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
that the Discoveries that he sets up for are not the same to all Nations and Persons as can easily be proved Ten thousands would break through the Hedge of his General Rule of binding them to the common Discoveries given to all Mankind as most of the People called Quakers do and would highly pretend to new and special Discoveries given to them by the Light within and to none others and the reason they will alledge that it is not given to others is their Unfaithfulness and especially that like Corah they Rebel against their Spiritual Guides and Leaders Thus we may see the great need of an outward Rule and the great Goodness of God that he hath given us one full and perfectly sufficient to be a Rule of our Faith and Life in all necessary Cases And besides If W. P's Argument have any Truth in it it would infer that Christ or the Spirit abstractly considered from all Revelation both Internal and External should be the Rule because he is the Ruler If the Ruler and the Rule must still be one and the same thing then suppose all Revelation Internal as well as External should cease Christ or the Spirit should be the Rule because the Ruler Who sees not the Fallacy and Sophistry of W. P's Argument here Hath not every common Artificer his Rule of Wood or Brass that is not the Man himself but the Instrument that he hath made and prepared for his use The Prophets Rule by which their Faith was ruled in what they Prophecied was not the Spirit but the internal Revelation of the Spirit the Spirit was their Guide and Ruler but not to speak properly their Rule but the Revelation they had or things revealed that was their Rule and so now the external Revelation of the same Truths is the Rule of our Faith whereby to believe them as the Spirit inwardly by his secret Illumination perswades us of their Truth and certainty not by any new verbal Record but by Sealing to the Record outwardly given Section 12. His falsly alledging that he has the first Reformers Fathers and Martyrs on his side viz. That the Scripture is not the Rule of Faith but the Light in every Conscience His Fallacy in this detected in the late Book called The Deism of W. P. and his Brethren c. The Spirits being superior to the Scripture proves not that the Spirit is the Rule of Faith His pretended ground of his pitying the Bishop for his supposed Ignorance Causeless and Fallacious His false Accusation and Charge against the Bishop and Church of England and all Protestant Opponents to the Quakers that they confine the Operations of the Spirit to the first or Apostolical Times That the Ministers among the Quakers are less acted by the Spirit of God in their Praying and Preaching than the Ministers among their Protestant Opponents evidently proved AND this leads me to detect another Fallacy of his which shall be the last I intend to notice though I could detect many more but these I think will suffice to shew how Fallacious he is Let us therefore hear him once more In his Page 106 and 107 after he has most grosly alledged that he has the concurring Testimony and Assent of the best and first Reformers as well as Martyrs and Fathers to confirm his Fundamental viz. That not the Doctrine of the Holy Scriptures without but the Light within is the Rule of Faith and Life and that the Light or Spirit within is something at least co-ordinate if not superior and antecedent to the Scripture Which is more saith he than we said before and consequently is the Rule of Faith and Life superior to the Scripture Having in my late Treatise of W. P's Deism rescued the Fathers and first Reformers from his Perversions I shall only now take notice of his fallacious Inference by this his Argument The Light or Spirit within is something superior and antecedent in way of Excellency to the Scripture therefore it is the superior and antecedent Rule above the Scripture the Proposition is granted and I know none that ever denied it to wit That the Spirit which is God is greater and more excellent than the Scripture But then it followeth not that it is the greater or more excellent Rule because properly speaking it is no Rule at all Right Logicians will tell him if he will go and learn of them which it is to be suspected for all that he was a Student at Oxford he has great need to do that things in a different kind are not to be compared If it were asked of W. P. whither a Knife of Gold or a Knife of Steel were the best Knife he would answer surely though Gold is superior to Steel and more excellent yet it is not fit to be a Knife and Men make not the blades of Knives of Gold So though the Spirit be superior to the Revelation of it whither Internal or External yet not the Spirit but his Revelation is the Rule and Internal Revelation was the Rule to the Prophets whereby they believed their Prophecies and what internal Revelation was to them external Revelation is to us though we have