Rotterdam, the 28th of March, 1678.
* * * * *
_A brief and distinct Solution of the Argument which the
Ambassador aforesaid useth against_ Robert Barclay’s Thesis,
_whereby he attempts to evince, that not the inward revelation
of the_ Holy Spirit, _but the outward by the Scripture, is the
principal rule, and foundation of our faith: at least to us
Europeans, who have the Scriptures._
As to his argument, as it was transmitted to us, if he considers the
strength and substance of it, thus it stands: ‘The history of the
outward coming, nativity, death, resurrection, and ascension of Jesus
Christ, is either necessary to their salvation, to whom the Scriptures
came, or it is not necessary, viz. to be known and believed. If we
say the second, namely, that the history is not necessary to be known
and believed in order to the salvation of us Europeans who have the
Scriptures, then it will follow that we are not Christians, because we
deny that true, essential, and constitutive character of the Christian
religion, which consists in believing that Christ was sent into the
world, born of the Virgin Mary, dead and buried, rose again the third
day, ascended into heaven, where he sitteth at the right hand of the
Father, &c. But if they say the first, viz. That the knowledge and
faith of the history are necessary to our salvation, then it will
follow, that the Scripture, and not the inward revelation of the holy
Spirit, is the principal rule and foundation of that historical faith
and knowledge.
Now this he endeavours to prove, both from some other principles of the
Quakers, so called, and from R. B.’s sixth Thesis, after this manner:
That, said the ambassador, is the principal rule and foundation
of our faith, which is the only medium or mean, whereby that
historical knowledge and faith are brought unto us: but,
according to the Quakers, and the sixth Thesis, the Scripture is
the only medium or mean, whereby that historical knowledge and
faith are brought unto us: therefore, according to the Quakers,
and the sixth Thesis, the Scripture is the principal rule and
foundation of our faith.
The minor he proves thus: the author of the Thesis, (says he,)
confesseth in his sixth Thesis, that there is a people, to whom
God, by some inevitable accident, hath made that historical
knowledge and faith impossible: and the reason why that
historical knowledge and faith are impossible to that people, is
because they are destitute of the Scriptures, and live in those
corners of the world, whereunto the outward preaching of the
history never came; from which argument it will follow, that the
Scriptures are the only medium or mean, whereby the historical
knowledge and faith of Christ came to any people.
For the clearer understanding the solution of this argument, some
things worthy observation are to be considered:
1. First then observe, that the force of this argument at most
intends to prove this, viz. That the Scripture is the principal
rule and foundation of historical faith and knowledge; but we
with good reason distinguish between historical and saving
knowledge, and between historical and saving faith; because
many may have an historical knowledge and faith, who have not
that which is saving. Yea, it is possible, that a man, by the
inward revelation of the holy Spirit, may have an historical
knowledge and faith, who yet may not have that faith which is
saving; because saving faith hath regard to God, not precisely as
revealing some outward history concerning God and Christ but as
revealing very God and Christ by his grace, goodness, mercy, and
power, ready and willing to save us, according to his unspeakable
good-will towards us: by which saving faith we rest upon God
through Christ, our light and life, as upon our most merciful
Father; which faith can neither exist, nor be conceived without
love to God, humility before God, denial, and diffidence of self;
and therefore such a faith is saving. But historical faith,
though wrought in the hearts of men by the inward revelation and
operation of the holy Spirit, may be without that divine love,
humility and self-denial: wherefore precisely considered in its
own nature, it is not saving. It was this kind of knowledge and
faith which wicked Balaam had, who saw and knew many historical
futurities, and believed them, but had not saving faith.
2. Observe, secondly, That the knowledge and faith necessary to
salvation, are to be understood two ways, either by a necessity
antecedent, or in way of priority, or by a necessity consequent,
or in way of posteriority. Necessity antecedent, or in way of
priority, is, when something is absolutely necessary to our
salvation, that we both know and believe it; and because it is
necessary, God doth therefore reveal it to us; of which sort are
such principles as these, viz. That God follows men with his love
and good-will; that he invites and persuades them to come unto
him; that he is ready to show favour to men, and pardon their
sins, if they sincerely repent themselves of their past misspent
life, and lead a new one for the time to come; that God hears
the prayers of those that are truly humble and suppliant; that
he is a glorious rewarder of all that live soberly, righteously,
and godly; that he is a most just avenger against all those who
despise his grace and love, and repent not of their sins, &c.
