Selected quad for the lemma: life_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
life_n	believe_v	know_v	word_n	4,525	5	4.2540	3	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A47140	An exact narrative of the proceedings at Turners-Hall, the 11th of the month called June, 1696 together with the disputes and speeches there, between G. Keith and other Quakers, differing from him in some religious principles / the whole published and revised by Goerge Keith ; with an appendix containing some new passages to prove his opponents guilty of gross errors and self-contradictions.	Keith, George, 1639?-1716.; Whitehead, George, 1636?-1723.; Penn, William, 1644-1718.; Ellwood, Thomas, 1639-1713.	1696 (1696)	Wing K161; ESTC R14328	86,182	64

judged an Apostate for changing his Opinion of some Men especially when he finds cause so to do Quaker You are fallen from your former Principles G. Keith If you prove me not to have changed in any Fundamental Principle ye ought not to charge me to be an Apostate I know not any Fundamental Principle nor indeed any one Principle of the Christian Faith that I have varied from to this day ever since I came among the Quakers which is about Thirty Three Years ago therefore I ought to be cleared of that Imputation Quaker H. G●ldne● began to speak G. Keith Art thou deputed to Answer to what I have Charged them with Stranger They have declined your Meeting and yet several persons it seems are deputed by them to speak Auditors G. Keith go on with your Charge G. Kei●h There is another passage in G. Whiteheads book wherein he denies the Divinity of Christ and he deceives the Nation and the Parliament by telling them They own Christ to be both God and Man and believe all that is recorded of him in the Holy Scripture and no wonder he has deceived me In his pag. 24. Light and Life he saith To tell of the word God Co Creator with the Father is all one as to tell of God being Co-Creator with God if the Father be God and this is to make two Gods two Creators c. For God Co-Creator with the Father implyes two Ye see this is positive and he puts this Censure on the Baptists words Thus Nonsense Confusion and Blasphemy is heapt up against the Light within Quaker We tell you that whereas G. Keith hath Printed several Books they have Answered them from time to time and he has left two Books unanswered and whatever he will print to the contrary we will defend our Principles G. Keith They have a Publick Stock I have not they are able to raise some Thousands of Pounds sooner than G. Keith can raise an Hundred Here some Noise being raised in the Meeting by some discontented persons Auditors Let there be a Moderator chosen G. Keith If there be any Offence do not charge it on me I desire you for the Honour of the Nation and of the City of London to be still It is a Mob from Grace-church-street to make a disturbance Then that passage in G. Whiteheads book was read again See here the Son of God his Eternal Generation is denyed If he had a Father then there are two Gods And here is as plain a denying Christ to be God as any Socinian can be guilty of Quaker Nat. Mark The casual dropping of words is no proof G. Keith I have proved to you already he disowns Christ to be God Now I will prove he has denyed him to be Man And then there is that great Article of our Faith lost and the Object of the Christian Faith denyed Here is G. Whiteheads Answer to T. Dansons Synopsis of Quakerism as he calls it p. 18. This is in the book called The Divinity of Christ asserted recommended by W. Penn Reason against Railing p. 185. See how G. Whitehead takes him up and how he banters him If the Body and Soul of the Son of God were both created doth not this render him a Fourth Person c. But the stress I lay is in the words following But herein whether doth not his and their ignorance of the only begotten of the Father plainly appear Where doth the Scripture say that his Soul was created For was not he the brightness of the Fathers glory and the express Image of his Divine Substance But supposing the Soul of Christ was with the Body created in time c. Here ye see he will not own that Christ had a Created Soul Th. Danson being a Presbyterian Minister did plead That Christ as Man had a created Soul This G. W. makes an inconsistency as if he could not be God also This was the Errour of Apollinarius who said Christ was without a Humane Soul for he was the express Image of his Father But supposing the Soul of Christ were created with the Body c. That which I would have you take notice of is this Where does the Scripture say his Soul was created Quaker Waite That was only a Question G. Keith Well it was his way of Disputing as is ordinary to him and many others An● such way of Questioning plainly imperteth a Denyal Next I prove that G. Whitehead says He has not the Body of a Man And then I hope I shall have performed what I promised See his Nature of Christianity p. 29 41. Here I undertake to prove that G. Whitehead denies that Christ in Heaven has any Bodily Existence without us It he has said otherwise in any of his late Printed Books I am glad of it But let him retract these for these have done much mischief Now when I said he was Orthodox I mean not as he was Heterodox For there is a G. Whitehead Orthodox and a G. Whitehead not Orthodox I did not know G. Whitehead not Orthodox till lately I do not say there are two persons in George Whitehead he is but one and the same person in this and some other things