whether that Corrupts and how David could be said to see Corruption or Job that Corruption was his Father c. If nothing of Man as Man be Corrupt the which he hath rather sought to evade than answer The like the Friend urged from G. Keith's saying The Man-Eaters may eat the gross part of Mans Body yet that more subtile and Invisible tart they cannot eat asking What is this but to say the Man-eaters may eat Mans Body but they cannot eat the substance of Mans Body p. 34. 35. This G. Keith never â—ites yet infers from it that he would with â—is devouring Throat Eat or Swallow up the Resurrection of the Body which shews G. Keith is better Skilled in the Art of Railing than disputing he knows who called that a Black Art once with something more I may chance to put him â—n mind of before we part see Way Cast up p. 169. Besides C. Pusey did not seek to Swallow up the Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Body but to detect his explication as unâ—ound and unscriptural as well as Contradictory But how doth it appear that his Opponent â—yneth with Atheists and Sadducees in arguing against the Resurrection of the Body being the same â— substance from the Man-Eaters as G. Keith â—harged him Do the Atheists and Saducees acknowledge there is a Resurrection yet not the â—â—me in substance Or doth not the one deny â—here is a God Heaven or Hell and the other that there is a Resurrection at all or Angel or Spirit as in Acts 23. 8. Are these Case Parallel Or is it not rather manifest that G. Keith's Suggestions are as false as they are malicious Who no longer ago than in the Year 1691. in his Book called Presbyterian and Independent Churches tells his Reader It is a notorious false Charge that we deny the Manhood â— the Lord Jesus Christ and affirm that as Maâ— he is not in Heaven or that we deny the Resurection of the Dead But because we deny theâ— carnal Conceptions of the Resurrection and hâ—â— us to Scripture Words which is most safe therefore they have so beliâ—d us saith he p. 22â— 228. And the Case is the same now between us and him C. Pusey further saith in his p. 35. Is not this â— contrary to that common Understanding thâ— God hath given Man as the Popish Doctrinâ— of Transubstantiation For the Papists sâ—â— Though as to their Sense they eat the verâ— Bread it having the very colour the smell the taste and shew of Bread yet the Substance of Bread they eat not So G. Keith hold That though Man-Eaters may eat the visible Part of Mans Body which is seen with the outward Eyes yet the Matter and Substancâ— of Mans Body they cannot eat c. This G. Keith though he gives us not the Friend Words inveighs loudly against saying From this he most nonsensically inferrs that I affirm tâ— Man-Eaters eat the accidents of Mans Body Again I neither said nor thought the Man-Eateâ— eat only the accidents c. This he Terâ— quibbling partly from his gross Ignorance and partly from thâ—â—â—rversion and Prejudice of his 〈…〉 shall I say of G. Keith who gives not the Friends Words at all yâ—â— foistâ—th in as said by him what there is noâ— Syllable of in the Book no mention of 〈◊〉 â—he Word not so much as named for I have â—iven almost the whole of what was said there â—â— that Subject Whence came this but from â—erversion and Prejudice of Spirit not gross Ignorance for it was done wittingly He goes â—â— I distinguished betwixt the Radix and principal Substance of Mans Body and the drossy Part which is frequently separated from the noble voâ—ile Part by Chymical Operations Answ Thus â—â— makes two Substances to Mans Body and â—e Man-Eaters to be the Chymists to make this â—eparation But supposing these Man-Eaters â—t not the Body till after a Year more or less â— which time he allows Truth Advanced p. â—17 the Separation may be made betwixt the â—â—nel and the drossy Part do they then our Mans â—ody Or do they not Or what is it they do it if that be not Mans Body And whereas back this Assertion he queries p. 15. Whether Robbers that swallowed down Gold did eat it Answer The Instance is very remote except â— could prove they eat the drossy Part and â—t the more refined behind them then it had â—uer suited his Purpose But what he inâ—â—ances in Iron the Demonstration is more obâ—ous Men do not eat Iron because they do â—â—t digest it but the Ostrich that digests it â—aid to eat Iron Query Whether the Substance of Iron when eaten the excrementitious Part voided and the more noble Part transmuted into real Flesh in the Ostrich a Notion he hath favoured in p. 12. and I have commented upon be the same as before it was eaten And to his last clause in the Paragraph viz. As every Body hath a distinct Seed so thâ— Radix of every Body is a distinct Radix I say if every Body have it's distinct Seed and Radix theâ— Man's Body before the Fall had so and must there be a Radix to the Cloathes also To thâ— Coats of Skins which he interpreteth Truth Advanced p. 27. to be the Skin and Flesh oâ— this frail mortal and corruptible Body tâ— that which he saith Ibid. p. 113. is not proper to Man as Man and this such a Radix aâ— the Man-Eaters cannot eat with the dross and husky Part The Miller whom he would send to his Mill and cautioneth not to go beyond his Sphear of Knowledge is a better Philosopher than this comes to Now after all his bluster of Sadducees Sadducean Fraternity c. he brings in his Opponent owning a Resurrection of Just and Unjust though to help himself off he brands him with great Hypocrisy who being a prejudiced Adversary and offering no reasonable Demonstration I submit it to the Candid to make their Judgment of both of them and so leave it Nor shall I now debate with him whether the Primitive Christians were come to any result about what their Bodies should be It is sufficient that he hath not detected us whatever he would have Men believe concerning us to have deviated from the Faith of the Resurrection or from Scripture Terms and Expressions to which he hath said it is only safe to keep in this and all other things as hath been instanced To C. Pusey's query If it was the common belief of the Primitive Christians that the very same Matter and Substance of this corruptible Body should be the Body that is raised why should any among themselves especially have asked such a needless Question as with what Body do they come G. Keith Answers Such who asked that Question were such among them that said there was no Resurrection of the Dead 1 Cor. 15. 12. Answ This is no ways deduceable from that Scripture nor any other that I can find For the Question asked ver 12. was
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
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
Scripture was writ And yet did they not receive the Holy Ghost Could not that Law that Command that Word make Perfect Had Men Faith in Christ and could not that Faith save in their Days Monstrum horrendum Page 105. He tells us that Moses falls a declaring concerning the New Covenant Deut. 30. from ver 11 to 16. the Probation whereof he gives in the next Page both from Jer. 31. 32. and Rom. 10. 5 6 7 8 9. And in p. 107. thus hath it The Jews and People of Israel who lived in Moses's Time and were SAVED it was through Faith in this Word in this Prophet raised up in them in their Hearts not at a distance but nigh the Word is nigh in thy Heart And this is Christ in them the Hope of Glory the Mystery hid from Ages and Generations but was EVER made manifest in his Saints but in the latter Days more clearly c. p. 107 108. Query Had Men Faith in Christ the Word Was the Mystery ever made manifest in the Saints and yet was the Law within in sufficient to make perfect till since Christ was offered up in the outward Having transcribed many verses in 119 Psalm concerning the Word he queries p. 109. What Word this is whether the Letter of the Scripture oâ— that Word of Faith Paul and Moses long before spoke of and its effects upon David he tells us anon saying This quickned him this strengthned him this comforted him this taught him and made him wiser than his Teachers This was as Oyl unto him a Lamp unto his Feet and a Light to his Paths in this his Steps were ordered verse 133. in this he worshipped he prayed he sung Psalms and all his Springs were in this p. 111 112. But I query if the Law within made nothing perfect until the one Offering was revealed how came David by his Quicknings Strength Comfort Instruction Wisdom Light fresh Springs c For now we are got a step beyond proving that the Gentiles were savingly enlightned and by occasion administred from G. Keith driven to evince out of his former Writings that the Patriarchs before Christ was born and suffered had such a Law within them as did make them perfect Are these the Fruits of an imperfect Law to quicken strengthen c. or will he who once contended that many were saved and attained unto perfect Peace and Reconciliation with God in their Souls now deny it to David a Jew both inward and outward as he must do if the Law could not make perfect How is he confounded how engaged in what is and will be too hard for him Solomon comes next From what he â—â—ys of Wisdom's crying at the Gates in every City G. Keith queries Is not her crying c. the same with Jesus Christ his standing at the Door c. p. 113. And I query Whether to them that opened unto him even during that Administration he did not come in and Sup with them for G. Keith immediately quotes Rev. 3. 20. to adapt it to Solomons saying 2dly Whether such had the Holy Ghost And 3dly Whether the Law within such made them perfect in that Age G. Keith goes on thus The Gospel was Preached unto Abraham Abel Enoch Noah and to ALL BELIEVERS who lived before Scripture was writ in a Book and it was spoken into their Hearts by the Spirit of Jesus Christ and the Saints who then lived and were inspired of God preached the Gospel and the Gospel is the same in all Generations for it is the Everlasting Gospel Rev. 4. 