Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
scripture_n	great_a	holy_a	see_v	3,964	5	3.2444	3	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A49900	The lives of Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, Bishop of Cæsarea, Gregory Nazianzen, and Prudentius, the Christian poet containing an impartial account of their lives and writings, together with several curious observations upon both : also a short history of Pelagianism / written originally in French by Monsieur Le Clerc ; and now translated into English.	Le Clerc, Jean, 1657-1736.	1696 (1696)	Wing L820; ESTC R22272	169,983	390

of a far-fetch't Eloquence ought to be despised but Clearness cannot be reckon'd among those Ornaments It must needs be confest that there are but few Fathers whose Writings are not lyable to the same Observation with those of Clemens Most of 'em whilst they excuse themselves for not being Eloquent do whatever they can to appear so after their way as may be seen by a thousand high stroaks and strained Metaphorical Expressions which their Writings are full of and we see but few who thought that the greatest care a Writer should take consists in exciting in the Minds of his Reader clear Idea's of what he says by using Words without any Equivocation There is extant besides an Homily of Clemens entitled What Rich Man is Saved It was printed in Greek and Latin by Combefis at Paris 1672 and at Oxford 1683 With several other Greek and Latin Fragments Those who took care of the German Edition at Colen 1688. of Clemens's Works should have printed it with the rest of his Works it would have made their Edition more considerable which otherwise is not much more valuable as those that use it will find They have only followed the Paris Edition 1641 without adding any thing to it except New Faults There is at the End of the Volume An Abridgment of the Doctrine of Theodotus and of the Doctrine called Eastern in Valentinus's time The greatest part of it is only an Interpretation of some Places of the Holy Scripture which some think to have been taken out of the Eighth Book of Clemens Alexandrinus's Hypotyposes as I have already observed * Lib. 6. cap. 14. Eusebius tells us that he had interpreted the Holy Scripture after a compendious manner in that Work without omitting says he the Disputed Writings as St. Jude 's and the other Catholick Epistles St. Barnabas 's Epistle St. Peter 's Apocalypsis and the Epistle to the Hebrews which he assures to he St. Paul 's c. † God CIX Photius who had seen that Work says also that the Design of it was to Explain the Holy Scripture but he accuses the Author of maintaining That Matter is Eternal That the different Forms which it receives are imparted to it by virtue of I know not what Decrees That the Son is in the number of Things Created That there hath been Many Worlds before Adam That Eve was formed out of him after another manner than what the Scripture relates That the Angels having been conversant with some Women had Children by them That the Reason was not made Flesh tho' it seem'd so to Men That there are Two Reasons of the Father the least whereof appeared to Men and was made Flesh If we had those Books still we might perhaps more clearly know that they are only some Platonick Doctrines some of which Photius did not well understand because of the Equivocation of the Terms and the other were not in Clemens's time lookt upon as Impieties as they have been since Systems of Divinity were compiled among Christians In the first Ages when no Systems were entertained in the Schools and explained to the Youth as they are now every one Philosophized as well as he could upon Matters of Speculation and explained Speculative Doctrines according to the Philosophy he had learned Except some Opinions which either because they had made a great Noise or for some other Reasons were condemned by the Bishops they were very free in their Thoughts If any one doubted of it he might convince himself of the Truth thereof by the strange Opinions which have been entertained by some of the Fathers who were rank't among the Orthodox and for which they were not censured in their time One may see many Examples of it in the Fourth Chapter of Dallaeus's Book de Vsu Patrum which notwithstanding the Panegyrists of Antiquity will always be accounted a Good Book by those that know Antiquity Such was for Example St. Hilary's Opinion who believed that Christ felt no Pain when he was scourged But Photius suspects that the Hereticks corrupted the Works of Clemens and Ruffinus had the same Thoughts as it appears by his Apology for Origen which is in the IV. Tome of St. Jerom's Works Yet if there was no more in them than what Photius cites there would be no reason to believe that they were much corrupted though it cannot be absolutely denied The reason of it is that whatever that learned Patriarch may say those very Opinions if well understood are to be found in the other Works of Clemens and are agreeable to the Principles which he follows every where 1. He approves * Strom. l. 5. p. 599. clearly enough the Opinion of Heraclitus who believed that the Matter of the World is Eternal and he shews that he esteems him for having distinguisht the Matter of the World from its Form the first whereof is immutable and the second subject to change 2. As to the Reasons why Matter receives certain Forms Photius knew no more of it than Clemens 3. If Clemens had said that the Supreme Reason was Created 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one ought to observe that † See the Life of Eusebius to Create Produce Beget signifie the fame thing in Plato and that it doth not follow from thence that he believed the Reason was Begotten or Produced out of Nothing 4. It was Plato's Opinion That the Form of the World doth altogether change in a certain number of Years and that many such Changes happen'd before the Revolution in which we are began One may read his Politicus concerning this wherein he maintains that the Revolution of all the Stars must cause an Universal Change in the World Thus in his Opinion what was said That Men had their Original from the Earth happened in the Beginning of a Revolution * Pag. 175. 