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	world_n	write_v	2,133	5	5.3230	4	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A52606	A brief history of the Unitarians, called also Socinians in four letters, written to a friend.	Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.; Biddle, John, 1615-1662.; Firmin, Thomas, 1632-1697.	1687 (1687)	Wing N1505; ESTC R37735	58,564	186

mortal Life he raised and changed the Body of Lazarus which was corrupted that the Power by which he restored Lazarus to Life again was not our Lords own proper Power but God's that is the Fathers is plainly intimated by our Lord himself John 11. 41. Father I thank thee that thou hast heard me c. Almighty God can lodge even in dry Bones a Power of restoring the dead 2 Kings 13. 21. see also what hath been said on John 5. 19. 20. John 8. 56 58. Abraham rejoiced or desired to see my Day and saw it Before Abraham was I am Or as 't is rendred by the Syriac Nonnus and Grotius I was Answ 1. Abraham saw Christ's Day in the Spirit of Prophecy he saw it as coming not as present he foresaw as he desired the time when it should be 2. St. Austin has confessed that Christ is here said to be before Abraham not actually but in the Counsel Decree and Ordination of God. And so St. Peter explains this matter 1 Pet. 1. 20. Who verily was fore-ordained from the Foundation of the World but was made manifest in these last times In like manner at Rev. 13. 8. Christ is called the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World. The Words are Whose Names are not written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the Foundation of the World. Every one sees that Christ could be no otherways slain from the Foundation of the World but in the Counsel and Decree of God. See more such Instances on John 17. 5. 'T is true the Jews did not apprehend in what sense our Lord meant he was before Abraham but neither did he intend or care they should for finding them averse from Truth and Piety he often so spake to some of them as to perplex and affront their Blindness and Arrogance yet more and not to instruct them see for this Luke 8. 10. 21. John. 10. 30. I and the Father are one Answ Not one God but as Friends are said to be one Thus our Lord explains himself John 17. 11. Keep them whom thou hast given me that they may be one as we are The Disciples could be one no otherways than as Friends are one namely in Affection and Design neither with one another nor with God. Ver. 22. The Glory which thou gavest me i. e. the Power of doing Miracles I have given them that they may be one as we are one 22. John 10. 33. Thou being a Man makest thy self God or a God. Answ It appears they lied by our Saviours Answer at ver 36. Say ye of him whom the Father hath sanctified and sent into the World Thou blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God. Had our Lord been more than the Son of God he would have owned his Dignity when they charged him with Blasphemy for saying those things from which it might by their strained Consequences be inferred that he made himself a God. Camero on this Text ingenuously confesses that in this Context our Lord doth not make himself God He adds that times and circumstances required that the Revelation of this Mystery should be deferred till our Lord's Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven In which saying he gives up to the Socinians all the Texts of the Evangelists 23. John 10. 38. The Father is in me and I in him Answ 'T is also said 1 John 4. 16. He that dwelleth in Love i. e. exerciseth Love and Charity dwelleth in God and God in him Therefore Christ and Christians are said to be in God and God in them by their mutual Love or because of their mutual Love. 24. John 12. 41. These things said Isaias when he saw his Glory and spake of him Answ see on Isai 6. 1 8 9. 25. John 14. 1. Ye believe in God believe also in me Answ Our Lord has himself interpreted this John 12. 44. He that believeth on me believeth not on me but on him that sent me 26. John 14. 7 9. If ye had known me ye would have known my Father also and from henceforth ye know him and have seen him He that hath seen me hath seen the Father how sayest thou then shew us the Father Answ It is also said Luke 10. 16. He that heareth you heareth me 't is there farther added He that despiseth you despiseth me and he that despiseth me despiseth him that sent me Shall we now infer that the Disciples and Ministers of Christ are Christ nay are him also that sent Christ namely God The Truth therefore is when we are said to know see hear despise God in knowing seeing hearing or despising Christ or his Ministers the meaning only is that Christ and his true Ministers being the Ambassadours and Messengers of God and revealing to us his Nature and Will they are so far forth to be esteemed one with God and in seeing and hearing them we see and hear him as much as the invisible God can be seen or heard in this mortal Life 27. John 14. 14. If ye ask any thing in my Name I will do it Answ The obvious meaning is if ye pray for any thing to God using my Name I will cause it to be done for you by my Intercession the general Intercession that I will make for all good Christians Heb. 7. 25. He is able to save them that come unto God by him i. e. that pray to God in his Name seeing he ever liveth to make Intercession for them 28. John 16. 8 13 14. When he the Comforter or Spirit is come he will reprove the World of Sin He shall not speak of himself He shall receive of mine and shew it to you Here the Spirit is plainly spoken of as a Person Answ 1. Of those that are Vnitarians all the Arians and very many Socinians do acknowledg that the Holy Spirit is a Person chief of the Heavenly Spirits prime Minister of God and Christ because he is here called the Comforter or Advocate and said to hear speak and teach and elsewhere to interceed for us But they add that this very Context in telling us ver 13. He will guide you into all Truth for he shall not speak of himself Sufficiently sheweth that he is not God or a God. For it were intolerable to say of God he shall lead you into all Truth for he shall not speak of himself the contrary is true of God he shall lead you into all Truth For he shall speak of himself 2. But more generally the Socinians say that Actions proper to Persons are by a Figure ascribed to things and even to Qualities of things not only in Holy Scripture but in all Writers God's Commandments are called Counsellours Psal 119. 24. Understanding is said to lift up her Voice Prov. 8. 1. Wisdom to build her House and hew out her seven-Pillars Prov. 9. 1. Charity to think no evil 1 Cor. 13. 5. Water and Blood to bear Witness 1 John 5. 8. The Stone set up by Joshua to hear all the Words