Orthodox and not Orthodox George Whitehead contradicting George Whitehead he is accountable for these Contradictions and not I. I own it that I have cited divers passages out of his later books that are Orthodox to prove him sound but I did not then know when I so cited him that he was guilty of such gross Errors as since I have found by a further search into his books Let him retract his Errors and well enjoy his Orthodoxy Ye know contradictory Propositions cannot be both true I shall read to you p. 29 41. of his Nature of Christianity This is posteriour to his former book In Page 29. Or dost thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear outwardly in a Bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words page 30. If thou dost thou mayst look until thy E●es drop out before thou wilt see such an appearance of him This is but one place that is that Christ will not so appear But why will he not so appear but because he has no Bodily Existence without us That I come now to prove for which I shall read to you in his pag. 41. And that he existeth outwardly bodily without us at God's right Hand What Scripture Proof hath he for these Words And then what and where is God's right Hand Is it visibl● or invisible within us or without us only And is Christ the Saviour as an outward bodily Existence or Person without us distinct from God and on that Consideration to be worshipped as God yea or nay And where doth the Scripture say he is outwardly and bodily glorified at God's right Hand Do these Days express the Glory that he had with the Father before the World began in which he is now glorified And where doth the Scripture say And here is the

but knows the contrary you know the Substance of the Egg the White and Yolk by the force and heat of the Hen sitting on the Egg is changed into a Chicken Is here any Transubstantiation So that W. Penn and G. Whitehead are guilty of the Doctrine of Transubstantiation and not we and abuse the World with false Philosophy They warn People against G. Keith and his false Philosophy and I appeal to you to Judge whether they have not abused the People with false and vain Philosophy Auditors If you will answer one of these two things you that are a Friend of W. Penn do you have excommunicated G. Keith either answer or justifie it G. Keith If they will appoint a Meeting of Friends to prove me guilty of Error I will never refuse to meet them and here are many Persons of discretion I thank God that has given me that humble Heart that if they bring any Passage out of my Books that is not to be justified I will own my Error and shortness Now if they would do the like it would be well But the matter is here T. Danson says Our want of Infallibility is no Argument against our Ministry G. Whitehead says it is they that want Infallibility are not true Ministers Now I hope I have proved they want Infallibility and therefore by their own Doctrine they are no true Ministers of Christ Therefore I think it necessary to have the Passage read G. Whitehead's Voice of Wisdom pag. 33. Says T. Danson As for our want of Infallibility 't is no valid Plea against our Ministry c. Now here is the Answer His falshood here appears plainly for they that want Infallibility saith G.W. and have not the Spirit of Christ they are out of the Truth and are fallible and their Ministry is not of the Spirit seeing they speak not from the Spirit but from their own Hearts which are deceitful when they want Infallibility Quaker N. Marks I do make my further Appeal to you and if I am either impertinent or defective I beg your Excuse G. Kieth Then thou art not Infallible Quaker You may be ashamed to mention that Quaker N. Marks What I have to offer I submit to you The Person that has denoted me to be W. Penn's Friend has hit right and I own I am not capable to represent him And as you are Professors of Christianity I hope you will not conclude that Philosophy or Logick are any Essentials to Christianity G. Keith Who says it is But is it not sad that their false Philosophy should destroy their Faith and deceive so many People and destroy their Faith Quaker N. Marks I hope you will observe too that the Method taken to make the Proofs has been principally by the Rules of Philosophy and Logick Next I beg the Charity of you to consider how much it is the Right of every Man to give his own Interpretation of all he says and writes Therefore I hope you will not believe all you hear having the Illustrations of an Antagonist Next I would Apologize for the Persons they are not here it may be you are not all of you capable of knowing the Reason of things G. Keith has had his Conversation among us many Years between Twenty and Thirty Years G. Keith Between Thirty and Forty Years Quaker N. Marks Now for as much as these Writings were then extant long ago and he was then intirely passive still and quiet under all these Objections he now makes I hope as we know so you will believe it does not arise altogether from the matter of Fact For I do not think this a good way of proving to take a bit here and a bit there Next I say I hope you will reasonably conclude that we who knew the Circumstances of his Life and his Temper knew his Conversation has been such that we could not own him He stands not charg'd with us on the Account of his Principles I do not know but you will find when you have an Answer to what he has offered that those he charges and paraphrases on will agree with him in Principles nor have