All which, in some degree, are to all men, even to those who are
destitute of the Scriptures, revealed by that inward evangelical
light, which enlightens all men. Necessity consequent, or in
way of posteriority, is, when something is not absolutely
necessary to our salvation, but after a certain sort, or under
some respect, condition, and limitation; of which kind are those
things which are not revealed, because they are necessary; but
because they are revealed, they are necessary to be believed by
us: for example; if God should reveal to any man, that it was
his will and command, he should go to Rome to reprove tyranny
and superstition; certainly this revelation were necessary to
be believed to that man’s salvation, by a necessity consequent,
because that faith is an act of obedience; and to obey God is
necessary to salvation.
3. Observe in the third place, that among those things that are
necessary to be believed to salvation by a necessity consequent,
there are some things, though not absolutely necessary, yet are
they very profitable and conducive means to our salvation; of
which sort are the historical knowledge and faith concerning God,
the creation and government of the world. Christ’s taking flesh,
and dying therein for our sins, &c. whether that historical
knowledge come to us, either by the sole inward revelation of
the holy Spirit, without the medium or mean of Scripture, or
also by both, to wit, both by the inward inspiration of the holy
Spirit, and by the Scriptures; which two mediums or means, do
sometimes concur in producing in men historical knowledge and
faith concerning God and Christ, as is said before, but in a
different manner. The outward revelation, as it is called, of
Scripture, is a medium or mean, by way of material object, in
producing that historical knowledge and faith: but the inward
inspiration and revelation wrought in the hearts of men by the
holy Spirit, are a medium or mean by way of formal object,
in producing the same historical knowledge and faith. By the
material object we understand that which is believed; and
therefore the Scriptures which are believed, are the material
object of historical knowledge and faith. By the formal object
we understand the principal motive in respect to the object,
for which the Scriptures are believed. But the principal motive
in respect of the object, is not the Scripture itself, but that
inward testimony of the holy Spirit, which when we hear or read
the Scriptures, when it pleaseth the most good and great God to
inspire the hearts of men, works an assent in us, whether it
inclines us to assent to the historical truths hitherto declared
in the Scriptures or no: wherefore we do not affirm that the holy
Spirit doth ordinarily and commonly speak in us something that is
new, or declare to our inward hearing those particular histories
of God and Christ, (though God may, if he shall please, do it at
this day;) but we say, that God doth by his holy Spirit, through
his sensible and perceptible motions and operations objectively
representing themselves, move and incline us to assent unto, and
believe the Scriptures, and the historical truths declared of in
the Scriptures.
These things considered, we affirm, that though the Scriptures
are ordinarily and commonly a certain medium or mean, by way of
material object or condition, for the producing of historical
knowledge and faith in us; and that, commonly speaking, a
necessary mean too, as being that without which God doth not
ordinarily reveal the outward history of God and Christ; yet we
utterly deny that in true Christians the Scripture, or outward
history in the Scriptures, is the principal motive, foundation,
or principal rule of that historical faith, much less of saving
faith, to the producing of which the letter of the Scripture doth
very frequently, (as to many of its acts, if not all,) not concur
or co-operate, either as a material object, or as a necessary
condition, which is wont commonly to be called in the schools,
_Causa sine quâ non_, or a cause or condition without which a
thing cannot be done, though it doth not influence the effect.
Now for a direct solution of the argument aforesaid, we answer,
that the historical knowledge and faith concerning Christ’s being
born, dead, buried, &c. to us Europeans, who have the Scriptures,
are necessary to salvation, that is to say, by a necessity
consequent, or in way of posteriority, (as was before explained,)
which assertion of ours nevertheless militates not against the
sixth Thesis, which granteth, that that historical knowledge
and faith are impossible to those who live in those corners of
the world, where the knowledge of the history is wanting: which
impossibility is not absolutely to be understood, but after a
sort, and in some respect; because, without doubt, God doth
ordinarily communicate that historical knowledge unto men, by the
medium or mean of the Scriptures; yet not as the principal medium
or mean, much less as by the only one: because certainly that
inward motion of the holy Spirit wrought in our hearts, moving
and inclining us objectively to assent unto, and believe the
Scriptures, is the principal motive in respect of the object, for
which we believe the Scriptures, and therefore is the foundation
and principal rule of our historical faith also.
