Selected quad for the lemma: act_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
act_n	believe_v	faith_n	object_n	6,980	5	9.0206	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A32889	The Christian belief wherein is asserted and proved, that as there is nothing in the Gospel contrary to reason, yet there are some doctrines in it above reason, and these being necessarily enjoyn'd us to believe, are properly call'd mysteries : in answer to a book intituled, Christianity not mysterious.	Cheynell, Francis, 1608-1665.	1696 (1696)	Wing C3941; ESTC R212988	55,473	162

tolerable Ideas of and yet without any Materials to work upon can never be comprehended The Platonist supposed a Soul to the World and the Aristotelian a first Mover but could never give any tolerable account of the Rise of Mundane Matter without making it eternal In short they always taught That an Agent necessarily supposes a Patient really distinct from the Patient especially in external Actions And we know in Numbers it 's universally true Ex nihilo nihil est And we can conceive no otherwise in Nature at least the Reasoner cannot on his Principles pretend to it for he tells us we can form no manner of Idea of nothing and therefore how it is possible to form an Idea of the Creation by common Ideas when all our Ideas take their rise from Created Beings even that of the Infinite and Eternal Being are resembled by Objects of his own production It 's true we say this is an effect of Infinite Power but we have no notion of the Thing unless we apply Infinite Power to that which is the Subject of it which is nothing into every thing and when all is done we form an Idea of this Infinite Power purely by the Effects of it in Finite Beings So that upon the whole it 's evident the Belief of the Creation that implys a Production of all things out of nothing is an Object that exceeds Humane Comprehension and consequently we may conclude that Faith which yields an Assent to the Doctrine of the Creation often implys an Assent to a Thing that contains something in it that is Incomprehensible And indeed that Objects of Faith contain Things that exceed Humane Comprehension is a Truth so indisputable that Faith in the Judgment of the Primitive Church-Writers was on this account distinguished from Knowledge or Science It 's true In all Objects of Faith we are to know so much of 'em as to direct us what it is God proposes to our Belief And Secondly We are to believe That it is God that proposes ' em Thirdly In all Acts of Faith we are to yield an Assent to the Truth or Being of Things and this supposes that we have formed at least an imperfect Idea of their Nature but for the Quomodo sint that is for the Manner of their Being or Existence that may be an act of Knowledge or Science but not of Faith so that if seeming Contradictions or Absurdities arise on this account and consequently are thus far justly Incomprehensible Faith throws us upon the Infinite Veracity of God All this I shall endeavour to confirm by the Authorities of the Primitive Church And First The Passage already cited from Irenaeus manifestly instructs us That there are Difficulties and MYSTERIES in Revealed Truths which Humane Reason cannot comprehend and obliges us to commit all such Matters to GOD because they were delivered by his Word and Spirit and what is this but to embrace and believe upon his Infinite Veracity And at last concludes That if we observe the Method Fidem nostram servabimus omnis Scriptura à Deo nobis data consonans nobis invenietur Does not this imply that there are things contained in Matters of Faith that are Incomprehensible Yea rather that all seeming Difficulties or Absurdities that arise from 'em when scann'd by common Notions or Ideas are to be committed to God as the best Expedient to preserve a right Faith see Pag. 64. But Secondly Clemens Alexand. seems to state the Notion of Faith more clearly in opposition to Science And first he fixes the Foundation of Faith in the Word of GOD or the Holy Scriptures and represents it as an Irrefragible Foundation that carries the highest Demonstration in it and that we are to enquire no further than Ipse dixit upon which he advances this Maxim 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And to let us see how far he extends it he instances in the fore-cited Passage to the Heb. Cap. xii v. 12. and thence proceeds to state the Difference between Science and Faith thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Vid. Stro. Lib. 2. P. 362 3 4. and in his 5th Book he 's more full 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here we see Faith is resolved into the Infinite Power and Veracity of GOD insomuch that we are obliged to believe as soon as we know it to be the Word of GOD or as soon as we know GOD proposes any thing to our Belief Here we find Science and Faith opposed the one requiring Demonstration or Arguments drawn from the Nature of the Thing the other not so Therefore we must conclude That if GOD proposes any thing to our Belief that contains Matters incomprehensible or not reconcileable with common Notions Faith in the Opinion of this Father will command an Assent insomuch that his Infinite Power and Veracity must over-ballance all seeming Absurdities and Contradictions But to conclude this Argument I shall produce the Judgment of St. Chrysostom Thus he assigns the Reason why the Natural Man cannot receive the Things that be of GOD 1 Cor. ii v. 14. viz. For the Immensity of the Things ' emselves far exceeding the Comprehension of the most Improved Reason and for the want of Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 7. And upon the Article of the Creation Heb. xi v. 3. he tells us The Mind that is prepared for the Reception of Faith must be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 she must be elevated above Sence and all sensible Objects and pass over the Weakness of Humane Reasonings and afterwards Whereas says he Faith is vilified as a Thing that is void of Demonstration 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or rather a Thing full of Folly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Apostle shews us in this one Instance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for the very Article says he is not established by Reason but rather the contrary 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hom. 22. In Epist. Heb. Again we find him describing Faith under the very same Notion Hom. 23. in Ter. Iohan. where upon Nichodemus's Words How can a Man be born when he is old v. 4. he observes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Upon which he enlarges and tells us It is the Question of Hereticks upon the Incarnation of our Blessed Saviour demanding 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that by the weakness of common Notions or Reasonings destroy his Immense Nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and at last concludes That such Practices or Questions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And on the Second Part of the Question about entring the Womb a Second time he observes When a Man proceeds upon common Notions or Reasonings in Spiritual Matters and does not receive the Dictates of Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He talks like a Drunken or Mad-man uttering the most absurd and ridiculous things And now certainly we may conclude what St. Chrysostom's Notion of Faith was without drawing Inferences and that it every way agrees with that of Clemens Alexandrinus It 's therefore manifest Faith is distinguished from Knowledge or Science not only