6. But now the Declarations Discoveries and Manifestations of this one Gospel have been many and different under the Law more darkly in the Time of the Prophets more manifestly in the Time of the Apostles Yet more manifestly and yet all ONE GOSPEL and we preach no other but the same Everlasting Gospel which is the Power of God unto Salvation Rom. 1. 16. See p. 213. Now hence I query Whether the Gospel Preached unto Abraham Abel Enoch Noah c Were the Law within Abraham c And whether it made them perfect 2dly Whether these Believers who lived before Scripture was writ in a Book who had that inspeaking into their Hearts by the Spirit of Jesus Christ partook of the Holy Spirit the Spirit of Holiness of Adoption or Sonship or of the Spirit of Fear and Bondage only Were they Sons of Hagar or Sarah Of First or Second Covenant 3dly Whether those inspired Men who preached the Gospel which he allows to be the same in all Generations had ALL OF THEM the Doctrinal Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified and preached it to others And this I the rather urge for as much as Truth Advanced p. 42. he denies that Paul means the Gospel is the Power of God simply and abstractly considered without all Doctrine and doctrinal Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified All Saints have the same Spirit and Word of Prophecy in some measure more or less that the Prophets had who ever directed People to the same Spirit and Word in their Hearts from which they spake that they might in themselves hear the same Word and Spirit whereby the true Faith comes p. 221. Is this Spirit and Word saving Is it perfecting in all Ages Can a Man hear it and obey it and yet be without the Holy Ghost But hear him again This second Adam is called the quickning Spirit by whose quickning Vertue the Souls of ALL the Holy Men and Women were made and kept alive unto God as truly before he came in the Flesh as after for they did all eat the same spiritual Meat c. Which was Christ yea they did eat his Flesh and drink his Blood as TRULY REALLY in measure BEFORE he came in that Body of Flesh as the Saints have done since p. 227. To the same purpose he expresseth himself in p. 258. and in Way cast up p. 95. and in Rector Corrected p. 95. This shews what he once thought of the Holy Men and Womens Condition in those first Ages of the World who then only placed the difference in Degree not in Kind now will not allow more then Gentile Sincerity and Righteousness where Faith in Christ crucified is not revealed as well as that he concludes all before Christ was visibly offered under such an inward Law as made not perfect How he will reconcile such a State to that of eating his Flesh and drinking his Blood let him look to In the mean while as he queries Truth Advanced p. 184. in his query 10. Can any Eat the Flesh of Christ and drink his Blood who have not the Faith of him as he GAVE his Body of Flesh to be broken and his Blood to be shed for us So I query Could any do thus before it was given or broken Or had all those Holy Men and Women he spoke of even now so much as the Faith or Knowledge that it should be broken Having offered what Citations I at present
the Virgin Mary but not to him as manifest in the Saints which saith G. Keith contradicts the Scripture Testimony Ibid. And G. Keith doth the same in Effect in representing the Word or Law within weak and imperfect before that Manifestation My next Citations shall be out of his Postscript to G. Whitehead's Book stiled Nature of Christianity c. in Answer to the same Rob. Gordon Printed Anno. 1671. God was in Christ reconciling Men to himself EVER SINCE the fall in all Ages both BEFORE and since Christ suffered in the outward having given them or put in them the Word of Reconciliation by which they who became renewed thereby were reconciled and justified IN ALL AGES But according to R. G.'s Doctrine no Men were justified nor reconciled until Christ suffered Death in the outward because then and not till then was Reconciliation and Justification wrought c. p. 65. And according to G. Keith it is the same except Men were reconciled and justified by a Law that made not perfect Page 70. He reckons up R. Gordon his corrupt Doctrines the fourth whereof is this That Obedience to the Light in the Conscience is but the Work of the first Covenant and Righteousness thereof and that no Man is justified thereby Query Is not the Light in the Conscience the Law within Or is that sound in G. Keith which is corrupt Doctrine in R. Gordon But G. Keith is yet more full in asserting the Light and Grace given the Gentiles to be Saving and Evangelical even before Christ's coming in the outward for which hear him in his Book of Universal Grace Prted Anno 1671. For the better Understanding saith he of the Matter in Hand how that the Saving and Evangelical Light of Jesus Christ hath been communicated unto all Men IN ALL AGES AND GENERATIONS of the World we are to consider the Words of the Apostle to this purpose There are Diversities of Operations saith he but ONE Spirit Is that one Spirit the Holy Spirit or another and diversity of Administrations but one Lord which diversity of Operations and Administrations are reducible unto these two the Law and the Gospel or the first Covenant and the second Which two as they were very distinguishable among the Jews so were they also among the Gentiles As concerning the Jews they had first the Law which came by Moses and secondly they had the Grace and Truth which came by Jesus Christ was that saving The Righteousness of the Law and the Righteousness of Faith and these two though they were distinguishable yet as they were administred of God they were not separated nor divided but the Gospel LAY HID within the Law as within a Vail And thus Christ Jesus was in the Law and under it The Dispensation of the Law was as Darkness in respect of the clear Dispensation of the Gospel yet even in this Darkness did Jesus Christ the true Light shine And also in or among the Gentiles UNIVERSALLY there was and is somewhat which by way of Proportion doth answer unto the Law and Gospel first Covenant and second which was so distinctly held forth among the Jews And as among the Jews there was Moses and the Prophets in the Letter so universally in ALL Men both Jews and Gentiles there hath been Moses and the Prophets in Spirit and also CHRIST p. 8. Compare this with Truth Advanced p. 70 71. above recited To an Objection How it is that in the Gospel is revealed the Righteousness of God from Faith to Faith unto the Just and also that the Wrath of God is from Heaven revealed therein against the unrighteous seeing the Gentiles have not had the Gospel preached unto them all this TIME BY PAST in which they have lived in their Ungodliness and Unrighteousness G. Keith replies To this Paul Answers That which might be known of God is manifest in them for God had shewed it unto them which is as much as to say though the Gospel came not unto them outwardly by the Ministry of Man yet it came unto them inwardly by the Ministry of God himself because that which may be known of God is manifest in them for God hath shewed it unto them So that it is manifest that by this Expression That which may be known of God and as it is in the Greek 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is understood the Gospel See p. 20. By this Manifestation of God in the Gentiles adds he our Adversaries deny that the Gospel or any Manifestation that is of a SAVING Nature is understood to which a little lower he thus replies If it were not Evangelical and the very Gospel it self in an inward Ministration it would quite render the Words of the Apostle impertinent and contrary to the purpose he treats of For Paul is here shewing what the Gospel was and what was revealed in it both to the Just and the Unjust and because the Unjust among all the Gentiles and Nations had not the Gospel outwardly administred he shews they had it inwardly God having shewed it unto them p. 21. Doth this agree with his Asserting the Law within made nothing perfect till the Faith of Christ the one Offering come to be revealed Or will he say the very Gospel it self in an inward Ministration was not saving and perfecting before Christ was offered up in the outward But the foregoing he corroborates by a fourthly thus This Manifestation is said to be that which may be known of God which he had shewed unto them therefore it is of an Evangelical and Saving Nature 5thly By this Manifestation here mentioned they did CLEARLY see the Invisible Things of God even his ETERNAL POWER and Godhead p. 22. There was a Time saith G. Keith when God dwelt in their the Gentiles Knowledge whereby they knew him through what he had made manifest of his Eternal Power in them p. 24. Was God known through the Eternal Power made manifest in them and the Holy Ghost not received What Confusion doth he run himself into Descanting upon Rom. 1. 20. he tells us By the things that are made may be understood those things which are inwardly made those MARVELLOUS Works of the Lord which are wrought in Mens Hearts both of Judgment and Mercy through the Appearance of God and the Revelation of his Almighty Arm and Power in that Heavenly and Divine Principle of his own Seed by which indeed the Invisible Things of him are clearly seen And until a Man come to see the Lord in the things that are made of him in himself he can never see him in the things that are made without him which gave occasion to many of the Gentile Philosophers to bid People seek God within themselves p. 26. Now I query Are these marvellous Works of Judgment and Mercy wrought in Mens Hearts and the Holy Ghost not received Or is the Divine Principle of his own Seed separable there from This is certainly to divide Christ But a little lower he tells us what
