Selected quad for the lemma: book_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
book_n	call_v	name_n	see_v	2,453	5	3.4415	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A60586	A sermon of the credibility of the mysteries of the Christian religion preached before a learned audience / by Tho. Smith ...	Smith, Thomas, 1638-1710.	1675 (1675)	Wing S4250; ESTC R10064	33,935	84

antient MS. Grotius made use of though he gives us no proof of its antiquity in that place and suppose it were written a thousand years since we are not to be swayed by it as if it were authentick 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and no more who thereupon conjectures these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the former verse to have been added by the Arians to prove the father son and holy ghost to be one in consent only but afterwards removed and altered by the Catholicks and added to the former verse which is said without any the least proof either from reason or antiquity and has nothing to maintain the fancy but the great name of the Author of it That which Sandius and several others allege in the first place that eo omisso meliorem esse verborum connexionem the connexion is far better if the 7 v. were omitted and that therefore it ought to be so and was antiently omitted if the supposition were true is not only vain and frivolous but very bold and immodest to ty the spirit of God to such a way of writing as pleases their humours and fancies best and savours most of humane artifice and by the same argument they may reject not only verses but whole chapters in the N. T. for the meanness and inaccuracy of the stile and the seeming carelesness of the method which is not always conformable to the rules of the Gr. eloquence 2. Indignum est summo Deo esse testem inio coram quo judice testis foret is a groundless and bold cavil for this witnessing is nothing else but the declaration of God to mankind by evident signs and tokens concerning our Saviours being the true Messias and of his being born in the flesh and that he came from him This God has attested and sufficiently made known to the World and in this sense the Word often occurs in the Scriptures without the least indignity offered to the Divine Nature The only pretence he has for his fancy is a base and unworthy comparison he conceives in his mind between Gods being a witness and mans being a witness in our Courts of Judicature forgetting the genuine and easie sense of the word as I have above expressed it 3. That it is highly probable that this verse was inserted by a Sabellian the contrary whereof is most true 4. That in several MSS. and Editions of modern languages there is a transposition of these two verses The same before was acknowledged to be found in some Greek copies which no way proves the pretended interpolation but only that antient copies do not all agree 5. That this v. does very highly favour the Arians but this is such a strain of fancy that he may as well allege the first words of the Book of Genesis to prove Aristotles opinion of the eternity of the World If men out of a prejudicate opinion against the doctrine of the Catholick Church allow themselves to interpret Scripture according to their own fancies it cannot seem strange to any that they should go about to prove and justifie their blasphemies from the plainest texts of Scripture that in the judgment of all sober persons who are free from those prejudices do most evidently refute them FINIS ● Tim. 1. 10. a Thus Eusebius sums them up in general it being the common argument of the Heathen Philosophers against the Christian religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 4. Parisiis A. C. 1628. b The words of Celsus as we find them in Orig●ns first book against that Epicurean Philosopher are these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. ● edit C●ntab In this latter part he alludes to S. Pauls words 1 Cor. 3. 18. which he most horribly and maliciously perverts as Origen shews p. 12. He had before out of his great Philosophical wariness advised his readers not to take up opinions upon trust without following reason and a rational guide which he imputes to the Christians and reckons them among the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. such as rashly believe juglers and pretenders to Legerdemain tricks whose credulity and simplicity they aluse to evil designs and intents So in the third book he most falsly accuses the whole body of Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as diving away every wise man from the doctrine of faith and only admitting persons void of understanding and of a base and servile temper p. 121. c De morte Peregrini speaking of the Christians whom he makes a company of idiots easily cheated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 d In Eusebius