have been permitted to come to our hands so express themselves that they may be taken for Arians Howbeit it suffices us if they generally appear to be but Semi-Arians For then it is evident the present Trinitarians cannot justly plead Antiquity The celebrated Writings of Lactantius are a further Testimony to what I have said concerning the State of the Platonick Trinitarianism in the Church before the Council of Nice He asserts that God before he set upon this ourious Work of the World begat an incorruptible and irreproveable Spirit that he might call him his Son Altho' God produced also for his Service infinite others whom we call Angels yet he has vouchsafed to give the Name of Son but to his First-born Instit L. 4. C. 6. And because the Son was faithful to God and taught Mankind that there is one God and that he alone is to be worshipped neither did ever call himself a God because he had not discharged his Trust therefore he received the Dignity of a Perpetual Priest and the Honor of a Soveraign King and the Power of a Judg and the Name of God Ib. C. 13. Now when any one has a Son whom he entirely loves who notwithstanding dwells in the House and under the Governing Power of his Father altho' the Father grants him the Name and Authority of a Master yet in the terms of Civilians here is but one House and one Master So this World is but one House belonging to God and the Son and the Father who inhabit the World and who are of one Mind or of like Affections and perfectly agree are as One Government or One only God the One being as the Two and the Two as the One. And no marvel since the Son is in the Father because the Father loveth the Son and the Father is in the Son by reason of his faithful Resignation to his Fathers Will and that he does nothing but what the Father Commands him This evidently declares in what sense the Father and Son are to be understood to be One God or One Mind and One Spirit Namely inasmuch as they are of one Mind they are therefore as if they were but one Spirit or but one Person and one God Yet according to this they really are Two distinct Beings and Two very unequal Spirits For the Son has freely received all from the Father and is ever Inferior and Subject to the Father and was produced then when God was going to set himself upon the Creating of the World and consequently is not from all Eternity The Father then is the First and Principal God and the Son is a God of a lower kind If this be not pure Arianism as it may be taken and seems to be all that it can amount to is at most Semi-Arianism which indeed very little differs from Arianism for both Systems hold the Son to be God but in an Inferior sense and assert the Father alone to be the one only true God tho' the Semi-Arians esteem that the Son was Created out of the Fathers Nature or Substance whereas Arius and those that are exactly of his Opinion as was said conceive that the Son tho' immediately produced by the Father was Created out of Nothing and only differs from other Creatures in that he is more Excellent than they all put together was Created by the Father alone and is set by the Father over all created Beings As concerning the Person and Nature of the Holy Spirit Dalaeus in the Fourth Chap. of his Second Book De usu Patrum remarks after St. Jerom that Lactantius expresly asserts the Holy Ghost to be but a Creature and not to partake of the Deity Sandius brings many Instances to prove that both Lactantius and all the other foremention'd Authors were even of Arius his Sentiment and not they only but also generally the remaining Ante-nicene Writers All these Authors which we have quoted were undoubtedly most learned and deservedly esteem'd in their Generations and are now generally esteem'd still by all Christians and indeed they may be accounted the Chief of the Ante-nicene whose Writings have been preserved We may also rank among them Eusebius Bishop of Caesarea as well as Lactantius since he Flourished somtime before as well as since the Council of Nice and appears to follow wholly the Sentiments of Justin Martyr when not aw'd by the Nicene Tyranny so that the then current Ante-nicene Doctrin may be known in these Writings Concerning these Matters therefore we may remark Eusebius expresses himself to this purpose He that is beyond all things the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the Governor of all things how many and of what quality soever they be even of the Holy Spirit himself yea further of the Only Begotten Son also is deservedly stiled by the Apostle the God that is over all and he only may be called the one God the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ But the Son is the Only Begotten God who is in the Bosom of the Father And the Advocate the Holy Spirit is neither God nor Son for he has not received his Production from the Father like the Son but is one of those things which were made by the Son De Ecclesiast Theol. L. 3. C. 6. If John had conceived the Father and the Son to be one and the same thing he would have said that the Word was the God with the Addition of the Article which not doing he evidently teaches us that he is the Prime God who is the Father of the Word and that the Word was not that very God but yet that he also was a God Ib. L. 2. C. 17. This is the Current Doctrin of the Old Ante-nicene Platonists concerning the Son and Holy Ghost Eusebius like the other before him expresly asserts that the Holy Ghost is not God and it is visible he says no more of the Son than at most what is agreable to Semi-Arianism That was it seems what the