A48160:43
A letter to a friend concerning a postscript to the Defence of Dr. Sherlock's…A letter to a friend concerning a postscript to the Defense of Dr. Sherlock's…
A letter to a friend concerning a postscript to the Defence of Dr. Sherlock's notion of the Trinity in unity, relating to the Calm and sober enquiry upon the same subjectA letter to a friend concerning a postscript to the Defense of Dr. Sherlock's notion of the Trinity in unity, relating to the Calm and sober enquiry upon the same subject
London: printed by J. Astwood for Tho. Parkhurst, 1694
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.
therefore he is disproving himself. If I had said so, I would have denied his consequence, for there may be similar parts: Whereas by different, he seems to mean dissimilar. He says not only distinct, but different natures. Now you have that wonderful thing talked of some times, but never brought to view before, a distinction ⟨p. 36⟩without a difference. 'Tis strange how any things should be distinct, and no way different. What distinguishes them if they differ by nothing. This different, applied to this present Case, is his own word, coined to introduce a Notion that is not new to Christians only, but to all Man-kind. If by different Natures he means (as he seems) of a different kind, who thought of such a difference? But I trow, things that differ in number, do as truly differ (however essentially cohering) tho' not so widely.
therefore he is disproving himself. If I had said so, I would have deny'd his consequence, for there may be similar parts: Whereas by different, he seems to mean dissimilar. He says not only distinct, but different natures. Now you have that wonderful thing talk'd of some times, but never brought to view before, a distinction ⟨p. 36⟩without a difference. 'Tis strange how any things should be distinct, and no way different. What distinguishes them if they differ by nothing. This different, apply'd to this present Case, is his own word, coined to introduce a Notion that is not new to Christians only, but to all Man-kind. If by different Natures he means (as he seems) of a different kind, who thought of such a difference? But I trow, things that differ in number, do as truly differ (however essentially cohaering) tho' not so widely.
His next is, that though we have a natural notion of an eternal Being, we have no notion of three eternal Essences (which again I put instead of his parts) which necessarily coexist in an eternal union.