we any thing against his Conversation among Men in the World It was his Discontents with particular Persons because he was a little troublesome petulant Man and we could not pacifie him and it was for that Reason chiefly that we did disown him G. Keith A little petulant Man Quaker I would have you note I do not pretend to personate any of the Persons challenged Auditors What is this Discourse for then They are ashamed to come Quaker I am coming to give you a further Reason why they do not meet him We have had several Meetings with him before he was put from us And the Reasons why they did not think fit to meet him now you have heard the Paper gives you an Account of it Now since he is disowned by us and also by them where he lives we do not think our selves obliged to submit to such a peremptory Challenge G. Keith I suppose you cannot think I can answer to every particular because my Memory does not serve me He charges me to take a bit here and a bit there out of their Books I have quoted full Periods at length as all Authors do the Quakers when they refute Books of Adversaries do not use to recite the whole Author they write against Stranger About what you say as to Philosphy Dr. Sherlock says the Salvation of the Soul Depends not on such niceties but for you to charge G. Keith as an Apostate is one of the greatest Charges under Heaven and now for you to say that he differs not from you in Principles is to clear him from that Charge Upon which the People made some Shout G. Keith Pray be quiet and regard the Honour of your Nation Let me put you in mind of one very great falshood He says Here one Wyat or Wait a Quaker interrupted G. K. as they did oft on purpose to divert him from his matter Quaker Wait. There is an Apostacy from the Spirit of Christianity as well as from the Principles Friends have excommunicated him not for his Principles but for going from the Spirit of Meekness Charity c. G. Keith The Tree is known by the Fruits I was like a Lamb among I know not what where there were Two or Three Hundred I had scarce One that sympathized with me at their Yearly Meeting when clandestinely with their Doors shut suffering none that were my Friends to be present they passed false Judgment against me without any Trial A Notorious Falshood he chargeth against me and nothing else only he calls me a little petulant man and he is not a Story above my height He says I am Quaker I observe a Contradiction in G. Keith he said he was not disowned by half the Yearly Meeting and now he says by all G. Keith Let me answer that I say Divers in the Meeting were favourable but W. P.

be answered They say I did not exhibit to them a Copy of my Charge against them an Indictment they call it they would represent me as a Man setting up a Spiritual Court but my Printed Paper sayes W. Penn and G. Whitehead are justly desired to be present This is no Indictment nor Summons as they falsly call it And for the particulars I intend to prove against them they were expresly mentioned in my Printed Paper called An Advertisement containing Four Fundamental Doctrines of Christianity by them opposed I desired W. Penn to make good his Charge against me in a former Printed Paper which was That I was an Apostate and Impostour endeavouring to pluck up the Testimony of Truth by the roots This he said at a Meeting at Ratcliffe above Fourteen Months ago and while I was peaceably speaking in that Meeting he interrupts me and like a Clap of Thunder falls on me in the midst of my Testimony calls me Aposta●e c. I desired him also at the Yearly Meeting of the Quakers at London held 1695. to make good his Charge and I told him If he refused I would put him to prove it in the face of the Nation He justified his calling me Apostate saying He was in no Passion but he was so transported by the Glorious Power of God that he knew not whether he was Standing Sitting or Kneeling And since I have in Print desired him to prove his Charge and now at this Meeting but he declines to appear Ye know the saying Affirmanti incumbit probatio He ought to prove what he has affirmed Quaker H. Goldnay If those that thou didst summon had appeared I do not see thou hadst provided any convenient place for them G. Keith If your Friends had appeared they might have had a place There pointing to a Table and a Bench s●t on it opposite to the place where he stood is a place provided for them If you will fetch them they shall have a place or they might have been here with me where I stand Strangers that stood on the Table If they come we will give place to them Quakers N. M. and H. G. We came here to give an account that our Friends think not fit to be here and have given their Reasons for it G. Keith It is a strange thing that th●y cannot print a Paper but must have so many Falsities in it They call my Paper a Summons and an Indictment but I meant it not so But to leave that and come to our business The four things which I charge them to be guilty of are these and I appeal to all moderate persons whether my intimation of such a Meeting can be blamed when it is to defend such Points as these Faith in Christ as he outwardly suffered at Jerusalem to our Salvation That is the First Justification and Sanctification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed That is the Second The Resurrection of the Body that dyeth The Third And Christs coming without us in his glorified Body to judge the Quick and Dead That is the Fourth All which have been contradicted