and such cautions are very frequent with you which in this place I take to be moste needelesse Now as time and place were as you sayde shadowes of Gods eternitie and immensitie So the power of the creature is a shadowe of Gods infinite power Yet shadowes we all knowe have proportioÌ„s to the substances shadowed by them but betweene finite and infinite we commonly say there is no proportion 2. God you say is more infinite in every kinde then all the united powers of severall natures though they were for number infinite and each infinitly operative in its owne kinde But let us not lye for God as man doth for man to gratify him True and naturall beauty needeth no painting And Gods perfection needeth no Mountebanke like amplifications to sett him forth The powers of the creatures are not formally in God but eminently that is they are sayd to be in God in as much as he can produce them and they re effects allso As for example though he be not hott yet can he produce heate in greater measure then fier dothe But consider I pray you Can God produce a greater heate then that which is infinite or can he produce a greater number then that which is infinite It is apparent that he cannot not by reason of any defecte of power in God but by reason that a greater then that which is infinite to be produced is a thing utterly impossible You are pleased to take notice of a former observation of yours which was this That thinges by nature most imperfecte doe oftentimes best shadowe divine perfection You have allready intreated of Gods immensity and eternity and therein you have tolde us that no positive entity no numerable parte of this vinverse doth so well represent the immensity and eternity of God as the negation of all thinges which we describe by the name of Nothinge I thinke there never dropt a more vile assertion from the penne of any wise man then this yet you desire here agayne to commende it unto the Reader as some quainte observation But what doe you meane to repeate it under such forme as by calling it somethinge though imperfect Is Nothinge or the negation of all thinges to be accoumpted somethinge though imperfect yet the same observation you will have to have place here allso As if this which we call nothinge were the most fitt to represent Gods immensity by yea and his eternity yea and his infinite power allso How neere drawes this to the making of God to consiste of nullities since you say his naturall properties are best resembled unto nullities well we have heard what that is which best representeth his immensity and eternity now we are to expecte what that is which best represents his infinite power And this after a long deduction you expresse to be the center of the earth which you say is matter of nothing And thus you maintaine a just proportion of discourse concerning Gods attributes for still your witt serveth you to resemble them either to Nothinge or to that which you call matter of just nothinge But herein you proceede by degrees And first you seeme to conceave that this center of the earth is in the language of the Holy Ghoste made to be the foundation of the earth as in that speeche of the Lord to Iob chap. 38. 4. 5 6. Where wast thou when I layed the foundation of the earth and whereupon are the foundations therof fastned who hath layde the corner stone therof And first you commende the phrase as surmounting all poeticall decorum and will have the Majesty therof consiste therin sufficiently testifying that it was uttered by God himselfe Now hertofore you have made poeticall witt to stande in opposition unto Metaphysicall truth But of poeticall de corum especially in this place like enough you have a better opinion For my part I am persuaded the Majesty of Gods speeche consists in the power of the Spirite rather then the Wisdome of the wordes Paule allso spake by the Spirite of God and some have observed greate parts in his very language but see what Castellio a freind to your opinions writes of Bezaas judgement concerning this in the defence of his translations upon the 2. Cor. 11. 6. Paulum sayth he of Beza grandiloquentiâ Platoni vehementia Demostheni Methodo Aristoteli atque Galeno anteponit in quo mihi videtur Pictores imitari qui Christi matrem dum honorare volunt regio vestitu pingunt â—idem tamen ita cogente historia praesepe in quo jaceat Christus infans appingunt nobili sane solaecismo Quid enim mundanis regibus cum praesepibus Mariae gloria est paupertas pictores eam divitiis exornant Sic Pauli gloria gloriatio est Sermonis imperitia But lett the Majesty of the speech passe as nothing pertinent to our present purpose where doe you find the center of the earth to be mentioned or pointed unto in all this doth the corner stone there mentioned signifie so much or by the foundation there expressed muste we necessarily understand the center of the earth The Holy Ghoste seemes rather in this inquisition to have reference to something without the earth that should uphold it or fasten it and withall signifieth that no such supporter can be found Then you proceede to admiration at this that the center shoulde beare up the earth and all thinges theron which center is no body or substance no not so much as a meere Angle or corner nay such as forth with you say is a matter of nothing And so in the issue it comes to this that nothing beares it up which is true in the forme of a negative but