Selected quad for the lemma: book_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A65735
|
D. D. An advertisement, anent the reading of the books of Antonia Borignion By George White minister at Mary-Culter near Aberdeen.
|
White, George, d. 1724.
|
1700
(1700)
|
Wing W1767; ESTC R222008
|
41,559
|
107
|
are all His Works from the beginning of the World Eph. 1.4 Having chosen us in Christ before the foundation of the World Vers 5. Having Predestinated us to the Adoption of Children by Jesus Christ to himself according to the good pleasure of His Will and Verse 11. Who worketh all things after the Counsell of His own Will Again A. B. writes that man hath liberty to resist the Will of GOD L. W. pt 1. p. 192. which plainly contradicteth the Divine Oracle Rom. 9.19 Who hath resisted His Will And linked with these Tenets she asserts that gracious persons may apostatise and be eternally damned L. W. pt 3. p. 136. 137. which assertion is inconsistent with our LORD 's most gracious promise John 10.28 My Sheep shall never perish In fine There are disseminated throughout all her Books the whole Arminian Tenets concerning the Quin quarticular Question excepting that of universal Redemption which why she omitted imbracing all the rest it is not easie to conjecture unless it be for her want of Charity to the generality of Christians And as A. Bs. Doctrine in the foresaid Tenets is contrary to the Scriptures so it is contrary to the Exposition of these and the parallell Texts of Scripture received in the Orthodox Church For it was condemned by the Synod of Dort Anno 1618 both in the complex and in all the 5 heads thereof Which Councill was conveened purposely to put a Stop to the contagious Errours which were spread abroad in the Belgick-neather-lands by Episcopius Corvinus Grevinchovius and other followers of Jacobus Arminius Unto which chosen men were delegated from many reformed Churches who were well versed in the Doctrine of the Primitive Church and every way able Ministers of the Gospel who also after conference with the offending Party upon mature debate and deliberation finding the Arminian Doctrine inconsistent with the Holy Scriptures and the Confessions of Faith of the Respective Churches and tending to the reviving of the Pelagian and Semi Pelagian Heresies and not a little symbolizing with the pestiferous Socinians did condemn it altogether as said is Neither can it be justly thought that these worthy men were ignorant of the sense of the Confessions of Faith of the Respective Churches to which they belonged who were all approved and commended at their return home both by their Constituents and the King Princes and States which sent them for their actings in that Assembly Nor have the representatives of any Protestant Church ever since disallowed the Acts of the Synod at Dort and altho some particular men have vented some flights and fancies too favourable to the Doctrine of the Remonstrants that is not to be imputed to any National Church which by their publick Doctrine and Actings rather disapproves than allowes the samen Scotland had only at that Synod Mr. Bacanquell a Pious and Learned Man to represent it but England had four at first George Bishop of Landaff Joseph Hall Dean of Worcester and John Davenant afterwards Bishops who are and will be still famous in the Church of Christ for their labours in the work of the Gospel and particularly for their excellent writtings Dr. Ward was the fourth and Dr. Goad was sent over in stead of Joseph Hall when he came home sick Yet I own that it was both Piously and Prudently done by the Church of England with the consent and authority of our Wise and Learned King James the 6. to prohibite all rash Preaching or Writting excepting such as should be authorised thereto on these abstruse and intricat questions raised be the Arminians upon the heads aforesaid and whensoever they might be obliedged to touch upon them in explaining a Text of Scripture to a popular auditory to hold to Scripture language and the words of the 39 Articles and the approved homilies of the Church Many judicious People marvel how any man could have been at the pains to write so large a Book being tedious to be read as the Ap. for A. B. is but I finde that his plea for Arminianism in sundry parts thereof hath very much conduced to swell it to the bigness that it hath accresced to under his pen as pt 2. from p. 104. to 127. and pt 4. p. 386. 