Selected quad for the lemma: religion_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
religion_n christian_a holy_a true_a 2,766 4 3.9231 3 false
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
A67388 An explication and vindication of the Athanasian Creed in a third letter, pursuant of two former, concerning the Sacred Trinity : together with a postscript, in answer to another letter / by John Wallis ... Wallis, John, 1616-1703. 1691 (1691) Wing W581; ESTC R38415 30,910 70

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

be declared in Scripture we ought to Believe But I see not why it should be thought of it self more necessary to salvation if he do not know it to be declared in Scripture for a man to know that her Name was Mary than that the Name of Adam's Wife was Eve or Abraham's Wife Sarah or that one of Iob's Daughters was called Iemima for all these are declared in Scripture and supposing that we know them so to be ought to be believed as part of the Catholick Faith Nor do I know that it is of it self more necessary to know that the Name of the Judge who condemned our Saviour was Pontius Pilate than that the Name of the High-Priest was Caiaphus And though one of these and not the other be put into the Apostles Creed whereby we are more likely to know that than the other yet both of them being True and declared in Scripture they are both of them parts of the Catholick Faith and to be believed but neither of them I think with such necessity as that who knows them not cannot be saved And what I say of this General Preface in the beginning is in like manner to be understood of the General Conclusion in the end which Catholick Faith except a man believe faithfully he cannot be saved Of which I shall say more anon After the General Preface concerning the necessity of holding the Catholick Faith he proceeds to two main Branches of it that of the Trinity and that of the Incarnation with the Consequents thereof which he declares likewise as what ought to be believed That of the Trinity he declares thus in General And the Catholick Faith is this that is this is one main part of the Catholick Faith namely That we worship One God in Trinity and Trinity in Unity Neither Confounding the Persons nor Dividing the Substance Which is what we commonly say There be Three Persons yet but One God And this General which after some particular Explications he doth resume is what he declares ought to be believed But he doth not lay such stress upon each Particular of that Explication though True He thus explains himself For there is one Person of the Father another of the Son and another of the Holy Ghost Which Persons therefore are not to be confounded But the Godhead of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost is all One. That is one Substance one God Which is what he said of not Dividing the Substance as if the Three Persons should be Three Substances or Three Gods According as Christ says of Himself and the Father Iohn 10. 30. I and the Father are One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is one Thing one Substance one God not one Person And 1 Iohn 5. 7. These Three are One 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hi Ires sunt Unum not Unus These three Who 's are one What. They are one Thing one Substance one God though Three Persons And as their Godhead or Substance undivided is all one so it follows The Glory equal the Majesty co-eternal Such as the Father is as to the common Godhead such is the Son and such is the Holy Ghost The Father uncreate the Son uncreate and the Holy Ghost uncreate The Father incomprehensible the Son incomprehensible and the Holy Ghost incomprehensible The Father eternal the Son eternal and the Holy Ghost eternal For all these are Attributes of the common Deity which is the same of All. And yet they are not Three Eternals but One Eternal Not Three Eternal Gods though Three Persons but One Eternal God As also there are not three Incomprehensibles nor three Uncreated but one Uncreated and one Incomprehensible One and the same Substance or Deity uncreated and incomprehensible So likewise the Father is Almighty the Son Almighty and the Holy Ghost Almighty and yet there are not Three Almighties but One Almighty So the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Ghost is God and yet there are not Three Gods but One God So likewise the Father is Lord 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word by which the Greeks do express the Hebrew Name Iehovah the proper incommunicable Name of God the Son Lord and the Holy Ghost Lord and yet not Three Lords but One Lord. Not three Iehovahs but one Iehovah For like as we are compelled by the Christian Verity to acknowledge every Person by himself to be God and Lord so are we forbidden by the Catholick Religion to say There be Three Gods or Three Lords Which are so many particular Explications or Illustrations of what was before said in general of not Confounding the Persons nor Dividing the Substance Which Explications though they be all true and necessary Consequents of what was before said in general yet to none of them is annexed such Sanction as that whosoever doth not Believe or not Understand these Illustrations cannot be saved 'T is enough to Salvation if they hold the true Faith as to the substance of it though in some other form of words or though they had never heard the Athanasian Creed Nor is any such Sanction annexed to the Personal Properties which next follow The Father is made of none neither Created nor Begotten The Son is of the Father alone not Made nor Created but Begotten The Holy Ghost is of the Father and of the Son neither Made nor Begotten but Proceeding Where by the way here is no Anathematization of the Greek Church of which those who would for other reasons disparage this Creed make so loud an out-cry 'T is said indeed He doth proceed and so say they but not that he doth proceed from the Father and the Son And 't is said He is Of the Father and Of the Son 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 some way or other and even this I suppose they would not deny but whether by procession from both or if so whether in the same manner it is not said but warily avoided Though indeed it seems to favour what I think to be the truth and what in the Nicene Creed is said expressly that he doth proceed from both and for ought we know in the same manner which yet we do not determine Nor do I see any reason why on this account we should be said to Anathematize the Greek Church or they to Anathematize us even though we should not exactly agree in what sence he may be said to be Of the Father and in what Of the Son And those who are better acquainted with the Doctrine and the Languages of the present Greek Churches than most of us are do assure us that the differences between them and us are rather in some forms of expressions than in the thing it self However those who would make so great a matter of this should rather quarrel at the Nicene Creed than the Athanasian where it is expresly said of the Holy Ghost that he proceedeth from the Father and from the Son 'T is not therefore for