not as an affirmative as if there were any power in the center to beare it up And why should we conceave that the center of the earth should beare it up more then the center of a tennis ball beares it up which allso might be the center of all if it lay in the middle of the earth And if any side of the earth were removed from the center to the heavens it would forthwith appeare that the center of the earth beares not up the rest for that which before was the center would now be driven aÌ„ greate deale higher and become the outside of the earth So that the center of the earth will not serve your turne will you then runne to the center of vacuum or of the space imagined to contayne the earth Yet you distinguish not of centrum Physicum and centrum Mathematicum For who doubts but that one side of the earth may be heavier then an other Againe it was woont to be a received Maxime that Terra non gravitat in loco suo and therfore there is no neede of any thing to beare it up For the middle of the world is the naturall place of the earth which when it hath gotten it swayes not nor propendes not nor can be swayed to weighe downewards which indeede were
to weighe upwards which way soever And have heavy thinges any neede thinke you of supportance to keepe them from weighing upwards Yet we acknowledge the whole world and every part of it is from the finger of God For the very course of nature is the worke of God That fire doth burne that the Sunne and starres doe inlighten the earth that heavy thinges moove downewards and light thinges upwards all this I say we acknowledge to be the worke of God And we woonder at the power of God in making all this by his word and supporting all by his word But being made and as wonderfully preserved by God we woonder not at this that heavy thinges moove downewards light things upwards or how it comes to passe that the earth without a supporter continueth where it is seing if it did not continue where it is it should moove upwards towards the Heavens lighter then a feather which is quite contrary to the nature of the earth We well woonder at the power of God in this that as he made it by his worde so with the turninge of an hande he coulde sett an ende unto it if it pleased him And therefore to talke of chamberinge up sustentative force in the center multiplied accordinge to the severall portions or divisibilities of magnitude successively immensurable to speake in proportion to your owne language is to affect more Rhetoricall witt then Metaphysicall truthe in plainer termes is to multiply woords without sense So then to amplifie the infinite power of God by surpassing the imaginary sustentative force of a center which as your selfe confesse is a matter of nothinge and consequently the sustentative force of it must be a matter of nothing is a very poore amplification of the power of God If the center were able to supporte the earth not where now it is but in the hollowe of the moone that were somewhat to magnifie the sustentative power therof Yet I make no doubte but God coulde doe so by his power Which case is of farre greater force for the manifesting of his power then in bearing up the earth where it is which indeede being created and preserved in being hath no neede of supportarâ—oÌ„ in his owne place where it can moove no lower and if it moove by directe motion it muste needes moove higher which kinde of motion is more proper for a feather theÌ„ for the heavy earth whose wombe is impregnated with stones and mettalls And therfore you doe well to take this power of God into consideration as namely of his ability to tosse this universe with greater case then a Gyant doth a tennis ball yet I never read or heard before of Gyants playing att tennis ball through out the boundlesse courtes of immensitie By the way your overlash in talking of the Courts of immensitie wherin this motion should be For as for the immensitie of God that is no fitt space to tosse the world in And as for the immensitie corporall that is a thing utterly impossible the motion you devise must needes be in vacuo or not att all Now the force of the center is no way fitt wherby to illustrate this power of God For certainly if the earth were placed in the hollowe of the Moone it together with his center would tumble downe againe as little congruous is it for the illustration of that power of God wherby he is able to dissolve Rocks of Adamant with the phillep of his finger sooner theÌ„ bubbles of water with the breath of the Canon In all which you seeme to affect not Metaphysicall truthe only but Rhetoricall if not Poeticall florishes allso We beleeve that God as by his word he made all thinges out of nothing so by his word he can returne them into nothing this is plaine English neyther hath his power neede of any Pyrgopolinices bombast eloquence to illustrate the Majesty therof or sett it forth 3. But from the breath of the Canon you fall congruously upon the consideration of the mother of it which creature is commonly called gunpowder And here you tell us first that our admiration of Gods active power may be raysed by calculating the imaginary degrees of active powers increase in creatures that which followeth divisible as well in quantitie as operation is of no importance but only to fill up The Canon sends forthe his bullet with greater violence then the Sacher like enoughe and so every Ordinance exceedes other in force of Battery according to the quantitie of charge or length of barrell which I leave to the consideration of the Master of the Ordinance To this you adde that if the same quantitie of steele or yron were possible to be as speedily converted into a siery vapor as gunpowder is the blowe would be 10. times more irresistible then it is I doe not thinke your meaning is to instruct the would in a new way of making Saltpeter if it were Saltpeter men should be your scholars I would be none of them So much Phylosophie I apprehend that fire is most swifte in mooving upwards as the Element of earth is most swift in mooving downewards And like as the contraction of more parts of the earth together makes a bodie the heavier so likewise the more siery anything is so much the more swift in motion upwards But to say that the active force or vigour of motion allwayes increaseth according to the degrees of celerity which it accumulates is an idle speech as much as to say the more swiftly it mooves the more vigorously it mooves It had more shew of congruity to say the more vigorously it is mooved to witt in respect of the Agents force that mooves it the more swiftly it mooveth Now you come to the accommodation of all this unto the infinite power of God in this manner Though the moste active and powerfull essence cannot be encompossed with walls of brasse nor chambred up in vaults of steele allbeit much wider then the Heavens yet doth it every where more strictly girde it selfe with strength then the least or weakest body can be girte For what bonds can we prescribe so strict so close or firme as is the bond of indivisible unitie which can not possibly burst or admitt eruption wherin notwithstanding infinite power doth as intirely and totally encampe it selfe as in immensitie How incomparably then doth his active strength exceede all comparison What a mad comparison is it in illustrating the infinitie of Gods power to say that God girds himselfe with strength more strictly then the weakest body can be girt Doe weake persons girde themselfes with strength or is Gods girdinge of himselfe with strength like to our girding of our clothes aboute us By that which followeth it seemes that you have an allusion to Gods girding of himselfe into a narrowe compasse like Ladies that affect slender wasts For to what other purpose doe you tell us that Gods girding is as strict as is the bond of indivisible unitie And before you told us
have end And in this case it can neyther properly nor improperly be sayd that God is after it For it is manifest contradiction to say that hath an end which is supposed to have no end You seeme to groane in the delivery of some quaint subtiltie when you write thus Yet that eternitie now is and ever was aâ— infinitely preexistent to all ages in succession comming towards us one way it is and was to the Worlds nativitie the other way Here you make a full point whereby it comes to passe that wanting a principall verbe the sentence contaynes a manifest non-sense it is the observation of others as well as mine if divers such non-sensed propositions have dropped from your penne in this discourse yet your meaning we see plainly in the sentence following as when you say This is a point which we must beleive if we beleive God to be eternall and know what eternitie is So the former speech of yours though imperfect indifferently capable of being pronounced to be a fable as a truth we perceave to be received by you as a truth and not so onely but affected allso by you as a truth whose consideration hath not beene so well taken to heart by those who have had Gods eternall decrees and the awardes of it most frequently in they re mouthes and pennes as it hath beene by your selfe Thus you accommodate your selfe to the venting your Readers to the expecting of some sublimate and so quintessentiall a conceite that poore Calvin Beza and such like unproficients in Academicall studies never attayned to the depth of any such speculation Once before I observed a certayne gradation tending to this purpose and that with some wonderment as when you affirmed in the beginning of this section that God was as truly before all times future as before all times past As if to be before all times future were a greater matter then to be before all times past whereas I had thought that such poore snakes as my selfe might truly be accoumpted to be before all times future So in this place it might well make a man wonder what you meane to affirme in solemne manner that God is and ever was as infinitely preexistent to all ages comming towards us as to the Worlds nativitie As if to be preexistent to the times to come were as greate a matter as to be preexistent to times past which might seeme to carry no sobriety in the forehead For ever the meanest worme that creepes upon the Earth is preexistent to all ages to come but none is preexistent to all ages past but God himselfe But there is no doubt a mysterie in this Heretofore I had a sent of it But now it beginnes to breake forth in greate measure For when we say God is preexistent to all ages past consequently must needs be preexistent to all ages that are to come we understand all this but one way according to the course of time from future to the present from being present to become past and so that which is first actually existent is before all that which arrives to actuall existence