generality of the Primitive or Ancient Aâ—teâ—nicene Platonists meant by the Divinity of the Word and for the not coming up to which they opposed the Ebionite and the Nazarene Vnitarians Eusebius in the 25th and last Chap. of the 5th Book of his History quotes a remarkable Passage of an Author a Platonizing Christian who had written upon that account against the most rigid Vnitarians The Passage is to this effect The Vnitarians pretend that the Apostles and all the Ancients held the very Doctrine concerning the Person of our Saviour that is now maintained by the Vnitarians and that it is but only since the Times of the Popes Victor and Zepherin that the Truth has been adulterated and discountenanced This would be credible if first the Vnitarian Doctrin were not contrary to Holy Scripture and if divers before Victor and Zepherin had not contended for the Divinity of the Lord Christ Namely Justin Martyr Miltiades Tatianus Clemens of Alexandria Irenaeus Melito To whom we may add the ancient Hymns or
them and concurrs with them at their Working and which properly doth the Wonders or the Chiefest Part of them in the effecting of Super-natural Works They are as it were but the Bearers of the Divine Virtue or the Disposers of it which God entrusts to them because in that Employment they reap the glory delight of Serving God and of being Instrumental in the good of Others They dispose therefore of that Portion of Divine Power as they dispose of their own Faculties That which was alloted to a Prophet was called his Spirit 2 Kings 2 15. and 5.26 1 Cor. 5.3 4. But the Word especially since his Exaltation has the Disposition of the Divine Power as was said of all the Holy Angels whom he sends whensoever he will on Errands to do what He pleases and so he is said to have received the Spirit without Measure whereas no Prophet before him had and that but at sometimes the Share but of an Angel or at most the Assistance it may be of two or three Angels and the Power accompanying them or annexed to them That by the Holy Spirit something like this Viz some Angel or Angels together with a certain Concurrence of God's Acting or a certain Influence of the Divine Power is to be understood and not altogether and expresly God himself or a literally and properly Divine Person is evinced by the Vnitarian Arguments in the Brief History in the Apology for the Irenicum Magnum and in Crell's Book Of one God the Father It is certain that in Job 32.8 the Spirit and the Divine Inspiration are manifestly put as Synonyma or as Terms that imply and explain one the other the Original Words Rouak in the Hebrew and Pneuma in the Greek being undoubtedly susceptible of that Sense not only signifying Spirit but properly signifying Breath or Breathing which is likewise the import of Afflatus the Expression Metaphorically also us'd in Latin to imply Inspiration which is represented as a Spiritual Breathing or a certain Acting of the Divine Power figured by Breathing And on the other hand in John 1.32 compared with John 1.51 Acts. 8.26.29.39 Revel 8.3 compared with Rom. 8.26 and several other Places the Spirit and an Angel or the Angels John 1.51 Hebr. 1.7 compared with Acts 2.3 4. are also put as the same or synonymous terms From whence it seems it follows that by the Spirit we must understand the Divine Inspiration carried and communicated by the Means of a Holy Spirit or Holy Angel that is to say an Acting and Influence of the Divine Power communicated to or performed on some Men at the Presence and Acting of an Angel or which is the same a Holy Angel acting according to the Direction of the Divine Inspiration and together with the Assistance and a certain Instuence of the Divine Power Thus the Spirit is both a Creature and not a Creature an Angel and also the Spiritual Breath of God or a certain Virtue of God or an Influence of the Power of God which is Something belonging to the Father or a certain Acting of the Father but appears not and need not be concluded and in reason cannot be thought to be a particular real Divine Person distinct from the Father As by the Word is understood both the First-Born the Word-Bearer and the Chief of all Creatures and a Divine Word or an Influence of the Father's Wisdom and Divine Nature dwelling in and as intimately as possible united with the First-Born The Father according to these Notions may then truly be said to be the whole Godhead or the only true God and to know alone all things but then by the Influences of his Divine Word Spirit he may manifest to others what He pleases that when he thinks fit properly 't is not the Father that is Incarnate but his Word which is agreable to Scripture as well as Reason And the Spirit may be said by a Figure to search the things of God See Crell's Touching One God c. Book 1. Sect. 3. Chap. 14. And indeed who besides God should know or search the things of God but the Divine Inspiration or they to whom it is reveal'd by the Divine Inspiration In the Form of Baptism and in the Creed the Word and the Spirit may well be mentioned after mention made in general of the Father tho' they be not Divine Persons distinct from the Father but be certain Influences of the Divine Perfections or certain Actings of the Father by some Powers or Virtues belonging to his Nature The Form of Baptism thus implies that thereby we are Consecrated the Disciples of God our Father and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Disciples of the Word communicated to Christ who has Redeemed us by his Doctrine and by his Blood and in fine of the Holy Inspiration also which