The real Christian, or, A treatise of effectual calling wherein the work of God…

Secondly, There is no Article of our Christian Faith, which the Socinians oppose, that is seemingly so contrary to reason, as is the measuring of an Infinite Essence by Finite Maxims.

Secondly, There is no Article of our Christian Faith, which the Socinians oppose, that is seemingly so contrary to reason, as is the measuring of an Infinite Essence by Finite Maximes.

1. We deny that any Article of Faith which we maintain is contrary to sound Reason, though it be above Reason; therefore I put in the word seemingly contrary. Let that which measures be able to contain the thing measured: And is not this the Logic of the Socinians? How do they judge of the Articles of our Faith, how do they measure them, the unity of the Essence in the Trinity of the Persons, the union of the Divine and Humane Nature in one Person, but by these Maxims, by which they measure a finite Essence. In a finite Essence it is impossible that one singular Essence should subsist in three distinct Persons, therefore it is impossible it should be so in the Infinite Essence. To have two distinct Natures unite in one Person, this cannot be; Therefore it cannot be in the second Person of the Trinity: (Yet the Mistletoe and the Apple-tree are united together, and are distinct.) The sum of their Logic is this, what cannot be found in a Finite Being, must be denied in the Infinite Essence. [Greek or Hebrew], we account a great piece of Sophistry in disputing. Certainly a most gross absurdity to take Maxims fitted for finite Creatures, and limit the Infinite Being unto them, when as Infinite and ⟨image 13⟩Finite differ toto Coelo. What use these Maxims may be of, laying down first the Scripture for my Major, to which I assent, upon the Authority of God revealing, I have touched in my former Head, but cannot now insist upon it.

1. We deny that any Article of Faith which we maintain is contrary to sound Reason, though it be above Reason; therefore I put in the word seemingly contrary. Let that which measures be able to contain the thing measured: And is not this the Logick of the Socinians? How do they judge of the Articles of our Faith, how do they measure them, the unity of the Essence in the Trinity of the Persons, the union of the Divine and Humane Nature in one Person, but by these Maximes, by which they measure a finite Essence. In a finite Essence it is impossible that one singular Essence should subsist in three distinct Persons, therefore it is impossible it should be so in the Infinite Essence. To have two distinct Natures unite in one Person, this cannot be; Therefore it cannot be in the second Person of the Trinity: (Yet the Misleto and the Apple-tree are united together, and are distinct.) The sum of their Logick is this, what cannot be found in a Finite Being, must be denied in the Infinite Essence. , we account a great piece of Sophistry in disputing. Certainly a most gross absurdity to take Maxims fitted for finite Creatures, and limit the Infinite Being unto them, when as Infinite and