A26864:341
Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression…
Rich. Baxters apology against the modest exceptions of Mr. T. Blake and the digression of Mr. G. Kendall whereunto is added animadversions on a late dissertation of Ludiomæus Colvinus, aliaà Ludovicus Molinæs̳, M. Dr. Oxon, and an admonition of Mr. W. Eyre of Salisbury : with Mr. Crandon's Anatomy for satisfaction of Mr. Caryl.
London: printed by A.M. for Thomas Underhill, 1654
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.
§. 35.
R.B. 1. Either that Image is like the Sampler (as you call it) in some parts and unlike in others, or else it is like in no part, but near to like. If the later, then it is but near to a true Image of that thing, and not one indeed. If the former, then it is nothing to our case. 1. Because it is Justitia universalis, and not particularis, that according to the Law of works must denominate the person righteous, and not-condemnable. 2. Because indeed no one word, action, or thought of ours is truly conform to the Law of works.
R.B. 1. EIther that Image is like the Samplar (as you call it) in some parts and unlike in others, or else it is like in no part, but near to like. If the later, then it is but near to a true Image of that thing, and not one indeed. If the former, then it is nothing to our case. 1. Because it is Justitia universalis, and not particularis, that according to the Law of works must denominate the person righteous, and not-condemnable. 2. Because indeed no one word, action, or thought of ours is truly conform to the Law of works.
2. Similitude, as Schibler tells you truly, doth lie in puncto as it were, and ex parte sui admits not of magis or minus: and therefore strictè & philosophice loquendo (saith he) that only is simile, which is perfectly so: but vulgariter loquendo that is called simile, which properly is but minus dissimile. Scripture speaks vulgariter often, and not strictè and philosophicè, as speaking to vulgar wits, to whom it must speak as they can understand. And so that may be called the Image or likeness of God, which participated of so much of his excellency as that it demonstrateth it to others, as the effect doth its cause, and so is less unlike God. I dare