.Nw.ODI1: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
[ed: some text disappears into margin] | [ed: some text disappears into margin] | ||
os: 1.16.10. yt by this pretend ye | os: 1.16.10. yt by this pretend ye Socinians have not needed yt | ||
but might as well have stuck to ye old Arrian sense of making | but might as well have stuck to ye old Arrian sense of making | ||
God's instant in ye crea[ti]on, but to ye it may be said | God's instant in ye crea[ti]on, but to ye it may be said either he | ||
created instant or | created instant or uncreate, if ye first yt a [creation] doth not im | ||
infinite power of one creature may create another, if ye | infinite power of one creature may create another, if ye 2d then | ||
?rns God by nature. Other argumts for | ?rns God by nature. Other argumts for ye divinity of X see | ||
? d. Xto L1.c4.all: | ? d. Xto L1.c4.all: | ||
?ll ye main difficulty in explaining ye doctrine of ye | ?ll ye main difficulty in explaining ye doctrine of ye | ||
Trinity by reason may be reduc'd to these 2 | Trinity by reason may be reduc'd to these 2 | ||
How there can be 3 | How there can be 3 p[er]sons & but one God | ||
How these can agree in a 3d & not agree among thems. | How these can agree in a 3d & not agree among thems. | ||
? wee say one Individual nature may be communicated to | ? wee say one Individual nature may be communicated to | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
? we say ye soul has 3 faculties understanding, will, & memory | ? we say ye soul has 3 faculties understanding, will, & memory | ||
?out ye least absurdity wee may say these 3 are one | ?out ye least absurdity wee may say these 3 are one | ||
Socinians objt yt every person is an individual being & there- | |||
? distinct persons must be 3 individual beings ie: 3 Gods A person | ? distinct persons must be 3 individual beings ie: 3 Gods A person | ||
2 things. something common wth others of ye same nature as 3 | 2 things. something common wth others of ye same nature as 3 | ||
| Line 30: | Line 30: | ||
?elieve, & wt wee have power to conceive, wee have reason to | ?elieve, & wt wee have power to conceive, wee have reason to | ||
a God tho we cannot concieve his astral attributes wee must | a God tho we cannot concieve his astral attributes wee must | ||
him to | him to be eternal & Omnipres[en]t tho we cannot well explain | ||
? those notiary. For ye understanding ye Athanasian creed this | ? those notiary. For ye understanding ye Athanasian creed this | ||
?ylds is sufficient viz: Cot is affirm'd of ye divine nature as | ?ylds is sufficient viz: Cot is affirm'd of ye divine nature as | ||
?may be common to all 3 persons but wt is affirm'd of ye several | ?may be common to all 3 persons but wt is affirm'd of ye several | ||
such must be peculiar to yous. yt design of ye creed was to | such must be peculiar to yous. yt design of ye creed was to them | ||
?eral did not believe such a trinity as consisted of 3 persons unequal | ?eral did not believe such a trinity as consisted of 3 persons unequal | ||
&dff'rent in nature substance & duration. | &dff'rent in nature substance & duration. | ||
Latest revision as of 06:53, 31 July 2017
[ed: some text disappears into margin]
os: 1.16.10. yt by this pretend ye Socinians have not needed yt but might as well have stuck to ye old Arrian sense of making God's instant in ye crea[ti]on, but to ye it may be said either he created instant or uncreate, if ye first yt a [creation] doth not im infinite power of one creature may create another, if ye 2d then ?rns God by nature. Other argumts for ye divinity of X see ? d. Xto L1.c4.all:
?ll ye main difficulty in explaining ye doctrine of ye Trinity by reason may be reduc'd to these 2 How there can be 3 p[er]sons & but one God How these can agree in a 3d & not agree among thems. ? wee say one Individual nature may be communicated to ? unless wee suppose yt ye divine nature cannot communicate ?fter no manner yt a created nature but wherever there ? distinction ye number may be multiplied tho yt subjt be but ? we say ye soul has 3 faculties understanding, will, & memory ?out ye least absurdity wee may say these 3 are one Socinians objt yt every person is an individual being & there- ? distinct persons must be 3 individual beings ie: 3 Gods A person 2 things. something common wth others of ye same nature as 3 ? one of ye same nature tho they be 3 persons 2 something ? & incommunicate to any other so yt Jn cannot be Peter nor ? ames. Now if wee are to much puzled in assigning ye Pow'r Individuality in created beings wee have ye less reason to unsatisfied if we cannot clear ye diffr'ces between Nature & ? an infinite Being. Distinguish betwn wt wee have no ?elieve, & wt wee have power to conceive, wee have reason to a God tho we cannot concieve his astral attributes wee must him to be eternal & Omnipres[en]t tho we cannot well explain ? those notiary. For ye understanding ye Athanasian creed this ?ylds is sufficient viz: Cot is affirm'd of ye divine nature as ?may be common to all 3 persons but wt is affirm'd of ye several such must be peculiar to yous. yt design of ye creed was to them ?eral did not believe such a trinity as consisted of 3 persons unequal &dff'rent in nature substance & duration.