Selected quad for the lemma: spirit_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
spirit_n holy_a scripture_n speak_v 14,888 5 5.2608 4 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
A40088 A second defence of the propositions by which the doctrine of the Holy Trinity is so explained according to the ancient fathers, as to speak it not contradictory to natural reason : in answer to a Socinian manuscript, in a letter to a friend : together, with a third defence of those propositions, in answer to the newly published reflexions, contained in a pamphlet, entituled, A letter to the reverend clergy of both universities / both by the author of those propositions. Fowler, Edward, 1632-1714. 1695 (1695) Wing F1715; ESTC R6837 47,125 74

There are 2 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

A Second Defence OF THE Propositions By which the DOCTRINE of the Holy Trinity Is so Explained according to the Ancient Fathers As to speak it not Contradictory to Natural Reason In ANSWER to A Socinian Manuscript In a LETTER to a Friend Together With a Third Defence of those Propositions in Answer to the Newly published Reflexions contained in a Pamphlet Entituled A Letter to the Reverend Clergy of Both Universities Both by the Author of those Propositions London Printed for B. Aylmer at the Three Pidgeons in Cornhil 1695 ERRATA PAge 16. Line 27. dele is P. 20. l. 23. for doth read do P. 32. l. 22. for that proceed from the Sun r. that proceeds without the Sun P. 33. l. 9. for Pooceed r. Proceed P. 37. l. 3. for Stages r. Stage l. 5. for Soul r. Souls P. 46. l. 17. for Incorporal r. Incorporeal P. 49. l. 1. for does r. do THE PREFACE THE Propositions relating to the Doctrin of the H. Trinity were but Twenty-one when the Manuscript mentioned in the Title-Page was writ against them But all the Twenty-eight which since came out are implyed in them And I acknowledge that those Written Papers occasioned my making them so many more to put the Explication more out of danger of Misconstruction There is likewise some difference in the Wording of those Twenty-one and the Title and two or three small Additions but the Sence of both is Exactly the same Those I drew up in Compliance with a Gentleman of as great Worth as Quality who requested me to give him in Writing the Sence he once heard me Affirm to be the most Ancient of this Grand Article of our Faith and in my Opinion incomparably Preferrable to the Later Hypotheses And falling into this Method of Expressing Clearing and Confirming the Fathers Notion of the Trinity by Propositions I delivered when I had finished them a fair Copy of them to that Gentleman and gave my foul one to a Friend who needed Satisfaction about this Great Point This Person some time after brought me from a Socinian Acquaintance of his an Answer to my Paper Concealing his Name from me and I sent him my Thoughts of his Performance as soon as my Occasions would permit me to Consider it which are contained in the next following Defence Only in what I now Publish I abridge a little in a few places of what I writ nor is there any other Considerable Alteration And as I Printed not more than an Hundred Copies of the Propositions till I Reply'd to the Answer to them a while since Publish'd by Another Hand So the now Coming Abroad of This Answer is Solely Occasion'd by the New Reflections But if it be thought no fair dealing with my Adversary that I do not Publish also his Papers I have this to Say I have them not to Publish but returned them at His desire who brought them to me not thinking it worth the while to take a Copy of them since I had not then a Thought of ever Printing my Reply But if I have played any Tricks in Transcribing what I Animadvert upon which is the Substance of the Whole both my Adversary and his Friend are able to let the World be Acquainted with them But I Abhor such Doings The Twenty Eight Propositions 1. THE Name of God is used in more Sences than one in Holy Scripture 2. The most Absolutely Perfect Being is God in the highest Sence 3. Self-Existence is a Perfection and seems to be the Highest of all Perfections 4. God the Father alone is in reference to His Manner of Existence an Absolutely Perfect Being because He alone is Self-existent 5. He alone consequently is absolutely Perfect in reference to those Perfections which do presuppose Self-Existence 6. Those Perfections are Absolute Independence and Being the First Original of all other Beings In which the Son and the Holy Ghost are comprehended 7. All Trinitarians do acknowledg That these Two Persons are from God the Father This is affirmed in that Creed which is called the Nicene and in that which falsly bears the Name of Athanasius