'T is what as he goes on our Predecessors said who lived at the End of the foregoing Change and were near the following as well as those who were born in the Beginning of this The Stoicks believed also the same thing as † Strom. l. 5. p. 549. Clemens reports who doth not seem to dislike their Opinion and fails not to confirm it by the Authority of Plato 5. The same Philosopher thought that the First Men were Androgynes and had Four Feet Two Heads and so with the other Members but that God divided them afterwards into Two as may be seen in his Feast Some Rabbins have said something like it and grounded their Opinion upon this That 't is said That God ‖ Vid. Breschith Rabba in sect VIII Created Man Male and Female This seems to be only an ingenious Fancy not an Opinion which those Authors did seriously entertain It may be that Clemens took some delight in making some Reflections upon Plato's Opinion with so much the greater freedom because perhaps he believed as his Disciple Origen that there was abundance of Allegories in the Beginning of Genesis 6. As for the

whether it is not Supposititious whether it be not Interpolated and then he shews that the Jews worshipped the Creator of the World But 't is the Custom of many Antients to make use of all sorts of Arguments and Books to bring over Men to their Opinions If any should use the same Method now they would presently be accused of Simplicity or want of Honesty But every Age hath its Customs However 't is certain that the Rules of Good Sence have always been the same and 't is not less certain that Great Learning makes not a Man more Exact and Judicious according to that famous Maxim of Heraclitus which Clemens cites some where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Clemens is wont to explain the Scripture Allegorically without making his Allegories look likely as 't was the ordinary Custom of the Antients One may see what Huetius says concerning the Origin of Allegories in his Origeniana lib. 2. chap. 2. qu. 14. But if one carefully reads what Clemens says of it in the Fifth Book of his Stromata where he doth somewhat enlarge upon this Matter one may easily perceive that that which chiefly induced him to believe that the Holy Scripture is full of them is because the Egyptians and the Greeks were wont to hide the Secrets of their Philosophy under some Emblems and Fables 'T is true that the Jews had the same Thoughts even before the Coming of Christ 'T is true also that in the remotest Times that Nation expressed her self not only by clear Words but also by symbolical Actions as it appears by several places of the Old Testament However there is not one Example by which it appears that they designed to hide the Doctrines of the Jewish Religion which on the contrary they express very clearly and after a simple manner There are but some few places of the History of the Beginning of the World which may be turned into Allegories with some likelihood and only with respect to some Circumstances which do not at all concern the Essential part of the History nor belong to the Worship of God Good Manners or the Doctrines without which they could not serve God nor be Good Men according to the Law In all the rest of the History of the Hebrews there is nothing that looks like an Allegory every thing in it is simple and easie to be understood which makes one believe that those that wrote it were no Allegorists and that if there is any thing in the most ancient Events of the History of Mankind that may be understood that way the Hebrews took that turn only because Tradition or the Memoirs upon which they wrote were so worded It doth not appear that they designed to Philosophize or teach any Doctrines of Natural Philosophy either clearly or obscurely and those Places wherein Philo endeavours to find some Philosophical Doctrines are so violently wrested that any Body may see the Sacred Writers never thought of what he makes them say Indeed if we reflect upon the Origin of Allegories among the Heathens we shall find that they came out somewhat late And when the Philosophers undertook to give an Account of the Fables or ancient Histories of the Gods that is to save the Honour of their most ancient Historians who were accused of having absurd Notions of so excellent Natures as those of the Gods were so they were obliged to make those whom those scandalous Histories offended believe that the Poets meant quite another thing than what they said and from thence comes the word Allegory For a * Heracl Pont. Alleg. Hom. pag. 412. Ed. Amstelod Westenianae Discourse which taken in its proper sence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies quite another thing than what is meant by it is properly an Allegory Thus some Histories were turned into Allegories among the