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
they have not but must have it when shall that be iâ— a renewed Visitation in some other Revolution or in Purgatory A Medium let hiâ— find if he can And so I follow him to tâ—â— second Head 2. Absurdities and Contradictions Promiscuoâ— Collected I now come to make my Observations some Absurduies and Contradictions inter worâ—â— by way of Miscellany as I find them occuâ—â— his late large Tract entituled Truth Advâ—â—ced in which as in the foregoing â—â— keep to the order of the Pages for the mâ—st part Some he saith expound the Herbs and Trees given to Man for Food before the Fall to be paradisical Gen. 1. 29. And the Earth paradisical distinct from this Gross visible Earth called the Dry Land and adds So it will be to the raised Saints at the Resurrection of the Dead who shall live and dwell in that Garden where Adam and Eve at first was placed called The New Earth Rev. 20. And though they shall have the Command and Rule of this Visible Earth under Christ their Head yet they shall need nothing in it p. 24. By this it should seem that this Visible Earth is to remain though the Saints need nothing in it Then not to be Burnt up and dissolved with the Works that are therein according to 2 Pet. 3. 10 11. for what is burnt up and is dissolved is no more Visible From an unproved assertion that The Body of Man had not this Grosness and Impersection before the Fall he draws this Inference that It is manifest that the manner of Mans Generation or Propagation had been after a far more Excellent manner than now it is if the Fall had not been p. 27. 28. But that is not Manifest though he Dictator like saith it is but needeth Proof It is certainly a great and hurtful Error for any to hold that the outward and Visible Earth was not cursed for Mans sake saith he p. 32. Then I hope the Contrary is true that the Earth was Cursed for Mans sake But why I pray If Man before the Fall was not made of the common Dust but much more pure and Refined than that which of which Mens Bodies were made since the Fall as he tells us p. 21. and also p. 117. and that Paradice where God placed Man was no part of this Visible Earth p. 16. Must the Earth suffer for what Man did in Paradiâ—â— when neither his Creation was out of heâ—â— but of a more pure and Refined Dust nor his Sin committed in her How could it affect her then Is it equal she should suffer for what was done elsewhere by one that had not his â—ice out of her Surely if his Notion were true the Garden where he Trespassed and out of the Dust whereof he was made were more likely to be affected with Adams Sin than this Visible Earth For Gods way is equal Ezek. 18. 25. No Illumination he saith is able to save fully and perfectly with Eternal Salvation but that which gives the Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified and Raised again p. 40. Then those Jews and Gentiles who dyed without it either shall not be saved with eternal Salvation or it must be revealed hereafter according to the Doctrine of the Revolutionists The latter seems to be his by his supposing A middle state for some time only until the Faith of Christ be revealed unto the â— Souls p. 44. In p. 97. he 〈◊〉 hath it Both Christ's Resurrection Body and the Resurrection Bodies of the Saints at their appearance shall have no heaviness nor weight to encline them to the Globe of the Earth as Christs Body Now in Heaven hath none And in p. 98. They shall appear in some certain place above the Globe of the Earth over or above the Mount of Olives where Christ ascended after he rose from the Dead And though the Resurrection Body of a Saint cannot be in all places at once yet without doubt they can move from one place to another at any distance upwards or downwards South North East or West in the twinckling of an Eye or according to the swiftness of a Thought which is easy to understand and such who know that some of the Moveable Stars and Luminaries move some hundreds of Miles in less than one Minute of time some of which are greater Bodies than the Globe of the the Earth This Notion he would do well to Evince by plain Evidence of Holy Scriptures and in Scripture Words and Terms seeing he saith it is only safe to keep thereto P. 118. As such I leave it with him and proceed When their Resurrection Bodies shall be given unto them then their inner white Garments shall be Cloathed upon as with an outward Garment even as when a man that is Cloathed with a sine Linnen Shirt or Wascoat putteth on another fine Garment above it to which the words of Paul are to be referred 2 Cor. 5. 1 2 3 4. See p. 101. And in the next Page as if he were proud of his Comparison he goes on and tells us I shall not enlarge at present nor further launch forth into THESE MYSTERIES although I may safely say more of these things have been in Part opened unto me than I think fiâ— to declare or can declare in Words p. 102 Which if they be no better than his Wastâ— Coat Mysteries he may even keep them to himself and make the best of them For he is Strange Man at Similes Yet he will be kiâ—â— for rather than Men shall want cloaths at thâ— Resurrection he hath provided them an upper and under Garment a Shirt or Wastcoat and fine Garment above it So that they shall be doubly cloathed which is more than his Text allows him As in p. 27. he had interpreted the Coats of Skins wherewith God cloathed Adam and Eve after the Fail to be a cloathing the Soul with the Righteousness of the Lamb and the Body with the Skin and Flesh of this frail mortal and corruptible Body on which I made my Observations in my last Book called People called Quakers cleared c. p. 45. now he improveth it thus Within this bruial Skin of the gross Body that rotteth in the Grave there is lodged the true Body of Man that corrupteth not and the gross Skin or visible Part is no essential Part of the true Body more then Dross is a Part of the Silver or Gold but at the Resurrection of the Dead nothing of the Drossy Part that is brutal shall arise but only that which is proper to Man as Man to wit such as Adam had before the fall So the Flesh that is gross mortal and corruptible is not that Flesh that shall be raised up immortal and incorruptible p. 113. This not only contradicts his own saying Testimony against that absur'd Opinion p. 3. That which riseth is the MORTAL that putteth on immortality and the corruptible which putteth on incorruption but even the Apostle Paul for he saith this mortal shall put on immortality
1 Cor. 15. 54. Now from what I have quoted above I demand proof of him First That the frail mortal and corruptible Body which Adam had after the Fall was not the Body he had before the Fall Secondly That the Body he had after the Fall riseth not but that which he had before the Fall for we must not take things upon trust from so unstable an Author In p. 115. he tells his Reader where the Separation is made between the pure and noble Part and that drossy Part in Mans Body viz. In the Mystical and Invisible Machpelah or Sepulchre in Hebron in the Land of Israel figuratively and mystically understood and who it is to be bought of viz. Of Ephron the Dust-Eater and at what price viz. 400. pieces of Silver i. e. by so many Vertues and adds in the next Page that in the mystical Land of Israel all the dead Bodies of the Saints shall be raised up and stand with the Lamb upon Mount Zion to wit not the literal Zion but the Mystical But foreseeing an Objection viz. How can these 400. pieces of Silver signifying so many Vertues be paid to Ephron the Dust-Eater Ephron be the Devil c. to this he very gravely Answers Things spoken by way of Allegory and Parable are not strictly to be understood in every Circumstance This is like himself Dictator-like when he pleases they shall when otherwise they shall not be understood in every Circumstance His Word must be a Law else he will wrangle Nay in thâ— very Place he will not bate an Ace of 400. Vertues they must be just so many the number 400. being as he saith produced of four Answer to the four elemental Principles or Qualities of the Body and the number 10. to the ten Commandments and that again multiplied by other ten because every one of the ten Commandments may be well understood to be branched forth into other ten This is to impose not argue If this be the Fruit of his being further enlightned as he boasts Advertisement p. 4. I may safely say surely the old is better Luke 5. 39. what he learnt when little and low beyond these tow'ring Imaginations But what Reason I pray save that G. Keith saith it is there for straining the Allegory in one place not in the other Or why might not another multiply them by ten more and so make 4000. of them Again he saith The Graves that shall be opened at the Resurrection of the Dead are not any visible Places on this Globe of the Earth How will he prove that I am sure his Friends he would now creep in with are of another Mind but certain in visible places to our carnal Eyes commonly adds he Men have two Graves the first given them by Men until the Separation be made betwixt the Kirnel and the Drossy Part by Putrefaction as suppose after a Year or more or less the second given them by God who probably may use the Ministry of Angels therein See Jude 9. saith he p. 116 117. Query What becomes of the Body after a Year or more when the Separation is made betwixt the Kirnel and Drossie Part And what becomes of the Kirnel Where is it bestowed till the Day of Judgment Or to use his own Words is only Belly Guts and Draught lest behind He goes on What is said of the Drossy Part belonging to Mens Bodies called by Paul Corruption is no wise to be understood of the Body of Christ which had no such part in it but was altogether most Pure and saw no Corruption and therefore when the Sepulchre was looked into nothing was there to be found but the Grave-cloaths p. 117. From hence I observe that the additional Cloathing which he makes Man to have received after the Fall that which was not proper to Man as Man viz. the Skin and Flesh of this srail mortal and corruptible Body Christ partook of and â— scended with nothing was to be found in the Sepulchre but the Grave cloaths yet his Flesh not corrupt But we leave that cloathing behind us a Separation being made betwixt the Kirnel and the Drossy Part How then shall our vile Bodies be changed and fashioned like his glorious Body according to Phil. 3. 