387. and often in other places thereof Wherein he hath studied to represent the positions and Arguments of the Arminians in behalf of A. B. in a taking popular dress yet in all his pleadings to that purpose I have not been able to discover any Argument which is new but what hath been often tossed heretofore and solidly answered and discussed by the Orthodox Writters which to repeat from them consists not with my Scope in this place But to shew that his arguing can be rationally answered I shall only at this time deal with one of his most plausible Topicks which pt 2. p. 112. is propounded thus GOD knoweth all things only according to their nature but the Will of Man being made a free faculty to chuse or not to chuse or to reject any object propounded unto it by the Understanding GOD doth not foreknow what it shall determine ever as a man who giveth the power of his goods to his Wife cannot fore-know how she will dispose of them This is but a meer fallacie from the homonomie or different significations of the words Knowing and Nature For GOD seeth not as Man seeth 1 Sam. 16.7 And He is Nature natureing Mans Knowledge of things is but finite and limited as himself is apprehending things to be of such and such a nature by the properties figure habitudes and effects which he discerneth them to have and were it not for these means of Knowledge they would define things otherwise whereas the omniscient GOD in whose eternal Idea all things had their first determinations knoweth all things comprehensively even all the possible causes effects and contrariety of things so of all Agents whether necessary or free HE knoweth our thoughts afar off Ps 139.2 GOD who Inspired the Prophet Elisha to tell Hazael what his free will would determine long ere he knew so much himself 2 Kings 8.12.13 He that teacheth man knowledge shall he not know Ps 94.10 Neither doth his simile hold for a wife is her Husbands equal to whom he may give power of his goods either prudently or imprudently but the alwise GOD hath not exempted any of His Creatures from the reach of His Omnipotencie or Omniscience The due consideration of the infinite difference between GODS Omniscience and Omnipotence and the Faculties of sinfull man serves also to disclose the grand Arminian Errour in suspending his Grace upon Mans free Will against the Essentials of Religion POINT II. Of the Image of GOD in Man A. B. asserts that the Image of GOD after which Man was created consists only in Mans free will and nothing else L. W. pt 1. p. 42. which is contrary both to Scripture and Reason for the Soul of Man being Spiritual and immortall imports as much of the Image
Image of GOD Knowledge and Holiness and be cemented one with another in love but from this no Scripture language nor any Christian Commentator neither any wise man did ever infer that men should be called GOD Unless he would vouch the Manichees for his Authors who were vile Hereticks and held that there were two Gods one good and another evil they indeed taught That the Soul of man was of the substance of GOD As did other blasphemous Hereticks to wit Cerdonians Marcionites and Priscillianists which we have faithfully accounted by a most trustie and diligent antiquary Forbes of Corse in his Instr hist Theol. Li. 4. C. 5. N. 12. Citing also the Orthodox who refuted them Namely St. Ambrose Aug. Theodoret c. And how can the unlearned Readers of A. Bs. writtings distinguish her Opinion from theirs in this prime and essential part of Religion Likewise A. B. denyes GOD'S Attribute of Omniscience tho to deny any of his Attributes be to deny GOD himself when she taught that GOD doth not foresee all future Actions of a free agent which is defended by the Ap. pt 2. p. 127. 128. 129. This is contrary to the Scriptures John 21.17 LORD thou knowest all things Psalm 139.2 Thou knowest my down sitting and mine uprising thou understandest my thought a far off Are not these the Actions of a free Agent Moreover A. B. denyes the Justice of GOD which she learned from the pestiferous Socinus L. de Serv. p. 1. C. 1. c. Where he Sophistically argues because GOD is Love 1. John 4 8 Therefore there is no vindicative Justice in him which is defended by the Ap. pt 1. p. 22 where he affirms that the Scriptures which speak of GOD'S Justice and displeasure in threatning and punishing of sin are to be understood as these which attribute humane parts and passions to him All this contradicts the Scriptures which teach that hatred of sin and vindicative Justice are of the nature of GOD as he is Simple Pure Holy and Righteous even as Love and Mercy are of his Nature and Essence as He is good Habb 1.13 HE is of purer Eyes than to