Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n authority_n church_n interpretation_n 4,397 5 10.0901 5 true
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
A49107 An answer to a Socinian treatise, call'd The naked Gospel, which was decreed by the University of Oxford, in convocation, August 19, Anno Dom. 1690 to be publickly burnt, as containing divers heretical propositions with a postscript, in answer to what is added by Dr. Bury, in the edition just published / by Thomas Long ... Long, Thomas, 1621-1707. 1691 (1691) Wing L2958; ESTC R9878 172,486 179

There are 7 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

the promise of Eternal Life to the Believer and therefore he says p. 42. Col. 2. Whoever ascribes it to any other Doctrine however true however revealed makes himself equal to Christ in Authority and superiour in Faithfulness If then that Scripture of our Saviour This is life eternal to know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent Joh. 20.31 And 1 Joh. 5.20 We are in him that is true even his Son Jesus Christ this is the true God and eternal life 1 Joh. 5.20 St. Augustine reads the Text thus To know thee and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent to be the only true God and so doth St. Chrysostom Now if I say Eternal Life be appropriate to this knowledge that Christ is the true God then it is a fundamental Article of Faith P. 43. There can be no need of an Interpreter of Scripture or Determiner of Doubts concerning Matters of Faith saith the Doctor How then comes it to pass that there are so many Controversies concerning Matters of Faith and that each Party denies Salvation to their Adversaries that differ from them His appeal to natural Faith will never be able to determine the Controversies that are yet undecided concerning such Fundamental Doctrines as are necessary to Salvation Socinus de Adoratione Christi says Bonas rationes rectas ex verbo dei consecutiones in sacris disputationibus aspernare nec admittere velle hominis est suae causae parum fidentis He says 3. We need not ought not to be uncharitable to any who differ from us in other Doctrines to the belief whereof the Promise is not appropriate But is Eternal Life any where promised to those that believe that Jesus Christ was only a Creature and a meer Man Can we hope for Salvation without satisfaction to the Divine Justice or can we make satisfaction Is it not good Divinity to say there is no Salvation but in the Name and through the Merits of Jesus Christ who died for our Sins and rose again for our Justification I have shewn you how the Doctor would interpret this latter Scripture Rom. 4. ult Commodius interpretationis as they call them there but if their little Criticisms and false Punctations should be admitted the Scriptures would indeed be made as he says A Nose of Wax witness their interpretation of John 8.58 Before Abraham was I am i. e. say they Before Abraham was made the Father of the Faithful and of many Nations that were converted by the preaching of the Gospel I am viz. the Light of the World So Eniedinus renders the Confession of St. Thomas as an Exclamation directed to God the Father O my Lord and my God as saith he we are wont to do when we behold any strange sight And Christ's words to the Thief Luke 23.43 are thus pointed I say unto thee this day Thou shalt be with me in Paradise viz. When I shall come to Judgement Thus Francis David on the words of St. Stephen Act. 7.59 makes this Comment O God the Father who art the Lord of Jesus receive my Soul In this ch p. 44. c. 2. the Doctor says that the Remission which the prophets promised reached only to temporal punishments but that by Christ to eternal life How then can a natural Faith secure us of Life eternal when that Faith though greatly improved by the Prophets could not do it Ch. 11. in this Chapter he revives and pleads for another Socinian Tenet for the Resurrection not of the same but another Body He propounds the Question thus Whether any Promise doth necessarily import a restitution of the same numerical Matter and undertakes to prove That it is more honourable to God and more serviceable to the Design of the Gospel to believe the contrary But First This is contrary to the Grammatical Signification of the Word and to the Scripture by him quoted viz. That God gives to every seed his own Body And Ruffinus mentions the word Hujus the Resurrection of this Body which though it shall have a kind of Transfiguration by substraction of the old earthly Qualities and the addition of such as are new and heavenly yet the subject shall continue the same which St. Paul means 1 Cor. 15.53 This corruptible shall put on incorruption that as we have born the image of the earthly we may bear the image of the heavenly and as Job says With these eyes see God Job 19.25 And the Justice of God requires this that as the Faithful have born the Marks of the Lord Jesus Christ in their Bodies wherein they were Partakers of the Sufferings of Christ and were consecrated to him as the Temples of the Holy Ghost may partake of the Reward and Crown of Glory in the same Bodies What he says of our being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proves as well that we shall have no Bodies as that we shall not have the same The change that shall be made in our vile Bodies doth not alter the form of our Bodies no more than it doth the Body of Christ which though it be now a glorious Body yet is still the same numerical Body and to call that a Load of Carion which the Apostle calls the Temple of the Holy Ghost is not becoming a Christian Doctor As we believe therefore that the same Body our Saviour which suffered is now glorified and that the same Bodies that remain to the last day shall be taken up to meet the Lord in the Air shall be the same Bodies that shall be ever with the Lord. And as we believe