.Nw.ODI1: Difference between revisions

From Newberry Transcribe
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
[...]1.16. [...] have not [...]
[ed: some text disappears into margin]
but might as well have studied [..] old Arrian senses of making [marking?]
 
God's [...] bu be  [...] as may be said [...]
os: 1.16.10. yt by this pretend ye socinany  have not needded yt
erra[..] if [..] first [...]
but might as well have stuck to ye old Arrian sense of making
infinite [...] if one creature may create another it [...]
God's instant in ye [creation], but to ye it may be said [cilorka?]
[..] God by nature. Other arguments for [...] Divinity of X see
created instant or unerate, if ye first yta [creation] dock not im
si Xlo f 1. c 4. occ:[?]
infinite power of one creature may create another, if ye xt then
[...] main difficultiy in explaining the d[...]sine [..]
?rns God by nature. Other argumts for ye divinity of X see
Trinity by reason may be [...]
? d. Xto L1.c4.all:
[...] can be [...]but one God
 
Now they can agree in a [ ] or not agree among themselves.
?ll ye main diddiculty in explaining ye doctrine of ye
[  ] say one individual nature may be communicated to [ ]
Trinity by reason may be reduc'd to these 2
unless we suppose [ ] divine nature cannot communicate
How there can be 3 to any & but one God
after no other [ ] a
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
Soocinany 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 ve eternal & Omniprest 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 ?
?eral did not believe such a trinity as consisted of 3 persons unequal
&dff'rent in nature substance & duration.

Revision as of 21:36, 5 July 2017

[ed: some text disappears into margin]

os: 1.16.10. yt by this pretend ye socinany have not needded yt but might as well have stuck to ye old Arrian sense of making God's instant in ye [creation], but to ye it may be said [cilorka?] created instant or unerate, if ye first yta [creation] dock not im infinite power of one creature may create another, if ye xt then ?rns God by nature. Other argumts for ye divinity of X see ? d. Xto L1.c4.all:

?ll ye main diddiculty in explaining ye doctrine of ye Trinity by reason may be reduc'd to these 2 How there can be 3 to any & 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 Soocinany 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 ve eternal & Omniprest 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 ? ?eral did not believe such a trinity as consisted of 3 persons unequal &dff'rent in nature substance & duration.