Observations, censures, and confutations of notorious errours in Mr. Hobbes his Leviathan and other his bookes to which are annexed occasionall anim-adversions on some writings of the Socinians and such hæreticks of the same opinion with him / by William Lucy ...

Sect. 2.

* 1.1But he urgeth farther, that [St. John give's this and no other reason, towards the end of his Gospell, John 20.31. Cur Jesu signa, (I translate it) why he writ the Miracles of Jesus or (as others would have it) his whole history, then that we should believe that Jesus is Christ, the Sonne of God, and, believing that, we should have life eternall.] I will not trouble his lection which is very erroneous, but let the Reader observe, that although St. John say, that this was the cause why those things, which he writ, were written; yet he useth not that phrase put upon him by Socinus, this & non aliam and no other; but sup∣pose he had, this will serve our designe, for all we la∣bour for, is to prove, that our Saviour is the Sonne of God; it is true, these troublesome men have brought distinctions of the Sonne into naturall and adopted; and

the like; but that he is such a Sonne, as believing of which we may have eternall life, can be conceived no∣thing lesse, then that he must be the naturall Sonne, of the same nature with his Father; all other beliefe, I doubt, will fall short of that excellency; and therefore, Beza, most genuinely,* 1.2 according to the Originall (which prepose's an Article both to Christ and the Sonne) reade's it thus, That ye should believe that Jesus is that Christ, that Sonne of God; which Emphasis doth ex∣ceedingly much elevate the Conceipt of him, shewing him to be an extraordinary Christ, and an extraordina∣ry, not merely an adopted, Sonne; which all his Servants are here bound to believe; so that, it seeme's, St. John writ this Gospell to shew, that our Saviour was, in some eminent and peculiar way, the Sonne of God;* 1.3 that which he adde's, that believing in him we might have eternall life, is an absolute avoyding a strong Argument to prove his Godhead; for although I think by life here is meant eternall life; yet in the Originall there is no word of eternity, but it is word for word, as it is in our English [ye might have life] through his name, or in his name, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, that is, his power, his strength, which none could grant, but the great God; and truely I wonder where he got that translation, for it is without the Originall, nor Beza, nor Erasmus, nor Montanus, nor any, that I see,* 1.4 but something like it Tremelius his tran∣slation out of the Syriacke, and yet he reserve's that Em∣phasis, which I make use of, and render's it thus, and when ye shall believe, ye shall have life eternall by his name, the force of which last phrase, by his name, was cleane omitted by Socinus; so then it seeme's to me, that if St. Iohn did here, in these words, put down the totall reason of his writing this Gospell (which can never be

evinced) yet in this is clearely taught this Conclusion of our Saviours divinity, and that he was the Son of God; nor could ever man have understood it in any other sense then we doe, untill that foolish conceipt of a crea∣ted God was introduced, of which (God willing) I en∣tend to treate hereafter. Thus I hope I have given a satisfactory answer to his objections against the story of Cerinthus, which one thing granted, the expressions of the rest would be undoubtedly very perspicuous.

Notes

• * 1.1

  St. Iohn's ••ea∣son of his wri∣ting not soli∣tary, as Socinus alledg••th.
• * 1.2

  Beza's ge∣nuine lection.
• * 1.3

  Socinus rigu∣la•• in his▪
• * 1.4

  But for a little consonance with Treme∣lius.