afterwards But you tell us of two wayes that God is preexistent before all ages past one way before all ages to come another way by which other way your meaning seemes to be this that as God is afore all ages past so also he is after or behinde all ages to come which phrase of speech in saying God is after or behind any thing because you thinke it too ignoble to be attributed unto God and perhaps in part to astonish your Readers with some strange language being never acquainted with the like This being after all ages you are pleased to instile call his being before them but another way or a different way from his beinge before all ages past As if a man should say that the Horse goes before the Cart one way and the Cart may be sayd to goe before the Horse another way which later is indeede and in substance of sense no other then to go after the Horse In like sort we may say the calling of the Gentiles is before the calling of the Iewes one way and the calling of Iewes goes before the calling of the Gontiles another way to witt as it comes after it So the rising florishing of Antichrist goes before the fall of Antichrist one way and the fall of Antichrist goeth before the rising and flourishing of Antichrist another way to wit it followeth after it Now if this manner of language doth not goe beyond all Canting I know not what doth But take wee your phrase according to this sense yet there is no truth in this assertion God indeed was before all ages past because he was when they had no beginning but he shall not be after all ages to come because he shall not be when all ages have an end For according to your owne opinion all ages shall never have end And for this reason in the very beginning of this section your selfe affirmed that God could not properly be sayd to be after all times and durations to come For what sayd you can be after that which hath no end To this I added this could not be affirmed eyther properly or improperly because there was no truth in it as that which implyed a manifest contradiction Much lesse properly or truly can it be sayd that God is pre-existent to all ages to come after a different way from that whereby he is sayd to be preexistent to all ages past But let us see whether any greater measure of sobriety can be found in that which followeth In the next place you tell us that As he is no Christian Philosopher much lesse a true Christian divine that would deny that whatsoever is by God decreed was so decreed before all worlds So he is no Christian Philosopher much lesse a true Christian divine that shall referre or retract the tenor of this speech before all worlds to that onely which is past before the world beganne whatsoever can be more properly sayd or conceaved to be past then to be yet to come or to be in every moment of time designable can have no propertye of eternitye So then whosoever shall dare say that it is a more proper speech to affirme that God did chuse us in Christ before the foundation of the world then to say that God shall chuse us in Christ after the end of the World you will be bold to deny him the title both of a Christian Philosopher and of a true Christian divine also By the way let me aske you what that is which you call past before the World was for before the World was nothing at all was but God Agayne though we say the decrees of God were before the world was yet no divine that I know sayth they were past before the World was for the decrees of God are nothing but the Counsayle and will of God which undoubtedly we say
tables of the law and calling others unto him to fall upon the massacring of the people yet this testimony is given of him that hee was the meekest man on the earth I doe not dislike your allowance of men to be passionate in the promoting of Gods glory I hope you will give like allowance to men to be passionate in the defence of Gods truth I have no greate edge to make Christians contend in passion with worldly men how wise soever Yet well I wote that David one of the worthyes of the World amongst Martialists his eyes did gushe out with rivers of water because men kept not the law of the Lord holy Lot did vexe his heart with the uncleane conversations of the Sodomites These morall essayes of yours have a foule issue as when you inferre but most inconsequently as arguing from the nature of man to the nature of God that passions are in God nor so only but even such affections as essentially include perturbation you were as good plainly professe that God is not exempt from perturbation Neyther is to be zealous or compassionate to be like God in wisedom but rather in affection Yet zeale and compassion are accidents in man not in God arise in man never without alteration but no alteration as your selfe have made shew to maintayne is incident unto God Yet I doe easily grant you that the vehemency of mans passions doth as significantly represent the want of passion in God as the swift motions of the Heavens doth represent Gods immutability Like unto him that presenting an unsufficient person to his degree and being demaunded what he meant to prostitute himself to such profanesse made answere he might doe it with a safe conscience For he undertooke for him but tam quam tam moribus quam doctrina and he thought him as good one way as the other though indeede good at neyther And now if your selfe be arrived after all this unto a rest I doe not