Confirms the Gospel and Sanctifies the Soul of true Believers And in the Creed we profess this Belief Evidently herein is no Tautology nor any thing Superfluous For the Father and his Influences or God and the most eminent Actings of his Powers are things distinct And those Actings and Influences are not therefore known tho' the Father be and tho' they belong to the Father And tho' they were Necessarily in the Father it would not be Impertinent to particularize them after having made mention of the Father As after having said that there is a Sun it would not be irrational to add that we believe and know the Sun produceth Light and Heat Otherwise indeed what could the Trinitarians themselves plead for mentioning the Son and Spirit after the Father when they hold that the whole Son and Spirit are wholly in the Father and that the Father cannot be without them Now according to our System the Spirit implying an Influence and an Acting of the Divine Nature those may well be said to be the Temple of God in whom the Divine Inspiration resides tho' the Divine Inspiration be not a Person or not a Person distinct from the Father Indeed tho' the Divine Inspiration were only the Acting of an Angel commissionated and directed by God Christians in whom the Impiration works might then also be truly said to be the Temple of God and not of the Angel because the Angel works not for himself or on his own account but as sent and ordered by God and Christ and then according to the Jewish Phrase Apostolus cujusque est quisque as when an Embassador Wedds a Princess in his Master's Name She is not thereby Married to the Subject but to the Prince that sent him And the Angels may be called by way of eminence the Breath of God inasmuch as they proceed from him as our Breath doth from us or most probably inasmuch as they carry the Influence of the Divine Spirit or Power as God's-Word Bearer is called God's Word inasmuch as he carries the Commands of God and both acts by Gods ' Power and Wisdom and represents and exhibits God's
fine pretended that it seems marvellous that a Creature should be named before and should be said to have the preheminence over the Power of God by the Holy Ghost understanding the Influence of the Divine Power and Divine Inspiration it must be remembred both that by the Divine Inspiration or Influence of the Divine Power the Vnitarians do not understand a Person but a Property or an Act and that agreeably to the express Doctrine of Scripture they hold that Christ is made partaker of the Fulness of the Godhead in the manner we have spoken of before and just now have further specified so that for Desiring the Father he may at any time Dispose of the Divine Power and Inspiration and doth actually dispose thereof as is said according to what he pleases to ask it of God and therefore the Holy Spirit is represented as proceeding from the Father by the Son and the Holy Spirit is said to be Christ's Now it is not strange that the Disposer should be mentioned before the thing disposed of as it is in the Form of Baptism There is then no need to insist any longer upon this And so we have don with the second Particular importing that the Assertions of the Vnitarians are not uncredible and that their Interpretations are rational and agreeable to the stile and current of Scripture and therefore natural and obvious enough And this together with the following Particular being considered the Trinitarian Sentiment will appear to be wholly groundless and incontestably therefore altogether incredible For indeed is it likely that Christianity for many Ages having been altered in many weighty Points the present Trinitarian at least seemingly impossible and contradictory System has all this while remained the same that it was from the beginning and by the hands of the Platonists and Scholasticks has passed pure and undefiled In Summ. When some Texts seem susceptible of two Senses the one more literal but expresly irrational or contradictory impossible manifestly inconsistent with other Passages and the Current of Scripture and the other more strained or figurative but agreeable to the Scripture-Stile and reconcileable with Reason which of the two Senses do the generality of Christians and in particular Protestants commonly prefer in their Interpretations They unanimously hold as a standing Rule by which the Scripture is to be interpreted that it may be rightly understood as was shewn in the last Chapter That We are to reject that Sense which is manifestly absurd and inconsistent with express Texts and are then to hold by that which is reconcileable to Reason and Scripture tho' somwhat more remote from the Sound of the Words And indeed it would evidently be most unreasonable to follow other Measures We ought then most incontestably constantly to prefer that Interpretation which is consistent with Scripture and Reason before that which is inconsistent with both And this Consideration leads Us to the next Particular CHAP. XIII An Answer to the third Branch of the Objection 3. IT is possible and easy and warrantable to understand in an Vnitarian Sense all the Texts which the Trinitarians alledge for their Sentiment To evince the truth of which Proposition we shall consider those Texts which are mentioned in the Objection and instanced in as the strongest for the Anti-Vnitarian Cause and as for the others we shall refer the Reader to the Brief History of the Vnitarians or even to Grotius his Annotations but especially to the Works of the Fratres Poloni The Texts instanced in for the purpose aforesaid are those