Selected quad for the lemma: truth_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
truth_n	believe_v	faith_n	fundamental_a	1,746	5	10.1277	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47128	Bristol Quakerism exposed shewing the fallacy, perversion, ignorance, and error of Benjamin Cool, the Quakers chief preacher at Bristol, and of his followers and abettors there, discovered in his and their late book falsely called Sophistry detected, or, An answer to George Keith's Synopsis : wherein also both his deisme and inconsistency with himself and his brethren, with respect to the peculiar principles of Christianity, are plainly demonstrated / by George Keith.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.	1700 (1700)	Wing K148; ESTC R41035	27,308	34

a far greater for the Common Discovery given to all Mankind by the Light Within being the primary Rule Tho' this primary universal Rule tells them nothing of Christ as he was outwardly Born of a Virgin c. Nor any one of the peculiar Doctrines and Precepts of Christianity yet for all that the common Discovery that Heathens Jews Turks and Infidels have as well as the Quakers is the more Excellent and Venerable The Secondary is but the Servant or Lackey to the Primary The great Truths of the Gospel discover'd by the Holy Scriptures through the special operation and illumination of the Spirit not given to Heathens but only to faithful Christians must vail and yeild subjection to the common Dictates of the Light Within of Moral Justice and Temperance that Heathens have Readers what think you of this sort of Divinity and deceitful way of shewing his and their Veneration to the Holy Scripture But possibly he will say Must not Christ or the Spirit or God himself who is within all Men be preferred to the Scriptures And it is Christ they hold to be the primary Rule But this Objection comes from great Ignorance for neither God nor Christ nor the Spirit can be properly said to be a Rule or the Rule in any Man more than a Workman can be said to be the Tool or Instrument that he works by God is certainly Greater and more Excellent than the Scripture and so is Christ and the Holy Spirit so much as the Creator is greater than the Creature But the Comparison is not stated betwixt God or Christ or the Spirit and the Scripture but betwixt the common Illumination given to all Mankind which is neither God nor Christ nor the Spirit but their Effect and Operation and the Scripture which certainly gives a discovery of all the peculiar Doctrines of the Christian Religion and Precepts thereof and there is no need of any other discovery by way of material Object but only that the Spirit of God give a Spiritual sight and sense of the Truths of the Gospel already discover'd to us in the Scriptures But Lastly How doth this great pretended Veneration that B. Cool seems to have for the Scriptures agree with the Vile and Contemptible Names that G. Fox the Quakers great Apostle has given them who together with Richard Hubberthorn in the Book called Truths Defence did call the Scriptures page 14 102. Earthly and Carnal Death Ink and Paper Dust and Serpents Meat And their Gospel is Dust Matthew Mark Luke and John which is the Letter And in Truth 's Def. p. 102. The Cursed Serpent is in the Letter See abundance more of the Quakers Contemptible and Vile Names given to the Scriptures in my 4th Nar. And not only W. Pen but Joseph Wyeth their late Defender in his Switch chargeth the Scripture with Uncertainty p. 46. But why saith B. Cool to me in his p. 9. George should we by thee be rendered so Hetrodox for Vindicating the Light Within both with respect to its Vniversality and Authority when thou thy self hast Writ and Printed the same Truths over and over and to this day are not to be found amongst thy Retractations Answer I never held the Gross and Absurd Notions of the Light Within asserted by G. Whitehead W. Pen and the generality of the Teachers of the Quakers viz. That the Light Within is sufficient to Salvation without any thing else i. e. Not only without the Scriptures but without the Man Christ and his Death and Sufferings and precious Blood outwardly shed for us and his Mediation for us without us now in Heaven all which are some thing else than the Light Within Now that this is the great Offence that the Quakers took against me That I held That the Light Within is not sufficient to Salvation without something else is fairly confessed by G. Whitehead in his Antidote p. 28. And yet he confesseth that by that somewhat else I meant the Man Christ Jesus as he outwardly Died for us Far less did I ever hold that most Absurd and Nonsensical Notion of G. Fox That the Quakers have whole Christ in them God and Man Flesh and Spirit Blood and Bones And that they have His Flesh in them because they Eat it as I have prov'd out of his Great Myst in my 4th Narative p. 107. Nor did I ever confound the Common Illumination given to Heathens with the Special Illumination given to Christians as the Quakers generally do and as I find B. Cool as well as W. Pen doth So that I can say with a good Conscience I never was guilty of their Deisme and Paganisme For I always held in my former Writings when among the Quakers That Faith in Christ God and