21. if we rise only with whâ—â— is proper to Man as Man and which Adaâ— had before the Fall and Christ taketh both Is that which he in us terms the brutal Partâ— so necessary an Appendix to Christs Body aâ— not so to ours Or are our vile Bodies insteâ—â— of being fashioned like his glorious Body lâ—â— behind unchanged This 't is to over-valueâ— Mans self upon School Philosophy and neglectâ— better Teacher And I bring it not as declaâ—â—tive of my own Faith either way but as Argumentum ad hominem against G. Keith That the Body of Man before the Fall â— which he compares the Resurrection Bodies were not made of this visible Earth but â— that Dust whereof is Gold and the Stones of â— Sapphires Job 28. 6. compared with Râ—â— 21. 21. is another of his unproved Assertion Ibid. And yet p. 118. summing up his Maâ—ter he saith But against the Doctrine of tâ—â— Resurrection as here delivered and openâ—â— by plain Evidence of Holy Scripture and â—â— Scripture Words and Terms to which it â—â— ONLY safe in this and in all other things â—â— keep close some will be ready to Objeâ—â— Answ Who these Objecters are he hath not declared nor perhaps can We have been â—â— far from so Objecting that we have still keâ—â— to it our selves and rejected the contrary particularly in this very Controversie of the Resurrection And I am willing to join issue wiâ—â— him here touching these very Notions he haâ— so lately Broacht Let him then give plain evâ—dence from Scripture and in Scripture Words aâ—â— Terms that God cloathed Man after the Fall with the Skin and Flesh of this frail mortal and corruptible Body that there is a twofold Grave one given by Man the other given by God who may therein use the Ministry of Angels that it is to be bought of the Dust-Eater the Devil and the purchase 400 Vertues answering to the four Elemental Principles and the ten Commandments brancht forth into other ten that Man was not made of the common Dust of this visible Earth and that the Resurrection Bodies were to be made of the same He that is so tart upon others let us see how he will come off himself for I demand Chapter and Verse for these Assertions of his More I could instance in but these lye next As he had said p. 27. It is not to be questioned but the true Body of Man lieth within the Shell Oar or Mine of this gross heavy and corruptible Body and that is it which shall be the Resurrection Body at the Resurrection of the Dead So now he saith Though Man-Eaters may eat the gross Part of Mans Body yet that more subtile and invisible Part they cannot nor can that which belongs to one be
given to another hence by way of Allegory and Metaphor it is called Bone in Scripture Isa 66. 14. See p. 119. Query What is that gross part the Man-Eaters may eat Is it only the Belly Guts and Draught which p. 111. he tells us Paul distinguisheth from the Body saying God will destroy the Belly but he doth not say he will destroy the Body And what is the more subtile and ivisible Part Is it that very Numerical Body that dyeth without Belly Guts and Draught which he saith elsewhere Man was cloathed with after the Fall Or is it that Body which he pretends is proper to Man as Man and received before the Fall Again What is that Bone he speaks of Is it the Bone LUZ he hath talkt of Or what is it If he will needs set up for a new Sect between the received Opinion of the same Body of Flesh Blood and Bones rising and our sticking to Scripture Words that it is sown a natural Body raised a spiritual Body let him explain his terms Now let us hear him upon a new Subject having treated from p. 122. of the new Heavenâ— and new Earth promised to the Saints in p. 124. he saith This new Earth is called Prov. 8. 26. The highest Part Heb. Head of the Dusts of the World And Isa 58. The high places of the Earth All which he tells us cannot be understood of any visible places of the Earth Why so Because G. Keith saith it And that it is called Prov. 8. The Head of the Dusts of the World doth plainly Point at the Excellency of it for as Man is called in Scripture the little World and the whole Creature so the World may be called and is so called by some a great Man Now though the lower Parts of this great Man i. e. the World are visible to our carnal Eyes yet the Head or chief Part of iâ— is invisible to us and will be until we attain to our Resurrection Bodies but with Eyes suitable to our Resurrection Bodies we shall both see it and find our selves in it c. See p. 124 125. And then tells us That in Scripture the Word Land or Earth hath a Reference to a certain Place or Region above the Globe of this visible Earth whither the Body of Christ is ascended and whither the Bodies of the raised Saints at the Resurrection of the Dead shall ascend c. Answ That Prov. 8. and Isa 58. speak of the new Heavens and the new Earth he would enforce Ibid. from the Terms high and highest Part of the Earth alledging the visible Mountains are but like Moles in a Face and from the Excellency of it But what of all that The Hills are the highest places in respect of the Valleys and a Mole in a Mans Face is a rising there and higher than the rest as well as that one part of the Earth excells another Was not Canaan the Land he had espied for Israel the Glory of all Lands Ezek. 20. 6. Or is there no transcendency no excellency to be allowed to one part of the visible Creation before another but we must needs confound it with the new Earth Again I observe that with him This new Earth is part of the old Earth the lower Parts of this great Man the World are visible the other the Head or Chief Part invisible Whence will he pretend to deduce his Proof hereof viz. That the new Earth was part of the old Will he do it by plain evidence of Holy Scripture and in Scripture Words and Terms to which he said in p. 118. it is only safe to keep Or will he dig into the Ditch of that called Philosophy a Phrase of his own to make it out And whereas he tells us that the Word Land or Earth in Scripture hath reference to a certain Place or Region above the Globe of this visible Earth whither Christ is ascended and the Saints Bodies shall ascend why doth he not give his Reader Chapter and Verse where it is so said that he may see whither cogent or aptly applied or no From p. 125. to p. 127. he infers the long Life of those within the Millenium or thousand Years from Isa 65. 20 21 22. saying p. 126. The Age of Men shall be exceedingly prolonged beyond what it is now even as it was in that Time before the Flood Again Whereas it is promised As are the Days of â— Tree so are the Days of my People I do well remember that Justin Martyr in his Dialogue with Tryphon the Jew saith ' That they should be read As are the Days of the Tree of Life so are the Days of my People which do relate to Adams Paradisical Estate before the Fall saith G. Keith for if Adam had not sinned he had never dyed the Bodily Death c. p. 127. What is this but to confound long Life with Eternity and that out of the same Text Especially considering thaâ— in that very verse it is said They shall not build and another inhabit they shall not eat and another plant for as the days of a Tree are the days of my People Isa 65. 22. Doth he think what they built and planted while here they should inhabit in and eat of hereafter Looking back upon p. 126. towards the bottom I find this Passage viz. The raised Saints shall need neither Candle nor Light of the Sun even to their bodily Eyes as Adam before his Fall needed no Light of the Candle or of the Sun c. Answ This â— gratis dictum that Adam before the Fall â—eeded not either Light of the Candle or Sun â—or have we plain Evidence of Holy Scripture for â—â— or so much as Scripture Words or Terms â—hich he even now said it is only safe to keep â—â— That the raised Saints as to their bodily â—yes shall not need it is ejusdem farinae for â— is the Sight so the Object And it is not to â— questioned but they shall be in as good a â—ondition as ever Adam was before the Fall â—â—d may be inferred that their Opticks if the â—me which lies upon him to prove will be as enetrating as ever his were before he fell To an Objection That ' As the Manna was not to be gathered on the Sabbath-day c. â—o in the Time of the 1000 Years or great Sabbath there is no possibility of Conversion to any who have not been formerly conâ—erted he Answers It doth well enough prove that there is no possibility of Conversion to any who have formerly lived in the World and neglected their Time of Grace and Salvation which they once had it is â—ain for any such to expect to live again and â—ave another Time of Grace and Salvation â—ut it doth not in the least prove that any â—uch who have not at any Time formerly â—ived in the World shall not have a Time of Grace c. This I bring as an Instance of his â—ning to the Notion of the Revolutionists which
