A64989:96
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 6: Ananswer to part of the 10, the 12, 13, 14, and 15 pages of W. P's Pamphlet, which he i…
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.
After W. P's. vain attempts to refute the Doctrine of the Trinity from the Scripture, he fronts his other arguments with the swelling but false title Refuted from right reason, false I say, for besides that what ever attempt reason doth make for the refuting of any Scripture truth, which is the object of faith, as this is concerning the Trinity of persons in the unity of, the Divine essence, it doth hereby discover it self to be crooked and depraved reason, and the arguings from it are called the perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth. 1 Tim. 6. 5. compared with the fourth verse; W. P. (who before had charged me, for using Heathenish Metaphysics in disputing for the Truths of God, though my terms were either Scripture-words, or carried Scripture-sense) doth here most Heathenishly make use of Metaphysical terms, in arguing against the truth, but that so weakly, that his Argumentation is so far from deserving the name of right reason, that more properly it may be called no reason, as shall be made evident in the Answer unto his Arguments, which if they seem crabbed, it is not because of the strength, but because of the obscurity of them, for some of the phrases are so uncouth, and his reasoning are so oddly jointed ⟨p. 43⟩together; (to avoid that part of a Scholar, in putting them into a Syllogistical form,) that it is more difficult to find out what his cloudy brains conception and meaning is than to give answer unto any of his cavilling Arguments. And here having promised to reply to his reason, p. 10. why he flatly denied my minor proposition, (in the Syllogism before mentioned) wherein he argueth only against the conclusion, endeavouring to prove that there are not three subsistences, and the argument he useth being the same in sense and scope with his first argument under that which he calleth a Refutation from right reason; I shall answer both together, and omit nothing in his argument, that hath any show of cogency in it. His argument is thus: No one substance can have three distinct subsistences, and preserve its own unity, and not to repeat all his words in the obscure way that he propoundeth his arguments, but to help him in the methodizing of them; his consequence is, that every distinct Subsistence will have its own substance, and consequently that three distinct subsistences will require three distinct substances;
After W. P's. vain attempts to refute the Doctrine of the Trinity from the Scripture, he fronts his other arguments with the swelling but false title Refuted from right reason, false I say, for besides that what ever attempt reason doth make for the refuting of any Scripture truth, which is the object of faith, as this is concerning the Trinity of persons in the unity of, the Divine essence, it doth hereby discover it self to be crooked and depraved reason, and the arguings from it are called the perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds and destitute of the truth.