say vigorous least that might proove the embleme of greater motion from your passion I pray consider how these doe agree First to say that Gods wisedom doth not exempt him from passion and then to acknowledge a want of passion in God 2 I see no reason why you should complaine of the barrennesse of your imagination in illustrating the attributes of God to my judgement it hath bin more fruitefull then all that ever went before you who I dare say were never able to discerne that lively resemblance you speake of betweene the swift motion of the Heavens and the immutability or vigorous rest of God as also betweene the vehemency of mens passions and the vacuity of all passion in God Your Mathematickes though I professe my selfe a very sory scholler in that science I doe reasonablely well understand as namely that a circular figure is as it were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and of all figures of equall circumference the most capacious and that all other figures the nearer they draw to a circle and the more Angles they contayn of equall circumference are the more capacious I expect your mysterious and profound explication 3. The Analogy spoken of betweene sides and Angles as found in circles and other figures doth fitly expresse you say that analogy which Schole divines assign betweene wisedom science love hatred goodnesse desire as they are found in God and man Your theame was how Anger Love Compassion mercy or other affections are in the divine nature of all these there is but one found in this latter enumeration of yours and that is love and wheras you proposed to speake only of the affection and to shew how they are in God Yet here you mention wisedome science goodnesse which never were accoumpted affections No name or title of affection can you say be univocally attributed unto God And this is true and as true of habits and powers of our soules that they cannot univocally be attributed unto God For whatsoever is in God is mere essence and therfore such titles as signifie accidents in us cannot denominate God secundum nomen nominis rationem But as we love by an act of passion so God may love by an act which is his essence Our wills and understandings are accidents yet doth God as truly will and understand as we by his very essence not by any act which is really distinguished from his essence Gods love Gods wrath are merely his will to doe good or to revenge evill as they signifie any thing within God But if they be used as externall denominations so when God punisheth us he is sayd to be angry with us when he doth us good he is sayd to love us And in the like sense may every name of any affection be attributed unto God provided it doth not essentially imply any imperfection as feare doth and desire doth which cannot be attributed unto God but metaphorically The fruits of love compassion proceede from none so freely so plentiously as from God and therfore he may justly be sayd to be most loving most compassionate but to whom he will In like sort the fruits of wrath and a revenging will proceede from none more powerfully and more heavenly then from God Psal. 90. 11. Heb. 10. 13. Who knoweth the power of thy wrath Psalm 90. It is a fearefull thing to fall into the hands of God Therefore may he justly be accoumpted a most severe regenger of iniquity but on whom he will For he can pardon it and cure it in whom he will these being but the fruites of his mercy and he hath mercy on whom he will But to say he is wholly love and wholly displeasure is a wild expression in my conceyte For to say that he is wholly love is as much as to say that whatsoever he is is love whence it followeth that seeing he is displeasure also as you say his very displeasure is love and consequently by the same reason his very love is his displeasure The truth is affections in us belong only to the will and so translated unto God they should only denominate his will Now his power his understanding his will are very distinct notions though in God they are not really distinct yet so farre distinct as that it seemes absurd to say that his power is his will or his wisedom or that his wisedom is his will or his power or that his will is eyther his power or wisdom So you speake truth we are content you take what liberty you think good in the illustration of it and to satisfie your selfe with your illustrations though your readers you doe not I finde you are much pleased in the commodious illustration which a circle doth afford you or which you divise in a circle which you call the true embleme of eternity Some I confesse have professed that eternity doth ambire tempus but I never observed that they compared it to a circle but only I conceave theire meaning was that at this present it was