by some of them as W. Penn G. Whitehead c. though these are Fundamental Principles belonging to the common Faith and are generally owned by Christians of all Professions Now if you please I shall proceed to my Proofs Most of my business whether they be here or not is to read my Proofs out of their Books that they are guilty of every one of these Four Errors opposing thereby Four Fundamental Truths The first is The necessity of Faith in Christ as he outwardly suffered for us at Jerusalem This is the first But that this is opposed by them I prove thus The O●ject of Faith is opposed by them and therefore the Faith it self must needs be opposed I hope the consequence is clear enough it needs no Proof The Object of Christian Faith is Christ both God and Man and yet but one Christ But so it is that I offer to prove that G. Whitehead and W. Penn by approving of G. Whiteheads Books has denyed Christ both to be God and Man This is the thing which if I make out I make out my first Point And first I offer to prove that G. Whitehead in a Book of his has denyed Christ to be God and W. Penn has owned this Book The Book is called Light and Life recommended by William Penn in his Reason against Railing p. 186. in Answer to W. Burnet a Baptist Preacher Printed 1668. P. 47. Here he first brings in the Baptists words Says the Baptist Now as he was God he was Co-Creator with the Father and so was before Abraham and had Glory with God before the World was and in this sense came down from Heaven Now here is G. Whiteheads reply What Nonsense and Vnscriptural Language is this To tell of God being Co-Creator wi●h the Father or that God had glory with God Does not this imply two Gods and that God had a Father Let the Reader judge I shall read the Baptists words again and see if there be any thing in them offensive to Christian Ears I hope there are not many here but understand what Co signifieth it is with Now see if the words of the Baptist are offensive to Christian Ears As he was God he was Co-Creator with the Father Ye know John saith In the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God John 1.1 2. See also Prov. 8. 22,3● If these words offend any let them speak with all my Heart Quaker N. Mark If I might I desire to have liberty to speak when was the date of the Book Auditors If you will undertake their cause you may speak otherwise not Quaker Pray hear me The Reason why I askt him the date of the Book is because I believe it was a book antiently written and G. Keith did write in Vindication of our Principles and now for him to appear in opposition to our Principles it appears that he has apostatized from our Principles G. Kei●h Now let me Answer him I do say if it were my last words I know not that I ever read a line of this book till I came last to England which is about Two Years And if G. Whitehead be wiser since it is very well But then he should have retracted this For this book and some other books of his has leavened the minds of many in America as well as here with Poysonous Errors Stranger A Quaker Then George Keith ought to make a candid and full Retractation of what he has said contrary to Truth before he appeared against them G. Keith I own I have been mistaken in these Men But I hope this Auditory are sufficient Judges of that that if they cannot prove me to hold any Doctrine contrary to my former Principles nor any Unchristian Principle and that they have nothing against me Conv●rsation they ought not to call me an Apostate I never heard that a Man was

Water and Blood which washeth and sprinkleth the Conscience are all Spiritual and Mysterious as the New Covenant it self is which they belong to and these things known in And this is the new and living way which Christ set open through the Veil of his Flesh Heb. 10. Let them receive this who can Note By G. Whitehead's Argument as the New Covenant is Spiritual and inward and not outward so the Blood of the New Covenant is inward and not outward so the Passover is inward which is Christ the Mediator and not outward this is a plain denyal of the Man Christ without us to be our Mediator our Passover Offering or his Flesh and Blood without us to be concerned in our Salvation otherwise than as the Type That Christ's Flesh is called the Veil is not to be understood like the Typical Veils Figures and Shadows but hath a far greater and profound sense and consideration But mark W. Burnet does not express it universally but in this particular Case And G. Whitehead extends it to an Universal as if all the Types of the Old Testament signified nothing Internally and Spiritually But VV. Burnet saith no such thing though he justly contends that the material Blood of the Beasts that were offered was a Type of the material Blood of Christ that was outwardly shed yet many of the Types signified the internal and spiritual Gifts and Graces that true Believers have by Christ Now here I clinch the matter G. Whitehead says But to say material Blood was a Type of that which was material this is to give the Substance no preeminence above the Type especially if neither of them be mystical nor in being or like as if one should say one Type was a Type of another Now the Argument lies here If the Sacriffces under the Law were Types of Christ's Blood then that Blood must not be outward Blood but inward to wit the Light and Life in Men but this is a false Consequence of G. Whitehead and sheweth that he denieth Remission of Sin and Justification