that Christ arose from the Grave in the same Body wherein he died so we believe that he carried the same into the heavenly Sanctuary and shall come at last in the same Body to judge both the Quick and Dead that all Eyes may look on their Crucified Saviour and unless it shall be the same Body it cannot properly be called a Resurrection And no doubt but our Resurrection shall be conform with that of Christ's as the Apostle intimates Rom. 8.11 He that raised up Jesus from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies To this purpose St. Augustine Epl. 57. That as Christ glorified his own Body but destroyed not its nature so will he give Glory to our Bodies but not take away the nature of them Nor indeed do other qualities any more alter the nature of our Bodies than of our Souls which for substance shall be the same But lastly if this Enquiry be a matter of Curiosity not of Faith why doth he oppose the Doctrine so long received in the Church to bring in a Socinian Tenet And now p. 50. c. 1. he gives us the Socinian Scheme of the Naked Gospel such as Socinus Crellius Sclichtingius Smalcius and the whole Tribe have fancied and published to the World before him That its business was to reduce the Jews from their Bondage under the Law of Moses and the Gentiles from their worse bondage under the Worship of Devils to the
Fellow heirs with the believing Jews then it ceased to be a Mystery and surely there is another Mystery in v. 9. of that 3d Chapter which our Doctor cannot yet apprehend thô plainly revealed viz. That God created all things by Jesus Christ See Crellius Heb. 1. v. 10. which though frequently asserted in the Scripture as Col. 1. Heb. 1. c. yet the Socinians utterly deny nor can they apprehend what is that Righteousness which is by Faith as opposed to that which is by the Law or to our Doctor 's Natural Faith but the Doctor tells us of another Mystery little less than a Contradiction as p. 1. c. 2. viz. The Patriarchs knew only the Fathers yet Abraham had the knowledge of Christ and our Saviour says that Moses spake of him and the Doctor affirms the same That Moses spake of Christ Deut. 30.12 for the Doctor saith p. 41. c. 1. that the Apostle applied that place to Christ If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus and shalt believe in thy heart that God raised him from the dead thou shalt be saved It was not so much in dislike of the Popish Mysteries that the Doctor so often rejects whatever is above human Reason under that Notion as in dislike of the Doctrine of the Trinity and the Eternal Generation of our Saviour of which he speaking p. 34. c. 1. says If you understand not this you must not wonder at least not gain-say it for it is a Mystery which Reason cannot fathom and therefore must be rejected as one of the Packs of Impertinent Mysteries p. 58. c. 2. The Doctor that writes so mystically himself should not be so much displeased if he meet with some Mysteries in other Writings especially in the Scripture wherein as St. Peter observes of St. Paul's Epistles There are some things hard to be understood and will not be fully explained till Elias come And indeed as Naked as his Gospel is it is darkned with so many obscure mists and subtle insinuations that it will appear to some of his most diligent Readers to be one continued Mystery of Iniquity It is a sorry shift which Sandius and others that write against the Trinity make to excuse themselves for thus Sandius pleads see his Appendix p. 107. That he wrote his Book on behalf of the Protestants against the Papists to convince them that the Scripture is the only Rule of Faith because they could not prove the chiefest Articles of their Faith viz. the Trinity Consubstantiality and Coequality from the Tradition of the Fathers of the three first Ages In this our Doctor follows Sandius and would perswade us to renounce the Doctrine of the Trinity because it is a Popish Doctrine See more of this in another Epistle of Sandius p. 261. I have proved saith he that the whole World in the fourth Age was Arian and the Arians enjoyed Temporal Felicity and wrought Miracles to shew against the Papists that these are not marks of the true Church I reckoned diverse Councils of the Arians who condemned the Catholick Faith to shew that we ought not to depend on their Determinations in Matters of Faith but on Scripture only I have shewn that the Church of Rome hath honoured many Arians that were of very evil lives as Saints to shew you what manner of Saints the Papists do Invocate by the Authority of the Infallible Church of Rome c. All this is right but when the whole design of his Book is to shew that the Doctrine of Arius denying the Godhead of Christ and making him a Creature is more consonant to Scripture and Antiquity than that of the Trinity in the Church of Rome is to condemn all other Churches that maintain the same Doctrine for to this purpose tends that which remains in the Third Enquiry concerning the Papists who do impose new Articles of Faith and set their Traditions and Decrees in an equal rank with the Scriptures and sometimes above them with a Nonobstante to Christ's own Institutions as the Socinians do by their Reason let them therefore dispute the Case with each other and let Baal plead for himself He cannot wound the Church of England through their sides unless he can prove the Doctrine of the Trinity to be a Popish Tradition which he doth more than intimate and herein he would do them more service than any of their Champions by proving Popery to be more ancient than the Council of Nice I am now come to the Conclusion of the Author who shuts up his Naked Gospel as generally the Socinians do with a Plea for Toleration to all that confess the Lord Jesus and believe that God raised him from the Dead though they leave him as Naked a Lord as the Doctor hath left the Gospel robbing him of his