In-Text |
but that this Vnum sunt, (They are one) is onely an unity of consent, and not of essence. It is an unthrifty prodigality (howsoever we be abundantly provided with arguments, from other places of Scriptures, to prove this Vnity in Trinity) to cast away so strong an argument, against Iew, and Turke, as is in these words, |
but that this One sunt, (They Are one) is only an unity of consent, and not of essence. It is an unthrifty prodigality (howsoever we be abundantly provided with Arguments, from other places of Scriptures, to prove this Unity in Trinity) to cast away so strong an argument, against Iew, and Turk, as is in these words, |
cc-acp cst d fw-la fw-la, (pns32 vbr crd) vbz av-j dt n1 pp-f n1, cc xx pp-f n1. pn31 vbz dt j n1 (c-acp pns12 vbb av-j vvn p-acp n2, p-acp j-jn n2 pp-f n2, pc-acp vvi d n1 p-acp np1) pc-acp vvi av av j dt n1, p-acp np1, cc np1, c-acp vbz p-acp d n2, |