which either call Christ the Son of God by way of eminency or shew that Christ may and is to be Pray'd to and declare that God will have Men honour the Son even as they honour the Father As to the Texts which call Christ the Son of God by way of eminency an Observation of Dr. Sherlocks will go a great way to give a light into that Matter These are his words at Pages 71st and 72d of his Book against the Bishop of Gloucester That which entitles Creatures to the natural relation of Sonship to God is to receive their being from God in the likeness and resemblance of his own Nature Thus Angels are called the Sons of God and so is Adam who was immediately formed by God in his own Image and Likeness And thus som think that Christ who was as immediately formed by a Divine Power in the Womb of the Virgin as Adam was of the Dust of the Earth is for this reason called the Son of God See Luk. 1.35 where that reason is expresly given of Christ's being call'd the Son of God The Vnitarians to this Observation will in particular add that no Creature was ever made in so great a Likeness and Resemblance of the Divine Nature nor designed to so high a Dignity as Christ was and that this particularly is the reason why Christ is called the Son of God by way of eminency besides that He is actually God's Only-Begotten Son as we did observe from Luk. 1.35 This is a plain and a rational and after all an unexceptionable account of the Matter and therefore what Dr. Sherlock adds thereupon serves only to shew that the Scholastick or Platonick Trinitarian Sentiment of Christ's Sonship is impossible For this is certain and undeniable and yet if the Platonick or Scholastick Sentiment were true this could not be allowed of according to that System for he says that System implies that there being but one Son in Christ it is Heresy to hold that Christ is the Son of God in any other sense than by an Eternal Generation Christ as we have seen is called the Only-Begotten Son of God because he is the only Person whom God caused to be born of a Woman without the help of Man And in that sense he is God's Only Son as well as in this respect that he is the only Lord whom God has placed at the head of the Vniverse and to whom he has subjected all Creatures For Soveraigns and Kings are called the Sons of God Luk. 1.32 John 1.49 c. as is shewn in the Introduction of Dr. Patrick's Witnesses of Christianity and this is the Only Soveraign and King who is constituted the Lord of all other created Lords and Kings in which respect he is like to God which we have not well translated equal to God as also in respect of the exercise of the Divine Power in working the greatest Miracles whenever be pleased and whenever he will Som People are apt to imagin that even God being called the Father is a valid Proof of more Persons than One in the Divine Nature But seriously do they think that the Samaritan Women and common Soldiers were acquainted with the Scholastick or Platonick Trinity Yet these speak of a Son of God Mat. 27.54 and to the other our Saviour speaks of the Father as of Somwhat intelligible to them John 4.21 Conclude we then that by the Father we must understand God the
know his Benefactor and that he should be in a hearty disposition to express his Gratitude for the Benefit to the best of his power according to the Knowledge he can get thereof In the Revelations 19 12 We find it is said that our Saviour has a Name which no Man understands but He Himself Why then should We be so Decisive Magisterial and Imposing as if We certainly and infallibly understood all these Mysteries As we cannot reasonably imagin that we infallibly understand the most difficult things we ought not in reason to pretend to determine and judge for other Men in the most abstruse and intricate Matters Howbeit it seems the Semi-Arian System is much the same with or not essentially different from this of the Father or God and his two Powers and Influences or Acts. And it seems this is reconcileable with Scripture and Reason God grant Us all to do our Duty in this Inquiry and in all respects that We may discern and follow the things absolutely Necessary to Peace and Salvation A POST-SCRIPT Wherein it is farther consider'd That the Arguments for the Divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost at most seem not to be inconsistent with the Unitarian System or to destroy the Necessity of keeping with relation to this Doctrin to the Generality of the Expressions of Scripture for Terms of Church-Communion Wherein also it is inquir'd Whether the Unitarians may with a good Conscience joyn in Communion with a Trinitarian Church Of the Reasons of both Sides of which Query the Governors of the Church are humbly desir'd to give their Opinion FROM the whole it seems that these three Points deserve a particular Consideration I. It should be considered that the Arguments for the Divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost seem not inconsistent with the Vnitarian System II. It should be inquired Whether the Vnitarians may joyn in Communion with the Trinitarian Church III. We should consider that what is inferred from the Vnitarian Arguments remains in force and that it is an indispensable Duty to profess and establish the Gospel-Terms of Communion and to keep to the seeming or apparent Generality of the Expressions of Scripture for Terms of Church-Union tho' the Trinitarians and some Vnitarians should opine that the Vnitarians may with a good Conscience joyn in Communion with the Trinitarians and even tho' there were in God what might truely be