Eternity and Deity and that Honour and Worship which on those considerations are due to him our Faith in his Name Obedience to his Commands a devout use of his Holy Sacraments and so turn Turks Jews o● as some English Socinians have done Quakers and live above Ordinances satisfying themselves with a Christ within them and a Natural or Naked Gospel as Mr. Pen in a Socinian Tract hath done This he calls giving Faith its due Bounds by imprisoning it and dismembring it separating Obedience and Love which are inseparable from Evangelical Faith And as for Love saith he we must give it its due boundlesness even to them that love not but deny and bid open defiance to the Godhead of Christ to whom the Apostle denounceth Anathema I wish heartily the Doctor had shewn more Charity to the Church of Christ in general than to think and speak of them as guilty of Idolatry in all Ages for so are they that give Divine Worship to a Creature and that he who stiles himself a Son of the Church of England would not defame her as tainted with Popish because she holds the Athanasian Doctrine for he calls that and the Nicene their Creeds and our Litany their Litany and so becoming a Papist to the Papists and it 's much better to be an Athanasian Papist than an Arian or Socinian Heretick The Doctor tells us in the Vindication p. 7. of his intention to have presented his Naked Gospel to the Convocation that they might be induced to enlarge their Charity at a time when all the Christian World expected it from them And was all the Christian World once more become Arians that they should become Disciples to his Naked Gospel I cannot conceive what compliance the Doctor could presume of from that Convocation he well knows their Prolocutor was the same that agreed shortly after to the burning of it in the Convocation at Oxford and doubtless both he and the several Members would have had the same Resentment of it at Westminster as the Oxford Convocation had When therefore we see a Viper rising out of the Fires of Oxford and hissing p. 5. That the Heresie lay not in the Book but in the
presume by his short line of Reason and Discourse to fathom the deep things of God which the Apostle says are past finding out When the Socinians say though it be contrary to Reason and Scripture That Divine Worship must be given to a Creature as they affirm Christ to be why may not the same Scriptures be believed when they tell us that Christ is One and equal with the Father God over all c. though Reason cannot apprehend how the Divine Essence can be communicated to more than one Person yet is it good Logick though no Socinian Reason that though the Divine Essence be singular yet it may be predicated of more than One without Multiplication or Division But are the Socinians the only Masters of Reason that all Mankind must stand or fall at their Tribunal Are they the Light of the World and all Men else in Darkness Yea even Christ himself who hath taught many things as contrary to their Doctrines as Light is to Darkness then we may say that neither God is true as well as that all Men are Lyars The Socinians grant That the Man that makes Reason his Judge ought to have divers necessary qualifications as that his Reason be clear and uncorrupt that the Person be of great Probity and Sincerity free from Vice and prejudicate Opinions well instructed and exercised in Human and Divine Knowledge one that hath studied discoursed and meditated on the Things he doubts of considering what is said pro and con by learned Men. And when all these Things meet one thing more is necessary the Illumination and Assistance of the Spirit of God And hath this Spirit and sound Reason forsaken the Universal Church in all Ages and confined itself to the Raccovian Catechists or is every private Man thus qualified Are not the most carnal ignorant or obstinate ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth being lead away with divers Lusts which darken their Understandings and cause them to imprison the Truth of God in Unrighteousness and lean more to their own Understandings than to the Revelation and Assistance of the Holy Spirit I doubt not but the Socinians will grant that such Men are not fit Judges for themselves or others in Matters of Salvation Who then shall judge for them If they choose another it will be probably one of whom they have such a good Opinion as most inclined to their own Sentiments And how are they assured that he is not tainted with some of the same Failings as himself is he ought therefore to consider what the Church of GOD hath held in all Ages what the most general Councils after mature deliberation have approved of and above all what is most consonant to the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and make these his Rule and then he will plainly see how contrary the long approved Doctrines of Original Sin and of Eternal Death the Wages of Sin the Necessity of Satisfaction to the Divine Justice and in order thereto the Incarnation of the Son of God which are as clear in the Holy Scriptures as the Sun in the Firmament are to his clouded and carnal Reason we may not wonder that there are in all Ages Men of perverse Minds c. because we have been foretold there should be such or that the Sophistry of such Men may raise prejudices against the most evident Truths even against the Being of a Deity and the first Principles of any Religion but for any who hold the Scriptures to be the Word of God and yet deny the Fundamentals of the Religion therein taught and shine as the Sun throughout one end to the other is against Reason as well as Scripture what is more plain than the Creation of the World by God in Gen. 1. yet may an Atheist urge the same Reason by his Metaphorical Sense of that History as the Socinians do by their absurd Interpretation of that of St. Joh. 1. and apply the particulars of the History of the Creation