A14095:672
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.
To remove this you acquaint us with your conjectural dictates. First that tis probable they dreamed of a created knowledge. A most improbable conjecture, that they should conceive, that God brought his works to pass by the knowledge of a creature not by his own knowledge; Yet that creature by whose created knowledge God is conjectured to have wrought by, in their opinion, being one of Gods works, ⟨p. 244⟩how could that creatures knowledge be possibly accounted his mother in creation. Your second conjecture is, that under these terms they covered some transformed notion of the second person in the Trinity. Such a person more fit by far to be the Author of all Gods works in order under God the Father; But equally improbable it is that this second person in Trinity should be called by them, The Mother of Gods works. Rather Sapientia in Latin, and [Greek or Hebrew] in Greek being the feminine gender; in this grammatical notion they might account it [Greek or Hebrew] the Mother of all things created, which yet is more then my learning will encourage me to ascribe unto them. And Christ you deny not to be the wisdom of the Father, but you add that he is the wisdom personal; but you speak here not of the wisdom personal, but of the wisdom of the Godhead as it is essentially in the whole Trinity.
To remoove this you acquainte us with your conjecturall dictates. First that tis probable they dreamed of a created knowledge. A most improbable conjecture, that they should conceave, that God brought his works to passe by the knowledg of a creature not by his owne knowledge; Yet that creature by whose created knowledge God is conjectured to have wrought by, in theire opinion, being one of Gods workes, ⟨p. 244⟩how coulde that creatures knowledge be possibly accoumpted his mother in creation. Your second conjecture is, that under these termes they covered some transformed notion of the second person in the Trinitie. Such a person more fitt by farre to be the Author of all Gods works in order under God the Father; But equally improbable it is that this second person in Trinitie should be called by them, The Mother of Gods workes. Rather Sapientia in Latine, and 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 in Greeke being the feminine gender; in this grammaticall notion they might accoumpt it 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 the Mother of all thinges created, which yet is more then my learning will encourage me to ascribe unto them. And Christ you deny not to be the wisedome of the Father, but you adde that he is the wisedome personall; but you speake here not of the wisedome personall, but of the wisedome of the Godhead as it is essentially in the whole Trinitie.