Grecians lest they should believe that the Gods of Greece had been only Vitious Men. The Jews who had never applied themselves to the Study of Criticks and Philosophy were no sooner among the Greeks but they admired that Method of Explaining Religion and made use of it to explain the Sacred Writings after a manner more agreeable to the Taste of the Heathens as may be seen by the Example of Philo who explains all the Old Testament after the Platonick way Nay they went so far as to explain Allegorically not only such Places as might have some difficulty but also the clearest and plainest without so much as excepting those which concern Manners and which being literally understood contain a most excellent sence for the Conduct of one's Life nor the plainest Histories and from which one may draw most useful Instructions without looking for any other sence but that which offers it self to the Mind Philo is full of such like Examples The Christians imitated the Jews afterwards and were not contented to explain the Old Testament Allegorically They did the same with respect to the New though neither Christ nor his Apostles have proposed any Doctrine after an Emblematick manner but what they explained clearly enough to save the trouble of seeking its meaning by having recourse to Allegories in which there is no certainty For it must be confest that according to that Method if the Sacred Writers had said quite another thing than what they said or if you will the quite contrary yet one might find as good a sence in them as those that will try it will presently observe Hence it is that the Pagans themselves who had been the Contrivers of that strange way of interpreting ancient Books could not abide that the Christians should make use of it as the Christians in their turn laught at the strained Interpretations of the Heathens Nay some Pagans more quick-sighted than others thought they were ridiculous Wherefore the Christians and the Jews would have done much better to keep close to the Letter than to use so uncertain a Method to defend the Holy Scripture against the Pagans 3. Although several Opinions of Clemens Alexandrinus may justly be accounted Erroneous yet if we consider every particular Opinion which he held and is no more admitted amongst us we shall observe That some of them are lookt upon as Erroneous only because the contrary Opinions have been introduced I know not how into most Schools though Men have had no New Light concerning them As soon as a Famous Man hath maintained a Doctrine without being contradicted by Men of an Equal Reputation or Authority or even without any Opposition such a Doctrine takes root so well that Men use themselves by degrees to look upon the contrary Opinion as an Error without knowing why Opinions are often introduced as Customs which owe their Beginning to the Example of some few Persons whom others imitate They so affect Mens Mind that any other besides those which he follows seem to him ridiculous A Garment which is not commonly seen seems Extravagant though it was Fashionable in former Times The same may be said of an Opinion which is grown old

he says That no Body could do it but by a Divine Revelation but that if it should happen as it were by chance that any one did it without that help nothing would be more certain than that Philosophy and although he could not defend himself by the Authority of Revelation Truth would maintain it self only by its own Light Afterwards he blames those who stick to One Sect so as to embrace all its Opinions and condemn all other Sects being ready to dispute against all the Doctrines which they have not learned of their Masters That Design of collecting whatever the Philosophers said that was agreeable to the Gospel is undoubtedly a fine one and may very much conduce to convince Men of the Truth of the Christian Religion But to do it succesfully 't is necessary to understand both Philosophy and the Christian Religion well and to confine one's self to clear and undeniable Articles such as those that are Practical and some few Speculative ones The Heterodox of that time had introduced into the Christian Religion for want of Consideration an infinite number of Philosophical Doctrines which have no relation with those of the Gospel Thus the Carpocratians * Strom. l. 3. p. 430. believed as Clemens testifies That it was lawful to Lie promiscuously with all Women and did actually do it when they had supp't in a great Company and put out the Candles They fell into this Conceit because Plato would have Women to be Common in his Commonwealth and because they had wrested several Places of the Scripture to make them agree with that Opinion But Clemens is of opinion that they understood neither the Scripture nor Plato well This latter meant only this he thinks That there should be no Maid in the Common-wealth but to whom All the Citizens might indifferently pretend although if she had been Betrothed to any Man others could no more hope to Marry her I could easily shew that Clemens doth not explain well Plato's Meaning if this was a fit place for it The Marcionites † Ibid. p. 431 465 seq who said that Matter and Nature are Bad and condemn'd Marriage came by their Opinion so contrary to that of Carpocrates by Explaining some Passages of Scripture by the Platonick Principles Because the Scripture often describes the Miseries of this World and praises Continency they fancied that the Sacred Writers had the same Notions of this Life and Generation or