to the Erection of the Jewish Pedagogy and Policy by Moses as the Socinians do the first Institution of the Christian Religion to be the Sense of the Creation of the World by Christ Who was with God and was that God by whom the World was made as is most express Col. 1. and Heb. 1. See the Bishop of Worcester against Crellius Whence is it that the Ancient Fathers and Modern Doctors have lost their Reason and the Socinians found it that they as the Chineses say are the eye of the World Quid est quod Velleius intellegere possit contra non possit as Cicero de Natura Deorum Sure they have as good Intellectuals and as good helps to improve them and have given as great Testimonies of their Probity as any Socinian whatsoever their boast of Reason therefore may be checkt with that of Lucan of the British Druids Solis nosce Deos Coeli numina vobis aut Solis nescire datur Socinus grants That we ought not to forsake the common and usual sence of the Scripture and apply a Metaphorical Sense when the matter is capable of it And if his Disciples would grant but one thing more viz. that we ought not to wrest little words and particles which may admit of various significations contrary to their common import to which the subject matter doth determine them the Controversies between us and them would be soon decided for as the R. R. Bishop notes concerning that great Point of the Satisfaction of Christ which is so obstinately denied that it cannot be more clearly expressed by any Man than it is in the Scripture and if any Company of Learned Men should purposely write of it as the Apostles have done the Socinians would find the like evasions from the Sence of the one as they have to elude the other We say then that no Man of sober Reason assisted by the Illumination of the Word and Spirit of God can dissent from the Revelations of the Gospel because first it doth propose such things as are above the reach of human Reason but not contrary to it for one Light may be greater than another but not contrary to another and that Mind or Reason which is improved and elevated by the Light of Faith beyond the Sphere of its natural activity and is endowed with a spiritual understanding doth not only believe those Mysteries to be true but also may perceive many Reasons for their credibility which are hid from others that have not the same Opticks such as he may infer from the Wisdom of God who proposeth them and from the Nature of the Things proposed And if the Socinians talk of human Reason in the Concreate i. e. such as yet remain in the natural and corrupted Man of which St. Paul speaks 1 Cor. 11.14 it cannot be expected that this should agree with the Gospel for if to the eye of the body many things appear otherwise than in truth they are which
answered Our Doctor mentions it for another reason viz. how any Church dare challenge or any Man dares pay that Faith to any yea all the Creatures in Heaven and Earth which is due to God only And on the Socinian and Arian supposition that Christ is a Creature there is no more Faith or Obedience due to him than to other Messengers of God but we must seek for Salvation by a Natural Religion and then blind as we are by Nature and having but blind Guides we may soon fall into the Ditch For the natural man perceiveth not the things of the spirit flesh and bloud cannot reveal them nor can any man say that Jesus is the Christ but by the Holy Ghost That this seems to be the Socinian sence of the Author is probable from the following words Those who require implicit Faith on any other authority so as to contradict reason give God the lye making him contradict himself for Reason is no less the word of God than is the Scripture So that if the Doctrines of the Gospel contradict the Reason of Arians and Socinians they are not to be received for therefore only are we to believe the Scripture because we are by plain Reason convinced that it is the Word of God But what if some Socinians be tainted with Quakerism and their Reason tells them the Gospel is not the Word of God but that Word is written in their Hearts and the Light within them is the only Word of God and not the Word incarnate or that which is written with Pen and Inke that is in our Doctor 's Opinion the Natural Religion for though the evidence we have that what is offered us for the Word of God is really such to this we must pay neither more nor less belief than Reason will prove due p. 18. col 2. P. 19. c. 2. The Doctor speaking of Belief says thus The same Natural Religion which claimed it as due to God forbad to pay it to any Creature upon the former account there was no need of an express Precept and upon the later there was the greatest need not only of an express Command but such repeated Importunities as might out voice both Reason when it should decry such a Command and Interest when it should rebel against convinced Reason both whereof concurred against the belief which our Lord required The sence of this Paragraph seems to be this That as the Faith which Natural Religion claims as due to God needed no express Precept so Natural Religion forbidding to pay Faith to any Creature there was the greatest need not only of an express Command but repeated Importunities to pay it to Christ such as might out-voice both Reason and Interest seeing they both concurred against the belief which our Lord required I wish the Doctor would give a more rational inference from these words then this that both Natural Religion Reason and Interest do forbid to pay Faith to Christ as forbidding to pay it to a Creature for he saith they concur against the belief which our Lord required If the Doctor by implicit Faith means more particularly a readiness to believe as Articles of Faith and as necessary to Salvation whatever Propositions are imposed on him by his Superiors he well knows we have no such Custom in the Church of