by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed And this whole Passage of G. Whitehead his Advocate T. Ellwood doth defend in his Book called Truth Defended which is one of the two they say I have not answered Now as to the Letter we go on to what T. Elwood says He is so unfair he will have it that G. Whitehead owns that the material B●ood of Christ is that by which we are justified But here is the Trick G. Whitehead makes a typical Offering of Christ and an anti-typical the typical was the Offering of Christ at Jerusalem the anti-typical is the Offering of Christ within See here then their Answer It was queried whether they owned that we are by the Blood of Christ outwardly shed justified or that the Blood that was outwardly shed did belong to the Sacrifice G. Whitehead has since of late answered Yea here they have sought to blind all the World Christ as he outwardly suffered was a Sacrifice but a typical Sacrifice Therefore the next Question to be put must be Whether he was the anti-typical Sacr●fice Now see what G. Whitehead hath said to the Letter of Solomon Eccles to blame or censure it I can find nothing at all He does not own that Solomon Eccles's Expression was an Article of their Faith but does he disown it Nay a man may not own a thing to be an Article of his Faith and yet not disown it If G. Whitehead had had the true Faith in Christ crucified and had the true Value of Christ's Blood outwardly shed he would have very severely and sharply blamed and censured Solomon Eccles's Letter as blasphemous but I find not that he censured it all He tells you in what Sence he owns it viz. That Blood had a peculiar Significat●on I told him so had the Blood of Beasts a peculiar Signification for their Blood signified Remission of Sin but was no satisfactory Offering for Sin And if Christ's Blood outwardly shed was a Type as G. Whitehead affirms it was then he confirms Solomon Eccles's false Doctrine and makes it no more than the Blood of the Beasts that were offered But saith T. Ellwood He does own that the Blood of Christ is more than the Blood of another Saint but what B●ood the Blood of Christ within there is the Trick Is not this enough to cheat all the World They have a double Meaning as Arius had They say they own the Blood of Christ and every other thing said of him according to the Scripture so said the Arians and Macedonians when at other times they discovered their Meaning to be quite contrary to Scripture Quaker N. M. I offer a Word in Vindication which is this I am here an accidental Man as you are What I would offer is this 1. I acknowledge the Favour you give me leave to speak Next this little Tumult gives me Occasion to let you know that the principal Reason of the Persons not being here that were challenged was that Confusion and Disorder that would be the Consequence G. Keith Who makes it Quaker N. M. There are not fifteen of us here therefore we take care not to be parties to it The Persons challenged I do respect I know their own Ability I think my self not capable to speak in their behalf What I wou●d say is to the Letter The Letter you are to understand is the Effect of a Dispute between two Persons Though this Letter was writ by one that had Conversation with us yet I think we are not intitled to what is in it But if G. Whitehead hath writ in Vindication of it it affects us as a People And whatever we publish as a People we are so far affected with it But this Letter was writ by the Hand of a particular Man whose Conversation among us I think not fit to answer for G. Keith He was an Eminent Preacher among them Quaker He says G. Whitehead has vindicated this Letter now I observe G. Whitehead finds fault with the Letter G. K●ith Here he makes G. Whitehead the Representative and Metropolitan of the Quakers saying what G. W. writes affects them as a People I am a Quaker still though I glory not in any Name but that I may be accounted a true Christian But he says if G. Whitehead has justified the Letter it is imputable to the Body What is this but to make G. Whitehead the Metropo●itan And I protest against it I have so much Charity and Knowledge of many of the Quakers that I believe there are Thousands will not own that Letter though G. Whitehead does He says if G. Whitehead justifies that Lett●r the whole Body is understood to justifie it Now I see not one Syllable wherein G. Whitehead blames it And he that does not testifie against a thing when he has just occasion for it justifies it But hear what G. Whitehead saith pag. 58. Light and Life Now to these words viz. No more than

is no diference between them and me I will cite a passage or two out of a Manuscript from Pensilvania it is a thing that will satisfy your Consciences as much as any thing I brought the Manuscripts they were read at the yearly Meeting at London 1694. and something was objected to the hand and it was asked at Samuel Jennings my Adversary whether it was the hand of that man and he said he believed it was and you will find it is matter of Doctrine at the bottom for which they have Excommunicated me however they would cloak it Let them retract their Errors and I will forgive them my Excommunication See the Book called Light and Life pag. 41. See what is here said by G. Whitehead That there is not an outward coming of Christ to Judg the Quick and Dead What I prove from G. Whitehead is proved from W. Penn for W. Penn has Authorized his Book therefore it is the proof of them both Here is the place Moreover