Man without us yet one Christ is a fundamental Doctrine of Christianity and so much plainly appeareth from that very Book that B. Cool hath quoted called the * Note Reader That Book called The Fundamental Truths of Christianity was not Publish'd by me nor was ever intended by me to be publish'd in that Imperfect manner but being found in a Manuscript unfinish'd was Publish'd by another as the Book it self sheweth without my consent or knowledge I being then in America See the Preface Fundamental Truths of Christianity which tho' he quotes as making against me as my present perswasion is and for him and his Brethren yet it makes for me and against them for he confesseth that I said in that Book And I deliver it as one of the Fundamental Truths of Christianity That Christ is come outwardly as Man for all Now seeing he grants that I deliver'd this as one of the Fundamental Truths of Christianity it necessarily follows That he who believes not that Truth wants a Fundamental of Christianity and is no Christian But this is quite contrary to G. Whitehead W. Pen and B. Cool also who think Men may be true Christians without this Faith if they be Moral Men Just Meek and Merciful c. That there is a Principle of Light given to all Men and is in them I still hold and that it is given them for that end that they may become the Children of God to wit as by a preparatory operation as Repentance is preparatory to the Gospel Faith and Dispensation and also by way of Concomitancy and Subordination to a higher Ministration of Light that is given under the Christian Dispensation that is special only to Believers in Christ who have Faith in him either express or implicit I mean in Christ consider'd as God Man without us which I have fully and sufficiently clear'd to any Impartial Reader in my Book of Retractations p. 13 19. And therefore B. Cool is the more Unjust to me in this as in other things as well as Fallacious in seeking to deceive his Readers by making them believe I was of the same Mind with them in all their Notions and Doctrines of the Light Within In my Book of Retractations what Unwary or Unfound

he ought to Know Believe or Practise I cannot understand of what great use the Scripture can be unto him or at least it is of no necessity to him this primary Rule The Light Within hath taught him all before hand otherwise it is not primary This Argument I have produc'd against W. Pen is of equal force against B. Cool and his Bristol Brethren and the Quakers in general who affirm they have this Primary Rule and are come to be Taught by it whatever is to be known of God as W. Pen in his Discourse of the General Rule of Faith and Practise p. 21. affirmeth and giveth for his proof that place in Rom. 1. 19. which he grossly Perverteth by wresting and corrupting the Text making it say what it saith not for thus he Quotes it WHATEVER might be known of God was manifest within for God who is Light hath shewn it unto them But the word Whatever is neither in the English Translation nor is there any word in the Greek that can be so Translated St. Paul in that above quoted place is not treating of the knowledge of God given to Christians by special Illumination in the use of the Scriptures discovering the great Love of God by the Redemption of the World through Jesus Christ as he gave himself to Dye for us c. but of the knowledge of his Eternal Power and Godhead given to the Heathen by the works of Creation and the common Illumination given to all Mankind What B. Cool Quotes out of W. Pen's Discourse of the General Rule of Faith and Life in his seeming praise of the Scriptures in his 6th page can be judged no other but like Judas's Kiss when he betray'd his Master and a palpable Contradiction and Inconsistency both to himself and Brethren for which they are accountable but is no argument of my Insincerity as B. Cool doth most falsly and unjustly accuse me For while he argueth against the Scriptures being the great and only Rule of Faith and Practise to Christians with respect to all the peculiar Doctrines and Precepts of Christianity and gives that Office to the Light Within as common to all Mankind Jews Turks Heathens Infidels and yet as it were with the same Breath extols the Scriptures calling them The Blessed Scriptures of Truth and that the Quakers most heartily believe them to have been given forth from the same Holy Spirit and are a declaration of the mind and will of God and as such are obliging upon all that have and can have them both in reference to Faith and Practise And we utterly disclaim and renounce all Doctrines and Practises repugnant to them He seemes like some Rebelious Subject who being accus'd that he denies the Kings Laws falls out in high Praises of them but all this while doth not own them to be the Kings but sets up other Laws in their place But seeing B. Cool thinks that W. Pen hath said enough in commendation of the Scriptures to prove G. Keith disingenuous for blaming him for Disputing against their being the Rule from their Uncertainty either as to their Original or Copies or Translations all which he hath laboured as the Papists do to set up their Tradition to render uncertain and that they do not determine without extraordinary Revelation whether the