England we call no Man on Earth our Master or Law-giver in Matters of Faith He that advanceth his own Reason which is often against and then it must be above Scripture he is in as bad a condition as the most bigotted Papist for he makes himself and all his Faculties and Reasonings as Infallible as they believe the Pope to be Chap. 5. The Contents of this Chapter is thus express'd Why Faith under the Gospel maketh a greater figure than under the Law This state of the Question he presently alters and makes it his business to shew That when our Saviour first claimed the publick profession of Faith in him there were extraordinary reasons for his Importunity and Promises some whereof in these days when the Christian Religion hath been long established have lost their influence and by consequence the importunity of those Precepts and the influence of those Promises do now cease These extraordinary Reasons viz. for professing Faith in Christ he draws from 1. The Difficulty and 2. the Danger of professing Faith in Christ and 3. the Necessity of it All which are readily granted viz. That though it were both difficult and dangerous yet it was necessary that the Disciples of Christ should publickly own Faith in him but then the Inference which he makes is not conclusive p. 23. col 1. viz. Now that our Education makes it as difficult and our Laws as dangerous to deny Christ as it was then to confess him and consequently what extraordinary merit Faith might draw from those Topicks must now be lowered and so Faith will appear a common Grace worthy of no greater than common rewards Is false for as he confesseth though in extraordinary respects that necessity be now abated yet there is a permament necessity from the influence which Faith alway hath on the action of Believers because as he says The Christian is alway a Souldier and must fight against all kinds of Enemies to Christ's Kingdom not only Flesh and Bloud but spiritual Wickedness and whatever would not have the Lord rule over them He must follow the Captain of his Salvation who was made perfect by Sufferings and when tempted he must walk in the steps of his Father Abraham sacrifice his Lusts though no less dear than was his Isaac So that Faith must be habitually the same and therefore needs the same encouragements now as it did when it was first required And I see no great need of that which he so carefully requires that we must distinguish the times for we are still under those later times which St. Paul calls perillous wherein we shall meet with divers Tryals and Temptation and therefore need the whole Armor of God c. And we still need the same degrees of Faith to overcome the World i. e. The lust of the Flesh the lust of the Eyes and the pride of Life To this great Work he says Christ came furnished with no other power but of working Miracles but the Scripture tells us of other powers for St. John says Grace and truth came by Jesus Christ He had the power to confer Grace to give Repentance and Remission of Sins to give Faith and to increase it to open the eyes of their Understandings and turn them from Darkness unto Light and from the power of Satan to God without which powers that of working Miracles was insufficient for we read of many that wrought Miracles in Christ's name and yet had no saving Faith and a Heathen may have a Natural Faith and Moral Vertues and yet come short of Salvation He adds in the conclusion of this Chapter That if we believe him i. e. Christ to require Faith for any other
things above Reason though to a carnal Apprehension they seem contrary to Reason Why else doth our Saviour pronounce them blessed that have not seen and yet believed viz. as St. Thomas did that Christ is their Lord and their God This is another great Fortress of the Socinians from which they tell us in the Doctor 's Language That Articles of Faith above the apprehension of Reason are like the Ravings in Bedlam p. 56. c. 1. A cast of Tertullian's Montanism Credo quia impossibile and that excess of Confidence he means our Christian Faith in defect of Reason is a certain symptom of Madness To this Fortress as their Frontier Garison all the Socinians resort nothing can be believed which cannot be understood and comprehended by Reason So Schlinchtingius against Meisner It implies a Contradiction that what exceeds the reach of Reason should be made an Article of Faith As if when the God of Heaven revealing his Will doth injoyn any Commandment or requires the belief of any Proposition upon his Authority which the reason of his Creatures is not able to comprehend or demonstrate to itself he did enjoyn the belief of Contradictions As in our Author's instance when Abraham believed against Hope and against his Reason he believed on the Authority of God that required him to offer up his only Son Isaac And why may we not as well believe that God sent his Eternal Son to be Incarnate and come down from Heaven for our Redemption tho' we cannot comprehend it we ought to believe the thing tho' we cannot comprehend the manner Natural Faith relieth upon natural Reason but Divine Faith upon Revelation which may be above but not against Reason If you require any other Testimony it is not Faith Vides saith St. Augustine non est fides what thou assentest to because thou seest a reason for it is not Faith Faith is the evidence of things not seen Heb. 11.1 That properly is Faith which gives up its assent to a Proposition on the Testimony of him that propounds it and in this case we say with the Doctor Let God be true and Humane Reason a Lyar. Humane Reason hath the judgment of Discretion the judgment of Decision belongs to the Scriptures to the Scriptures I say not as understood by any private Interpretation but as interpreted by the Analogy of Faith by the Harmony of the Old and New Testament and by the general Consent of the best Teachers in all Ages and