in the confutation of his impious book which he intitl'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherein he compared Apollonius of Tyana to our most blessed Saviour where he objects to the Christians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 lightness and easiness of nature p. 512. and calls them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fools and rusiicks p. 514. edit Paris in fine librorum de demonstratione Evangelica * In Apologetico cap. 5. where he mentions an old decree of the Ron an Senate Ne qui Deus ab Imperatore consecraretur 〈◊〉 à Senatu prebatus and hereupon he tells us that the Emperor Tiberius moved by the report of those mighty works which declared the truth of our Saviours Divinity he received out of Pal●stine detulit ad Senatum cum praerogativa suffrag●i sui though the Senate were not disposed to admit him into the number * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ex editione Reverendissimi Usserii Armachani p 20. This perchance more particularly respects Marcion the heretick for by that name he called him to his face as we read in Irenaeus 3. lib. adv haereses cap. 3. a See the excellent discourse of Plato about this subject toward the latter end of his second book de Republica p. 377. c. lomi secundi ex editione Serrani b In his Epistle to Herodotus as it is extant in Diogenes Laertius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 edit Londinensis p. 285. This he establisht as one of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or main principles of his Philosophy 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 300. and laid down therefore in the first place by his great admirer and follower Lucretius in the beginning of his philosophical Poem to make the better way for the Atheism which was to follow that is to exclude God with a fairer pretence from having any thing to do either with the framing or governing of the world and to deny a providence that censure which Cotta in Tully mentions to have bin past upon him by several being exactly true Video non●ullis videri Epicurum ne in offensionem Atheniensium caderet verbis reliquisse Deos re sustulisse lib. 1. de Nat. Deorum speaking of this very Atheistical afhorism * In haeresi An●maeorum quae est LXXVI * Principiorum Philosophiae parte primâ sect XXXVII Joh. 20. 29. a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Epiphanius in haeresi Ebionaeoru● q●ae est XXX sect XVIII ex edit Pet●vi● Peris●is 1622. pag. 142. b Epiphanius in haeresi A●i●ncrum quae est LXIX sect XVIII p. 741. c Gregorius Abulpharagius in historiâ Dynastiarum Arabicè p. 129. edit Oxon. 1663. Eu●ychius in Annalibus Alexandrinis Arabicè edit Oxon. parte primá p. 397. 441. d This argument drawn from the Form of Baptism is generally made use of by all the antient Fathers against the blasphemy of Sabellius Arius and the rest of the Hereticks who had departed from the true faith establisht at first to follow phansies and inventions of their own But reserving these numerous citations for another work I shall content my self at present to say with the Author of the Breviarium fidei adversus Arianos who lived above 1200 years since put out by the most learned Sirmondus to whom the world is so much obliged for his publishing several writings of the antients out of MSS. Qui Spiritus sanctus si Deus non esset non in baptismo in uno nomine Deitatis patris filio sociaretur sicut scriptum est ubi regulam baptismi posuit ipse Dominus Ite inquit baptizate omnes gentes in nomine Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti Quod solum testimonium deberet haereticis sufficere ad credulitatem insiparabilis Trinitatis quia nec ipse audent aliter baptizare ne regulant Domini corrumpere videartur Et ubi unum nomen dicitur ibi mejor miner excluditur e Of this see the Appendix a 1 V●l. p. 147. Paristis 1627. b Tom. 2 p. 55● p. ●8● p. 772. a p. 591 ex Editione Theophili Ranaudi Soc. Jesu ●arisiis 1671. printed with St. 〈◊〉 Maximus T●urinensis and four others which make up the ●●pras ●raesulum P. 447. b lib. 1. p. 16. ex Edit I. Sirmondi Parisiis 1629. a This Preface is printed in an old edition of the N. T. with the interlineary Gloss and I find it in several MSS both in the Bodleyan and our own Colledg-Library before the Catholick Epistles The Stile is exactly St. Hierom's and questionless his and acknowledg'd as such both by Erasmus and Socinus however omitted by Erasmus in his edition of St. Hierom's works at Basil a de illâ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ut mihi quidem videtur non agitur hoc in loco quod glossa ista interlinearis quam vocant agnosci● Tom. 4. Bibliothecae veterum Patrum Paris 1610. pag. 372. a Consule Epistolarum Pontificalium censuram à D. Blondello editam Genevae A. Chr. 1628. pag. 190. * In appendice Interpretationum Paradoxarum p. 381.