From Reformation to Reformation

[And the care of the Dutch Synods against him ought to be highly commended and diligently observed.]See Judicium Ecclesiasticum contra...

δ. In this way the Mystery of the Trinity necessarily goes forth either unto Tritheism, that is, if the distinction of the Persons is...

4. A Theologian in the Netherlands, recently Philosophizing, proceeds our AUTHOR, is not able and ought not to be passed over here...

Take Up and Read! Shortly after my conversion to Christ, I became a regular listener to the radio broadcast of Dr. R.C. Sproul. Through Dr. Sproul I was exposed to Reformed theology for the first time, and, from the first, I was captivated. I was quite interested, of course, when he mentioned that he thought that Jonathan Edwards’ Freedom of the Will was the most important, most theologically formative, book that he had ever read. I ordered it immediately and waited anxio

2. God is Living Substance, just as Life is attributed to God everywhere in the Sacred Scriptures, both by Himself, John 5:26, and by others, Psalm 84:2; Matthew 16:16, so also He is distinguished from dead Idols, Jeremiah 10:10, 11; Acts 14:14, 15. Neither is rational Life able to be denied to the very Father of rationally living Spirits. The fount and origin of all Life is not able to be without Life. Indeed, the inanimate things themselves, by their singular craftsmanship

1. We saw above in § 13, that it is better to call God a Spirit than a Substance, when it is asked, What is God with respect to Essence or Nature? But when it is now further asked, what is that Spirit? what then do we assign to God when we pronounce Him to be Spirit? Our AUTHOR responds, that He is a Living Substance, furnished with the faculties of Intellect, Will, and Power. Now, from those things that we observed on § 13, it is proven that God is not to be referred to the

What things occur at this point are without difficulty. The Papists here imitate the Jacobites, so called after one Jacob, a Syrian, an obscure man, who lived with Anastasius ruling during the Sixth Century,[1] and gave his name to the Jacobites in Syria and in the East constituting a peculiar family of Eutychians[2] thereafter. Now, concerning these Jacobites NICEPHORUS[3] has noted in addition, Historia Ecclesiastica, book XVIII, chapter LIII, column 1165, as absurd in the

They are Practical Anthropomorphites, whoever think that the Essence of God is able to be represented by Images: or even represent God to themselves in prayer in a corporeal form, like a King sitting upon a throne in the heavens. The Objections of the Anthropomorphites, enumerated by our AUTHOR, are trifling: 1. That human Members are attributed to God. I respond that this is done ἀνθρωπομορφῶς/anthropomorphically, but it is to be explained θεοπρεπῶς, in a manner suitable for

Spinoza DITTON,[1] in his Dissertatione de Materia non cogitante, chapter XIII, pages 592, 593, etc., observes against Spinoza, that these truths are indubitable, 1. That from all eternity some consummately necessary Being has existed, subsisting of itself, independent, and infinitely perfect. 2. That the same Being is infinite, intelligent, prudent, and wise. From these principles he derives the following Conclusions. If that necessary Being be infinite, and essentially inte

Baruch Spinoza As far as Spinoza is concerned, the Most Eminent NIEUWENTYT observes, Gronden van Zherheid, part IV, chapter III, pages 250-255, that he only puts in his Definition, what he understands by God, not what He actually is, writing in his Ethics, part I, Definition VI, “By God I understand a Being absolutely infinite, that is, substance consisting in infinite attributes, each one of which express eternal and infinite essence:” and at the same time the Most Eminent M

Among the more recent Anthropomorphites, our AUTHOR names theoretically Vorstius, who in his notis on Disputation III de Deo, pages 199-203, thinks that in the future age, when we shall no longer be flesh and blood, but ἰσάγγελοι, angel-like,[1] and spiritual, we are going to see God; which opinion he sets over against that of others, who speak here of the vision of the mind only, not of the eyes, or of an internal, not external, and true contemplation. And he believes that t

The Anthropomorphites state the contrary, called Anthropomorphites after their error, because the attribute to the highest God μορφὴν ἀνθρώπου, the form of a man; of which sort were the Ancient Audian Monks, followers of Audius or Audæus; they lived in the fourth Century, originating in Mesopotamia.[1] AUGUSTINE, in his de Hæresibus, chapter L, relates concerning them: “Those that they called Audians (and Epiphanius maintains that they appeared to be schismatics, not heretics

The Rationale of Scripture is added, with an argument sought from the highest Perfection of God, which by no means admits corporeal Extension; but pronounces God to be without all matter. For, since all matter is extended, and every extended thing has parts, is composite, divisible, liable to change, which is not able to conceive motion unless impelled by another, nor to restrain motion, but is necessarily moved according to the manner of the external impulse; Body and matte

But when we say that God is Spirit with respect to Essence, we speak with the Scripture , which not only Hypostatically makes use of the term Spirit for God, to designate the third Person of the Trinity, but also thus designates God Essentially considered, John 4:24, πνεῦμα ὁ Θεός, God is a Spirit , supplying ἐστί/ is . For the verb ζητεῖ, He seeketh , is not to be supplied out of verse 23, as Socinus maintains, opera , tome 2, page 439 b , “The Greek Codex,” says he, “

In the Description of God just given the Nature or Essence of God occurs first to be considered: our AUTHOR advises that this is ascribed to God with good reason ; and there is to be no scrupulous abstention from these terms. He thus advises obviously against the Antitrinitarians , who contend, as MARESIUS [1] observes in his Systemate Theologico , common place II, § 4, page 47, that these words are used profanely and incorrectly of God. And indeed, 1. not only was this

It is also able to be noted, what we said concerning the impossibility of a perfect Definition of God, against those that go overboard in commending the Definition of God by which He is called the most perfect Being , which our AUTHOR says is actually a most imperfect Definition ; since, 1. only the more remote Genus is here given, and it is not clearly determined whether by this Being is understood Substance or Accident; and, if Substance, whether Spirit or Body? 2. When It

And that is what in the second place in this § our AUTHOR proves, that the divine Essence is not able to be fully comprehended by us . Which, α. is evident from Experience, with the consent of the ancient Philosophers firmly established; to which pertains that which CICERO narrates concerning the Philosopher Simonides , [1] book I de Natura Deorum , chapter XXII, “When the tyrant Hiero [2] asked, what or of what sort is God, requested one day for himself for the sake of

God is not able to be Perfectly defined, as one being measured according to the rules of Logic ; because, α. He is not composed of Parts; for what is defined, as existing in the category of substance, is composed of a substantial genus and a form or substantial difference, characterized by which difference an Entity is differentiated from, and specific with respect to, its genus: but God is simple, free from composition. β. Neither does He admit a Univocal categorical Genus

Concerning the Insanity of the ancient Atheism and the Impiety of the new Atheism, consult LEYDEKKER, [1] in his Veritate Euangelica triumphante , tome I, book II, chapters III, IV. The Insanity of Atheism is briefly and palpably demonstrated by GERARDUS VAN AALST [2] in his præfatione ante Explicationem Parabolæ de Satore , * 1-4. Concerning Atheism , see STAPFER laboriously discoursing in his Theologicæ polemicæ , tome 2, chapter VI, pages 586-741, in which, 1. he g

GROTIUS, in de Veritate Christianæ Religionis , book I, § 2, 7, evinces that there is a God . SPANHEIM the Younger in his tractate, which is called l’Athée convaincu en quatre Sermons sur Psalm 14:1, with remarkable ability gives proof of the Existence of God against the Atheists , making use of these arguments: α. From the history of the Church, handed down to posterity in Sacred Scripture. For, if there is no God, 1. There was never a divine Vision or Revelation, never P