to this we shall Appeal for the Decision of this great Truth That our Saviour is the Eternal Son of God There are certainly more plain Contradictions in the Arian Doctrines in this viz. That there should be an Omnipotent and Omniscient God that created all things and knows the secrets of all hearts and that this should be a created God for the Arians grant Christ to be the Creator of the World That God should be reconciled to Man that by Transgression is his Enemy hating and hateful to God without any satisfaction to his Justice this is to reconcile Light and Darkness Heaven and Hell or that a Finite Creature as a Created God must be could satisfy an infinitely offended Justice Nor is there any Article of our Christian Faith that seems so contrary to Reason as is their measuring of an Infinite Essence by Finite Reason that which measureth should be able to contain the thing that is measured Again To give Divine Worship to a Creature by what Name soever it be dignified or distinguished which is due only to the Almighty God our Creator is contrary both to sound Reason and Scripture which the Socinians some of them at least do and on their own Principles are guilty of Idolatry The Difference among the Socinians concerning giving Divine Worship to Christ will save us the labour of proving them to be Idolaters if Christ be not the Eternal Son of God Socinus would not hold him for a Christian that would not worship Christ with Divine Worship But Christianus Frankin Francis David and some others who agreed with Socinus that Christ was but a Man urge this Argument to prove Socinus and his Followers to be Idolaters because they worshipped him whom they believed to be but a Creature The Argument is thus formed As great as is the distance between a Creator and a Creature so great ought the difference be of the Honour that is given to the Creator from that which is given to the Creature but the distance between the Creator and Creature is the greatest distance therefore there ought to be the greatest difference in the Honour that is given to the Creator from that which is given to a Creature Hence they conclude Socinus and his Followers who worshipped Christ with Divine Worship were Idolaters But to this they answer That if it be the pleasure of God to have it so so it must be and for this they quote St. John 5.23 That all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father To this Franken replys That by Socinu 's own Doctrine the Scripture he says must not be believed because it is contrary to Reason and therefore there is some other hidden sence in that Scripture which must be searched out N. B. and Franken urgeth Deut. 6.13 repeated Matth. 4.10 Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve And it is farther urged that Crellius saith the word only in John 17.3 where Christ says This is life eternal to know thee the only true God that by it Christ excludes himself from being the true God And by the same word say his Adversaries Christ excludes himself from being the Object of Divine Worship This Franken confirms farther against Socinus from Isa 42.8 My glory will I not give to another Isai 48.11 and observe who speaks I am Jehovah that is my name and my glory c. What Glory is that Gloria Jehovitatis mea as Calomus's Phrase is that is The Glory of my Godhead So in Jer. 3.18 That men may know that thou whose name alone is Jehovah art the most High Jehovah then is the Name of the most high God and his alone so that it cannot be given to any other who is not the most high God but this name Jehovah is given to Christ in the Scripture therefore he is the most high God This Argument shall be confirmed hereafter In the mean time we have gained this Point viz. That if Christ be the Object of Divine Worship as the Socinians grant then must he be the Eternal Son of God of the same Essence with his Father and as St. Paul speaks God over all blessed for ever Now if the word only in St. John exclude Christ from being the true God then the same word in Deut. and St. Matthew exclude him from Divine Worship wherefore if his being the true God be against the Reason of Socinians though never so plain in Scripture we must search out some other hidden sence as Socinus says
Scripturis facere pronunciant qui absque necessitate a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 discedunt They do but make sport of the Scripture Joh. 1. Col. 1.16 Heb. 1. that depart from the Letter of it when therefore the Scriptures do declare our Blessed Saviour to be the Creator of all things visible and invisible Which must be understood not of the new Creation only as the Socinians affirm to evade the Testimony of St. John ch 1. but of the whole Creation for the Angels which kept their purity and station needed not a new Creation when he is declared to be God over all blessed for ever 1 Joh. 5.20 when he is called the true God and Col. 2.9 In whom dwelt the fulness of the Godhead bodily that is really and fully That Christ says of himsef Joh. 8.58 Joh. 17.5 1 Tim. Acts 20 2● 1 Joh. 3.16 Before Abraham was I am That he speaks of the Glory which he had with the Father before the World was That God was manifested in the flesh That God purchased the Church with his own blood And hereby we perceive the Love of God because he laid down his Life for us and we are still looking for the appearance of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ And being exegetical the words the Great God shewing his Essence and that of our Saviour his Office That all men should honour the Son as they honour the Father And to omit many others he that Christ says of himself I am Alpha and Omega the first and the last which none but God could say What is it but to Play with the Scriptures after all these express significations of his Eternal Deity to deny it And because the best Interpretation of the Scripture is to be found in the Harmony and Agreement or the Analogy of the Old and New Testament the best Confutation of the Socinian and consequently the best Confirmation of the received Opinion of the Eternal Deity of the Son of God may be demonstrated from those places in the Old Testament which speaking of our Saviour as the Messias and attributing to him the very Essence Names and Properties of the Supreme God are in the New Testament appropriated to our Blessed Saviour who therefore in divers places appeals to the Prophesies that went before concerning him in the Law of Moses in the Psalms and Prophets to them we will appeal and search the Scripture because they testify of him At the Transfiguration of our Saviour Matth. 