himself or at least hoped we would not see it And therefore I desire him to consider that it is not said Thee only to be the true God but Thee the only true God And so in the Greek it is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Restrictive 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only is not annexed to Thee but to God To know Thee to be the only true God that is to be that God beside which God there is no other true God And We say the like also That the Father is that God beside which there is no other true God and say the Son is also not another God but the same only true God And if those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be thus expounded To know Thee to be the only true God and whom thou hast sent Iesus Christ to be the same only true God repeating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 those words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he would not like that interpretation but both the Words and the Sence will very well bear it without such Force as they are fain to put upon many other places Or if without such repetition we take this to be the scope of the place To set forth the two great Points of the Christian Religion or Way to Eternal Life That there is but one true God though in that Godhead there be three Persons as elsewhere appears in opposition to the many Gods of the Heathen and the Doctrine of Redemption by Iesus Christ whom God hath sent of which the Heathen were not aware the sence is very plain And nothing in it so clear as he would have us think against the Trinity but all very consistent with it And the same Answer serves to his other place 1 Cor. 8. 6. But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him or for him and one Lord Iesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him For here also One God may be referred 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 both to the Father if here taken as a distinct person and to the Lord Iesus Christ Or without that it is manifest that One God is here put in opposition not to the plurality of Persons as we call them in One Deity but to the many Gods amongst the Heathen and our one Saviour against their many Saviours As is manifest if we take the whole context together We know that an Idol is nothing in the World and that there is no other God but one For though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Gods many and Lords many But to us there is but one God the Father of whom are all things and we in him and one Lord Iesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him Ver. 4 5 6. Where it is evident that the scope of the place is not to shew either how the Persons as we call them or how the Attributes of that One God are distinguished amongst themselves But to set our One God who is the Father or Maker of all things in opposition to the Many Gods of the Idolatrous World and our One Saviour or Redeemer against their Many Saviours Indeed if we should set up our Jesus Christ to be another God the Text would be against us but not when we own him for the same God So that here is nothing clear in either place as he pretends against Christ's being the same God with the Father But in that other place of Iohn 1. which he labours to elude the evidence for it doth so stare him in the face that if he were not as he speaks Wilfully blind or did Wink very hard he must needs see it In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God The same was in the beginning with God All things were made by him and without him was not any thing made that was made In him was life and the life was the light of men Ver. 1 2 3 4. He was in the World and the World was made by him and the World knew him not He came unto his own and his own received him not But to as many as received him he gave power or right or privilege to become the sons of God even to them that believe on his Name Ver. 10 11 12. And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us and we beheld his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father full of grace and truth Ver. 14. Why he should not think this very clear is very strange if he were not strangely prepossessed Unless he think nothing clear but such as no man can cavil against But there can hardly be any thing said so clearly but that some or other if they list to be contentious may cavil at it or put a forced sence upon it For thus the whole Doctrine of Christ when himself spake it and he spake as clearly as he thought fit to speak was cavilled at And himself tells us the reason of it Matth. 13. 14 15. and Ioh. 12. 37 38 39 40. and after him St. Paul Acts 28. 26. and Rom. 11. 8. Not for want of clear Light but because they shut their eyes In Iohn 12. it is thus But though he had done so many miracles before them yet they believed not on him That the saying of Esaias the Prophet might be fulfilled which he spake Lord who hath believed our report and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed Therefore they could not believe because Esaias said again He hath blinded their eyes and hardened their heart that they should not see with their eyes nor understand with their heart and be converted and I should heal them These things said Esaias when he saw his glory and spake of him And thus in Matth 13. Hearing ye shall hear and shall not understand and seeing ye shall see and shall not perceive For this peoples heart is waxed gross and their ears are dull of hearing and their eyes they have closed lest at any time they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears and understand with their heart and should be converted and I should heal them So that 't is no argument of a place or doctrine's not being clear because prejudiced persons are able to pick cavils at it or put a forced sence upon it But let us see what these cavils are This I confess saith he were to the purpose if by the term Word could be meant he should rather have said be meant nothing else but a pre-existing person and by the term God nothing but God Almighty the Creator of Heaven and Earth and if taking those terms in those sences did not make St. John write Nonsence Now in reply to this I first take exception to that phrase if it could be meant of nothing else For if his meaning be this If no Caviller can start up another sence right