A44344:676
A comment upon Christ's last prayer in the seventeenth of John wherein is opened…
A comment upon Christ's last prayer in the seventeenth of John wherein is opened the union believers have with God and Christ, and the glorious privileges thereof ... / by that faithful and known servant of Christ, Mr. Thomas Hooker ... ; printed from the authors own papers written with his own hand, and attested to be such in an epistle by Thomas Goodwin and Philip Nigh.A comment upon Christ's last prayer in the seventeenth of John wherein is opened the union beleevers have with God and Christ, and the glorious priviledges thereof ... / by that faithful and known servant of Christ, Mr. Thomas Hooker ... ; printed from the authors own papers written with his own hand, and attested to be such in an epistle by Thomas Goodwin and Philip Nye.
London: printed by Peter Cole, 1656
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.
2. This In-being each in other, though it issues nextly, and immediately from the persons, yet not as they are in themselves considered, without respect to the Essence; but as they are subsistences in the same Essence, taking that in with them, to make up a full, and complete Ground; from whence this mutual subsisting in each other may be inferred; as thus: 1. Not only because they have the same Essence. 2. Not because they are distinct persons alone. But because they are distinct persons subsisting in other. For this mutual In-being requires both distinction and conjunction. They must be two, for one cannot be in it self: and they must be together with the same Nature, or else they cannot be each in other. As we see in the Creatures constantly, as a Father, or Son; Buyer, and Seller: though they be persons in Relation, yet because they be in several Natures, separate one from another, therefore they cannot be said to be each in other. Thus for the Ground of this In-being.
2. This In-being each in other, though it issues nextly, and immediately from the persons, yet not as they are in themselves considered, without respect to the Essence; but as they are subsistences in the same Essence, taking that in with them, to make up a ful, and compleat Ground; from whence this mutual subsisting in each other may be inferred; as thus: 1. Not only because they have the same Essence. 2. Not because they are distinct persons alone. But because they are distinct persons subsisting in other. For this mutual In-being requires both distinction and conjunction. They must be two, for one cannot be in it self: and they must be together with the same Nature, or else they cannot be each in other. As we see in the Creatures constantly, as a Father, or Son; Buyer, and Seller: though they be persons in Relation, yet because they be in several Natures, separate one from another, therefore they cannot be said to be each in other. Thus for the Ground of this In-being.
2. The ready way how to apprehend it, is made good in four Particulars. 1. The same Essence of the God-head, doth equally, and indifferently in the whole Nature of it, belong to all the Persons in the Deity: So that whatsoever is said of one, may be affirmed of the other. They are all Eternal, all Infinite, all Omnipotent, Omniscient, &c. because all God. As a man may be said to teach himself, and so is a Master, and Scholar; a Master, as he teacheth; and a Scholar, as he is taught. Now the whole man is both, not a part of him a Scholar, a part of him a Teacher; but the whole Nature of Man bears up both Relations. 2. Hence the Persons in the God-head, are distinct, truly amongst themselves, yet cannot be separated, or divided one from another; but where-ever the God-head