not that internal Revelation that they had which was Prophetical and Extraordinary but the Spirit internally by way of Seal Sealing to us the Truth and Certainty of the external Revelation gives us as sure ground for the certainty of our Faith as they had of theirs But this inward Seal of the Spirit is no Rule either co-ordinate with the Scripture or subordinate to it because it doth not propose to us by it self all the things necessary to be believed by us in verbal Propositions as the Seal of a Bond though it is a Proof and Evidence to the Truth of the Bond yet it tells us not the Contents of it And now because the Bishop found fault with his calling the Scripture without and the Illumination of the Spirit within the double and agreeing Record of true Religion as indeed well he might so do in W. P's sense though in a qualified and sober sense it may be acknowledged as perceiving the fallacious sense that W. P. had of those words well observed by the Bishop That they will not believe what Scripture saith except the Light within them dictate the same And yet none of them can justly say that the Light within doth dictate to them by it self one Article of that called the Apostles Creed yea W. P. doth not so much as pretend that it doth to him yet most uncivilly he falls upon the Bishop p. 107 telling him It must be his turn now to pity the Bishop And truly saith he I do it with all my Heart And this it seems in retaliation of the Bishop's tender Expression of his Pitty and Compassion towards some well-meaning Persons among them who are mislead by their Teachers But for what must he needs Pity the Bishop Why for his supposed Ignorance that he will not allow the Spirit to be
Spirit and these three are really one yet in his former Books particularly in his Sandy Foundation never yet retracted by him he hath sufficiently discovered his gross and vile error in that fundamental Doctrine of the Christian Faith thus arguing not only against their being Three Persons but their being Three otherwise than Nominally which was the Sabellian Heresie since the Father is God the Son is God and the Spirit is God which their opinion necessitates them to confess then unless the Father Son and Spirit are three distinct nothings they must be three distinct Substances and consequently three distinct God's And he bringeth Five Arguments against their being a Holy Three P. 12 13 14. In his Third Section he seemeth to profess his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture terms But this his professed Faith is quite inconsistent with what he hath delivered in his other Books here he saith That the Word was made Flesh and dwelt among Men and was and is the only begotten of the Father full of Grace and Truth his beloved Son c. who tasted Death for every Man and dyed for Sin that we might dye to Sin But as it hath been above shewed out of his Sandy Foundation he hath argued against any such distinction as of the Father and the Son in the God-head as inferring a plurality of God's and though here he professeth to believe that this only begotten Son dyed for Sin yet in his Serious Apology Page 146 he saith That the outward Person that suffered was properly the Son of God we utterly deny And in his guide mistaken P. 25. Christ Co-essential and Co-eternal with his Father c. of being made Man of his Dying Rising and Ascending into Heaven c. he saith of all this that it is confused Babble and by Rote Canting by paths of vain Tradition and Invention results of Factious and corrupted Counsels And in his Rejoinder to John Faldo Page 299. he plainly denyes that the Body of Christ was any constitutive part of Christ and for seven leaves together contends against John Faldo That Christ did not Dye nor hang on the Cross but only the Body which he will not have to be any part of him To this Doctrine of W. P. doth that of G. Whitehead agree a Man as great or rather much greater among the Quakers as W. P. who saith in his Dipper Plunged P. 13. Jesus Christ God-man is not Scripture Language And in his Christian Quaker P. 140. 141. though he grants that Christ had a humane Body of Flesh and Bones yet he denys that he consisted of it and saith he distinguisheth betwixt Christ's having a Body and consisting of it And in a Book given forth by the Quakers from their second days Meeting whereof G. W. is supposed the Author called A Testimony for the true Christ and his Light in confutation of R. Cobbet printed 1668. They deny the Humanity of Christ as Humanity signifieth the Earthly Nature of Man's Body as coming from Humus the Ground but as Humanity signifies Meekness Gentleness Mercifulness as opposite to Cruelty in this last sence they own Christ's Humanity but deny it in the former which yet is the true sense of Scripture and of all true Christians Section 2. His Fallacy in pretending to own Justification by Christ the Propitiation in Contradiction to what he hath delivered in