Birth that Heraclitus and Plato had Those Philosophers believed that the Souls did exist before the Bodies into which they are sent only to be punisht for the Sins which they had committed in another Life So that to speak properly Birth should be called Death rather than a Beginning of Life and Death Life because when we are born our Souls are thrown into the Prison of the Body out of which they are set at liberty when we die Hence it is that those Philosophers and many Poets after 'em said That 't was better not to be born than to come into the World and to die in Childhood than to live many Years Hence it is also that some times they speak vehemently enough against the Use of Marriage because in their opinion it did only conduce to build a Prison for some Unfortunate Soul which was thrown into the Body that was produced The Valentinians had also learned what they said concerning the Generation of their Aeones of Hesiod as it will appear by comparing the Beginning of his Theogonia with the Doctrine of the Valentinians as it is reported by St. Irenaeus and St. Epiphanius who do not fail to upbraid them with their having taken their Doctrine from that Poet. 'T is likely they confounded Hesiod's Doctrine with that of the Holy Scripture because of some small resemblance that is between ' em I could easily shew that Hesiod by the Marriages between the Chaos Darkness Light Heaven Earth Air c. meant only that there is some Relation or Connexion between the Things which he joins and that 't was this that gave him occasion to Marry them together But my Business is only to shew by the Example of the ancient Hereticks that the Primitive Christians made a great use of the Heathen Philosophy and that many have perverted it as Clemens hath observed in several places As for him although he profest to follow the Method of the Eclecticks and take out of every Sect what he thought fit yet he was more enclined to the Stoick Philosophy because Pantaenus his last Master and whom he esteemed most as we have seen preferred that Sect before others Wherefore 't is observed that Clemens hath a close and harsh Style and that he affects some Paradoxes and to use New Words Characters whereby the Stoick and those that studied in their Schools were known Stoicorum says * In Bruto c. 31. Tully adstrictior est oratio aliquantóque contractior quàm aures populi requirunt * De Fin. lib. 4. Nova verba fingunt deserunt usitata at quanta conantur Mundum hunc omnem oppidum esse unum c. Pungunt quasi aculeis interrogatiunculis angustis Those that understand Greek and have read something of Clemens may have easily observed all this in his Stile There are many Paradoxes in his Paedagogus for instance he maintains Book 3. Chap. 6. That none but a Christian is Rich. A Paradox much like that of the Stoicks who said the same thing of their Wise Man Those Philosophers exprest themselves thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Wise Man only is Rich And Clemens made no other Alteration in it but that of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wise Man into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Christian The Reasons which he makes use of to prove his Assertion are not very different neither from those of the Stoicks as may be seen by comparing what he says with Cicero's Explication of that Stoical Maxim in his Paradoxes The Study of Heathen Authors produced in Clemens milder Thoughts with respect to them than those which Christians have had since He observes in many places † Strom. l. 1. p. 314. That whatever they say is not false And cites to prove it St. Paul's Discourse to the Athenians Act. 17. where that Apostle tells 'em That he preaches to them the same God to whom they had erected an Altar with this Inscription TO THE UNKNOWN GOD the same God of whom Aratus had said that We are his Off-spring Clemens believes that St. Paul approved what was Good in the Inscription of that Altar and in those words of Aratus and gave 'em only a clearer Knowledge of the True God whom they already perceived without knowing Him well He elsewhere * Strom. l. 6. p. 635. quotes a Book which was ascribed to St. Peter and was entituled ΚΗΡΥΓΜΑ ΠΕΤΡΟΥ The Preaching of St. Peter It appears that Clemens made no doubt but that Book was St. Peter's From whence one may conjecture that there was

Projection and the other that he was not begotten no more than the Father To this Arius added the Explanation of his Opinion which we have already related The Bishop * Sozom. II. of Nicomedia having receiv'd this Letter call'd a Synod of his Province of Bythinia which wrote Circular Letters to all the Eastern Bishops to induce them to receive Arius into Communion as maintaining the Truth and to engage Alexander to do as much We have still a Letter of Eusebius to Paulinus Bishop of Tyre wherein he not only intreats Paulinus to intercede for Arius but wherein he exposes and defends his Sentiments with great clearness He says He has never heard there were Two Beings without Generation nor that the One has been parted into Two but that this single Being had begotten another not of his Substance but perfectly like to him although of a different Nature and Power That not only we cannot express by Words the Beginning of the Son but that is even Incomprehensible to those Intellectual Beings which are above Men as well as to us To prove this he cites the 8th of the Proverbs God the Lord possessed me in the beginning of his ways before is works of old I was