Papists or Protestants are right about Transubstantiation or the Socinians and sound Protestants are right about the Trinity I freely leave it to the Impartial Reader whether B. Cool has not most unjustly blam'd me for Disingenuity and whether B. Cool himself be not sordidly disingenuous and fallacious in this very matter as well as in other matters hereafter to be treated of But further to discover B. Cool ' s gross Ignorance in his way of Arguing against the Scriptures being the only Rule exclusive of the Spirit to wit from being the Rule for that he saith were to prefer the Effect before the Cause since the Light Christ was before the Scripture was and by him were they given forth through Holy Men for our Profit and Edification Answer O rare Logician As if to distinguish between the Workman and the Rule Square or Instrument by which he worketh were to prefer the Effect to wit the Rule to the Cause to wit to him that useth it and hath made it for his use But tho' the Spirit gave forth the Scriptures and did first reveal the great Truths delivered in them concerning the Redemption of the World by Jesus Christ unto certain Holy Men peculiarly chosen for that work yet the Spirit was not the Rule even to them but what the Spirit Reveal'd to them was the Rule of their Faith before the Scripture was writ and what the Spirit thus inwardly Reveal'd to them as to Abraham Moses c. I grant was the Rule to them and their primary and only Rule but that it follows that that inward Revelation which they had was or is the primary and only Rule to us is a most false Consequence unless on the supposition that we and all the Christians as well as Quakers have the same inward Revelation in kind that the Prophets had and if B. Cool will say they have it the same in kind then they have it without Scripture as Abraham and Moses so had it But if they have it not without Scripture but that their Knowledge and Faith of these great Truths particularly that one great Truth That the Son of God was Incarnate for the Salvation of Men doth necessarily depend upon the Written Word as the instrument by which the Spirit doth Illuminate or Inspire them to Believe and Understand the Written Word or Truths declared in Scripture this is no proof that the Scriptures is not the Rule to wit The great and only Rule but is indeed a sufficient and clear proof that the Scripture is the Rule and the Spirit is the Ruler or he that by the Rule as his Instrument Rules and Leads our Minds both to Believe the Scripture and Understand it and also rightly to Apply it for our Edification The Doctrine which W. Pen and B. Cool with their Brethren do set up of making the Spirits Internal Revelation the Universal and Primary Rule of their Faith and Practise doth necessarily oblige them to hold also That all what they Know or Believe of God and of Christ is from the same Internal Extraordinary Revelation and Discovery in kind that the Prophets and Apostles had For according to the Argument I have used above and recited out of my Book of Deisme against W. Pen if the Internal Revelation that the Quakers have be the Primary Rule of all the Faith and Knowledge they have of God and Christ it hath no dependance on the Scriptures or Written word so much as an Outward or External Means as the Original depends not on the Copy but the Copy depends on the Original and this indeed is perfectly agreeing with the Quakers great Apostle George Fox whom W. Pen and B. Cool also so highly

Common Illumination without the superadded Law of Christianity forbids Poligamy but the Law of Christianity forbids it And many other things the Christian Religion both Commands and Forbids which the common Illumination doth neither command nor forbid tho in the Substance of the Ten Commandments commonly called the Moral Law both the Rules agree Again this Super added Law of the Holy Scriptures B. Cool will not allow it to be any other than Secondary compared with the common illumination as the Copy is to the Original which is the Primary and as the Copy has nothing but what the original hath and is better and more Authentick in the Original than in the Copy and the Original has no dependence on the Copy but the Copy has on the Original from all which it is very plain whatever the Scriptures Teach or Dictate that the common Illumination in the Conscience doth not first and originally dictate is of no further Obligation upon any Men for the Secondary binds only by the force and Authority of the Primary and hath all its certainly and Evidence therefrom as W. Penn doth argue in his Discourse of the general Rule of Faith and Practice where he preferrs the inward Illumination common to all Mankind to the Scriptures affirming the first to be the Rule for it's Perfection certainty Evidence Plainness Antiquity Universality and many other Reasons and for all which Reasons he Rejects the Scriptures from being the Primary Rule yet is so kind to allow them to be the Secondary in diverse things viz. So far as the common Illumination is Commensurate to the Scriptures which is only but in a small part and for the rest of them the common illumination hath nothing about them as whether True or False further than the Ten Precepts of the Decalogue But that W. Pen