grace a worke of flesh and blood and not of the spirit of God And all the way no touch of faith your discourse savoring of the humour of a naturalist throughout rather then of a Christian. To them that are sanctified he is you say felicity and salvation but what is he to them that are not sanctified belike to them damnation Yet the holy Apostle hath taught us that God hath made Christ to be unto us wisedom righteousnesse sanctification and redemption 1 Cor. 1. 30. And that God is he that justifieth the ungodly Rom. 4. Alas how often hath the best despised his bounty love mercy grace and salvation yet is not he justice indignation and severity unto them but bounty still love still mercy and grace and salvation still and at length overcomes them and bringes them from the power of Satan unto God When for theire wicked covetousnesse he was angry with them and hath smitten them he hid himselfe and was angry yet they went away turned after the way of theire owne heartes Yet after all this He hath seene theire wayes and hath healed them Es. 57. 17. 18. Yea he rules them with a mighty hand and outstretched arme and makes them passe under the rod and brings them under the band of the covenant Ezech. 20. 37. He takes away their stony hearts and gives them an heart of flesh and putteth his owne spirit within them and causeth them to walke in his statuts and keepe his judgements and doe them I am sory to find so litle evidence throughout your discourse that your selfe have neede of this What did the heathens understand by theire Nemesis God or a creature If God surely he is not more powerfull then himselfe If a creature is it strange that the power of a creature should be inferior to the power the Creator VVhen the Apostle sayth God shall be all in all he speakes only of his elect to fill them with the joyes of Heaven and with God himselfe VVill you take boldnesse to apply this presence of God to the very divills and reprobates It is true we looke for the comming of the mighty God who shall be glorified in his Saints even then shall he shew himselfe from Heaven with his mighty Angells in slaming fire rendring vengeance to them that doe not know God as also unto them which obey not the Gospell of the Lord Iesus Christ which shall be punished with everlasting perdition from the presence of the Lord and from the glory of his power When he shall come to be glorified in his Saints and to be made marveylous in all them that beleive and because his servants testimony towards us was beleived in that day Then shall the Heaven depart away like a scrolle when it is rolled and every mountayne and yle be mooved out of theire place And the Kings of the earth and the greate men and the rich men and the cheife Captaines and the mighty men and every bond man and every free man hide themselves in dennes and among the rockes of the Mountaines and say to the Mountaines and to the rockes fall on us and hide us from the presence of him that sitteth on the throne from the wrath of the Lamb. For the greate day of his wrath is come and who can stande Anno Dom. 1629. Aprilis 30. FINIS The Errata IN the Epistle to the Reader pag 7. lin 24. for pag 1. read page 642. In the Praeface pag 4 lin 30. for which 〈◊〉 with p 6. l. 13. r necessitie contingencie lin 31 for your sweet r. the sweete p 10 l 32 for si antea read sint ea 1. Sect. p. 1. 2. l. 14 for good r. Godâ— p. 20 l. 7. for Salumy r. Salmuth p. 23. lâ— 22. for kight shâ—s r. kickshewes p. 25. l. 25. r. of things that doe appeare l. 29. r. omnis causa est principium omnis causatum est principlarum p. 30. l. 24. r. to be some 12 or 13 inches p. 31. l. 4. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 r. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 p. 50. l. 3. r. and as we all confesse l. 32. r. finite or infinite p. 63. l. 17. r. If you say a true being p. 74. l. 18. r. are life and power 2. Sect. p. 92. l. 27. for is not only r. it is not only p. 99. l. 16. for motis r. molis p. 102. l. 29. for most unlike r. most like p 104 l 1. for motis r. molis p. 1 18. l. 21 for quia et r. quia est p. 119. l. 24. for so they are r. so they are p. 123. l. 28. for the paradoxes r. your paradoxes p. 125. l. 2. for diaculetion r. ejaculation p. 126. l. 7. competi r. competeret l. 23. dare r. dari p. 127 l. 8. for returne to r returne from p 128 l. 4. for numerably r numerable l. 5. for notting r. nothing p 130 l 15. for Sincet r Snicet p 131 l. 31 for mutili read iuhtili p 133. l. 30 for properby r properly l 32 for motis r molis p 135. l 29 for persitum rea per situm p 141 l 23 for maxime r matter p 142 l 4 for tertium r tantum pag 143 l 12 for liberall r litterall p 144 l 26 blot out so l 28 they draw it from leaue out it and in the place thereof interline their existence continuance of being from that which did every way exist before them I know not how much lesse how they draw it p 145 l 33 for sect r section l 36 for spere r sphere p 146 l 15 for what such moue r what should move l 21 blot out the first word of the Greeks there and read insteed thereof earum p 147 l 18 for what I ever r what ever p 148 l 15 for cortune r continue p 149 l 8 r entertaine time that wasted p 150 l 9 r some things move more or lesse p 152 l 31 r move any way p 153 l 5 for and shall be r it shall be p 155 l 7 r and the miserablest p. 156 l. 17. for Dorphiry r. Porphiry pag 157. l. 1 r. or of being what it is l. 10. for hactens r. hastens l 16. for Times r. Time is p. 158 l 8. for be not stored r. be not scored p 161. l 3. r. severall branches of time l 9. r. is impossible p 162. l 7. r. is diversified l 8. r. one is sicke l 11. for crosse r crasse p 163. l 11. r then that being p 164. l 3. for even r aevum l 34 r. in that hope p. 169 l 4. r. with out begining l 28. r. but eminently p 172. l 2. r. I know not the l 31. r. diminution in quantitie p 177. l 35. r. to his power p 182. l 9. for forme r. formes p 148. l 13. r. world doth truely p 191. l 9. 10 11. to all things that haue been is and shal be coexistent to all that shal be is most