Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n
Text snippets containing the quad
|
ID |
Title |
Author |
Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) |
STC |
Words |
Pages |
|
A70687
|
Doctor Wallis's letter touching the doctrine of the blessed Trinity answer'd by his friend.
|
Nye, Stephen, 1648?-1719.
|
1691
(1691)
|
Wing N1506A; ESTC R211864
|
15,046
|
16
|
him as One single Person except only two or three obscure Passages in Genesis Neither can we have any Idea or Conception of God but Person is included in it taking Person for an intelligent Being so that all plain and clear Scriptures militate for them and the Trinitarians or those that say there are Three Persons in God or that Three Persons are all one God as your Doctor says have no Scriptures left but those that are obscure And that they are obscure appears clearly by this That there is scarce one Text alledged by them which is not otherwise expounded and in consistency with the Unity of the Person of God by their Writers You may see a great number of these Texts and Expositions in a Book entituled Scriptura S. Trin. Revelatrix under the Name of Cingallus Your Doctor proceeds he names but two Texts for he rakes his Opinion for granted as sufficiently proved by others His first Text is 1 John 5.7 There are Three that bear Witness in Heaven the Father the Word and the Holy Ghost and these Three are One. One would expect now that the Learned Doctor naming but two Texts should cull out those that were strongest for his purpose and yet this Text is so far from being clear and strong That 1. it has not the Authority as other Scriptures have for it appears not in the most ancient Copies of the Greek nor in the Syriack nor Arabick nor Ethiopick nor Armenian Bibles nor in the most eminent Latin Bibles 'T is not urged by the Fathers in their Disputes about this Question It 's wholly rejected by some and counted doubtful by almost all Learned Men. You may see saith he in Dr. Burnet Bishop of Salisbury his second Letter in his Travels how variously and uncertainly that Text appears in Ancient Manuscripts Here my Neighbour crav'd my Pardon went to his Closet and presently brought me a Greek Testament printed at Strasburg by Wolfius Cephalaeus Anno 1524. in the beginning of the Reformation wherein this Verse is wanting Bur 2ly allowing it to be Authentick yet the most Learned even of the Trinitarians understand it not thus These Three are One God but These Three are One in Testimony or agree in Testimony See Beza Vatablus Calvin Erasmus the English Geneva Notes As for his other Text Matth. 28.19 I refer you to The Brief History of the Vnitarians c. in four Letters whereof he gave me a Copy Only I desire you says he to consider how clear a Proof this Text is which must run thus We are Baptized in or into the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost Therefore these Three Persons are One God and each of them by himself God As if the Israelites by being Baptized into Moses and believing in the Lord and in Moses his Servant so Marg. Exod. 14.31 did acknowledg Moses to be a Person of the most high God though he was indeed in some sense a God to them for he was so to Aaron their High Priest for thus it is read in the Margin of the English Bible printed in 1660. He shall be to thee a Mouth and thou shalt be to him a God Exod. 4.16 You may see the Hebrew so render'd Jer. 31.33 and the Greek Heb. 8.10 I must confess to you Sir I could not tell what to oppose to this Argument of his which shew'd the obscurity of our Texts and he now made a Pause and expected my Answer Wherefore to divert him from taking notice of my Convictions I asked him if he had any other Argument to prove that Obscurity He answered Yes And that also is taken saith he from our Adversaries the Trinitarians I mean the Romanists For they are told by Mr. Chilling-worth the Glory of English Protestants and since that by Dr. Tennison in his words thus For Scripture your Men deny very plainly and frequently that this Doctrine of the Trinity can be proved by it See if you please this plainly taught and urged very earnestly by Cardinal Hosius de Author S. Script l. 3. p. 53. by Gordonius Huntlaeus contr Tom. 1. Controv. 1. de Verbo Dei c. 19. by Gretserus and Tannerus in Colloquio Ratisbon and also by Vega Possevin Wiekus and others Now it is to be observed That these Learned Men especially Bellarmine and Wiekus after him have urged all the Scriptures they could with their utmost industry find out in this Cause and yet after all they acknowledg their Insufficiency and Obscurity whereby they give a clear Testimony to the Doctrine of God's being One Person which to deny were even to deny the whole Bible But besides the current of all Scriptures on our side we have many clear Texts that prove the Father only to be God I 'll name but two Our Lord himself professes in his solemn Prayer to his Father in the presence of his Disciples saying This is Eternal Life that they might know thee the only true God and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent John 17.3 And the Apostle St. Paul says in opposition to 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 Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him 1 Cor. 8.6 Can any words be more express to prove that there is but One true God and One Person of that One God to wit the Father of our lord Jesus Christ who is oppos'd to him by his Names Relations and Characters Again there be a multitude of Texts that deny those things of Christ which cannot be denied of God and that affirm such things of him that cannot agree to him if he were a Person of God In like manner of the Holy Ghost Which of both sorts you may find urg'd and defended in the two Books of John Crellius touching One God the Father and abridg'd in Wolzogenius's Praeparatio ad utilem Lectionem Lib. N. T. cap. 2 3 4 5. So also in your Brief History c. the first Letter I then desired to know of the Gentleman what he could say to the Tradition of the Christian Church for you say that That from the Time of Christ and his Apostles hitherto as well before as since the Council of Nice hath ever held the Divinity of these three Persons and that these three are but One God This also you take for granted He answered 1. It is the Catholick Principle of all Protestants that the Holy Scriptures are a compleat Rule of Faith and Manners and clear and plain in all things necessary Now since this Doctrine of the Three Persons in One God is held a Fundamental and Necessary Doctrine it must consequently be clear and plain to all honest Enquirers which I clearly see it is not therefore I can satisfy my self concerning it without an endless Enquiry into the Fathers and Tradition 2. I am sure it has not been held in the Apostles Time nor I believe in any of the
