Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	apostolical_a	faith_n	tradition_n	2,256	5	9.3848	5	false

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A60978	Platonism unveil'd, or, An essay concerning the notions and opinions of Plato and some antient and modern divines his followers, in relation to the Logos, or word in particular, and the doctrine of the trinity in general : in two parts.; Platonisme déviolé. English	Souverain, Matthieu, d. ca. 1699.	1700 (1700)	Wing S4776	180,661	144

in such and such a manner since nothing is absolutely immutable but God himself he alone being that Father of Lights in whom there is no shadow of turning This is plain The Idea of a Triangle is nothing else but the very Essence of God modify'd in such a manner Again the Idea of an Owl is only this Divine Essence so modify'd the Idea of a Lobster is still but a Modification of this Divine Essence in a word the Idea of all Beings is nothing else than the very Essence of God modify'd in such or such a manner Jupiter est quodcunque vides quocunque moveris What do you call that It 's however on such fine Discoveries that these Gentlemen value themselves confidently and triumphingly saying So true it is that true Platonism is a good Preservative against Socinianism Yes say I but under a pretence of preserving us from Socinianism we are rudely robb'd of Christianity Let 's once more venture to speak as we think Athenagoras Tatian Theophilus of Antioch with many others of venerable Rank and Antiquity whom out of respect I do not name these Fathers whom our Moderns imitate with so much affectation consider'd the Christian Religion only as a new Sect of Philosophy which under low and popular Similitudes contain'd the most hidden Sense and profoundest Mysteries of all sorts of natural and divine Sciences whereon they gave themselves free scope and explain'd the Scriptures not as Interpreters but as sophistical Speculative Philosophers pretending to find Plato's Mysteries in certain Terms much as our Chymists pretend they find their Art in Genesis or in the History of the Creation Cabala every where I shall be exclaim'd against as abusing those Great Men but wrongfully All our Criticks say worse of them than that For not to mention Daille Huetius and Petavius who are not thought their Friends Dr. Bull will suffice as he is indisputably one of their greatest Admirers and if we may say it their pension'd Apologist his Testimony will be worth ten thousand others * Peruse his Defence of the Council of Nice He says of Origen That he sometimes spake too freely and like a Sceptick Of Tertullian That he little car'd how he spake of God provided he did but contradict his Adversary and that an Egg 's not more like an Egg than the Expressions of that Father resemble the extravagant Conceits of Valentin Of Lactantius That he was but a Rhetor ignorant in Theology Of St. Jerom That he was but a Joster and a Sophist Indeed there are scarce any of em whom he has not a fling at when he 's not pleased with their Theology Their Arian or Gnostical Expressions give him so much trouble that it puts him almost always out of humour What might we not say of their poor Interpretations of Scripture They went strangely to work on it if we may believe St. Jerom. Mons Le Clerc recites two Passages of him which will come in very properly here one of them is in Tom. X. p. 492. where that Father says in Apol. pro lib. cont Jovin p. 106. seq Ed. Gryph 'T is one thing to write in order to dispute and another to write for Instruction In the former Method Dispute is very extensive and the endeavour is only to answer the Adversary Now this is propos'd then that we speak in one manner and act in another c. In the latter an open and ingenuous Behaviour is necessary c. Origen Methodius Eusebius and Apollinarius have written much against Celsus and Porphyry Observe what Arguments and what doubtful Problems they make use of to overthrow the Writings compos'd by the Spirit of the Devil And that because they are necessitated to say not what they think but what the Dispute requires non quod sentiunt sed quod necesse est they contradict the Gentiles The other Passage may be found in the XII Tom. of the Bib. Vniv p. 146. and is taken out of St. Jerom's Letter to Nepotian p. 14. I was says he once desiring Gregory Nazianzen who was formerly my Master to explain to me what was meant by the * The English Testament hath it the Second Sabbath after the First Second-first Sabbath in St. Luke he pleasantly answered me I 'll inform you concerning that in the Church where when all the People are giving me their Acclamations you 'l be constrain'd to know what you do not know or if you alone are silent you 'l be accounted a Fool. To have yet more convincing Proofs of the pitiful manner of the Fathers explaining the Scriptures one need but see their Puerile Interpretations of these Words regnavit a ligno Deus which they apply to the Cross of Jesus Christ and on many other Texts whence they subtlely draw Plato's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 They are no more than a Train of flat and forc'd Explications as that which they give of these Words ex utero te genui c. Again see how Tertullian makes what David said of the Palm-Tree sute to a Phaenix The Hebrew Word is not equivocal and it 's likely that Tertullian was deceiv'd by the double sense of the Greek Word No 't was designedly that he played upon it not seeking so much the sense of the Scripture as an opportunity of finding in the Scriptures one of the greatest Wonders Paganism ever spake of Neither were the Fathers so ignorant in the Scriptures but that a little good Judgment would have shewn them the natural Signification of these Words eructavit cor meum c. It is not God the Father but David who there speaks however they were willing upon occasion to find the sublimest Doctrine of Plato's School in this ordinary expression of Scripture or make the Heathens believe that there was nothing so great in their Philosophy which was not hidden in those Scripture-Expressions which to us seem plainest and least mysterious But Dr. Bull finds admirable Expedients to save the Reputation of the Fathers He distinguishes between the Witness of the Faith and the Interpreter of the Scriptures and always taking for granted that they are good Witnesses of the Faith he grants that they are sometimes bad Interpreters of Scripture which is respectfully stabbing them with a Dagger So in pag. 140. alledging for Proof of the Divinity of the Holy Ghost a Passage out of Irenaeus where that Father mistakenly quotes the Prophet Isaiah We do not trouble our selves says he with Irenaeus's bad Interpretation for we are not consulting that Father as an Interpreter always happy in explaining the Scripture but as an irreproachable Witness of Apostolical Tradition I confess bad Interpreters may be good Witnesses of the Faith of their Age. But it must at the same time be granted me that the Faith whereof they testify is a too much suspected Faith when it depends on the Evidence of so bad Interpreters I say bad for it is not only one or two Passages mistaken by these Doctors which we are speaking of but