United States or Maldives ? Vote for the TOP Country of the Week !
God the Father he is God, and he only, and 'him only shall thou serve'. This I take to be a clear consequence from your principles, and unavoidable. Waterland's argument is absolutely unanswerable by a worshipper of Christ. The modern 'ultra'-Socinian cuts the knot. Query II. p. 43.
I cannot but think that Waterland's defence of the Fathers in these pages against Barbeyrac, is below his great powers and characteristic vigour of judgment. It is enough that they, the Fathers of the first three centuries, were the lights of their age, and worthy of all reverence for their good gifts.
Waterland's days led him to write one of his most valuable treatises in connection with the Trinitarian controversy. It was entitled, 'The Importance of the Doctrine of the Trinity Asserted, and was addressed to those only who believed the truth of the doctrine but demurred to its importance.
Waterland's anxiety to show the anti-heretical force of St. John's Gospel and Epistles, has caused him to overlook their Catholicity their applicability to all countries and all times their truth, independently of all temporary accidents and errors; which Catholicity alone it is that constitutes their claim to Canonicity, that is, to be Canonical inspired writings. Ib. p. 266.
Would Sherlock endure that I should infer: 'ergo', God is numerically one with me, though I am not numerically one with God? I have never seen, but greatly wish to see, Waterland's controversial tracts against Sherlock. Again: according to Sherlock's conception, it would seem to follow that we ought to make a triad of triads, or an ennead. Father Son Holy Ghost. 2. Son Father Holy Ghost. 3.
The various arguments by which it was supported will be best considered in connection with that great writer who now comes under our notice Dr. Waterland. Among the many merits of Waterland's treatment of the subject, this is by no means the least that he pins down his adversary and all who hold the same views in any age to the real question at issue. Dr.
If one compares Fletcher's writings on Calvinism with the scattered notices of the subject in Waterland's works, the difference between the two writers is apparent at once; there is a massiveness and a breadth of culture about the older writer which contrasts painfully with the thinness and narrowness of the younger.
How must the philosopher have been eclipsed by the shadow of antiquarian erudition, in order that a mind like Waterland's could have sacrificed the profound universal import of 'comprehend' to an allusion to a worthless dream of heretical nonsense, the mushroom of the day! Had Waterland ever thought of the relation of his own understanding to his reason?
Word Of The Day