Some of the many fallacies of William Penn detected in a paper called Gospel truths signed by him and three more at Dublin, the 4th of the 3d month, 1698, and in his late book called A defence of Gospel truths, against the exceptions of the B. of Cork's testimony concerning that paper : with some remarks on W.P., his unfair and unjust treatment of him : to which is added a synopsis or short view of W. Penn's deism, collected out of his book called A defense of the general rule of faith, &c. / by George Keith.

Section 1.

W. P's Fallacy, in calling the Illumination of the Holy Ghost, which to him is nothing but the com∣mon Illumination given to all Mankind, toge∣ther with the Scriptures a double and agreeing Record of true Religion. His false Notion of Heaven and Hell, denying the Locality of them. His abusive Reflection on the Bishop of Cork, his keeping the true Hell to himself. His Fallacy in pretending to the Bishop, that he owned the Holy Trinity; where as in his Sandy Founda∣tion he hath expresly denied it, and argued against it. His denying that outward Person that suffered at Jerusalem, to be properly the Son of God. His denying that the Body of Christ, was any part of Christ; and his agree∣ment with G. W. and other Quakers, in deny∣ing the Humanity of Christ, to be any part of the true Christ.

Page 1. HE saith, The Testimony of the Scriptures of Truth, and the Illu∣mination of the Holy Ghost, are the double and agreeing Record of true Religion.

In this he is very Fallacious in the very entrance, this Illumination of the Holy Ghost, he will have to be that which is given to be a general Rule to all Mankind, (see his Discourse concerning the General Rule of Faith and Life, Printed by T. Sowle 1699.) But how is that, together with the Scriptures, a double and agreeing Record? whereas that general Rule that he contendeth is given to all Mankind [to wit, that general Illumina∣tion, as given to Infidel Jews, Mahometans, and the Heathen World] is no Record to any one Article of the Apostles Creed, or any one peculiar Doctrine of Christianity, but only to some few Precepts of Morality, and general Piety towards God. Yea, W. P. hath confessed (see his Page 32 of that Discourse) That neither he nor his Brethren have any new superadded Revelation concerning A∣dam's Fall, and Christ's Birth, Death and Sufferings, &c. and saith, It is not necessary. Therefore the Illumination that he sets up for the General Rule to Quakers and Hea∣thens, is not any Record agreeing with the Scriptures in any one particular Article of the Christian Faith, or positive Precept of the Gospel, peculiar to the Christian Reli∣gion, as distinct from Deism and Heathenism.

Page 2. In his first Section the makes the eternal Reward of Happiness to be given to all them that fear God; without the least men∣tioning

of any Faith towards the Lord Jesus Christ, considered as both God and Man, to∣wards the obtaining the eternal Happiness; nor is there the least hint of any such Faith being necessary in all his Sections. And where∣as he saith, They that fear him not, shall be turned into Hell, as the Bishop of Cork did well observe: What W. P. means by Hell, by that Paper no one knows; but elsewhere what he means either by Heaven or Hell, he hath sufficiently told us in his Rejoinder to J. Faldo, p. 179. viz. To assert the Locality of Heaven and Hell is too Carnal, indeed Ma∣hometan. Seeing them W. P. doth not own any place without us, to be either Heaven or Hell, it is easie to understand what Hea∣ven or Hell W. P. is for, to wit, the Light within that's his only Heaven, and Darkness within his only Hell, which is the old Ran∣ters Notion, that is destructive to the great Fundamentals of Christianity, such as, that Christ is bodily ascended into a real Local Heaven without us, which Heavens all the Saints shall after the Resurrection, in their glorified Bodies he taken up into; and the Bodies of the Wicked together with their Souls, shall be cast into Hell, that is, a place of Torment, as really as the other is a place of Joy and Felicity. It is prodigiously Shame∣ful and Astonishing in W. P. that though he knew in his Conscience he did not mean Hell

in the common sense of Christians, which without doubt is the Bishop's sense, to wit, a real place of Torment without us, yet that he should so treat, the Bishop, and so rudely and unchristianly reflect upon him by a consequence as false as it is foul and dirty, saying in his Page 40, either one of these is an Article of his belief, or else he keeps the true Hell to himself.

Page 2. In his second Section, though he pro∣fesseth to express his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture Words, that there are Three that bear record in Heaven, the Father, the Word and the Spirit, and these three are really one; yet in his former Books, particularly in his Sandy Foundation, never yet retracted by him, he hath sufficiently discovered his gross and vile error, in that fundamental Doctrine of the Christian Faith, thus arguing not on∣ly against their being Three Persons, but their being Three, (otherwise than Nomi∣nally, which was the Sabellian Heresie) since the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spi∣rit is God, (which their opinion necessitates them to confess) then unless the Father, Son and Spirit are three distinct nothings, they must be three distinct Substances, and consequently three distinct God's. And he bringeth Five Arguments a∣gainst their being a Holy Three, P. 12, 13, 14.

In his Third Section, he seemeth to pro∣fess his and his Brethrens Faith in Scripture

terms. But this his professed Faith is quite in∣consistent with what he hath delivered in his other Books, here he saith, That the Word was made Flesh and dwelt among Men, and was and is the only begotten of the Father, full of Grace and Truth his beloved Son, &c. who tast∣ed Death for every Man, and dyed for Sin, that we might dye to Sin. But as it hath been above shewed, out of his Sandy Foundation, he hath ar∣gued against any such distinction as of the Father and the Son in the God-head, as in∣ferring a plurality of God's, and though here he professeth to believe that this only begotten Son, dyed for Sin, yet in his Se∣rious Apology Page 146 he saith, That the outward Person that suffered was properly the Son of God, we utterly deny. And in his guide mi∣staken P. 25. Christ Co-essential and Co-eternal with his Father &c. of being made Man, of his Dying, Rising and Ascending into Heaven, &c. [he saith of all this, that it is] confused Bab∣ble, and by Rote Canting, by paths of vain Tra∣dition, and Invention, results of Factious and corrupted Counsels. And in his Rejoinder to John Faldo Page 299. he plainly denyes, that the Body of Christ was any constitutive part of Christ, and for seven leaves together con∣tends against John Faldo, That Christ did not Dye, nor hang on the Cross, but only the Body, which he will not have to be any part of him. To this Doctrine of W. P. doth that of

G. Whitehead agree (a Man as great, or rather much greater, among the Quakers as W. P.) who saith in his Dipper Plunged P. 13. Jesus Christ God-man is not Scripture Language. And in his Christian Quaker P. 140. 141. though he grants that Christ had a humane Body of Flesh and Bones, yet he denys, that he con∣sisted of it, and saith, he distinguisheth be∣twixt Christ's having a Body, and consisting of it. And in a Book given forth by the Quakers, from their second days Meeting, (whereof G. W. is supposed the Author) called, A Testimony for the true Christ; and his Light in confutation of R. Cobbet printed 1668. They deny the Humanity of Christ, as Humanity signi∣fieth the Earthly Nature of Man's Body, as com∣ing from Humus the Ground; but as Humani∣ty signifies Meekness, Gentleness, Mercifulness; as opposite to Cruelty, in this last sence, they own Christ's Humanity, but deny it in the former, which yet is the true sense of Scripture, and of all true Christians.