Christ said The Son of Man shall come in the Glory of his Father with his Angels c. Matt. 16.27 28. Luke 9.26 27 Now what is that Glory of the Father in which his coming is is it visible to the Carnal Eye And when was that coming to be Is it now to be looked for outwardly But farther we do acknowledg the several comings of Christ according to the Scriptures both that in the Flesh and that in the Spirit which is manifest in several degrees as there is a growing from Glory to Glory But three comings of Christ not only that in the Flesh at Jerusalem and that in the Spirit but also another coming in the Flesh yet to be expected we do not read of but a second coming without sin unto Salvation which in the Apostles days was looked for And as concerning that noted place 1 Thes 4.17 brougt by W. B. to prove Christs coming without us to judgment G. W. denyeth it to be meant of his Personal coming and useth a Sophism to contradict it and wrest it to his inward coming whereas all the stress of his Sophism lies in that We We that remain but the true Sense of these words is those Saints those Believers that shall be living at that day shall not prevent them that dyed in Christ before It is an enallage personae frequent in Scripture putting we for they live that or James therewith bless we God and Curse men Now all these proofs he has Allegorized to Christ within he has allegorized away his Birth his Death Resurrection and Ascension and coming to Judgment and so we have nothing from Scripture to prove Christ's Death to be of any benefit to us and we have no Argument to prove he came in the Flesh And so all the proofs against Jews and Philosophers he has Allegorized away Thus you have had a proof from G. Whitehead and W. Penn. Now if you will adjourn the Meeting to some other time or continue it a while longer I am content And I hope I have proved that I am not Petulant and that I have had just cause to accuse them of these Errors I was presented by a Grand jury at Philadelgpia and the Presentment would have been Prosecuted if the Government had not been changed and I had been accused for endeavouring to alter the Government which is Capital by their Law and they would have found me guilty of Death had they not been turned out of the Government tho I was innocent And when I objected against the Jury they would not suffer one of the Jury to be cast Now it I had been guilty of any Trespass and Offence against K. William and Q. Mary the King is alive and God bless him do you think that Governour Fletcher put into the Government by King William and Queen Mary that was the Governor there if he had found me guilty of High Treason he would have passed me but he ordered them to let fall the Indictment Then the Company desired G. Keith to proceed if he had any more proofs against G. Whitehead G. Keith Yes I have Says G. Whitehead to R. Gordon Dost thou look for Christ's coming again to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence If thou dost thou mayest look until thy Eyes drop out before thou wilt see such an Appearance of him Now see how G. Whitehead has excused this he says He did not mean it of Christ's coming to Judgment but he meant it thus because R. Gordon would needs have it that Salvation was delayed till Christ's outward coming I am apt to think he abuses R. Gordon not that I would vindicate R. Gordon in every thing for I think he did overcharge the Quakers in some things at that time but now I do not accuse or acquit him But I say he says he only opposed that false Notion of R. Gordon as if the Saints remained under their Pollution till the Resurrection from the Dead Can you think so He was a Protestant and no Protestant will say any such thing We say we are saved by hope I say in a Scripture sense we may expect that great Salvation then even from all charge of Sin tho not from any stain of Sin Not that the sense of Pardon is not made manifest before that day but that in that day all that have Repented and Believed he will clear them before God Angels and Men. The Devil will be ready to accuse them in that day but Christ will then clear them It will be a great solemn Assize and there will be a solemn Acquitment to all that have sincere Repented of their sins and believed in the Lord Jesus Christ Quaker Let the passage be read out G. Keith If we had not had these oppositions we might have saved an Hour I will read the passage Dost thou look for Christ as the Son of Mary to appear outwardly in a bodily Existence to save thee according to thy words p. 30. If thou doest thou mayest look until thy Eyes drop out befor thou will see such an appearance of him Ye see these are plain and express words agianst Christ's outward coming The Scripture saith we are saved by hope and hope that is seen is not hope our great Salvation in the full accomplishment of it is at the Resurrection and Christs last coming then will be the great Discharge and Acquitment according to 2 Tim. 1.18 and 2 Tim. 4.16 The Lord grant that we may find mercy in that day and that our sins may not be laid to our charge And Acts 3.19 it is said Repent and be Converted that your sins may be blotted out when the times of refreshment shall come c. The word is very well Translated when the times of Reanimation shall come the Greek is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Quaker I desire to be heard a word G. Keith I have not done yet I beg of you I shall be but short I had said I had upward of six Manuscripts What