A14095:62
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.
4. Now we come to the scanning of your second Principle, 1Whatsoever hath no cause of being, can have no limits or bounds of being. This in part hath evidence of truth thus, Whatsoever hath no efficient cause of being, the same hath no beginning of being. But if it proceed of limits of essence, or of quality, or of quantity, it requires help of reason to make it good. For as many as denied the World to have a beginning, denied as it seems, that it had any cause of being; and thought the being thereof to be by necessity of nature. Yet did they maintain that the World had limits of quantity, and quality. For they maintained that Infinitum magnitudine was absolutely impossible, as Aristotle by name. By your distinction following, of diverse ways whereby being may be limited, you make no mention of limitation by having a beginning thereof; which yet hath been the chief, if not only limit, which hitherto you have mentioned.
4. Nowe we come to the scanninge of your second Principle, 1Whatsoever hathe no cause of beinge, can have no limits or boundes of beinge. This in part hathe evidence of truthe thus, Whatsoever hathe no efficient cause of beinge, the same hathe no beginninge of beinge. But if it proceede of limits of essence, or of qualitie, or of quantitie, it requires helpe of reason to make it good. For as many as denyed the World to have a beginninge, denyed as it seemes, that it had any cause of beinge; and thought the beinge therof to be by necessitie of nature. Yet did they maynteyne that the World had limits of quantitie, and qualitie. For they maynteyned that Infinitum magnitudine was absolutely impossible, as Aristotle by name. By your distinction followinge, of diverse wayes wherby beinge may be limited, you make no mention of limitation by havinge a beginninge therof; which yet hathe bene the cheife, if not only limit, which hitherto you have mentioned.
- 1Heb. 1•.