirmed p. 15. ad finem That Jesus of Nazareth cannot be something else than the Light Power and Spirit within Now can there be any thing more contrary to express Scripture than this Assertion Was not Jesus of Nazareth a real Man consisting of Soul and Body in whom the fulness of the Godhead dwelt bodily And is that Body and that Soul and that fulness nothing else but the Light within us O abominable Non-sense and Perversion and Contradiction to Scripture and all true Reason Ans By that Time I have given C. Pusey his Words I doubt not but to make appear that G. Keith is a Man nullius fidei not to be trusted For this he calls a plain Affirmation was but an Inference or Deduction from what G. Keith had laid down and no ways designed as here alledged to deny Jesus of Nazareth to be both God and Man C. Pusey p. 15 16.
thus hath it Seing G. Keith's Answer to R. Gordon implies that the Light Power and Spirit within is Christ the only Mediator and Saviour and that so to assert is not to assert another Christ than Jesus of Nazareth then surely Jesus of Nazareth cannot be something else than the Light Power and Spirit within because Jesus of Nazareth is the ONLY Christ Mediator and Saviour and SO is the Light Power and Spirit within acknowledged to be And if the same then not any thing else Thus far C. Pusey now where is G. Keith his Inference Where the Antichristianism Where the abominable Non-sense Perversion and Contradiction to Scripture c Where doth the Friend deny him to be a real Man consisting of Soul and Body or that he is our Mediator and Saviour Nay if applicable to either of them it must be to G. Keith himself whose the Assertion is not to C. Pusey for citing it and arguing from it ad hominem He that will so palpably abuse a Man to his Face as I may so say when Evidence so near to be produced what will he do behind his back But perhaps he thought every Reader would not scan it and so it might have passed From G. Keith his having in that Book of Truth 's Defence urged that nothing should be pressed as Articles of Faith but what is delivered in plain Expressions of Scripture Words the Friend put seven Queries to him from p. 56 to 59. wherein he demands express Words of Scripture for several of G. Keith his Assertions whereof G. Keith takes no notice except of the third Query about the four hundred Pieces of Silver Abraham Purchased the Burying Place with which I have remarked under my second Head but gives him six Queries by way of Retortion To which I say when he hath answered those Queries grounded upon his own thesis whereby he ought to be bound I may give an answer to his which as stated are not our Principles but his own unfair deductions He goes on p 19. Though I remain still in the same mind that no Article of Faith should be urged on any but what is Contained in plain express words of Scripture or so agreeable to express Scripture as the common sense of all Mankind that hears Scripture words must acknowledge c. Yet I see not why I should be so confined to express Scripture words in things that I require no man to own or believe as Articles of Faith c. And towards the bottom For there are many things both in my Book called Truth Advanced and in many other of my Books wherein I may possibly differ from others in Judgment yet I leave them to their Liberty to dissent as I desire to be left to my Liberty to believe as I judge God hath persuaded me Answer Waving the additional Terms so agreeable to express Scripture as common sense c. wherein he is likely enough to make himself the Judge what is and what is not so I tell him Of what kind many of his are even with respect to Articles of Faith hath in part been manifest and have been Communicated in several parts of this my treatise yet we deny him not a Liberty to dissent as persuaded in himself so long as his Dissent affects himself only and he is not quarrelsom with us stigmatizing us as Atheists Sadducees Sadducean Fraternity c. As he hath done upon account of doctrines himself allows to be Articles of the Christian Faith yet therein hath run so wide from Scripture Terms and Expressions as hath been shewed But we would if possible hold him to his own rule that if it be only safe to keep close to Scripture words and expressions he should do it at least in Articles of Faith of which that of the Resurrection is one And in as much as he urgeth upon us p. 39. That Scripture 1 Pet. 3. 15. of being ready to give an answer of the reason of the hope that is in us surely it cannot be amiss in us to demand the like of him as well as to shew the reason of our dissent from him where we find him incongruous and absurd as well as Unscriptural What remains p. 20. Being but a repetition of his former Slanders relating to the suffitiency of the Light within so excluding our Lord Jesus of Nazareth his Death Sufferings c. From being Concerned in our Salvation and his suggesting our not owning Justification by Christs Blood outwardly shed as he offers no Proof though he hath oft asserted the Contrary on our behalf I shall barely reject them as false Charges not desiring to fatigue my Reader And now for a close of this part G. Keith having so often insulted over his Opponent as a Miller Philosopher one going beyond his Last his Sphere of knowledge who had better keep working at his Mill to his own Trade of Grinding or Sawing Timber See p. 5. 11. 15. c. I shall wind up these with some few instances declaring what himself once thought and said of that whereupon he now so values himself as an indication that even herein the Man is changed from better to worse In his Book called Help in time of need Printed Anno. 1665. he thus saith Away with the education of Youth at Universities and Colledges of Philosophy so called I may say of them which Luther stuck not to call them in his Day that they are the stews of Antichrist p. 75. 76. Again p. 76. ' And the Philosophy so called which is taught them is but meer Deceit and Pedantry which even I came to see when among them And towards the bottom I certainly know the Human Wisdom or Learning is one of the MAIN Bulwarks of Antichrist against the Revelation and setting up the Kingdom of Christ in the Earth and because this is arising and shall rise down must the other go and all who seek to uphold it shall fall therewith Surely then G. Keith hath no such great cause to vaunt himself over another for his Skill in that Learning which himself confesseth to be a main Bulwark of Antichrist which must fall with its upholders wherein G. Keith may chance to be a truer Prophet against himself than he is aware of In his Book of Immediate Revelation Printed Anno. 1676. he saith Then down should all the PROUD LORDING LOFTY CLERGY with their many degrees of DOCTORSHIPS LORDSHIPS and MASTERSHIPS pass who being Strangers to the true knowledge are vainly puffed up in their Fleshly minds by the form of knowledge in the Letter as I was my self whilst among them and thought all Men Idiots and Unlearned who were not Skilled in that litteral knowledge but the Lord by his Grace brought me to see the Vanity of all that knowledge c. p. 137. But now it is happened unto him according to the true Proverb The Dog is turned to his own Vomit again c. 2 Pet. 2. 22. And what God once brought him to see the