occasion both to his Friends and Enemies to think him an Arian He saith that Phil. 2. 6. was the principal Argument of the Fathers against the Arians but that to say true it proves nothing against them He notes on Eph. 5. 5. that the word God being used absolutely doth in the Apostolick Writings always signifie the Father In his Scholia on the third Tome of St. Jerom's Epistles he denies that the Arians were Hereticks he adds farther that they were superior to our Men in Learning and Eloquence 'T is believed Erasmus did not make himself a party to that which he esteemed the ignorant and dull side of the Question In his Epistle to Bilibaldus he speaks as openly as the times would permit a wise Man to speak I saith Erasmus could be of the Arian Perswasion if the Church approved it 2. H. Grotius is Socinian all over This great Man in his younger Years attacked the Socinians in a principal Article of their Doctrine But being answered by J. Crellius he not only never replied but thank'd Crellius for his Answer and afterwards publishing some Annotations on the Bible he interpreted the whole according to the mind of the Socinians There is nothing in all his Annotations which they do not approve and applaud His Annotations are a compleat System of Socinianism not excepting his Notes on John 1. 1 c. which are written so artificially and interwove with so many different Quotations that he has cover'd himself and his sense of that Portion of Scripture from such as do not read him carefully 3. D. Petavius the most Learned of the Jesuits has granted that generally the Fathers who lived before the Nicene Council and whose Writings are preserved agreed in their Doctrine concerning God with the Nazarens or Socinians and concerning the Son our Lord Christ and the Holy Spirit with the Arians For 't is to be noted that the Arians and Socinians agree in their Doctrine concerning God that he is only one Person the God and Father of our Lord Christ but they differ concerning the Son and Holy Spirit The Son according to the Arians was generated or created some time before the World and in process of time for great and necessary causes became incarnate in our Nature The Holy Ghost they say is the Creature of the Son and subservient to him in the Work of Creation But the Socinians deny that the Son our Lord Christ had any Existence before he was born of Blessed Mary being conceived in her by the holy Spirit of God They say the Spirit is the Power and Inspiration of God saving that Mr. Bidle and those that follow him take the holy Spirit to be a Person chief of the Heavenly Spirits prime Minister of God and Christ and therefore called the Spirit by way of excellence and the Holy Spirit to discriminate him from Satan Prince and Chief of the wicked and Apostate Spirits This difference notwithstanding because they agree in the principal Article that there is but one God or but one who is God both parties Socinians and Arians are called Vnitarians and esteem of one another as Christians and true Believers as may be seen on the part of the Arians in their Historian Chr. Sandius Hist Eccl. l. 1. c. de Paul. Semosat and for the Socinians in the Disputation of Alba. But to return to Petavius He often affirms that the Doctrine of the Trinity and of the Divinity of the Son and Spirit cannot be proved by Scripture only and that those who have attempted it have always been baffled He adds there is no way to Unity in the Church about these matters but by contenting our selves to speak concerning them as the Fathers who lived nearest to the Apostles time did speak 4. S. Episcopius so much esteemed by our English Divines seems to have been an Arian He saith the Father is so first as to be first in order i. e. time in Dignity and in Power He saith that to make three equal Persons in God or in the Godhead is to make three Gods. He denies that the Lord Christ is the Son of God by substantial Generation that is by Generation from the Father's Substance or Essence Speaking of the Creeds that express the Catholick Doctrine of the Trinity and the Divinity of the Son and Spirit he saith that Bishops in general Councils being led by Fury Faction and Madness did not so much compose as huddle up Creeds for the Church See for these things Episc Inst Theol. l. 4 c. 32 33 34. 5. C. Sandius a Gentleman of prodigious Industry and Reading and no less ingenious then learned in all his Books refuses in Words to be called either Arian or Socinian but has written an Ecclesiastical History in Quarto with Addenda to it Coloniae 1678 on purpose to prove that all Antiquity was Arian and that the Vnitarian Doctrine has been reduced so low by the Persecutions of Rome and the puissant Arms of Charles the Great and other Kings of France for which Services they have been requited by the Roman Pontiff with the Titles of Most Christian Kings and Eldest Sons of the Church He has also under the borrowed Name of Cingallus written a small Treatise with this Title Scriptura Trinitatis Revelatrix here under pretence of asserting the Trinity he has as much as he could defeated all the strengths of the Catholick Cause and shews that there is no considerable Text objected to the Arians or Socinians but is given up as an incompetent and insignificant proof by some or other of the principal Critics and Authors who were themselves Trinitarians so that among them they have given away the Victory to their Adversaries But Sir I perceive I have drawn out this account of the Socinians to already a sufficient length for a Letter I will therefore conclude with a Passage out of Dr. Burnet's second Book of the History of the Reformation abridged George van Parr a Dutch Man refused to abjure so he was burnt in the year 1549 by virtue of a Law or Writ since abolished by Act of Parliament for affirming that only the Father is God and denying the Divinity of the Son our Lord Christ He had led a very exemplary Life for Fasting Devotion and a good Conversation and suffered with extraordinary Composedness of Mind These things cast a great Blemish on the Reformers It was said they only condemned Cruelty when acted on themselves but were ready to practise it when they had Power The Papists made great use of this in the next Queen Mary's Reign and what Arch-Bishop Cranmer and Bishop Ridly Authors of Van Parrs Punishment suffered in her time was thought a just Retaliation on them by that wise Providence which disposes all things justly to all Men. Thus far Dr. Burnet SIR I am most sincerely Yours A Second Letter TO A FRIEND Concerning the UNITARIANS Called also SOCINIANS Containing the Texts objected to them out of the Old Testament and their Answers Acts 24.