A26883:367
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who,…Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who,…
Richard Baxter's Catholic theology plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriors who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,Richard Baxter's Catholick theologie plain, pure, peaceable, for pacification of the dogmatical word-warriours who, 1. by contending about things unrevealed or not understood, 2. and by taking verbal differences for real,
London: printed by Robert White for Nevill Simmons, 1675
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.
125. And here they say that Gods will hath first a Liberty of contradiction, (to will or not will.) 2. And a Liberty to divers objects, (which I call of competition or comparison) yea and to will contrary objects by the same act. 3. But not a Liberty to contrary Acts (Veil & nolle) because that would be mutability.
125. And here they say that Gods will hath first a Liberty of contradiction, (to will or not will.) 2. And a Liberty to divers objects, (which I call of competition or comparison) yea and to will contrary objects by the same act. 3. But not a Liberty to contrary Acts (Velle & nolle) because that would be mutability.
126. And here many maxims are used by them as sufficient to answer all objectors, which yet are ambiguous or uncertain themselves. 1. One is, that God receiveth not the certainty of his Knowledge from the Creatures: And therefore if their present co-existence in eternity were proved, it would no whit clear the doubts, or help the Thomists, who are here at a loss for a sufficient answer. My business is to side with neither, but to debtor the Reader from the presumption of both parties; and to that end, to open the uncertainty of what they say. And so it is enough to answer, that As the Creature in being is no addition to Gods being or perfection, so to Know the Creature is not any addition to Gods Knowledge or perfection; but only the terminative acting of his perfect Knowledge ad extra. And that their word [Receiveth] hath a false supposition. For God Receiveth no Knowledge (though mans knowledge be partly Receiving); but the Infinite Light of his Intellect is emitted knowingly to the Creature. So that Gods knowledge may be terminated on Creatures, and thence denominated This or That knowledge without Reception.
126. And here many maxims are used by them as sufficient to answer all objectors, which yet are ambiguous or uncertain themselves. 1. One is, that God receiveth not the certainty of his Knowledge from the Creatures: And therefore if their present co-existence in eternity were proved, it would no whit clear the doubts, or help the Thomists, who are here at a loss for a sufficient answer. My business is to side with neither, but to deterr the Reader from the presumption of both parties; and to that end, to open the uncertainty of what they say. And so it is enough to answer, that As the Creature in being is no addition to Gods being or perfection, so to Know the Creature is not any addition to Gods Knowledge or perfection; but only the terminative acting of his perfect Knowledge ad extra. And that their word [Receiveth] hath a false supposition. For God Receiveth no Knowledge (though mans knowledge be partly Receiving); but the Infinite Light of his Intellect is emitted knowingly to the Creature. So that Gods knowledge may be terminated on Creatures, and thence denominated This or That knowledge without Reception.