17. it is said There appeared together with Peter James and John Moses and Elias Ut lex Prophetae cum Evangelio congruentes sempeternum Dei filium quem annunciaverant revelarent That the Law and the Prophets conspiring with Christ and his Evangelists might declare the Eternal Son of God whom they had foretold and were to preach to the World See St. Ambrose ad Gratian. 59. and St. Aug. ad Catechum c. 6. This the Author of the Naked Gospel might have observed from his own Quotation of Justin Martyr's words to Triphon the Jew P. 31. I shall not prove saith Just Mar. that Christ is God otherwise than by proving that this is the Christ and that it was foretold that he should be such The same course doth our Country-man Bradwardine take speaking of the Trinity c. p. 29. he confidently affirms That there is not one substantial Article of the Christian Faith which God had not solemnly foretold and revealed by his Prophets and that in so plain a manner that if any Philosopher as a Lover and Enquirer after Truth should duly consider what is written in the Old Testament he must become a Christian As he observes many of the Fathers who were such Philosophers were perswaded to be Such were Justine Martyr Clemens Alex. Tertull. Origen and many others who from the Schools of Plato and some Traditions which he had received from the ancient Jews were prepared upon reading of the Old Testament to imbrace the Doctrine of our Saviour and his Apostles because they agreed with the Gospel preached by our Saviour Hornbeck in his Sum of Controversies tells us That the Disciples of Mahomet do confess that if they believed St. Paul 's Epistles to be Canonical as we do they must believe the Divinity of Christ Therefore in their Disputes with Christians concerning the Deity of Christ they decline the Authority of St. Paul's Epistles saying They were adulterated by the Christians That Testimony which Pliny gives to Trajan concerning the Christians that they did carmen dicere Christo tanquam Deo sing Praises to Christ as their God coming from an Heathen is the more firm and it cannot be denied The Christians who suffered under the Heathen Persecutors suffered for their belief of the Eternal Deity of our Saviour for their demand of them was Nega Deum incende Testamentum Deny your God burn your Testaments which implys that they believed that Christ was God and that their Testaments bore witness to the same Yet their answer was Christianus sum Christum verum Deum agnosco adoro I am a Christian I acknowledge and worship Christ as the true God See the Tripartite History of the Persecution by the Vandals And now I shall compare those Testimonies in the Old and New Testament which do prove that our Saviour was the Eternal Son of God and only premise that if any one of those Scriptures which speak of the Eternal God in the Old Testament be rightly applied to our Saviour in the New that then he is that Eternal God To this therefore I apply myself desiring the Reader to bear in mind that whatever from the Old Testament is in the New Testament accommodated to Christ by himself or his Apostles is as true and to be believed as much as any other part of the Gospel The first Scripture that I shall compare is that of Moses Exod. 9.1 and Exod. 20.1 with Heb. 11.25 26. from which places it is thus argued He to whom the People of Israel were a peculiar People whom by the hands of Moses he brought out of Aegypt for whose sake Moses chose to suffer affliction with them rather than to enjoy the Crown of Pharoah He was the God of Israel but our Saviour Christ was he whose peculiar People they were therefore c. This is applyed to Christ Heb. 11.24 By Faith Moses refused to be called the Son of Pharoah's Daughter and chose rather to suffer affliction with the People of God than to enjoy the pleasures of Sin for a season esteeming the Reproach of Christ greater Riches than the Treasures of Aegypt Here the affliction of the People of God is called the reproach of Christ his therefore was that People and them he brought out of Aegypt and therefore he is that God The Apostle St. Jude v. 5. speaks to this purpose That the Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in the vulgar Latine is rendred Jesus having saved the people out of Aegypt afterward destroyed