set up from Everlasting and he has begotten me before the mountains were brought forth He says That we must not search in the Term of Begetting any other signification than that of Producing because the Scripture does not only use it in reference to the Son but moreover in speaking of Creatures as when God says I have begotten Children and I have brought them up but they have rebelled against me But these Letters not having had the Success which Arius expected he sent to get leave of Paulinus of Eusebius and Patrophilus Bishop of Scythopolis to gather those who were of his Opinion into a Church and to exercise among them the Office of a Priest as he was wont to do before and as was done at Alexandria These Bishops having Convocated the other Bishops of Palestine granted him what he demanded but ordered him however to remain subject to Alexander and to omit nothing to obtain Communion with him There is extant a Letter of Arius directed to this Bishop * Apud Epiph II. and written from Nicomedia which contains a Confession of Faith according to the Doctrine which Arius affirm'd that Alexander himself had taught him wherein after having denoted his Belief touching the Father which includes nothing Heterodox he adds That he hath begotten his only Son before the times Eternal that it is by him that he has made the World that he has begotten him not only in Appearance but in Reality that this Son subsists by his own Will that he is unmoveable that he is a Creature of God that is perfect and not as other Creatures that he is a Production but not as other Productions Nor as Valentinian said a Projection of the Father Nor as Manes affirm'd a Consubstantial Part of the Father Nor as Sabellius call'd him a Son Father 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nor as Hieracas spake a Lamp lighted by a Lamp or a Torch divided into two that he did not exist before he was begotten and became a Son that there are three Hypostases that is to say different Substances the Father the Son and the Holy Spirit and that the Father is before the Son although the Son was created before all Ages Arius adds that Alexander had several times preach'd this Doctrine in the Church and refuted those who did not receive it This Letter is sign'd by Six Priests Seven Deacons and Three Bishops Secondus of Pentapolis Theonas of Lybia and Pistus whom the Arian Bishops had Establish't at Alexandria Alexander * Socrat. l. 1. c. 6. wrote on his side Circular Letters wherein he sharply censures Eusebius of Nicomedia in that he protected Arius and recommended him to others He joins to this the Names of those who had been Excommunicated and explains their Doctrine wherein he contents not himself to set down what we have seen in Arius's his Letters touching the Beginning which he attributes to the Son he says moreover that this Priest maintain'd that the Son is one of the Creatures that we cannot call him the Reason and Wisdom of the Father but improperly seeing that he himself has been produced by the Reason and Wisdom of God that he is subject to change as other Intelligent Creatures that he is of another Essence than God that the Father is Incomprehensible to him and that he doth not so much as know what his proper substance is that he has been made for our sakes to serve God as an Instrument in Creating us and that without this God had never begotten him Alexander adds That having assembled near a hundred Bishops of Egypt and Lybia they had Excommunicated Arius and his Followers by reason of his Opinions He afterwards comes to prove this and shews first The Eternity of the Son by this passage of St. John In the Beginning was the Reason 2. That he cannot be reckoned among the Creatures because the Father says of him in the 45th Psalm My Heart has uttered eructavit a good Word 3. That he is not unlike the Essence of the Father of which he is the perfect Image and the Splendor and of whom he says He that has seen me has seen the Father 4. That we cannot say There was a time in which he was not seeing that he is the Reason and the Wisdom of the Father and that it will be absurd to say There was a time in which the Father was without Reason and Wisdom 5. That he is not subject to change because the Scripture says He is the same yesterday and to day 6. That he was not made because of us seeing St. Paul says That it is because of him and by him that all things are 7. That the Father is not Incomprehensible to the Son seeing he says As the Father knows me so I know the Father This Letter wherein Eusebius of Nicomedia is extremely ill treated shock't this Bishop to the utmost Point and having great access to the Court because Constanstine made then his abode at Nicomedia this occasion'd divers Bishops to be at his devotion But he could not engage Alexander to forget what had past to speak no more of this Controversie and to receive Arius into Communion The Quarrels every day grew hotter and the People were seen to range themselves some taking Arius's side others Alexander's and the Comedians being Gentiles this gave them occasion to make a Sport of Christian Religion on their Theatres Each side treated one another with the odious Name of Heretick and endeavoured to shew that the Sentiments of the opposite Party overthrew the Christian Religion but it appears that neither the one nor the other Party could yet persuade the Emperor seeing he wrote to Alexander and to Arius a long Letter of which Hosius Bishop of Cordavia was the Bearer wherein he