tho' with this difference that the Holy Ghost is asserted in them to be from the Son as well as from the Father Wherein the Greek Church differs from the Latin 8. It is therefore a flat Contradiction to say that the Second and Third Persons are Self Existent 9. And therefore it is alike Contradictions to affirm them to be Beings Absolutely Perfect in reference to their Manner of Existence and to say that they have the Perfections of Absolute Independence and of being the First Originals of all things 10. Since the Father alone is a Being of the most Absolute Perfection He having those Perfections which the other Two Persons are uncapable of having He alone is God in the Absolute Highest Sence 11. And therefore our blessed Saviour calls Him The Onely True God Joh. 17. 3. This is Life Eternal to know Thee the onely True God and Jesus Christ whom Thou hast sent And it is most Absurd to think That in these Words and the following Prayer He did address himself to the Three Persons of the Trinity conjunctly since throughout the Prayer He calls this Onely True God his Father and calls Himself twice His Son before these Words Not to mention the Absurdity of making our Lord to pray to Himself or of distinguishing Himself from those Three of which Himself was One. If such a Liberty as this in interpreting Scripture be allowable what Work may be made with Scripture 12. Our Lord calls the Father The Onely True God because He only is Originally and of Himself God and the First Original of all Beings whatsoever As he calls him the Onely Good saying There is none Good but God because He alone is Originally so and the Spring of all that Good which is in other Beings 13. The God head or God in this Highest Sence can be but One Numerically Of which the best Philosophers were satisfied by their Reason and therefore the Oneness so frequently affirmed of Him in Scripture is a Numerical Oneness 14. There seems to be neither Contradiction nor Absurdity in supposing the First Original of all things to be productive of other Beings so Perfect as to have all Perfections but that of Self-Existence and those which are necessarily therein implyed 15. Supposing any such Beings to have immediately issued forth from that infinite Fullness and Foecundity of Being which is in the Deity each of them must have a Right to the Name of God in a Sence next to that in which it is appropriated to the Father since they have all the Perfections of the Godhead but those that must of Necessity be peculiar to Him 16. It is evident from the Holy Scripture That the Son and Holy Spirit are such Beings viz. That they have all Divine Perfections but the forementioned Such as Unlimited Power Wisdom Goodness c. 17. And they are always spoken of in Scripture as Distinct
Beings or Persons according to the Proper Signification of this Word both from the Father and from Each Other Nor are so many Men or Angels more expresly distinguished as different Persons or Substances by our Saviour or his Apostles than the Father Son and Holy Ghost still are 18. It is a very presumptuous Conceit That there can be no way but that of Creation whereby any thing can be immediately and onely from God which hath a distinct Existence of its own Or That no Beings can have Existence from Him by way of Necessary Emanation Of which we have a Clearer Idaea than of Voluntary Creation It is the Word of the Ancients both Fathers and Philosophers nor can a better be found to express what is intended by it viz. A more excellent way of existing than that of Creation 19. It is no less presumptuous to Affirm That it is a Contradiction to suppose That a Being can be from Eternity from God the Father if 't is possible it may be from Him in a more Excellent Way than that of Creation And we have an Illustration of both these Propositions by something in Nature For according to our Vulgar Philosophy Light doth exist by necessary Emanation from the Sun and therefore the Sun was not before the Light which proceeds from thence in Order of Time tho' it be in Order of Nature before it And the Distinction between these Two Priorities is much Elder than Thomas Aquinas or Peter Lombard or any School-man of them all or Christian-man either 20. And if any thing can be from another thing by way of Necessary Emanation it is so far from a Contradiction to suppose that it must only be in order of nature before it that 't is most apparently a Contradiction to suppose the contrary 21. Our 18th and 19th Propositions do speak our Explication of the H. Trinity to be as contrary to Arianism as to Socinianism since the Arians assert That there was at least a moment of time when the Son was not and that He is a Creature 22. Altho' we