one Substance the one as a Fountain the other as a Stream flowing from him or as the Beams from the Sun which are not separated These many and plain Evidences of the Belief of the Ancient Fathers before the Council of Nice do evidently declare what sure footing they had for their Faith viz. the unanimous Consent of Apostolical Men Martyrs and Confessors who maintained that the Son of God was of the same Divine Nature and Substance with his Father consonant to the Doctrine of the Holy Scripture and consequently they also shew how rashly and inconsiderately the Doctor says p. 37. c. 1. That we have no firm ground to go upon that this Doctrine was first advanced by a Novice Emperor upon implicite Faith in two Bishops P. 38. c. 2. That it hath no foundation in Scripture Antiquity or Councils and that the Athanasian may be numbred among the Popish and Arian Doctrines which we know to be contradictory in the case of the Trinity And if in the mouth of two or three Witnesses every truth should be established how much more should this Truth be received as unquestionable being confirmed by the Harmony of the Old and New Testament by the Notions of the Apostolical Writers in the Primitive Times and by their Successors home to the Nicene Council who all delivered it not as their own Faith but as the Faith of their Predecessors home to the Apostles days And as for Councils the Synods that were before the Council of Nice and all since except a few under some Emperors deluded by the Sophistry of the Arians and circumvented by their Hypocrisie and Falshood have been constantly of the same Judgment with that of Nice Concerning the Eternal Generation of Christ there is a plain sence of the Anti-Nicene Fathers that will answer all the Objections made by the Arians against that Eternal Generation of Christ and their Opinions that he was only the first begotten of the Creatures being himself made in order to the making of the World for they assert That the Word did alway exist with his Father but there was a prolation emission or application of the Son ad exteriora the Father in order to the Creation and this is by some metaphorically called a Generation not as if he then had a beginning for God as Athenagoras says who is an Eternal Mind had in himself his Eternal Word from Eternity though the Energy or Operation of that Word appeard first in the Creation in which sence be calls the Word the first begotten But such says he as was not made but by whom all things were made This one Distinction of the Word or Son of God being Co-eternal with the Father and his Emission 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Progression for the manifestation of his Father and himself 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Creation of the World if duly considered as delivered by the Fathers before the Nicene Council will confute all the Councils of the Arians and Socinians against those parallel places of Scripture and particularly against such as speak of the Primogeniture of our Saviour as if he were a Deus Factus or a Creature Having shewed the Authority of Scripture and the Fathers to be against the Arian and Socinian Doctrines there is no necessity of urging that of Councils which they peremptorily decline so Sandius in his Preface to the Reader Ask for the old Paths saith he not of Synods nor of Councils nor the Books of Creeds which later Ages have set forth He was conscious that these would be generally against him except a few that were manged by Arian Emperors so that we have their consent to let these be silent for fear of their Anathema's It is observed that in all Lands where any venemous Creatures are bred there may be found some others that serve as an Antidote to that Venome and sometimes in that very Creature where the Poyson is lodged there is a Medicine to expel it as in the Viper the same Divine Providence hath in all Ages so ordered it that whatever Heresies have been conceived by erroneous Persons have been stifled in their birth by such as God hath raised up for the suppression of them An instance whereof we have in this Heretical Treatise which as it was brought to light by a Rector of Exeter-Colledge so by another Rector of the same Colledge it was provided long before to condemn it to perpetual Darkness and I may truly say it was Damnata prius quam nata condemned to dye before it was born And if the Antidote prepared by the One be duly applied the Dose of Poyson is not of so quick an operation but by the Blessing of God the ill effects of it may be prevented I have therefore for the benefit of ignorant and wavering Persons translated that Learned Lecture of the Reverend Dr. Prideaux the King's Professor of Divinity in Oxford and Rector of Exeter Colledge in the Year 1633. which begins p. 276. of his Lectures in Folio the Text which he chose to insist on is Matth. xvi v. 16. Simon Peter answered and said Thou art Christ the Son of the living GOD. THis celebrated Testimony concerning our Saviour is recommended to us by these four Particulars First That it was not Sudden but Deliberate Secondly It was not Private but spoken in the Name of all the Apostles Thirdly That it was not casually uttered but after a double Demand of Christ To which add Fourthly The Approbation of Christ and the Reward of St. Peter that published this Testimony Now the Scripture is not wont to propose trivial things with so great solemnity there is therefore something more in the matter than at first appears in the words of this Answer from whence both the Ancient and Moderns with clear and often confirmed assent have believed and asserted not only the Humanity of Christ which he took of the Seed of Abraham but also the Divinity of the Son of the Living God by ineffable Generation communicated to him by the Father from Eternity But that which St. Peter foretold That false Teachers shall be among you which will bring in damnable Heresies denying the Lord that bought them 1 Pet. 2.8 Rom. 9.17 Rom. 9.22 to which they were afore ordain'd saith St. Peter raised up saith St. Paul fitted and prepared that same the nauseousness of these times have vomited into the bosom of the Church Faction doth cherish Industry defends Sagacity promotes Wit urgeth Hypocrisie publisheth under the Veil of Sincerity So that unless such as Timothy carefully take heed to themselves and their depositum and such as St. Jude contend for the Faith once delivered there is great danger lest the Unclean Spirit that was cast forth by the Reformation return to the House that is swept and cleansed with a more numerous Train and the last State of the Church become worse than the former 2 S. Now among those Seven unclean Spirits that create trouble to the Church swept and garnished