"[T]he Deity himſelf, tho' he perceiveth neither Pleaſure, nor Pain, nor any thing elſe, as vve do: yet muſt needs have a Perfect and Tranſcendental Perception, both of Pleaſure, and Pain, and of all other things."
— 1701, Nehemiah Grew, “Of Celestial Mind”, in Cosmologia Sacra: Or A Discourse of the Universe as It is the Creature and Kingdom of God. […], London: […] W[illiam] Rogers, S[amuel] Smith, and B[enjamin] Walford: […], →OCLC, 2nd book, paragraph 33, page 84:
"All theſe conſiderations hovvever vvere belovv the tranſcendental dignity of the Revolution Society."
— 1790 November, Edmund Burke, Reflections on the Revolution in France, and on the Proceedings in Certain Societies in London Relative to that Event. […], London: […] J[ames] Dodsley, […], →OCLC, page 10:
"Thoſe Particles are here ſtiled Tranſcendental, vvhich do circumſtantiate vvords in reſpect of ſome Metaphyſical notion; either by enlarging the acception of them to ſome more general ſignification, then doth belong to the reſtrained ſenſe of their places: or denoting a relation to ſome other Predicament or Genus, under vvhich they are not originally placed."
— 1668, John Wilkins, chapter VI, in An Essay Towards a Real Character, and a Philosophical Language, London: […] Sa[muel] Gellibrand, and for John Martyn printer to the Royal Society, →OCLC, 3rd part (Concerning Natural Grammar), page 318:
"To be impenetrable, diſcerpible, and unactive, is the nature of all Body and Matter, as ſuch: And the properties of a Spirit are the direct contrary, to be penetrable, indiſcerpible, and ſelf-motive: Yea, ſo different they are in all things, that they ſeem to have nothing but Being, and the Tranſcendental Attributes of that, in common: […]"
— 1676, Joseph Glanvill, “Essay I. Against Confidence in Philosophy, and Matters of Speculation.”, in Essays on Several Important Subjects in Philosophy and Religion, London: […] J[ohn] D[arby] for John Baker, […], and Henry Mortlock, […], →OCLC, page 3:
"The Divine Underſtanding cannot be the fountain of the Truth of things, &c. This ſeems at firſt ſight to be a very harſh Paradox, and againſt the current Doctrine of Metaphyſicians, vvho define Tranſcendental or Metaphyſical Truth to be nothing elſe but the relation of the Conformity of things to the Theoretical (not Practical) Intellect of God; […] And hence they make Tranſcendental Truth to depend on the Intellectual Truth of God, vvhich alone is moſt properly Truth, and indeed the fountain and origine of all Truth."
— 1683, Henry More, “Annotations upon the Two Foregoing Treatises, […]. Annotations upon The Discourse of Truth [by George Rust]. […].”, in Two Choice and Useful Treatises: The One Lux Orientalis; or An Enquiry into the Opinion of the Eastern Sages Concerning the Præexistence of Souls. […] The Other, A Discourse of Truth, […], London: […] James Collins and Sam[uel] Lowndes […], →OCLC, page 177: