A14095:182
A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of…A discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of…
A discovery of D. Jacksons vanity. Or A perspective glass, whereby the admirers of D. Jacksons profound discourses, may see the vanity and weakness of them, in sundry passages, and especially so far as they tend to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twice, Doctor of Divinity, as they say, from whom the copy came to the pressA discovery of D. Iacksons vanitie. Or A perspective glasse, wherby the admirers of D. Iacksons profound discourses, may see the vanitie and weaknesse of them, in sundry passages, and especially so farre as they tende to the undermining of the doctrine hitherto received. Written by William Twisse, Doctor of Divinitie, as they say, from whom the copie came to the presse
Amsterdam: printed by the successors of Giles Thorp, 1631
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
It is true, that God is the supporter of all things, and in this respect, the Apostle acknowledgeth, that He is not far 1from any of us, for as much as In him we live, and move, and have our being.
It is true, that God is the supporter of all thinges, and in this respect, the Apostle acknowledgeth, that He is not farre 1from any of us, for as much as In him we live, and moove, and have our beinge.
6. You say that God was, when nothing was. A most improvident speech, and as good as sack and sugar unto Atheists. For it is as much as to say, that God was nothing, or that sometimes God was not. But eftsoons you alter this dangerous form of words, and tell us that God was, when nothing was besides himself. Without all peradventure, before the creation of the world, there was neither distinction of time, nor of place. Though you do not clothe God with an imaginary space as without him; yet may you do as great wrong, to imagine such a space in the nature of God, as it seems you do, and that you call immensity. For you say, such an imaginary space should be a check to his immensity, as being a parallel distance local. So that you seem manifestly to acknowledge a distance in Gods nature, but you would not have it checked by any parallel distance as immense as himself. This imagination is wondrous gross. ⟨p. 117⟩Whereas on the contrary, I find none to conceit of any immensity in God, otherwise then as he is said to fill all places; and therefore before places or bodies are existent, only a power and ability is in God to fill all places; & that filling, Durand professeth to be in respect of the effects wrought by him, & wherewith he fills all places, not with his essence piercing all things as you discourse, as if it were as big as the World, or as an infinite World: & yet you think to charm this extravagant conceit, with calling it indivisible.