my citations out of two of his former â—â—oks where he allowed that the true and â—NLY Method to bring People into the Faith â—â— acknowledgment of the Christian Religion was first to inform them of an universal inâ—â—rd Principle which would when this Foundation was laid bring them to own the Scripture and what Christ did and suffered c. And thaâ— the contrary was not good order and method he grants it here p. 27. but with a reserve and limitation saying What is necessary in the first place to be Preached to them that havâ— little or no true Knowledge of God or of an inward Principle is one thing and what is first to â—â— Preached in order to bring Men to the Christian Faith and Religion more immediately and proâ—â—mately is another Answer When he said â—â— I cited him in my p. 23. This is the trâ—â— method and order which the Lord hâ—â— taught us to hold forth unto People â—â— the first place to point and turn their minâ— unto the Light of Jesus Christ c. Again my p. 24. It is for want of this true order in Preaching of the Gospel that mâ—â— have had so little success hitherto c. Wâ—â— he writing to some Preachers that were â—â—ing into the Indies among the Heathen or â—â— his own Country-Men that lived among â—â— Did we hold it forth to be Preacht in â—â— first place with a restriction to those paâ—â— of the World where the outward was â—â— revealed or indefinitely Besides if to â—â— Gentiles it was to be Preached in the first plaâ—â— as that which would give them the knowledge of the outward why not to the Christiaâ— who are attained to a belief of the outwards yet too many undervalue the inward seeiâ—â— such as have had a belief of the outward wâ—â— be confirmed therein by the inward as wâ—â— as others taught it who had not known it befoâ—â— even as himself hath confessed He conculdes What do my Adversaries bring against me on this Head to prove my self Contradiction Nothing at all saith he therefore they shew themselves stronger in falsly accusing than in justly proving adds he Answer Had he not been stronger in falsly accusing then became him he had not thus falsly accused me For I proved his self-Contradiction and told him where viz. In Nameless Bull p. 10. 11. Which I had quoted before in my p. 11. It is true I did not there give the words at length having done it before but I gave the Title and Page of his Book and referred to my having already given it in that very Book So that he hath Slandered me wittingly In p. 29. of my Book I compared his saying It is not the meer outward name that saveth but the Life the Power of Christ that quickens cleanseth and purifieth by this they might be saved for it is the Life that saveth Rom. 5. 10. With a Friends saying as himself gives it that the Blood which cleanseth from all Sin was the Life and the Life was the Light which he then termed a perverse Exposition and called the Friend Bold Ignorant Soul and I deemed as authentick as G. Keith his saying the same Under this he is uneasy and having skipped many pungent places from p. 25. to 29. to come at it whereto he forgets ever to return such a Slippery Adversary have I to deal with he Labours as to justify his own so to brand the Friends words For himself he pleads p. 28. He doth not in the least Remember that ever he gave that Exposition on 1 Jo. 1. 7. And perhaps when Examined the Friend may say He doth not in the least remember he ever did so But hath G. Keith never unduly applyed places of Scripture to defend things that were Truths but did not really prove these Truths either by express Words or proper Consequence Let him Consult what himself hath acknowledged True Copy p. 18. If so why so harsh upon the Friend Had he then retracted those Errors or hath he done it yet when he fell so roughly upon the other Or hath he forgot what Christ said to such an one Thou Hypocrite First cast out the Beam out of thy own Eye c. Matt. 7. 5. Thus much o the exposition Now to the Doctrine it self Is it true Doctrine that the Life Cleanseth G. Keith hath said it the Friend hath said it Charity makes the best Construction But G. Keith's Charity begins at home and ends there too for he reserves none for his Neighbour If I had said nothing but the Life within saveth or cleanseth from all Sin they might have justly so argued saith G. Keith on his own behalf if the Friend had said nothing but the Life within saves c. G. Keith might have justly so argued say I. He goes on There are several Concurrent Causes in the great Work of our Salvation and cleansing from Sin which though agreeing in one Harmony yet one Cause is not the other therefore their Argument is Vain and False Answer Argument I made none but comparison of sentence with sentence nor do I yet see wherein the Friend could be unfound if G. Keith be found for this explication is as applicable to the one as to the other My quoting him Though Prophets and Apostles preached him Christ as in the form of a Man yet they Preached him also and that more generally as a Light to the Gentiles yea and to Jews also he terms a false and perverse sense upon the word more generally as if he did signify by it more frequently which he saith he did not but by more generally that he did and doth understand that his inward appearance was more general than his outward therefore what was in it self more general they Preacht to be so And then tells us how much oftner they Preached his outward than inward appearance wherein he saith not true Now that this is a false Gloss and shews he wants Sincerity the words and his sense then plainly intimating that more generally had relation to Preaching not appearance will appear upon consulting the place Light of Truth p. 16 17. In order whereto let us recur to the Spring to the Objection his Adversary raised which was not that Christs inward appearance was more general than his outward but that our saying as the place hath it That Christ was sometimes Preached as Crucified to the Jews but MORE GENERALLY a Light to the Gentiles inferred two Christs which G. Keith tells him is a most pitious and abominable wresting of those words and that though the Prophets and Apostles preached him as in the form of a Man yet they Preached him also and that more generally as a Light to the Gentiles yea and to the Jews also Here is never a word either in Opponent or Respondent that his inward appearance was more general than his outward that what was in it self more general they Preached to be so which G. Keith would now foist in but as the SOMETIMES
accepted I having in my p. 25 26. cited G. Keith That Eternal Life and Salvation is only to be had through the Knowledge and Faith of Christ Crucified that this Faith is indispensibly necessary to all The Work of Sanctification ascribed in Scripture to Christs Blood and Sufferings as well as to his inward Appearance and to both indispensibly necessary and to Faith therein I opposed them p. 26 to 31. to his former sayings G. Keith giving the go-by to the rest toucheth upon this Passage The Work of Sanctification c. Thus we see plainly saith he p. 30. they place ALL upon Christ within and NOTHING upon Christ without and adds O bold Antichristianism c But he sees amiss I did not here give Mine or my Friends Sentiments either way that I had done before p. 11. but opposed G. Keith to G. Keith Yet may now tell him We do not place all upon Christ within nor all upon Christ without we do not divide Christ but believe it was necessary that he should come as well as that it was afterwards expedient he should go away and that the belief of both is a Duty even in order to Salvation where the means of having it are afforded And himself hath said The Knowledge of Christs coming in the outward is not of necessity to Salvation save only where it is revealed Which as it was one of the places among many other I cited see my p. 30. in Contradiction to the three Passages above so had he no Reason to say here But wherein I have contradicted that Assertion they shew not for I both shewed and directed my Reader to fourteen contradictory Assertions out of his Book of Universal Grace from my p. 26 to 31. and declared p. 26. immediately after the Quotation he brings that I so brought them In his Sixthly he creeps in at the Tail of a Citation of Mine Nor is the outward Name that which saveth but the inward Nature Vertue c. thus But they no where shew how I contradict this Answ That is false for it is one of these fourteen I mentioned even now He goes on I say still it is not the outward Name either of God or Christ that saveth without the inward Nature Vertue and Power which dwelt and dwells in all fulness in the Man Christ Jesus c. Here he falsifieth his own Quotation as if there were no difference between saying It is not the outward Name that saveth BUT the inward Nature c. and saying It is not the outward Name that saves WITHOUT the inward Nature c. So little doth he regard what becomes a fair Adversary Had he took my Sentence entire his Contradiction had been obvious In Order to clear an Objection himself had raised That there can be no Justification without Faith in Christ but these Gentiles had not Faith in Christ therefore c. he Answers by denying the second Proposition thus If they did cleave unto and believe in the Light they believe in Christ for he is the Light nor is the outward Name that which saveth but the inward Nature Virtue and Power signified thereby which was made manifest in them c. So that here he ascribes Salvation in these Gentiles to the inward Work who according as stated on the Objection were supposed not to have Faith in Christ but they believing in the Light he saith they have and so contradicts that other saying alledged above that the Faith of both the inward and outward coming is indispensibly necessary to all He often laies to my Charge that I bring no place to prove where he