Doctor Wallis's LETTER Touching the DOCTRINE OF THE Blessed Trinity Answer'd by his FRIEND Honoured SIR I Read your Letter touching the Doctrine of the Blessed Trinity you were pleas'd to send me with a great deal of Attention and Satisfaction and thereupon went to visit a Neighbour of mine one that is reputed a modest Gentleman but one that is also reputed an Vnitarian or Socinian I shew'd him your Letter and made no question but it would Convince him as it had done me that they who denied the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost Three distinct Persons to be each of them God in the most perfect Sense of that Term and yet but One God were in a very dangerous and palpable Errour But I found my self greatly mistaken for be presently told me that you had unfairly represented them charging them with an Opinion which they abhor to wit That how clear soever the Expressions of Scripture be or can be to this purpose they will not believe it as being inconsistent with Natural Reason And therefore though they do not think fit to give us a bare-fac'd Rejection of Scripture yet they do and must they tell us put such a forc'd Sense on the words of it be they never so plain as to make them signifie somewhat else He told me he did very much wonder and was sorry for your sake that a Man of such Reputation for Learning and Piety should be guilty of so much uncharitable rashness against a Party of Men which even some of their Adversaries being Judges are both Learned and Pious though Erroneous If it were not their hearty Zeal for one of the great and clear Attributes of God! the God and Father of our Lord Jesus his Unity What saith he to me with a most compassionate Concern should make them expose themselves to all manner of Obloquy Reproach and Detestation of almost all that go under the Name of Christians in these Parts to the utmost of Injuries and Perfections the loss of their Imployments Estates Liberties Countries and some of them of Life it self by the violent Death of Hereticks Neither do they this from an Enthusiastic Heat nor yet upon the account of some indifferent or next to indifferent things in the Worship and Discipline of the Church it 's no less than the Incommunicable Nature of the only Potentate King of Kings and Lord of Lords that they suffer for hoping for their Reward through the Faith of those Promises revealed by Christ our Lord and recorded only in the Holy Scriptures The Authority whereof none have maintained with stronger Reasonings nor are more diligent in searching out the true Sense of them nor are more ready to submit to their Dictates He said moreover That it was too common for even Learned Men to charge die Vnitarians under the Name of Socinians with such Sayings as their Adversaries charge them with by Consequences without reading their Books Nay it is well known at Oxford that one in an Act there disputing for his Degree in Divinity took a Thesis to maintain to the very same purpose with that which your Friend avers against the Socinians but his Learned Opponent having read their Books did so baffle him that it appeared the Respondent had not read them but took his Testimonies from their Adversaries I would fain think otherwise of Dr. Wallis but he gives me here too much cause to suspect him I will appeal to you saith he whether he does not Then he fetch'd me Socinus de Authoritate S. Script and read in pag. 16. Quod enim ad Rationes attinet haec nimis fallax via est in re quae ex Divina patefaction pendeat qualis est Christiana Religion For as to Reasons this is too fallible a way in a Matter which depends on Divine Revelations such as Christian Religion is Next he brought Sclichtingius another eminent Writer that followed Socinus He in his Book Adv. Meifn de SS Trin. p. 68. His Adversary had said That Holy Scripture only is the most perfect Rule of Faith and Life To which Sclichtingius answers That if de rebus clarissimis verbis in Scriptura consignatis c. it be touching Points exprest in Scripture in most clear words so that no Man of a sound Mind can doubt of the Sense of them then he grants it and that chiefly because it is most certain That the Scripture contains nothing that is repugnant to manifest Reason or that implies a real Contradiction But if it treat of obscure Matters every one sees that it cannot be determin'd without Reason which yet is not to be setch'd in as if it could be opposed to Scripture affirming or denying any thing but only to declare whether such a thing be contained in Scripture or not If it appear to be contain'd in it whatsoever Reason may still say in Contradiction it must of necessity be deceived This says my Gentleman is a clear Account of the Socinians Judgment in this Point and is a direct Confutation of what you have read me out of your Doctor 's Letter He added yet another of their great Men Smalcius contr Frant Disp 4. p. 137. Nulla enim est Christianae Religionis particular c. There is not the least part of Christian Religion which doth not accord with Reason and that Opinion which doth not agree with Reason can have no place in Divinity As a small Light to a great one so Reason is not contrary to Holy Scripture Let Frantzius or any body else tells us of any one Sentence of Holy Scripture that is repugnant to Reason and then let Reason be silent in the Church Religion and Holy Scripture hath many things above Reason and therein it highly commends it self but nothing which is contrary to Reason Of these two last Passages the learned and candid Dr. Tennison takes notice in his Book The Difference betwixt the Protestant and Socinian Methods in Abatement of his Charge against some Socinians for exalting Reason too much Perhaps saith he your Friend Dr. Wallis had read that Book but took no notice of the Quotations in the Margin And if he were put to 't to maintain his Charge viz. That they do and must they tell us put such a farced Sense on the words of it the Scripture be they never so plain as to make them signify somewhat else I am perswaded he would acquit himself no better than the Candidate in Divinity I told you of He was much concerned at the Injuriousness of this Imputation and said He thought there was no sort of Protestants of different Sentiments from the Publick that were so inhumanly dealt with as the Vnitarians for they are so far from denying there are Three Persons in One God and asserting only One in opposition to the plainest Scriptures that they are thorowly perswaded the whole Scripture wherever it is plain is on their side For does not every Text in the whole Bible that speaks clearly of the most High God speak of