A14095:380
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.
A manifest evidence that you are still to seek how to satisfy your self herein, or others in this unprofitable speculation.
A manifest evidence that you are still to seeke howe to satisfie your selfe herin, or others in this unproffitable speculation.
And if this be to be endoctrinated by Plotinus, make you as much as you will with your knowledge of Plotinus his Philosophy, I shall have no great cause to complain of my ignorance therein.
And if this be to be endoctrinated by Plotinus, make you as much as you will with your knowledge of Plotinus his Philosophy, I shall have no great cause to complayne of my ignorance therin.
Your first resolution is, that he was a man and shall be a corps. This I say, is nothing to the question. For the question proposed is, not what he was, or what he shall be, but what he is in the instant of his dissolution.
Your first resolution is, that he was a man and shallbe a corps. This I say, is nothing to the question. For the question proposed is, not what he was, or what he shallbe, but what he is in the instant of his dissolution.