contradicts himself but that is not true He leaps over my Proofs that he may not see them picking here and there a Passage in reading over many Pages and perhaps chuseth such as lye most remote from my comparing wherein the Contradiction lies So here in his Seventhly upon my quoting him That these Gentiles he leaves out who did call upon the Name of the Lord and were saved and adds which was not there had the Gospel Preached unto them who goes on were not under any outward Administration of the Gospel And then alledgeth I bring no place to prove where he contradicts this Assertion I will tell him Let him â—ut read two Lines further and it will direct him where viz. in Truth Advanced p. 70. But guess I ken his meaning why he left out did â—all upon the Name of the Lord and put â—n had the Gospel preached unto them viz. that he might hook in the next Citation of Mine which more touched him without a particular Reply For this was but a Proem to that â—here from the Apostles saying They have not I obeyed I shew he allows the very Gospel hath â—een Preached unto all otherwise saith he they â—ould never have been charged with not having obeyed it And upon that I put him to prove â—hat the History of Christs Birth Crucifixion c. was ever preached to all either expliciteâ— or implicitely seeing he saith the very Goâ—pel hath been and secondly that such receiâ—ed not the Holy Ghost as in p. 28. of Mine â— this like a Man Or a Scholar And that to â—â—e he so vndervalues as having neither true â—ogick nor common Sense And whereas he â—n Answer to the jumbled Quotation he brings â—lledgeth that the former Distinction will serve â—re of express and implicite this is to affirm â—ot prove If Time or Ability had not failed â—im surely it behoved him to have done it What he would have to be Noted as if the â—ain Branch of the Question were of the Necessity of our Faith in Christ crucified to our Salvation who are professed Christians I do note as a notable slander for Proof whereof he referring nâ— to his own Evidence some where or other in his Exact Narrative for he tells us not where I Answer I doubt not but if there the Reader will find it replied to in the Answer to the Narrative How the most pious and upright among the Gentiles were saved by Faith in Christ Crucified whâ— had not Faith outwardly Preached he now say may be one of these Secret things that belong to God and not to us till he please to reveal it Whâ— doth he meddle with them then and provâ— quarrelsom about it Why seek to comprehenâ— it and describe it by the City of Refuge â— where he tells us they are shut up as in a Custody or Safeguard till the Faith come to be revealed But this 't is to hold Notions a Madares not defend In his Eighthly he brings me in thus quoting him He Christ left not the other Nations destitute of the main and principal Thing eveâ— the Manifestation of the Light c. I addeâ— there which would have given them the Knowledge of God and of all his Laws and Statutes neâ—â— ful to be known by them Hereupon he Paraphrâ— seâ—h upon his own Words main and principal thing 〈◊〉 think he meant the Light
For indeed what Analoge is there between a spiritual Body and that Body which is not to be destroyed but only the Belly Guts and Draught of it Herein he seems well-deserving the Character of a Carnal Conceiver which I fastned on him and this Answers G. Keith's Query Do these Words prove that I have Carnal Conceptions of the Resurrection like those Sadducees To the second Did not the Sadducees altogether deny the Resurrection I Answer Yes Yet the Idea they conceived thereof in such as did believe it was very carnal witness their Instance in the seven Men that married one Woman But upon a groundless Presumption that I had inferred his saying that Men should have Belly Guts and Draught after the Resurrection which I never intended he bestows his vulgar Rhetorick of Perversion and downright Forgery upon me then refers p. 34. to his Book called Truth Advanced which I am willing enough the Reader should see for there he will find more of the same Leaven and lastly his Answer to the Bishop of Aberdeen's queries which was Extant as he saith thirty Years ago Answ His former Sentiments therein being sound if they were so doth not prove his latter were so But that he hath contradicted himself in this and other particulars is too notorious I doubt not to such as have read my former and 〈◊〉 read these The next thing is concerning Water-Baptism and the Supper wherein I shewed thaâ— one while he pretended to be moderate in his Judgment concerning them another while represented theâ— as abolished Shadows and legâ— Rites buried and not to be raised up again as iâ— my p. 35 to 42. More Instances I could give but I reserve them till further Service calls foâ— them these being shifted by him though upon occasion of my opposing some of his Queries in Truth Advanced p. 183 184. tâ— his declared contradictory Sense formerly â—â— alledgeth that they were simply proposed by hiâ— as Queries and plainly distinguished from Positions and that at Turners-Hall some made the excuse They did but Query Answ That Account or Narrative of what passed at Turners-Hall being given by himself who is a Party and none of the fairest Adversaries I dare not confide in and therefore apply my self to himself thus That if I did believe he would deny there were affirmative Interrogatives Queries in the Nature of Affirmations I would hunt for a passage I lately saw in a Book of his that would give it against him For that these were so coupled with Positions not distinguished from them is plain in that they were proposed as tending to Love Peace and Unity among the Sincere Professors of the Lord Jesus Christ see Truth Advanced p. 173. which if he will not be bound by what are they brought for or what a slippery Chapman will these Men have of him But to go on from his adding of these Sincere Professors that they held the Head and Build on the true Foundation and yet differ in some lesser Matters I observed that at the same Time no Epithets were with him black enough upon his quondam Friends whom he sometimes boasts he hath been upwards of thirty Years amongst G. Keith taking hold of that Passage hold the Head and build on the true Foundation and giving the other the slip renders us so unchristianly uncharitable as he saith we too evidently shew we are as to judge none in Christendom differing from us in Profession hold the Head or are Sincere Professors of the Lord Jesus Christ but we only But he runs too fast and in his Prejudice outruns himself We do not so judge though he while so unchristianly uncharitable they are his own Words to his quondam Friends and yet seeking to claw with others that he might Nest somewhere deserved that rebuke Now let us hear what a kind of Retractation he makes The Reader may perhaps expect some great matter if he be enformed what large Notice he hath given before hand above a twelve Month ago and how he bespoke his own Praise in the being free to do it For in his Book called True Copy Dated in the third Month 1695. in Order to introduce what he called A short List of the Vile and gross Errors of G. Whitehead J. Whitehead W. Penn c. he freely acknowledgeth that upon a review of his former Books of Immediate Revelation Universal Grace Rector Corrected and Truth defended he hath found some Passages and Words that not only need some further Explanation but even in some Part an Emendation and Correction And thanks Almighty God that has not only given him to see them but has given him that Humility of Heart Love to Truth and regard to the Salvation of Souls that he can freely both acknowledge and correct his former Mistakes after the example of some worthy Ancients True Copy p. 17. What could be expected from hence but something besides flourish from such as did not know G. Keith especially considering he hath took Time for it All he gives is this I am not ashamed says he here p. 34 35. to own my general Mistakes I have been under concerning divers Places of Scriptures particularly Relative to Water-Baptism and the Supper as Mat. 28. 19. and 1 Cor. 11. 26. And some other Places of Scripture relative to some other Matters especially in the Misapplication of some Places to prove certain Truths which these Places did not prove And I am so far from being ashamed to Publish this Confession that I have great Peace and Joy in it Answ This Confession is as Lame as he pretends in another Place G. Whitehead's Evidence to be but two particular Scriptures named the rest General as if he designed a reserve when more of his Contradictions are laid open who notwithstanding the Joy and Peace he pretends to have in his Publication is very uneasily drawn to this little and perhaps had not I forced him to it by exposing of him had stayed yet another twelve Month before he had given them which yet Falls abundantly short of what was proposed in his True Copy no Emendation or Correction being yet extant to those four Books he there both promised to exhibit and assigned as needing them Thus Parturiunt montes nascitur ridiculus mus All G. Keith's empty crack ends in a Ridiculous Boast I shall follow him upon this subject though he unseasonably interposeth what comes not in course In his p. 36. upon his querying whether it may not be said there is one Baptism â—s there is one Land called America though the Map or Figure of it is also called America even as there is but one Spiritual Baptism with the Holy Ghost though the outward Baptism with Water is also called Baptism I opposed thereto his asserting That the Scriptures are not that word more than a Map or Description of Rome or London is Rome or London or the Image of Caesar is Caesar or Bread and Wine is the Body and Blood of Christ to which after a