and B. Cool also confesseth that the Quakers have no Extraordinary Revelation i. e. Special and Peculiar Concerning Christs Incarnation Birth Death Resurrection c. See B. Cool his page 20. B. Cool and W. Penn's Citation of Calvin is a meer Juggle of both and a notorious perversion of Calvin's Words as I have shown in my Book called W. Pen's Deism for that Calvin asserteth the necessity of the inward Motion or Influence of the holy Spirit to perswade us that the Scriptures are true is no Argument that Calvin thought the Spirit or Light Within to be the Rule as I have shewed in that Book of Deisme To the quotations of W. Pen's saying in his Address to Protestants What is Christ but Meekness Justice and Mercy Patience Charity and Virtue in Perfection He objects p. 32. That I purposely left out the last Word viz. In Perfection and for this uncharitable supposition he charges me to be a Sophister guilty of Envy and Malice as if I did represent W. Pen to have dwindled away Christ to nothing but a Habit. But I answer I did not omit purposely the word in Perfection as he doth uncharitably charge me for that half Sheet of mine called the Synopsis of W. Penn's Deisme being but an Index of my Book of Deisme and some other quotations I had extracted out of W. Penn's Printed Books I had no need to put down his words at large for I put down all that was necessary to show his Deisme and the words in Perfection I have put them in my 3d. Narrative for which see page 8. of my 3d. Narrative which was printed a year before my Synopsis Nor doth the Word in Perfection when added help W. Pen or B. Cool out of the Mire of Deisme for who can doubt but the Habits of Vertue in perfect Men who are come to a sinless Perfection are perfect as B. Cool and his Bretheren's Principle obliges them to believe But supposing that by Meekness Mercy Justice Patience Charity in Perfection W. Pen did mean not any Habits of Virtue however perfect in Men but the Essential Perfections of Christs Godhead which may be said to be Justice Goodness Mercy Charity in Infinite Perfection yet the Consequence that W. Penn draws from this as it is weak and false to prove that a Meek or meer just Man is a Christian so it is strong enough to prove W. Pen a meer Deist for though Christs Godhead is Infinite Goodness Justice Charity as St. John describes God to be Love yet Christ is not only God but Man also and that Faith that denominates a Man to be a true Christian must be a Faith in Christ not as God only but as both God and Man Which Faith must be a living Faith that hath good Works but against this Faith W. Penn argues as not necessary to make a Man a true Christian and by a false Consequence doth Inferr that he who believes in God believes in Christ because Christ is God as if Christ were God only and not Man also Thus Reader I have made good my three Charges against W. Penn and B. Cool and the Truth of my Synopsis which he calls the three Pillars of my whole Fabrick and supposing it were so seeing they are firm the Fabrick must be firm also I shall not further enlarge in Answer to his Book at present judging it needless but refer to my other Books especially my 4 Narratives my book called the Deisme of W. Penn which B. Cool ought to Answer throughout if he thinks to clear W. Penn of Deisme where his and his Brethrens Deisme and Antichristian Principles are sufficiently discovered and whereof the Synopsis was but as an Index And that other called the Fallacies of W. Pen and his Brethren in their Answer to the Bishop of Cork As to the Airy Flouts and Scoffs throughout his Book and Preface more Ishmael-like than a Sober Heathen and some base Insinuations against me in p. 11. and 12. of his Preface being as False as Foolish I think not worth Noticing But I dare him to make good his charge against me in any of these particulars which if he offers to do I doubt not but I shall thereby the more discover his Falshood and Folly As for the Bristol Quakers Reasons why they met me not to Answer to my Charges against their Antichristian Principles then Read and Proved against them out of the Books of their most approved Authors at the Baptists Meeting-House the 24th of July 1699. They being in effect no other than what the Quakers of London gave why they refused to meet me at Turners-Hall the 11th of January 1699. I refer to the Postscript of my 4th Narrative Printed 1700 where they are sufficiently answered But the only effectual Reason they both have omitted which was that of a Guilty Conscience knowing in themselves that they are really chargeable with those things But whereas they say I was not ashamed Hypocritically to profess my self a Quaker as I had done ever since I came to the City is a Notorious Untruth When by Violence they kept me out at their Meeting-House-Door some of them ask'd me If I was a Quaker I said I was a Friend of Truth but did not say I was a Quaker If to gain some of the Quakers from their Heathenism and Antichristianity as God hath been pleased to make me Instrumental to gain some I was for some time in some outward Behaviour like them as St. Paul said to the Jews he was as a Jew and to the Gentiles as a Gentile this will not prove me a Hypocrite as it proveth not that St. Paul was such FINIS