called Three Persons I. It should be considered that the Arguments for the Divinity of Christ and of the Holy Ghost seem not inconsistent with Vnitarianism For tho' by the Holy Ghost and the Word the Divine Nature be taken to be implied yet it follows not that the Father is not the whole God-head Nay the Scholastick Trinitarians themselves acknowledge that the Father implies the whole Divine Nature Consequently whatsoever is properly and literally Divine belongs to the Father and is a Property or Act of his Essence seeing that it belongs to the Divine Nature and 't is own'd the Father implies the whole Divine Nature St. Basil agreably to this Tom. 1. Pag. 778. Paris 1638. calls the Divine Word and Spirit the two Hands of God founding that Expression on Ps 19.1 and 102.25 compar'd with Ps 33.6 Hands or Arms are the same speaking of a Spirit And we see mention made of the Arms of God Deuter. 33.27 Jâ—b 40.9 Ps 98.1 Isa 51.5 c. Howbeit in speaking of God who is a Spirit or a Spiritual Being it is evident it must be own'd thas these Expressions are but Figurative All then that the Arms or Hands of God can imply must be some Powers Properties or Acts Influences that belong to God Now by God the Scholastick Trinitarians themselves understand the Father or Him whom the Scriptures and particularly the Books of the New Testament ordinarily or frequently stile our Father as well as in general the Father meaning the Common Parent of Men more particularly the Father of Christians most especially the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ as all agree And then as was observed the Scholastick Trinitarians acknowledge that the Father implies the whole God head Our Saviour is express that the Father dwells in him and doth the Works in him Joh. 14.10 And the Apostle teaches us that Christ is to be honoured to the Glory of the Father Phil. 2.11 All therefore that is meant and that appears can be meant by the Divinity of Christ or the Hypostatick Union is that the Divine Nature is so intimately united with the Soul of the Man Jesus Christ as the Human Soul is with the Body that the Divine Influence or Divine Indwelling in him and particularly the Divine Wisdom constantly illuminate conduct and assist Christ so as to enable him to represent God at the Head of the Universe to perform all the things necessary for such a Representative of God to do so that what belongs to God may be said to be Christ's all in kind tho' not all in all degrees who sees honours Christ may be said to see honour God what God doth at Christ's desire may be said to be done by Christ who procures it to be done by the God-head dwelling in him as a Human Soul simply and meerly by desiring procures of the Body with which she is united to do many Actions that she willeth that God has subjected to the Soul's Will and Power Holding then that some Texts of Scripture in some sense import the Supreme Divinity of Christ yet it can never be prov'd or with any colour of reason pretended that they necessarily imply any more than this For there are invincible Arguments against the being of more than one real Person in God by a Figure common in Scripture in all Languages Personal Acts may reasonably be attributed to Divine Wisdom or to a Divine Influence tho' it be not a distinct Person but a Property or an Act of the Father Even Charity is represented as a Person 1 Cor. 13.1 And God is said to send forth his Mercy Ps 57.3 Supposing then that by the Word in the beginning of St. John's Gospel be meant the Divine Wisdom produc'd forth and shewn in the Old and New Creation as it is even interpreted in the Brief History in that case it must necessarily be suppos'd to be said by a Figure to be incarnate meaning that it rested upon in an extraordinary most ample manner or most intimately dwelt with and constantly assisted and illuminated the Man Jesus Christ as if it had become Part of him or were his own Soul Christ then the Son of God is a Divine Person in that he is a Man assisted and inhabited by a Divine Influence or Divine Virtue And holding that some Texts of Scripture assert the Supreme Divinity of the Holy Ghost it doth not follow that thereby is meant any thing else than the Divine Inspiration or an Influence of the Divine Power either Directing or Wonder-Working that is commonly annexed to
Article with this Reflection It is altogether incredible that the Scripture has been materially corrupted but it is highly probable that the Writings of the Doctors may have been considerably changed and altered CHAP. VII A Farther Continuation of the Answer to the First Objection 6. HOwbeit it still in a great measure appears that the generality of the Primitive Christians were Vnitarians and even that the generality of the remaining Authors of the first three Centuries were far enough from being of that Opinion which is now called Orthodox it being evident that they incline more to the Vnitarian than to the present Trinitarian Sentiment When the rigid Platonists were become for the most part the Masters and the Strongest somtime before the Council of Nice as well as after it they expressed a blind and furious Zeal for their new Notions concerning the Son or Word and shew'd as much as they could their ill will to the Ancient Christians the Vnitarians and to those Churches and Parties that retained the Primitive Doctrin of the Gospel They therefore and that was the least harm they did them called them by several Nick-names as Nazarens Ebionites Mineans Alogi and the like The Jews had begun in the Apostles's time to call the Christians that