little ventilation that the foregoing is only a Query he will let it pass for a position and adds 1. The Scriptures are not that Living and Essential Word c. But that they may be called the Word as a Map of America is called America I never denied saith he The more unsound man he the mean while say I especially he having confessed they are no more so then Bread and Wine are the Body and Blood of Christ Therefore what he would turn upon us viz. That if we deny this to be a Truth we must hold with the Papists rebounds upon himself 2. That though there is but one Spiritual Baptism yet that the outward Baptism with Water is also called Baptism is also true for John's Baptism with Water is called in Scripture the Baptism of John saith he Answer And so there were divers Washings oâ— Baptisms and the Doctrine of Baptisms in those Daies see Heb. 9 10. and 6. 2. Although the Christians had but one which himself once acknowledged to J. A. of Leith when he told him We do not say as the Papists that there were two Baptisms with Water one of John another of Christ Truths Defence p. 124. But not it seems he can both say it with the Papists and defend it so uncertain a man is he Expostulating with him I added Here this Rabbi who once boasted that he hath the gifts both of sound knowledge and Expressions with manifold other Mercies bestowed upon him hath foiled himself sorely At this he excepts first against the word Rabbi alledging it is in a Scoffing Spirit and that it is the known way of the Quakers not to call a Man Master Answer I used it as the Characteristick of what he covets to be to wit a Sect Master and as such it suits him His next Cavil p. 37. against the Word foiled himself sorely he leaving to the Intelligent to Judge I do so also Yet is he willing to forestall his Judgment wherein I shall not imitate him Then to vindicate those words sound knowledge c. From savouring of Boasting he alledgeth that to make it look like a Boast I left out these last words for which I desire to Praise him for ever and the foregoing viz. his being Charged by his Opponent with Marvellous Ignorance Falshood and Giddiness To the first I say The Pharisee stood and Prayed thus to himself God I thank thee that I am not as other Men Luk 18. 11. The Pharisee thanked God G. Keith desired to Praise him for ever To the second Let another Man Praise thee and not thy own Mouth a Stranger and not thy own Lips Prov. 27. 2. He Objects against my calling his Book of Truth Advanced a Bulky Book But this I did not as representing it a bigger Volumn than many good Men have writ but that it was all Bulk not to edification but such gear as I have given the Reader a tast of already under my second Head I now return to his p. 35. where he alledgeth that I blame him for Opposing it as an Error That the Garden of Paradise was some part of this Visible Earth He left out And that Mans Food both for his Soul and Body was to have been Paradisical to which he gives no other answer than some citations and inferences out of G. W. G. F. and W. S. That G. W. and W. S have writ against them who have affirmed that the forbidden Fruit was an Apple the Serpent a Creature like our English Snares from which Dream of theirs the Picture of a Snake and an Apple in its Mouth in a Tree are set up at the beginning of Bibles c. Hence he argues p. 36. If the Trees of the Garden were not Visible and particularly the Tree of the forbidden Fruit as G. W. saith it was not then to be sure the Garden by his Judgment was not Visible c. Answer â—â— doth not follow that man was not in a Visible Garden any more than it would in the Metaphor wherein Nathan expressed David's Sin with Bâ—â—â—shebah under the Parable of an Ew-Lamb For as it would be an undue inference that David Uriah c. Were not Visible Persons upon this Visible Earth because it would be gross ignorance and darkness to think Nathan spake of a material Ew-Lamb so in this case it is as absurd to conclude G. Keith's Notions that the Garden of Paradise was not some part of this Visible Earth that man's Food before the Fall was to have been Paradisical and the Cloathing with the Skin and Flesh of this Frail Mortal and corruptible Body received but since the Fall as in Truth Advanced p. 16. 18. and 27. are backed by these Friends not allowing the gross Interpretation and Conception upon Gen. 3. What he adds out of G. Fox's Journal which he tauntingly calls that Famous Book where it is said I was come up in Spirit through the Flaming Sword into the Paradise of God is very idle For as there being a Mystical Canaan doth not imply there never was an outward one So there being a Mystical Paradise doth not imply there never was an outward Paradise To defend his Exposition of Adam and Eve's hiding themselves among the Trees of the Garden to be in a Tree of the Garden and that that one Tree may be well understood to be the divine Mercy or Clemency whereupon I replyed The divine Mercy is in Christ Jesus and if they were got there methinks when they heard the Voice of the Lord God walking in the Garden they should not have been afraid for they were already safe G. Keith p. 37. after a repeating his having said that the Hebrew doth bear it in a Tree of the Garden and a reflecting upon my ignorance in the Hebrew a Language I never pretended Skill in for it is the application that I mind adds Are they not carnally minded to think that Adam thought he could hide himself either among the Trees of an outward Garden or in any one Tree of it so as God might not see him Answer Adams thoughts I shall not dive into but if he thought to hide himself from the wrath of God even in a Tree of the Garden according to G. Keith's Exposition he found himself mistaken But how Natural it is for fear and guilt to take undue and precipitant Courses which in a sedate frame they could not propose to be sheltered by instances in Isai 2. 19. Hos 10. 8. and Rev. 6. 15 16. declare where men are said to go into the Holes of the Rocks and Caves of the Earth for Fear of the Lord to say to the Mountains Cover us and to the Hills Fall on us to hide themselves in the Dens and Rocks of the Mountains that they might hide them from the Face of him that sitteth upon the Throne and from the wrath of the Lamb. Did these men thinks he reckon God could not see them there Or were they not in a Terrour and
a plain Intimation what animated him not a concern for God and his Truth so much as Revenge and Malice In p. 7. G. Keith acknowledgeth he said in one Book this is quoted Presbyterian and Independent Churches p. 133. and should be p. 111. The express Knowledge of Christs Death and Sufferings as Man in the outward is not universally necessary to Salvation but that he hath said That the express Knowledge of Christs Death is universally necessary he alledgeth C. Pusey â—iâ—es no Passage in any of his Books Answ Himself hath acknowledged in that very Book Presbyterian and Independent Churches p. 111. That the express Knowledge is universally necessary to the perfecting of Salvation and Justification and in p. 112. hath allotted them when it must be viz. not when living but afterwards and the same he saith here thus I never had any Controversie with any saith he whether the express Knowledge and Faith of Christs Death and Sufferings be universally necessary to Mans Salvation so as necessary to be had by all and every one before Death Thus incidit in Scyllam qui vult vitare Charybdim To get off from a Contradiction he recurs to what will include the Doctrine of Purgatory or Revolutionism for if not before Death then after Death And when then In their Passage through the Valley of the Shadow of Death as instanced above Or in a renewed Visitation and Re-animation The former shakes Hands with the Papists the latter with the Revolutionists But the true State of the Question between them and me was and is saith G. Keith Whether the express Knowledge and Faith of Christs Death Sufferings c. be not necessary to Salvation to all professing Christianity and who have the opportunity and help of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament c. Answ What he calls the true State of the Question is denied by them particularly by S. J. State of the Case p. 11. to be any Question at all as well as that it iâ— against our known Principle to call in Question the Necessity of the Faith of Christs Death and Sufferings where the means of having it is afforded What C. Pusey relates from p. 24 to 28. G. Keith Terms base Insinuations against him about the twelve Revolutions and telling some Stories most of which are if we will believe G. Keith absolutely false and that little that is true not fairly nor duly related and for which no Proof is brought but his own forfeited Credit c. p. 8. Answ This is too general What are those Stories Which of them absolutely false Which in Part true And in what Part true in what unfairly related If the Friend have forfeited his Credit I am sure G. Keith goes not the way to gain his However one of the Relations I shall transcribe which was ' That G. Keith told Ebenezer Slocam of Rhoad Island as he affirms to this purpose That it was Gods great Mercy to the Jebusites Amorites and Hittites of Old in that he destroyed them so much at once by the Israelites for that by so doing their Souls might be sooner come into the Bodies of the Jews Children and so consequently become the sooner to be Members of the Visible Church c. See Modest Account p. â—7 If this be one of the Stories he hath ought material to object against it had highly behoved him instead of passing it over in silence to have declared whether false in the whole or in Part for if this be true his leaning to the Doctrine â—f the twelve Revolutions is undeniable as well as his