Selected quad for the lemma: nature_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
nature_n	godhead_n	person_n	union_n	3,927	5	9.3251	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A66556	The Scriptures genuine interpreter asserted, or, A discourse concerning the right interpretation of Scripture wherein a late exercitation, intituled, Philosophia S. scripturæ interpres, is examin'd, and the Protestant doctrine in that point vindicated : with some reflections on another discourse of L.W. written in answer to the said exercitation : to which is added, An appendix concerning internal illumination, and other operations of the Holy Spirit upon the soul of man, justifying the doctrine of Protestants, and the practice of serious Christians, against the charge of ethusiasm, and other unjust criminations / by John Wilson ...	Wilson, John, 17th cent.	1678 (1678)	Wing W2903; ESTC R6465	125,777	376

Cause it may not unfitly be call'd the Persuasion Dictate Testimony Inspiration of the Holy Spirit of God which Divines commonly but mistakingly ascribe to that which they call Supernatural Light out of their low esteem of Reason and that Natural Light that is in every Man This I confess the Author doth not make use of among the Arguments that he produceth to defend his Cause yet because it tends to beget a conceit according to the drift of his Discourse that what Men apprehend themselves to have a clear knowledge of by Reason or Philosophy is infallibly certain and thereby qualified for the sure Interpreting of Scripture I thought fit not to pass it over without some Animadversion This Assertion is a piece of wild somewhat for whether I should call it Philosophy or Divinity Sense of Nonsense I know not that if entertain'd gives ground to Men of corrupt Minds to father their most enormous Conceits upon God and his Holy Spirit Against it I shall propound a few Considerations 1. Do not all Ages of the Church bear witness that erring Persons may be as confidently persuaded of their mistaken opinions as others are of the Truth strongly conceiving what they hold to be most clear and evident so far as chearfully to lay down their lives in the defence of it So capable are Men of being deluded by their own darkned and corrupted Reason when they give themselves up to it as their sole guide that some have denied to the death those Truths that are in some degree knowable by Natural Light as that grand Maxim which is the Foundation of all Religion That there is a God witness Caesar Vaninus But for Doctrines of meer Revelation how peremptorily they are denied and upon what ground we need no farther instance than that of the Socinians or as they are otherwise called from a more Ancient Ring-leader Photinians who of all Hereticks have most perverted the Articles of our Creed and found out Followers in these latter ages who have erected a new Body of Divinity in opposition to the Catholick Theology says the Reverend Bishop of Chester Yet this new Socinian Body of Heterodoxies called by the Clergy of England in their Convocation Anno 1640. a Complication of Heresies is by its Fautors maintained with highest confidence and that under the plausible pretence of clear Perception by the Principles of Reason Upon this account One of that way denies Gods fore-knowledge of future contingencies and upon the same ground another of them denies the Doctrine of the Trinity and the two Natures of Christ because their Reason tells them as clearly and evidently as the Sun shines at Noon that these things are false 2. This countenances the absurd opinion of some ancient Philosophers That man is the measure of all things for according to this every thing must be accounted true that a Man is strongly persuaded to be so whereas the truth of our Perceptions lies in their consonancy to the nature of things which must be first supposed before we can apprehend them And therefore that great Maxim that bears such sway with some that whatsoever I have a clear and distinct Perception of is infalliby true is so far from being a sure Test of Truth and Falshood that in this dark and degenerate State of Mankind it infallibly betrays those who trust to it to innumerable and pernicious mistakes For suppose the Principle it self should be true That every thing is as we perceive provided our Perception of it be distinct and clear which way shall we be resolved whether this Perception we have of things be clear and distinct or dark and confused seeing experience puts us out of all doubt that persons as far distant in their apprehensions of the same thing as East and West do yet both of them with much confidence plead the greatest clearness and distinctness imaginable What shall we think to pass by other instances of the contest between Micajah and the four hundred false Prophets about Ahab's Expedition The false Prophets expressed as high a confidence of their being in the Right when abused by a lying Spirit as Micajah who was truely guided and acted by the Holy Spirit of God But the Explication that a late Author gives of this so much applauded Rule viz That then doth Reason clearly and distinctly perceive a thing when it perceives it as it is in it self renders it plainly ridiculous supposing the thing in question For when I am inquiring how I shall be assured that my apprehension of a thing is certainly true the meaning is how shall I be sure that I understand the thing to be as it really is for the verity of my Conception consists in its agreement with the object Therefore to make a clear and distinct Perception the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of a true and right apprehension and to explain this clear and distinct Perception by saying it is a Perception of a thing as it is is to make the same thing the Index of it self and leaves me as much to seek as at first for still it will be asked how shall I know that I perceive a thing as it is or that my apprehension agrees with the nature of the thing 3. I might further add That we are obliged to believe many things whereof we cannot have a clear and distinct perception as the Trinity of Persons in the Godhead the Incarnation of our Saviour the Hypostatical Union of the Divine and Humane Nature and such like Touching which I grant we must have a clear perception that they are revealed ere we can believe them but a clear perception of the reveal'd objects themselves we cannot have they being to us incomprehensible Mysteries upon which ground both these and sundry other Scripture-Doctrines are by some rejected as unintelligible and irrational But here Des Cartes acquits himself For he somewhere gives his Readers this Caution That we should remember God the Maker of all things to be infinite and our selves finite and therefore if he reveal any thing to us of himself or other things that is above the strength of our Natural Wit such as the Mysteries of the Incarnation and the Trinity we must not deny them credit though we cannot clearly understand them Nor should we at all wonder that there are many things both in his immense nature and in the Creatures made by him that exceed our capacity 4. This fond conceit of the Exercitator borders upon that of the Enthusiasts whose high-flown pretences of the guidance of the Spirit and the internal living essential substantial word within them comes to no more when searcht to the quick but their own darkned and besotted Reason whose absurd Fancies and Blasphemous Dictates they daringly imputed to the Spirit of God This Clause in our Author brings him under a suspition of complying with those old Libertines and present Quakers whom he professeth to dislike onely with this difference They put their

