Selected quad for the lemma: glory_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
glory_n face_n moses_n shine_v 2,681 5 9.0852 5 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A61548 A discourse in vindication of the doctrine of the Trinity with an answer to the late Socinian objections against it from Scripture, antiquity and reason, and a preface concerning the different explications of the Trinity, and the tendency of the present Socinian controversie / by the Right Reverend Father in God Edward, Lord Bishop of Worcester. Stillingfleet, Edward, 1635-1699. 1697 (1697) Wing S5585; ESTC R14244 164,643 376

There is 1 snippet containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

making mention of his descent from Heaven The Sense which these wise Interpreters put upon them is that Christ was rapt up into Heaven before he entred upon his Preaching But where is this said What Proof what Evidence what credible Witnesses of it as there were of his Transfiguration Resurrection and Ascension Nothing like any Proof is offer'd for it but it is a wise Way they think of avoiding a pressing difficulty But they have a farther reach in it viz. to shew how Christ being a mere Man should be qualified for so great an undertaking as the founding the Christian Church and therefore they say That before our Lord entred upon his Office of the Messias he was taken up to Heaven to be instructed in the Mind and Will of God as Moses was into the Mount Exod. 24.1 2 12. and from thence descended to execute his Office and declare the said Will of God In another place That when it is said the Word was with God that is the Lord Christ was taken up into Heaven to be instructed in all points relating to his Ambassage or Ministry In a third they say That our Saviour before he entred upon his Ministry ascended into Heaven as Moses did into the Mount to be instructed in all things belonging to the Gospel Doctrine and Polity which he was to establish and administer Now considering what sort of Person they make Christ to have been viz. a mere Man this was not ill thought of by them to suppose him taken up into Heaven and there instructed in what he was to teach and to do as Moses was into the Mount before he gave the Law But here lies a mighty difference when Moses was called up into the Mount the People had publick notice given of it and he took Aaron and his Sons and Seventy Elders of Israel with him who saw the Glory of God v. 10. And all Israel beheld the Glory of the Lord as a devouring Fire on the Top of the Mount v. 17. and after the 40 days were over it is said That Moses came down from the Mount and the Children of Israel saw him with his Face shining Exod. 34.40 Now if Christ were taken up into Heaven as Moses was into the Mount why was it not made publick at that time why no Witnesses why no Appearance of the Glory to satisfie Mankind of the truth of it And yet we find that when he was transfigured on the holy Mount he took Peter and James and John with him which circumstance is carefully mention'd by the Evangelists And Peter who was one of the Witnesses then present lays great weight upon this being done in the presence of Witnesses For we have not follow'd cunningly devised Fables when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Iesus Christ but were Eye-witnesses of his Majesty For he received from God the Father Honour and Glory when there came such a voice to him from the excellent Glory And this voice which came from Heaven we heard when we were with him in the holy Mount Now let any one compare this with the account which they give of Christ's Ascension into Heaven The Transfiguration was intended only for a particular Testimony of God's Favour before his suffering but even in that he took care there should be very credible Witnesses of it And is it then possible to believe there should be such an Ascension of Christ into Heaven for no less a purpose than to be instructed in his Ambassage and to understand the Mind and Will of God as to his Office and yet not one of the Evangelists give any account of the circumstances of it They are very particular as to his Birth Fasting Baptism Preaching Miracles Sufferings Resurrection and Ascension but not one Word among them all as to the circumstances of this being taken up into Heaven for so great a purpose If it were necessary to be believed why is it not more plainly revealed Why not the time and place mention'd in Scripture as well as of his Fasting and Temptation Who can imagine it consistent with that Sincerity and Faithfulness of the Writers of the New Testament to conceal so material a part of Christ's Instructions and Qualifications and to wrap it up in such doubtfull Expressions that none ever found out this meaning till the days of Socinus Enjedinus mentions it only as a possible Sense b●t he confesses That the New Testament saith nothing at all of it but saith he neither doth it mention other things before he entred upon his Office But this is a very weak Evasion for this was of greatest importance with respect to his Office more than his Baptism Fasting and Temptation yet these are very fully set down And after all our Vnitarians themselves seem to mistrust their own Interpretations for in their answer to my Sermon they say it is not the Doctrine of all the Unitarians and refer me to another account given of these Texts in the History of the Unitarians There indeed I find Grotius his Interpretation as they call it prefer●d before that of Socinus But they say Grotius was Socinian all over and that his Annotations are a compleat System of Socinianism and his Notes on the first of S. John are written artificially but the Sense at the bottom is theirs In short That the Word according to Grotius is not an eternal Son of God but the Power a●d Wisdom of God which abiding without measure on the Lord Christ is therefore spoken of as a Person and as one with Christ and he with that And this Notion of the Word leads a man through all the difficulties of this Chapter with far more ease than any hitherto offer'd But these wise Interpreters have as much misinterpreted Grotius as they have done the Scriptures as I shall make it appear 1. Grotius on Iohn 6.62 interprets Christ's Ascension into Heaven of his corporal Ascent thither after his Resurrection where the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Word was before of whom it is said That the Word was with God But how comes Christ to assume that to himself which belong'd to the Word He answers Why not since we call Body and Soul by the Name of the Man But if no more were meant by the Word but a divine Attribute of Wisdom and Power what colour could there be for the Son of Man taking that to himself which belonged to an Attribute of God What strange way of arguing would this have been What and if ye shall see the Son of Man ascending where he was before For according to this Sense how comes a divine Attribute to be called the Son of Man How could the Son of Man be said to ascend thither where a divine Attribute was before The words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must relate to him spoken of before and how could the Power and Wisdom of God be ever said to be the Son of Man