cannot understand how it should be no Contradiction to affirm That the Three Persons are But One Numerical Being or Substance yet hath it not the least shadow of a Contradiction to suppose That there is an unconceivably close and inseparable Union both in Will and Nature between them And such a Union may be much more easily conceived between them than can that Union which is between our Souls and Bodies since these are Substances which are of the most unlike and even Contrary Natures 23. Since we cannot conceive the First Original of All things to be more than One Numerically and that we acknowledg the now mentioned Union between the three Persons according to the Scriptures together with the intire dependence of the two latter upon the First Person The Unity of the Deity is to all intents and purposes as fully asserted by us as it is necessary or reasonable it should be 24. And no part of this Explication do we think Repugnant to any Text of Scripture but it seems much the Easiest way of Reconciling those Texts which according to the other Hypotheses are not Reconcilable but by offering manifest violence to them 25. The Socinians must needs Confess that the Honour of the Father for which they express a very Zealous Concern is as much as they can desire taken care of by this Explication Nor can the Honour of the Son and Holy Spirit be more Consulted than by ascribing to them all Perfections but what they cannot have without the most apparent Contradiction ascribed to them 26. And we would think it impossible that any Christian should not be easily perswaded to think as honourably of his Redeemer and Sanctifier as he can while he Robs not God the Father for their Sake and offers no Violence to the Sence and Meaning of Divine Revelations nor to the Reason of his Mind 27. There are many things in the Notion of One God which all Hearty Theists will acknowledg necessary to be conceived of Him that are as much above the Reach and Comprehension of humane Understandings as is any part of this Explication of the H. Trinity Nay this may be affirmed even of the Notion of Self-Existence but yet there cannot be an Atheist so silly as to question it Since it is not more Evident that One and Two do make Three than that there could never have been any thing if there were not Something which was always and never began to be 28. Lest Novelty should be Objected against this Explication and therefore such should be prejudiced against it as have a Veneration for Antiquity we add that it well agrees with the Account which several of the Nicene Fathers even Athanasius himself and others of the Ancients who treat of this Subject do in divers places of their Works give of the Trinity as is largely shewed by two very Learned Divines of our Church And had it not been for the School-men to whom Christianity is little beholden as much as some Admire them we have reason to believe that the World would not have been troubled since the fall of Arianism with such Controversies about this great point as it hath been and continues to be This Explication of the B. Trinity perfectly agrees with the Nicene Creed as it stands in our Liturgy without offering the least Violence to any one Word in it Which makes our Lord Jesus Christ to be from God the Father by way of Emanation affirming Him to be God of God very God of very God and Metaphorically expressing it by Light of Light answerably to what the Author to the Hebrews saith of Him Ch. 1. 3. viz. That He is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Effulgency of his Glory and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Character of his Substance And so is as much Of one Substance with the Father as the Beams of the Sun are with the Body of it And since there have been of late so many Explications or Accounts Published of this most Adorable Mystery which have had little better Success than making Sport for the Socinians I thought it very Seasonable now to Revive That which I affirm with great Assurance to be the most Ancient one of all much Elder than the Council of Nice and to have much the fewest Difficulties in it and to be incomparably most agreeable to H. Scripture The Defence c. SIR I Have perused your Friends Answer to the Paper I put into your hand and here hope to give you a satisfactory Reply to it I shall dispatch his Preface in a few Words He saith that The Trinitarians have in Vain tryed their Strength against their Adversaries And there 's no doubt of it if their Adversaries may be Judges As to his saying that The Vanquished Victors are viz. among the Trinitarians for each buys his Victory with the loss of his own Explanatory Hypothesis I confess I have that soft place in my Head