Scripture undoubtedly is and whatsoever is indeed contrary to the Voice of God speaking in this Sacred Volume whatever pretence it may have of Reason or Philosophy it is but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Tim. 6. 20. It is an honest Speech of Aquinas which I find quoted by our Judicious and Learned Davenant Omnis creata Veritas est defectibilis nisi quatenus per veritatem increatam rectificatur unde nec homo nec Angelus infallibiliter ducit in veritatem nisi quatenus in iis loquentis Dei testimonium consideratur To which I shall subjoin the judgement of Cartesius whose Authority may perhaps be of more credit with some now than either that of a Schoolman or of an Apostle Memoriae nostrae pro summa regula est infigendum ea quae nobis à Deo revelata sunt ut omnium certissima esse credenda Et quamvis fortè lumen rationis quam maximè clarum evidens aliud quid nobis suggerere videretur soli tamen auctoritati divinae potius quam proprio judicio fidem esse adhibendam This says he must be firmly remembred as our chief Rule That those things which are revealed to us of God are to be believed as of all things the most certain And although perhaps the most clear and manifest light of Reason may seem to suggest to us some other thing we are nevertheless to give credit to Divine Authority alone rather than to our own judgment CHAP. IV. 1. A second Argument from the disproportion between Man's Reason and Matters of Divine Revelation 2. An Exception removed MY second Argument is That there is no proportion between Mans Reason and the Mysteries of Divine Revelation These are so sublime they are out of the ken of a Natural Understanding they are of a far different kind from the highest Natural Principles How little is it that Mans Reason by its own Light can discover of the Nature of God and his Eternal Counsels The Heathen who wanted Scripture Light did but grope as Men in the dark Act. 17. 27. How greatly are we to seek in judging of the Wisdom and Goodness and Power and Justice of God if we have no higher light than Natural Reason to direct us Nor need this seem strange when we see how much the most knowing Men are at a loss concerning themselves the nature and faculties of the Soul and the manner of its union with the Body and how little insight they have into many of the minuta naturae Can it then be wondred that Mans Reason should be unable by its own light to have a clear view of the Divine Perfections that are infinite and incomprehensible Whence was it that so many of the wisest Heathens were so gravell'd at the proceedings of a Divine Providence when they saw good Men suffer and bad Men prosper How did Cato that severe Moralist stumble at the success that Julius Caesar had against Pompey But what shall we say to that great Mistery of Mans Redemption by Christ The line of Mans Reason is too short to reach these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Cor. 2. 10. Therefore Evangelical Doctrine is frequently called a great Mistery containing such things as Eye hath not seen nor Ear Heard nor have entered into the Heart of Man to conceive things beyond the reach not of Men only but of Angels It is true that all Men could not but know God to be very good they found it and felt it in the daily effects of his sustaining and preserving Providence and his wonderful patience and forbearance towards them and they did know also that God is Just and a Righteous Avenger of Sin this they might see in the Judgments that he brought upon the World beside the inward witness of their own accusing Consciences The wrath of God was revealed from Heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of Men Rom. 1. 18. And they knew the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the righteous judgment of God that they who do such wickednesses as they were conscious to in themselves were worthy of death Rom. 1. 32. But now how to reconcile these two the Goodness of God to his Creatures and his severe Indignation against Sinners so as with any satisfaction to hope for pardon and acceptance with him here their Principles of Reason faill'd them They saw themselves in a very ill case and that there was a necessity of somewhat to appease the provoked Anger of the Divine Majesty but how or which way this should be they could not tell and therefore lost themselves in a Maze of infinite Mistakes in their attempts about it Now it being so it is impossible that Reason by its Natural Principles should be a competent Judge of Scripture-Revelations It must therefore submit its own conceptions and Dictates to the Doctrine of Faith contained in the Scripture Here possibly it will be replied as before to the precedent Argument That all this may be granted of those that enjoyed not the Gospel and Written Word but where this is Reason may be allowed to judge and determine by its Principles concerning the things there revealed To this I answer two things First This implies a contradiction for it is not the Words or Sentences of Scripture that reveal any Mistery to us further than thereby the Mind of God is made known to us Now if this cannot be found out from the Scripture it self but from Principles of Reason then it is Reason it self that first discovers the Mistery I grant that Reason that is the faculty of Reason is and must be the instrument whereby we apprehend what God speaks in the Scripture But if there be any part of Scripture so dark as that its meaning cannot be gathered from the Words neither considered by themselves nor compared with other Passages of Sacred Writ I would know how comes Reason in Interpreting such an obscure place supposing it to be obscure to find that such and such Words so placed do contain in them such an Assertion when the Words and Sentences themselves cannot resolve us You 'll say our Reason teaches us by the light of its own common notions that this and no other must be the meaning of such a place Is it not then plain that Human Reason fetcheth that Truth if it be a Truth from it self and not from the Scriptures For the Scripture according to this Hypothesis gives an uncertain sound onely Reason determines it Remember we are speaking of matters of pure Revelation Now if the Sentences of Scripture under debate do neither by themselves nor with the help of any other clearly and certainly signifie any such thing as is fasten'd upon them such Arguers cannot say they have it by Divine Revelation unless they will pretend to that Enthusiastick Inspiration which they profess to decry and falsly charge upon their Opposites Secondly I add further that there are sundry things revealed in Scripture whereof God gives us no other Reason than his