A Discourse In Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, fol. 107
Machine transcription. Not an edition. Errors are expected: about 8% character error rate on Latin and French lines, higher on German. Mean line confidence on this page: 0.86.
Original at the GWLB · Page image · Annotations (IIIF) · Download text
The machine reads it as
- O
- AVE
- ep
- DIC
- the Doctrine of the Trinier.
- Parties mean What ther Cay, ertrere lies
- the disterence: Ir is lufficient for my
- purpose that cher are aorred, that there
- ean be no Division a5 to the divine Fs
- sence by the distinction oF PerTonS. And
- Cothis palsire oF the Arhanasian Creed
- holds g0od Neither confoundine the Per-
- sons nor dividine the Substance.
- The nexe Article, as it is Pet domnin
- the Nores on Athanasius bis Creed, I5 a
- contradiction to chis. For there it runS,
- BC
- ec
- There is one Substance oF che Father.
- another ot the Son, another oF thC
- IToly Chost. They mishe well charse
- it vich Contradictions at ehis rate. BuE
- that is a plain mistake For Person; For
- chere is no other varieer in the Copies
- but this, that Bayscus his Circeke Copy
- hacha osaois, and that ot Constantinople
- coccoco but allene Latin Copies Persona.
- Buc What consequence do ther draw trom
- tence: Then, lay cher, the Son is not the
- Father nor is the Father the Son, nor the
- FToly Chost either of them. IF chey hac
- Dut in Person, as thez oughe rohare donc,
- ic is irhat re d0 omn. And Wvhat FOl.
- lOWS. Is the Father bé not the Son, and
- vet isthe one true Cod, then the Son is not
- the one true Cod, because he is not the l’a-
- ther. The one true C0d may be calen
- EWC
Cite
A Discourse In Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity, fol. 107. Machine transcription, not an edition: Leibniz Legible (model FoNDUE-GD_v2_ft_Leibniz, run 74). https://leibnizlegible.com/page/727097563:0179?run=74