were among them Nazarens and Mineans which last signifies Hereticks or Sectaries and the other is a Denomination from Our Saviour whom the Unbelievers in derision called the Nazarene as it appears Act. 24.5 and 14. The Jewish and most ancient Christians were also as some think called afterwards by the Platonists Ebionites which signifies the Poor either as some pretend from a Man named Ebion who they say was a great Denfender of them or because they were the ordinary and poorer sort of People who preserved the longest the Primitive Doctrin and could the most hardly be brought to relish the Notions of Platonism or as Eusebius asserts because the Platonists accused them to have but poor and low Opinions of Christ In fine among the Gentile Converts the Maintainers of the Primitive Doctrine were by some called Alogi or Alogians as if they believed not Christ to be the Logos or the Word because they believed not an eternal Word like Plato and it is said that some of these Gentile Christians received not at first the Gospel of St. John as the generality of Christians admited not presently some other Books of the New Testament particularly St. John's Revelation and the Epistle to the Hebrews which generally for 400 Years was not received as Canonical It is too usual to go from one extream to another and it may be therefore that some of those Gentile Converts who saw the absurdity of Plato's Polytheism and were told that Plato's and St. John's Expressions were the same and exactly agreed imagined that this was a counterfeit Piece of the Platonists and Cerinthians to uphold their Divin Hypostasis distinct from the Father and so at first gave not themselves leave to consider and examin what might be the true Sense of St. John's terms and the Intention of his Gospel Howbeit the Platonists in process of time hated and defamed the Vnitarians not merely for what might have been amiss among some of them but in general for their being Vnitarian Christians And in that they followed the Jews who from the beginning persecuted the Christians and gave them what reproachful Names they could some of which always remained to the Jewish Converts that is to say to those Christians who originally came from among the Jews who were not generally vitiated by the Philosophy of Plato and whom therefore as we have said the Platonists called by the same Names that the obdurate and unbelieving Jews had given them namly Nazarens and Mineans Now it appears that these Nazarens Mineans Ebionites and the Jewish Christiâ—â—s were taken to be much the same and that they and the Alogi were Vnitarians were from the beginning were most numerous and continued a considerable Party for several Centuries till they were in a great measure destroyed and extirpated by the most violent Persecutions of the Platonists Crigen says that all Jews who own Jesus to be Christ are called Ebionites Contr. Cels. L. 2. p. 56. Theodoret attests that the Nazarens honour the Lord Christ only as a Holy Man Haeret. Fab. L. 2. C. 3. Epiphanius writes that the Nazarens and Ebionites held the same Heresy Haeres 30. C. 2. It is not impossble but that Epiphanius as well as Origen and other Platonists confounded with the Ebionites the other Jewish Christians who generally did not platonize but followed the true Vnitarian System whether we suppose it to be that which was maintain'd by Arius or that which is now known under the Name of Socinianism St. Jerom acknowledges that the Jewish Mineans vulgarly called Nazarens were to that Day over all Orient Ep. ad August There indeed was the Seat of the Jewish Christians And from the 24th Chapter of the 3d. Book and the 25th of the fifth Book of Eus-bius his Ecclesiastical History it may further be gathered that these as well as the Gentile Vnitarians were the Successors of the Primitive and First Christians and were defamed only by the Malice of the Platonists Yet all this Evidence is from the Testimony of professed Enemies there remaining now no other Authors that expresly treat of these things As for the Alogi their very Nick-name bespeaks them to be Vnitarians Epiphanius is the first who gave to them the Name of Alogi Before him they were simply called Christians Epiphanius speaks of them as the ancient Vnitarians of the Gentile Converts But we have above all other Evidences an express Testimony of the Faith of the Primitive Christians in their Symbol justly called the Apostles Creed which manifestly is altogether Vnitarian For it is a Profession of Faith in one God that is the Father Almighty And every thing that is there said of the Lord Jesus Christ is the Description not of an eternal God but of a Creature or Human Person highly exalted by God And of the Holy Ghost no more is said but that it is a Holy Spirit or a Holy Breath or Holy Inspiration The Compilers of the Creed pretended to know no more of it And it is a Generality which the Vnitarians highly approve of but which hitherto the Trinitarians seem not to be pleased to stick to If they were to make a Confession of their Faith they would not express it as it is here or if they did we would readily agree with them To believe in is a Phrase that signifies no more than to believe for the Creed teaches us to believe in the Holy Catholick Church as well as in the Holy Spirit and in one God the Father Almighty As for the Antiquity and Authority of this Creed we have the unanimous Opinion of the Fathers as it appears in their Writings and as is observed by Ruffinus in particular who flourished in the Year 360 that it was compiled by the
purpose The Church says he dispersed thro' the whole World has both from the Apostles and their Disciples received that Faith which is in one God the Father Almighty and in one Jesus Christ the Son of God incarnated for our Salvation and in one Holy Spirit who by the Prophets published the Dispensations of God Jesus Christ is our Lord and God and Saviour and King according to the good Pleasure of the Invisible Father advers haeres L. 1. C. 2. He who has no other God above him is the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Ib. C. 19. And in speaking of that Saying of Christ that he knew not the Day and Hour of Judgment he says The Father is above all things for the Father says Christ is greater than I Wherefore in knowledge also the Father is declared to have the Preeminence Ib. L. 2. C. 49. The Apostles would not call any one of his own Persor Lord but him that exerciseth Lordship over all even God the Father and his Son who has received from the Father the Lordship of all the Creation Ib. L. 3. C. 6. The Apostles confessed the Father and Son to be God and Lord but neither named any other God nor confessed any other to be Lord. Ib. C. 9. I invocate thee O Lord the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ who art the only true God above whom there is no other God who rulest over all and dost in domination besides our Lord Jesus Christ rule also over the Holy Spirit Ib. C. 6. By these Passages it appears that Irenaeus held the Father alone to be God in the most eminent sense of that word and the Son to be Lord and God under the Father but the Holy Spirit to be neither Lord nor God Yet he might hold the Holy Spirit to be above the Angels and 't is probable he understood thereby what the Vnitarians do These Matters being left in a great Generality in Scripture the Fathers explained them as they thought best That liberty of inquiry and examination must be allowed of so those explications and interpretations be but offer'd as Opinions and Conjectures but be not Magisterially imposed by any Man on other Men. For to follow the Design and Intention of Scripture Christians must Unite in the Generality of the Terms of Scripture as we see it in the Apostles Creed If these Measures had always been observed Platonism had done but little harm It seems that Platonism made the Platonizing Fathers differ from the strict Vnitarians and Arians I mean the Ancient and Primitive Christians that held the Sentiment that Arius revived or improved For it seems he believed after them that the Word like other Creatures was made out of Nothing But it seems Plato as after him his Christian Disciples of the Number of whom Irenaeus seems to be taught that the Word was created out of the Substance of God Dalaeus observes in the last quoted Place of his aforesaid Book that Tertullian tho' the most thorow-stitcht Platonist of his time had much the same Thoughts and held that God the Father produced the Word out of himself and made him his Son but that the Father is the whole Substance and the Son a Portion and Derivation of that whole In another Place the same Tertullian says expresly that there was a time when the Son was not Adv. Hermogen C. 3. and it seems that by the Holy Spirit-he means only the Vertue and Power of God De Praescript C. 13. Novatian says that the Holy Spirit is less than Christ De Trin. C. 24. moreover that once the Son was not and that before him was nothing besides the Father C. 11. Whereby he positively asserts that the Father alone is from all Eternity and consequently that the Father alone is God in the eminent Sense of that word Which is very different from the Sentiment of the rigid Platonists and the present Trinitarians who hold the Son and Holy Spirit to be from all Eternity as well as the Father and to be equal among themselves and co-equal with him as it is in the Creed of Athanasius Now those that do not assert the Son and Spirit to be eternal and consequently not to have a necessary Existence nor unlimited Perfections nor unborrowed Powers or Powers that they have not received freely from another may very well pass for Vnitarians seeing they make not the Son and Spirit to be God like the Father but the Father's Creatures Dalaeus in the Place we last quoted remarks that those expressions which afterwards were so much found sault with in Arius were used by these Antenicene be mentions Dionysius Arexandrinus who expresly calls the Son the Father's Workmanship which is the same as to say the Father's Creature They expresly say that the Father Made the Son and they even use the very term that the Father Created him Nay Dalaeus in the same Place forgets not to take notice that the 80 Platonick Bishops who at the latter end of the 3d. Century so violently condemned the famous Patriarch of Antioch yet at the same time did expresly declare that the Son is not of the same Essence with the Father Now therefore by the Acknowledgement of the Trinitarians themselves the Post-Nicene Trinitarians cannot with any Modesty pretend that the Ancients were of the same Opinion with them and consequently there can be nothing more vain than for them to plead Antiquity Origen like the foregoing Authors not only called the Son a Second God Contr. Cel. L. 5. p. 258. but a Creature and the oldest of the Creatures Ib. p. 257. And in his First and Second Books concerning Prayer he has so many Arguments against Praying to any but the Father and so blames those that would also direct their Prayers to the Son plainly calling them Fools for so doing that it clearly appears that according to him the Supreme or true