Attempts of this Heretick in endeavouring to Subvert the Doctrine of our Saviour's Incarnation and stiles it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and to prove it such cites this very place of our Apostle Secondly He represents the danger in attempting to unfold such profound Difficulties that are only with safety to us believed and in a word enjoyns us to adhere to the Apostolick Faith without admitting new Terms or Notions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and above all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to dread the Disquisition of such a Mystery But besides the Opinion of this great Man we have the Comment of Isiodore the Pelusiote and Theophilact fixing the Mystery of Godliness in the Incomprehensibleness of it Thus the former Lib. 2. Ep. 192. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and pursuant to this expostulates Who can comprehend the Miracle of his Conception transacted without Coition or imagine how the Divine Nature can be circumscrib'd that is Immense and not to be circumscrib'd And Theophilact proceeds in the same Strain thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Locum And now this is something more certainly than calling it a Mystery with respect to the Ages preceding the Gospel for I think this Passage in itself admits of the Exposition before us more naturally than that our Adversary contends for besides we have the Authority of the Learned in past Ages And since I have made it appear he has no advantage over us in his whole Hypothesis I know not why we may not in his own Language pronounce against him that Mystery in the New Testament is sometimes put for a thing inconceivable in itself and not to be judg'd of by our ordinary Notions however reveal'd This likewise calls to mind the Triumphs of our Adversary upon a Passage which as we allow stiles the Gospel a Mystery under this Notion it 's Rom. 16. 25. But is now made manifest whereupon he Expostulates In what sence could this Secret be made manifest if it remain'd still Incomprehensible A mighty Favour indeed to bless the World with a parcel of Unintelligible Notions I confess I incline to the former sence I mean a Mystery with respect to the Ages preceding the Gospel but can see no foundation for Absurdities no more than for his vain Triumphs if we take it in the Sence he pretends to explode for this Reasoner had he not been too much used to confound things together might have learn'd that the highest Mystery is not wholly unintelligible and it may be properly said to be manifested in as much as God has communicated by the Apostle's preaching what 's useful and necessary and as much as will inform us what God proposes to our Belief Again it 's manifested and that too to our unspeakable Comfort since the vast Designs of Divine Love and the unexpressible Benefits to us-ward in it are abundantly laid open and I think these are Favours or Blessings too rich to be exposed in Ridicule or Burlesque But further If the use of the Word in Scripture will not prove the thing we contend for there are sufficient hints in Scripture to prove it I shall first insist on St. Paul's Accounting the preaching of Christ unto the Greeks foolishness but unto them which are called the Power of God and the Wisdom of God 1 Cor. 1. 23 24. Now this place is generally interpreted of the Incarnation of Christ or the Union of the two Natures into to one Divine Person And those that embrace and believe it must resolve it into the Infinite Power and Wisdom of God not as a common but special Act and consequently a thing incomprehensible as they are and on this account it 's to the Greeks the great Masters of Reason Foolishness because as it is represented to us it contains in it Things that can never be reconciled with common Notions or Ideas What common Ideas can satisfie us that the Son of God should speak by a Man or as the Sacred Canon hath it in the form of a Man that God should have a Son and that he should suffer as the Son of God What common Ideas can represent to us that Christ could have a Being before the Worlds as God that he should be born a Man and exist as such and yet not as a Man begotten of a Man These things the most improved Notices of Natural Reason cannot confirm or warrant no not our Adversary with all his Reason If any thing it 's the Arian or Socinian Hypothesis tho' advanced contrary to the Current of Scripture that may pretend most to be a Rationale in this matter And yet our Adversary seems to explode this as much as that of the Trinitarians because they are forced to allow Divine Worship to be paid him Cap. 1. Sect. 2. N. 2. I am mistaken if either they or the Arians can make their Notions of a dignified and Creature-God capable of Divine Worship appear more reasonable than the Extravagancies of other Sects touching the Article of the Trinity But to return It 's manifest here we learn how the Doctrines of Christianity came to be branded with the Imputation of Foolishness viz. Because they will not comport with common Notices or the received Principles of Natural Philosophy for I have evinced it upon the Objection of Trypho against Iustin and St. Clement's Comment on the place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dial. cum Trypho p. 269. And St. Clement in locum thus Lib. 1. Stromat 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here we see this great Man does not charge the Greeks with false Principles of Philosophy as the Ground of their Error for he represents the Thing as much inconsistent with such principles as they could and makes this the Foundation of their unjust Charge I mean in pronouncing the Doctrines of Christianity Foolishness and indeed he calls 'em 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it can be on no other account than because they would admit of nothing but Natural Reason and Philosophy and thereupon would try all revealed Truths by common Notions or Principles of Philosophy and reject 'em as absurd and foolish because they could not make these deep Things of God to comport with common Ideas of Objects of Sence Indeed Celsus objects much the same things against Origen for upon every turn he endeavours to ridicule the Divinity of our Saviour by representing it inconsistent with the Principles of Natural Reason And now give me leave to make one single Remark since it occurs so naturally Are not these the very Principles which our Advocate for Reason moves upon So that an unprejudiced Person might suspect that I 'm dealing with a Celsus or a Trypho or that they were risen from the Dead But to conclude this Argument it 's manifest St. Clemens must believe That the Fundamental Doctrine of the Christian Religion still contains in it something that cannot be comprehended by Natural Reason that cannot be reconciled to common Ideas or Principles of Natural Philosophy and consequently something that 's Mysterious and