his Serious Apology and Sandy Foundation and his fallacious way of stating the Doctrine of Justification wherein he misrepresents his Opponents IN his fourth Section as seemingly Orthodox as he professeth himself to be as fallacious and insincere he is seeing he knoweth in his own Conscience that what he hath here delivered is utterly inconsistent with what is extant in his other Books never as yet retracted by him nor doth either he or his Brethren own any change of perswasion from what they had ever since they came under the profession of Quakers but as one of them hath lately said in Print As God is the same and Truth is the same so his People are the same viz. the Quakers I shall first set down his present profession of what he believes concerning Justification as followeth That as we are only Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done so there is an absolute necessity that we receive and obey to unfeigned Repentance and amendment of Life the Holy Light and Spirit of Jesus Christ in order to obtain that Remissionand Justification from Sin c. But in contradiction to this see what his Doctrine is in his Serious Apology P. 148. And indeed says W. P. this we deny viz. Justification by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils and an Arm of the Sea of Corruption which does now deluge the whole World Note Reader If according to W. P's former words we Only are Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the Propitiation and not by works of Righteousness that we have done then it is plainly evident by the same Doctrine that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us for these two manners of Speech are perfectly equivalent viz. That we are only Justified from the guilt of Sin by Christ the propitiation and that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person wholly without us The word Only plainly importing the Righteousness of Christ Wholly without us unless there be some great fallacy in W. P's words as the sequel will make appear a little after But if we take these two quotations in their genuine Sense the one that we are Justified by the Righteousness of Christ Only i. e. Wholly without us from the guilt of Sin and the other that this we deny i. e. that we are Justified by the Righteousness which Christ hath fulfilled in his own Person for us wholly without us and boldly affirm it in the Name of the Lord to be the Doctrine of Devils c. it is a perfect inconsistency and contradiction And yet now W. P. doth teach the same Doctrine which formerly he called the Doctrine of Devils without any change of his perswasion as he plainly tells in the conclusion of his Paper This saith he hath all along been the general stream and tendency both of our Ministry and Writings as our books will make appear But what a Forehead of Bras must W. P. have with so great confidence to assert so known an untruth Again the same W. P. in his forecited Serious Apology thus argueth P 148. against Christ's imputative Righteousness Death came by actual Sin not imputative therefore Justification unto Life came by actual Righteousness not imput ative Note Reader If we are not Justified by Christ's imputed which he calls imputative Righteousness as here he asserts
of the written word preached or read which is the Rule of Faith appointed and given us of God for that end and purpose W. P. doth not acknowledge but will needs have it that we receive all our Light from the inward Principle which sometimes he calls Christ at other times the Light of Christ otherwhile as in page 49. a Manifestation in the Soul of Man of Christ the word God the Light of the World c. without all Instrumentality of either the Holy Scriptures or Ministry of Men For to grant any such Instrumentality would quite marr his Notion of the Light within being not only the Guide and Ruler but the Rule it self of Faith and Life to all Mankind and he earnestly opposeth that Faith which is wrought by the outward Ministry of the Word in Preaching or Reading concerning Christ's Death and Sufferings Resurrection and Ascension c. as being but the Historical Faith that must pass away as the old Heavens For if he did grant the necessity of Scripture-Doctrine-Light received from without as well as the necessity of the Spirits internal Light or Illumination in God's ordinary way of working going along with the Doctrine-light of the Scripture there would be no Controversie betwixt the Bishop and him provided he did also grant that there is necessary a special Illumination of Christ by the Holy Spirit to be infused or inspired into the Souls of the Faithful to enable them to take in and understand the Light of the Doctrine of Salvation delivered in the Holy Scriptures Should W. P. own these two great things asserted here by the Bishop the Controversie should be none at all betwixt them but seeing he denies them both and the Bishop affirmeth both the Controversie remaineth