out any similitude of him, Deut. 4. 15, 23.
Secondly, the ancient Prophets, and people of God neuer made any such vse hereof.
Agrippa told Caligula, that the Temple neuer admitted any Image made with hands, and said farther, Our forefathers haue holden it a thing vnlawfull, to paint or carue him that is inui∣sible. Philo. Iud. de Legat. ad Caium. But if they had learned this Popish Diuinitie, as lawfull from such apparitions, and from such ascribing of parts of mans bodie to him, they would haue done it.
Thirdly, Saint Austin de fide & Symbolo. cap. 7. saith, To forme an Image of God, is abominable.
In Gregory the seconds time, Anno 726. in an Epistle to Leo Isauricus, it is said, they vsed not to paint, or represent God the Father.
The sixt generall Councell holden, Anno 687. Can. 28. for∣bids the making of the holy Ghost in the forme of a Doue: yet he so appeared. Those Fathers had not yet learned this Popish Doctrine.
Durand calleth it a foolery (hee might better haue said, an horrible impietie,) to make or adore an Image of the Trinitie, in 3. dist. 9. q. 2. Many Papists hold it vnlawfull to paint the holy Trinitie.
Caietan, Catharinus, Diegus, Abulensis, Peresius, and others.
Fourthly, if God may be so pictured, as hee by apparitions or words sets himselfe forth; we should haue represented to our senses, a very abominable Idol, in such varietie of parts and fashions, as it should be a very Idolatrous Monster; a picture of that which is not, which they themselues say is an Idol, and so forbidden.
Fiftly, howsoeuer God did appeare: yet was he neuer seene, Ioh. 1. 18. 1. Tim. 6. 16. Moses could not see his face, and liue, Exod. 33. 20. For Gods speaking to him face to face, is expoun∣ded of a familiar manner, as a man speaketh to his friend, as is there in the Text. How can hee be truely pictured that neuer was seene, nor can be seene?
Sixtly, though he might be pictured as he appeared: yet the