A64989:61
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 5: The Doctrine of the Trinity of distinct persons in the unity of the Divine Essence, ass…
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. The Father is God, 1 Cor. 8. 6. To us there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him. I need not multiply places of Scripture, nor add arguments to prove that the Father is God, since it is generally acknowledged by all that acknowledge a Deity and the Scriptures.
2. The Father is God, 1 Cor. 8. 6. To us there is but one God the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him. I need not multiply places of Scripture, nor adde arguments to prove that the Father is God, since it is generally acknowledged by all that acknowledge a Deity and the Scriptures.
3. The Son is God, this William Penn plainly denieth, he denieth that the Lord Jesus Christ is God, wretched blasphemy! that would thrust the Lord Jesus Christ off from the Throne of his Godhead? His denial of the Divinity of Christ, as well as the Divinity of the Holy Ghost is plain enough. I shall repeat his words as they lye in his first argument against the three distinct persons in the Godhead, page 13. And since the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God (which their opinion necessitates them to confess) then unless the Father, Son, and Spirit are three distinct nothings, they must be three distinct substances, and consequently three distinct Gods. I shall answer the argument in its proper place, only observe here that he denieth the Son and Spirit to be God, by a plain consequence, for first he telleth us that our opinion necessitates us to acknowledge that the Father is God, and the Son God, and the Spirit God, which showeth that his opinion is otherwise that the Son and Spirit are not God; especially it followeth from the scope of the argument, which is to prove that if the Father be God ⟨p. 29⟩and the Son God, and the Holy Ghost God, than there are three distinct Gods; but W. P. having plainly asserted his belief that there is but one God, he must of necessity deny by his argument, that the Son and Holy Ghost are God, for neither he nor any Socinian of them all, will deny that the Father is God. Behold here the Christian! that hath offered such an affront and indignity unto the Son and Spirit, as to divest them (what in him lieth) of their Divinity; is not this a treading of the Son of God underfoot, and doing despite to the spirit of grace? and should not this cause the hearts of all sincere Christians who have any zeal for their masters honour, to arise with indignation against such Black-mouthed blasphemers, and to abhor their opinions and ways? but more of this in the exhortation at the latter end; the Heathenism, abominableness and foulness of this opinion, being such a blasphemy and reproach of the eternal Son of God, may excuse a little digression to express my abhorrency thereof.