sliding so lightly over it gives a â—â—rong Presumption that he hath spoken to â—â—at Effect His next Essay to clear himself from having indicated us and our Doctrine to C. Mather a New England is as unsuccessful He saith â— was before that Party rose up against him in Pennsilvania to oppose the same Doctrine he deliveâ—ed in his Printed Books that he was astonisht to â—d how suddenly they turned against the very same â—octrine after W. Stockdale had accused him of Preaching two Christs and finding G. Whitehead and W. Penn to favour and support them he found sufficient cause to changs his Judgment concerning these Men p. 8 9. Answ This will not shelter him for his complaint against W. Stockdale which had had a hearing before Friends and they for the most Part excused and defended him as G. Keith alledgeth was by himself again laid before Friends of the Ministry at their Yearly Meeting in Pennsilvania in the seventh Month 1691. See Plea p 2 and 3. whereas the Book in Answer to C. Mather called Serious Appeal was Printed Anno 1692. This shews as if the Man would boggle at nothing to excuse himself who haâ— in that Book defended our Friends in Americâ— as well as here from being Heretical or Blasphemous Alike successful is he in what he alledgeth against G. Whitehead and W. Penn Foâ— those very Books out of which he and other in their Book called Christian Faith haâ— brought instances to convince our Opposers â—â— the soundness of our Principles hath G. Keith since offered to prove unsound in those very Principles This is not changing his Judgement of Men only but even of Books His next Paragraph p. 9. is about the Doctrine of the Revolutions in which he dodget extreamly one while representing it as such which from two Passages out of G. Fox in the one he mentions neither Book nor Page bâ—â— saith it is in some of his Printed Books in thâ— other he gives the Book viz. the Journal and not the Page he saith hath occasioned son to think G. Fox favoured the Revolutions and adds but I do not say he did Query Did he not know he did not Which shews the Man doth not know what he would be at for if not sufficient from his lame Quotations to â—aâ—ten that Doctrine upon G. Fox why did he bring them Another while he renders it a Question Whether the Disciples did not hold that â—xtrine that said Master who hath sinned this Man or his Servants he should have said Paents that he was born Blind and adds many other Places of Scripture there are on which he â—ight as much and much more query concerning the â—evolutions as any Expressions he hath mentioned â— mine But all this is trifling if he can prove at Doctrine of the Revolutions by Scripture â—â— him avow it to be his and do so He who â—â—th told us that it is only safe to keep close Scripture Words and Terms will he not do himself But what the Friend offered to â—ove that Notion to be his G. Keith gives â—â— but in a general Reference to p. 24 25 â—â— of the Friends Book till he comes to the â—stance of an Indian and poor Infant Now C. Pusey in his p. 25 26. had argued thus ' If â—hey could not perish though they dyed without Faith and Knowledge and yet that Faith and Knowledge is absolutely necessary
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.
related to his being Preached as Crucified to the Jews so the MORE GENERALLY as a Light to the Gentiles was also restricted to the so Preaching him yet with this addition that G. Keith then allowed it yet further that it was more generally Preached to both Jew and Gentile A Contradiction had been more excusable than such a deceitful Cover His Secondly cites no Page of mine in particular but hath a general reference from p. 15. to 33. which gives him scope to skip as he pleaseth They perversly infer saith he from my words that whereas I formerly made the knowledge and Faith of the History of Christs outward coming not Essential to Religion now I did make it Essential This he accounts Palpable Forgery denies any of the citations I bring prove it and at last recurs to his late distinction of implicit Knowledge and Faith But this is a meer begging of the question that who were saved by the inward had ALL of them the implicit Faith and Knowledge of the outward not brought till of late whatever he pretend of his understanding it so all a long and is impugned by me p. 14 15. particularly from Luke 24. 10 11. From whence I again argue That the Disciples themselves were so far from having an implicit Faith in Christ that he should Dye and rise again that they disbelieved it It seemed to them as idle Tales and they believed them not and that even after he had sent them out two and two and the Devils had been subject to them Chap. 10. ver 1 and 17. If the Reader be disposed to cast an Eye back to my p. 15 to p. 33. he will yet more evidently see I have not wronged him and perhaps be convinced wherefore G. Keith dropped them To his Thirdly Wherein he repeats his Notion concerning Cornelius not having the Holy Ghost in his Gentile-State c. as it hath been largely treated of in this very Tract under my first Head I referr thereto Yet he persisting p. 29. to deny the Holy Ghost is in Wicked Men or the pious Gentiles and that none have it but Believers in Christ crucified and yet acknowledging the Word near to be Christ an Administration of the Gospel to be given in all Ages of the World the Spirit the same the Rule the same the Faith the same see Universal Grace p. 8. Immediate Revelation p. 107 108. Truths Defence p. 70. forecited shews he would divide Christ from his Spirit and is contradictory A further instance whereof take out of his Book of Divine Immediate Revelation p. 63. where he saith Cornelius received the Spirit immediately and yet obtained it FURTHER by means of Peter's Preaching Whereas now he denieth he had the Holy Ghost in his Gentile-State But it is become habitual to him since he turned from Truth to contradict himself and his former Writings To my Question Whether any Prayer is heard by God but what is put up by his Spirit He Answers Nay but Servants and Pious Gentiles such as Cornelius was in his Gentile-State may be and are helped to Pray by the Spirit having the influence of the first Ministration of the Spirit which though remotely Preparatory yet doth not instate the Soul into Union with the Spirit c. Whence had he this Or how doth he prove that Mens Souls are not in Union with the Spirit when helped to pray by the Spirit Surely as there are Degrees of Ministration so there are Degrees of Union and Degrees of Acceptance Diversities of Gifts but the SAME Spirit 1 Cor. 12. 4. But he goes on And were not my Adversaries extream blind and ignorant they might understand how the Apostle calleth one and the same Spirit the Spirit of Servitude and the Spirit of Adoption Rom 8. 15. Doth he bring this for or against himself If the Spirit in the Son and the Servant be one and the same Spirit it must be the Holy Spirit It is Everlastingly Holy in its self Holy in every Operation and Ministration in Man but in Degree the Administrations differ the Law must be passed under before the Sonship is known it is the Spirit of Holiness in every step so denominated from its Effects though the Sonship is not the first step He goes on These Mens arguing that Men may be Eternally Saved c. who have no Faith or Knowledge of Christ without them do sufficiently declare what Heathens they are and of what little value they make the Faith and Knowledge of Christ Crucified and that their Religion is nothing but Deism c. Answ We do not believe that that Faith is not necessary to Salvation to us to whom the means of knowing it is offered but the contrary But that where it is not revealed it is not of Necessity unto Salvation G. Keith hath granted There it is more than Deism yea Christianity for believing in the Light they do believe in Christ See Universal Grace p. 117. and p. 30. In his Fourthly he cites a Passage of mine imperfectly out of Rector Corrected p. 150. and then makes his flourish To a Question of the Rector of Arrow whether the Light within sufficiently tells us that the Messiah is come born had real Flesh dyed c. G. Keith Answers that it doth teach That there is a God that created all things that he is most Holy Just and Wise a plentiful Rewarder of them that fear him c. and that these are AS NECESSARY Truths as any c. See my p. 22. Upon this I argued and G. Keith hath dropt both Quotation and Argument If the Holy Ghost be given ONLY to the one Faith not to the other surely that one Faith must needs be the most necessary Faith Now to the other part that many who never had the Scriptures yet if faithful to the Light whether they have not been accepted have not believed in the Light by believing in Christ who is the Light he queries But where is my Contradiction here Answ Even in what I have cited above and he hath craftily left out He goes on Did I ever say That Men may believe in the Light or Christ within and never at any Time from first to last believe in Christ without either explicitely or implicitely For this they bring no Proof and I believe they cannot saith he Answ It was not the Rectors Question Whether they that dyed without it and had it not at first should have it at last in some other Revolution Perhaps neither of them dreamt of that Distinction when the Book was wrote Nor whether they should have it explicitely or implicitely but whether the Light doth sufficiently tell it He should in his Answer have made that Distinction if he would have it allowed him now but instead of that to an indefinite Question he gives an indefinite Answer asserting there are Truths as necessary that it doth teach and that they that believe in the Light believe these necessary Truths thus revealed believe in Christ and are