A14095:230
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.
CHAP. VI.
Of Eternity, or of the branch of absolute infinities, whereof Successive Duration of the imaginary infinity of time is the model.
Of Eternity, or of the branch of absolute infinities, whereof Successive Duration of the imaginary infinity of time is the modell.
I See no reason to subscribe unto the proposition wherewith you begin your discourse on this Argument, as touching the exact proportion between immensity and eternity. For Gods immensity is that whereby he is ubique or every where, like as by his eternity he is semper or always: But to be every where supposeth the creations, but to be semper always, doth not: For God was always ever before the world: Again God in proper speech hath true being, and consequently true Duration of Being, which having neither beginning nor ending is properly eternal. But God in proper speech hath no quantity, and consequently neither extension, and so in proper speech cannot be counted immense, which signifieth extension without beginning and end; and having no extension at all, being merely spiritual and not material. And ere you turn over a new leaf, your self make doubt, whether Time hath the same proportion to eternity, as magnitude created hath to Divine Immensity. In a word, I do not believe you are like to find so many nothings to resemble God by in this argument of eternity as you did devise in the other of Immensity. That saying of Tertullian you mention, is no more appliable to Gods eternity as tis said he was to himself Time, then to his immensity, as 'tis therein said he was unto himself a World; And for ought I see, God is so still, and not only was so before all things; in as much as he hath no more need of them, then before all things he had. You say we cannot properly say God was in time before the world was made; I say such a speech in my judgement seems to be neither proper nor improper; but directly false, even as false, as to say God was in place before he made the world: For before the world was made there was neither time nor place: Now he is in