A64989:42
The foundation of God standeth sure, or, A defence of those fundamental and so…
The foundation of God standeth sure, or, A defence of those fundamental and so generally believed doctrines of the Trinity of persons in the unity of the divine essence, of the satisfaction of Christ, the second person of the real and glorious Trinity, of the justification of the ungodly by the imputed righteousness of Christ, against the cavils of W.P.J. a Quaker in his pamphlet entitled The sandy foundation shaken &c. : wherein his and the Quakers hideous blasphemies, Socinian and damnably-heretical opinions are discovered and refuted ... / by Thomas Vincent.The foundation of God standeth sure, or, A defence of those fundamental and so generally believed doctrines of the Trinity of persons in the unity of the divine essence, of the satisfaction of Christ, the second person of the real and glorious Trinity, of the justification of the ungodly by the imputed righteousness of Christ, against the cavils of W.P.J. a Quaker in his pamphlet entituled The sandy foundation shaken &c. : wherein his and the Quakers hideous blasphemies, Socinian and damnably-heretical opinions are discovered and refuted ... / by Thomas Vincent.
London : s.n., 1668
Chapter 3: An Answer to the 11. page of W. P's pernicious Pamphlet, by W. M.
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.
[If he can find a he without a substance, or prove that a subsistence is any thing else than the form of a he, he will do well to justify himself from the imputation of ignorance.] That my calling the three persons, three He's, implies a He without a substance, is the first thing that you would here insinuate, but this is your gross ignorance of this great mystery: For each of these He s is by nature God, and hath the entire undivided nature, substance, or essence of God, and all that you can say to the contrary, is but like children's shooting Paper-pellets against a Rock; your latter phrase discovers your ignorance of Philosophy, as much as the former doth of Divinity; for a subsistence is not the form of a he (as you suppose it to be) but it is [Greek or Hebrew] the manner of his being, the form of God the Father is his divine nature, but his subsistence is his manner of being in the relative property of the Father, and the form of God the Son is the same divine nature, but his subsistence is his manner of being in the relative property of a Son; and the form of God the Holy Ghost, is the same divine nature, but his subsistence, is his manner of being in the relative property of the Holy Ghost, as proceeding from the Father and the Son: and now having found a subsistence, that is not the form of a he, I hope I shall be justified from the imputation of ignorance, at least, as to this particular.
[If he can finde a he without a substance, or prove that a subsistence is any thing else than the form of a he, he will do well to justifie himself from the imputation of ignorance.] That my calling the three persons, three Hee's, implies a He without a substance, is the first thing that you would here insinuate, but this is your gross ignorance of this great mystery: For each of these Hee s is by nature God, and hath the entire undivided nature, substance, or essence of God, and all that you can say to the contrary, is but like childrens shooting Paper-pellets against a Rock; your latter phrase discovers your ignorance of Philosophy, as much as the former doth of Divinity; for a subsistence is not the form of a he (as you suppose it to be) but it is 〈non-Latin alphabet〉 the manner of his being, the form of God the Father is his divine nature, but his subsistence is his manner of being in the relative property of the Father, and the form of God the Son is the same divine nature, but his subsistence is his manner of being in the relative property of a Son; and the form of God the Holy Ghost, is the same divine nature, but his subsistence, is his manner of being in the relative property of the Holy Ghost, as proceeding from the Father and the Son: and now having found a subsistence, that is not the form of a he, I hope I shall be justified from the imputation of ignorance, at least, as to this particular.