behold Evil and cannot look upon Iniquity GOD hath no parts at all nor passions and when they are ascribed to Him in the Scriptures such as Love Anger Hatred c. It is spoken by Us not for the infirmity of affections but for some likeness of His works and ours as St. Aug. wordeth it De Civ D. L. 9. C. 5. And the effect hath produced the word Revenge which truth of the vindicative Justice of GOD is clearly vindicated from all the Objections of Socinus by John Owen Diatr de Just Div. where he proveth that the application or exercise of GOD's essential Justice is to be understood when he punisheth sin as our soveraign LORD and Judge and likewise he removeth the mistakes of Rutherford and Twisse thereanent and the satisfaction of CHRIST wherein yet they were not of the mind of A. B. and the Socinians Then for the Blessed Trinity in the GOD-Head Head her Doctrine is plainly Heretical writting that it is a Romish Errour to say there are three Persons in the GOD-HEAD that there are in Him only three Powers Attributes or Properties of Truth Righteousness and Goodness and that her self had these three Properties L. W. pt 2 p. 109 and pt 3. p. 166 Lavie continue p. 553 554 L. W. pt 3 p. 80 Ap. pt 2 p. 84 85. These Sentiments so called by the Ap. are contrary to the Essentials of Religion to the Creed and to the constant Doctrine of the Catholick Church See some of many Scriptures 1 John 5.7 There are three that bear record in Heaven the FATHER the WORD and the HOLY GHOST and these three are One. Heb. 1 3. CHRIST is the express Image of His FATHERS Person see also how the Trinity was manifested at Christs Baptism Mat 3 16 17. The Father speaking from Heaven the Son present in Person and the Holy Ghost by a Dove So Preaching and Baptising are enjoined in the express naming of the Trinity or three Persons Mat 28 19. And thus the blessing is still pronounced 2 Cor 13 14. The Primitive Church still condemned all Antitrinitarians for Hereticks and particularly Sabellius and Samosatenus were accursed by the great Council of Nice Anno 325 Theodoret Eccl. hist L. 5. c. 9. Epiph. haer 6. For the very Doctrine now revived by A. B. That there were not three Persons but three Names and three Powers in the GOD-HEAD Whereas to exclude all Hereticks and to mantain the Unity of Faith in the Catholick Church it was expressed in all the approven Creeds which are Exegetick or Explicatory of the Apostles Creed To wit the Creeds of the Councills of Antioch Nice and Constantinople and of St. Athanasius That there are in the GOD-HEAD three Persons or Subsistencies having Incommunicable Personal Properties the Father begetting the Son the Son begotten and the Holy Ghost proceeding from them both three in One and One in three undivided in Essence or Substance with much more which is to be seen in them to this purpose So that it is evident A. Bs. Doctrine is inconsistent with the Scriptures and many Articles of the Creed NUMBER II. Of CHRIST and His Satisfaction for Us. IT is worthy the noticeing in the first place anent this foundation of Religion that A. B. in all her Books never once giveth CHRIST his due Tittles as it is in the Creed His only SON Our LORD or the LORD 1 Cor. 11 23. The Ap is guilty of the same omission till p 406. Some approver of A. B. in a Letter to the Ap. doth it And no marvel that they shift to speak of Christs Divinity since they write that He had a sinful Nature corrupt and rebellious to the Superiour part of His Soul produceing inclinations and temptations to sin though He consented not thereto S. V. pt 1 p 198. Ap pt 2 from p 198 to 143. This contradicteth the Holy Scriptures which shew clearly that he took to Himself our Nature but without sin which could not have been if any sin had been in His Nature for the very first motions or inclinations in Us to sin which School-Men call Primo-primi they are sins because of our sinful Nature even before we deliberatly consent thereto Jam 1 15. Lust when it is conceived bringeth forth sin Gen 6.5 Every Imagination of the thoughts of Mans Heart is only evil continually Whereas it was impossible that the Lord Jesus Christ could have had a sinful Nature otherwise the Divinity which is Holiness and Purity it self could not have been Hypostatically united to his Humane Nature neither could the Holy One Immanuel GOD with us have any inclination or temptation to sin in his Nature or proceeding from any thing in Himself as the Scriptures teach us 2 Cor. 5.21 He was made sin for us who knew no sin Heb. 4.15 He was in all Points tempted like as we are yet