Wherefore we answer unto the minor proposition of the last
syllogism, by plainly and directly denying that minor
proposition, viz. That the Scriptures are the only medium or
mean for attaining to the knowledge of the history: they are
indeed one certain medium or mean, and that necessary; but they
are not the only or principal. An example for the illustration
hereof, occurs in natural and outward vision: for when I see a
white or red rose, that white or red rose is the material object
of my sight, and one necessary medium for the producing of that
sight; yet that rose is not the only medium or mean; for the
light is another, no less necessary, concurring to produce my
sight, by way of formal object, by means of which I see that rose
represented under such or such a colour and figure. Moreover, in
that he asserts, these inward motions wrought by the holy Spirit
in the hearts of believers, are so undiscernible by us, that
believers cannot clearly and infallibly distinguish them from
their own private and proper motions; this he supposes but proves
not. And therein he is deceived, either through his inexperience,
or want of that due waiting, and attention to those motions in
the divine illumination of Christ, wherewith he hath enlightened
both him [the ambassador] and all men coming into the world. But
our experience, together with the experience of the holy prophets
and apostles, is a stronger motive to induce us to believe, that
divine inward revelation is sufficiently clear and convincing
by its own light and evidence, than his own bare and jejune
supposition to the contrary, by reason of his want of experience
or attention.
As to the Latin, we have not been very curious in this writing,
by reason of haste; yet have briefly answered the argument as
a friend communicated it to us by letter; if he hath omitted
any thing in this transmission, or we may seem not to have
understood, or touched the strength of the argument, let it be
remitted to us; and we, through divine assistance, shall answer
it at large.
GEORGE KEITH, AND
ROBERT BARCLAY.
This solution was delivered to the said
ambassador, not long before the epistle cited
page 537, and at page 17, in the Appendix to
Sewel’s Dutch History.
* * * * *
_A brief Enodation of an Argument proposed by another person._
Moreover as to what relates to another person’s argument against that
part of R. B.’s second Thesis, which asserts, that divine inward
revelation is that which is evident and clear of itself, moving the
well-disposed understanding by its own evidence, &c. to the end of the
Thesis.
The argument is thus formed: Such an evidence as is asserted in the
Thesis, is destructive of faith, because it is not the evidence of
faith. He proves the antecedent by the words of the Apostle, “Faith
is the evidence of things not seen.” Heb. xi. 1. By which words the
apostle seems to intimate, that faith hath not this kind of evidence;
for if it were of things seen, it would contradict the apostle.
The solution of this argument is easy; for evidence is three-fold.
The first is the evidence of things sensible, appertaining to the
outward senses.
The second is the evidence of things intellectual, but natural,
appertaining to natural reason.
The third is the evidence of things spiritual and supernatural, as
they are proposed to the understanding by the inward illumination and
revelation of the Holy Spirit.
The first evidence may be called the evidence of sense, or animal
evidence.
The second, the evidence of reason, or rational evidence.
The third, the evidence of faith, or spiritual evidence.
But faith is the evidence of things not seen, that is, neither visible
by the outward senses, or by natural reason; yet these things hinder
not, but that faith may be the evidence of things not seen by the
understanding of a man, not as operating in its own natural way, but as
divinely elevated and assisted by the inward illumination and operation
of the holy Spirit. Wherefore, though things appertaining to faith may
be very obscure, and as it were mere darkness, both to the outward
senses, and natural reason; yet they have their evidence, if duly
proposed to an understanding divinely enlightened. Is it not said in
the same chapter to the Hebrews, concerning Moses, that by faith he saw
God? That is to say, not by the outward eye, nor by the eye of natural
reason, but by the eye of faith.
The curious may see the original Latin, from which the preceding are
translated, in the Appendix to William Sewel’s Dutch History of the
Quakers.