great betwixt them and the Bishop hath far the advantage of W. P. that he hath proved his Doctrine from Scripture and thus he fairly distinguisheth Christianity from Deism neither of which W. P. hath done nor ever can do It hath been ordinary in the People called Quakers even their chief Teachers as to deny the Scriptures to be the Word of God so to deny them that is the Doctrine delivered in them to be Light in any Scripture Sense turning all these places of Scripture that mention Light as with respect to Mens Knowledge and Faith to Light within only exclusive of all doctrinal Light of Scripture without as being the Rule of Faith or any necessary means of our Instruction in God's ordinary way of working though it has been God's ordinary way in all Ages by outward means of Doctrine delivered by Men as well as by the Spirits inward Illumination to beget in Men the saving Knowledge and Faith of the things necessary to Salvation the extraordinary Revelation of these Truths without all outward means of Instruction being given only to some singular Persons as the Prophets and Apostles but was never given in any Age to all Mankind nay nor to all the Faithful in any Age for even in the days of the Apostles when Prophetical Inspiration and extraordinary Revelation did most abound in the Church it was not given to all the Faithful but only to some as the Apostle Paul said Do all Prophesie Intimating they did not though a Manifestation of the Spirit was given to every one to profit withall yet that was not the extraordinary Revelation given to the Apostles and Prophets but the ordinary given to the Faithful to enable them to believe and understand what was outwardly taught them by the Apostles and Prophets Words and Writings Having thus taken a view of the Bishop's Christian sound Scriptural Doctrine both of Christ's Light within by the Illumination of the Holy Spirit and of the Scripture Light without as joyntly necessary in God's ordinary way of working to the Faithful the which Scripture Light as in respect of the Doctrine Laws Commands Precepts and Promises of God delivered therein the Bishop hath well proved from Psal 19. 8. Psal 119. 105. Isa 8. 20. and which Scripture-light may in a true sense be called though more remotely the Spirits Light In the next place let us take a view of W. P.'s unchristian and unscriptural Doctrine of the Light within which he saith in his page 48 is with him and his Brethren a Fundamental which one while he calls Christ the Word God another while the Light of Christ a Manifestation in the Soul of Man of Christ the Word God This Light within his great Fundamental as given to all Mankind even to them who have not the Scripture nor any external Revelation of Christ as he outwardly came in the Flesh he will not have it to be the Law of God in the Heart of Man nor the Impressions and Principles which are born and come with us into the World page 50. As the Work is not the Work-man so they are not properly the Light of Christ but the blessed Fruit and Effect of the Light of Christ the word God in Man which shines in the Heart and gives him the Knowledge of God and of his Duty to him so that the innate Notions or inward Knowledge we have of God is from this true Light that lighteth every Man coming into the World but is not that Light if self But why then doth he so confound the Work with the Work-man as one while he tells us the Light within is Christ another while a Manifestation in the Soul of Man of Christ the Word God Is not the Manifestation of Christ in the Soul of Man a Work of Christ How then is it Christ himself the Word God W. P. may remember how his Brother G. W. in his Light and Life recommended by him hath argued against the Body of Christ being Christ for if it were it would have this Sense the Christ of Christ or the Jesus of Jesus which to him is Nonsence Is it not great Nonsence to say The Manifestation of Christ to wit the Act or Effect of his Illumination in the Soul is Christ himself The Body of Christ together with his Soul are constitutive parts of his Manhood Nature personally united to his Godhead and may and do receive the Name of Christ and Jesus as the parts do receive the Name of the whole but the Manifestation of Christ in the Soul of Man is no part of Christ's Manhood nor of his Godhead which hath no parts but is only a Work of Christ in the Soul of Man by which it is enlightned And as the Work supposeth the Work-man or Worker to be present in the Soul to wit Christ considered as the Word God which the Bishop to be sure in the true Sence will acknowledge so the Work-man supposeth the Work as necessary to be wrought in the Soul for Christ as he is the Word God considered simply whither as in himself or as in Men is no Light to Men but as he hath his Work and Operation in them to enlighten them though in and to himself he is Light and Life
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