Divinity belong'd to the Father only This is so notorious that many have believed that Origen was of the same Opinion that Arius afterwards was of and Epiphanius did well observe that in many Places Origen makes the Son and Holy Spirit to be of another kind of God-head or of another Nature and Essence than that of the Father Epiphan adv Haer. L. 2. T. 1. p. 531. Now since so antient so renowned and learned a Doctor as Origen was of this Sentiment that alone is a sufficient Argument that the Notion of the present Trinitarians was not then known to be the Apostolick Doctrin that at least the Tradition about that Point is uncertain and consequently that the Determination thereof ought not to be sought for by this Means Indeed in reason so Abstruse and Intricate a Matter ought to be Magisterially determined by no Means if they are not attended with greater evidence but every one must be allowed to judge the best he can for himself and Men must Unite in the use of the terms and expressions themselves of Scripture if they appear to be susceptible of a
great Generality and perhaps designedly indeterminable and if there lie invincible Difficulties and unanswerable Arguments not to say Demonstrations against the Platonick Trinitarian System Howbeit as we shall further see the Scripture must be own'd to be the only Rule herein to be sought to besides the clear and incontestable Dictates of Reason and the Trinitarians if they be sincere must acknowledge that their Plea of Antiquity is vain and frivolous None but Quacks can talk at Dr. Sherlock's rate that the whole Catholick Church in all Ages has been of his Sentiment or of the Sentiment of the present Trinitarians and that the Vnitarian Controversy may be decided by the Judgment of the ancient Ante-nicene Authors whose Writings have in part been suffered to come to our Hands It appears evidently that the Ante-nicene were not of the Opinion that is now termed Orthodox To evince which Position of ours it is indeed superfluous to add many more Proofs after what we have alledged out of these most ancient and famous Authors I shall therefore only add two or three Passages out of the following Writers which tho' not altogether so ancient as the foregoing yet come not so much short of it as to deserve to be wholly unregarded They were very eminent and learned Men. It cannot be doubted but that they knew what Doctrin in as well as somtime before their time was held as Orthodox and was requir'd in that rigorous Age to be held as such And it is credible they would not have publickly asserted any thing in these Matters that would then have drawn upon them the Censures of the Church in the Communion of which they flourished and in which they were desirous to be in great esteem Nevertheless it doth appear their Opinion as well as that of the afore-quoted Authors is very different from that of the present Platonick or Scholastick Trinitarians For instance then Arnobius declared in the Treatise he wrote to inform the Gentiles with the Truths of Christianity that Christians did indeed hold Christ to be a God but inferior to the Father and a lesser God than He who alone is the Almighty God Christ says he is a God who in the form of a Man spake to the World by the Command of the Principal God Adv. Gent. L. 2. p. 106. The Almighty God who is the only God at length sent out Christ Ib. p. 120. How could he have taught more plainly or more expresly that the Father alone is the Almighty God and the only God or the only Person that is God in the eminent sense of that word Not but that he might hold both Christ and the Holy Spirit to be also Divine Persons But 't is evident he reckons them to be of an inferior kind seeing he denies them to be the Almighty the Principal and Only God He makes them therefore Creatures tho' created Gods whether or no created out of the very Substance of the Almighty God He comes then very near to Arianism if he be not altogether Arian He looks upon the Almighty Father as the only Fountain of all Being and Perfection and as able not only to produce other Beings but to communicate to whom he will immense or vast Perfections and a Divine Nature tho' inferior to his because there can be but one Infinite and Almighty Being Wherefore all Creatures tho' never so Divine and Excellent can have but limited Perfections and must ever remain subject to the Almighty Now who doth not see that this is to assert but one God properly so called or but one who is the Almighty God the Principal or Supreme God and the Only God And is not that Vnitarianism Besides tho' Justin Martyr said that in the 2d Century the Holy Angels were worshipped particularly it may be by some Platonists Arnobius declares that in his time Christians thought it sufficient to worship God even God the Father the Principal God Howbeit says he to discharge the Worship of Divinity the Chief God is sufficient for us I say the Chief God the Father and Lord of all Things In him we worship whatsoever is to be worshipped For we have in him the very Head of Divinity from whence the Divinity of all Divine Things whatsoever is derived If the Platonick Trinitarians had always kept strictly to this Generality in their Terms of Communion there needed have been no Disagreement nor Division It is evident that in the second and third Centuries after that Justin Martyr and the other converted Philosophers had introduced their Platonism in the Christian Religion the Primitive Vnitarians were indeed commonly vilisied and opposed but yet the Platonists kept not all alike at the same distance from these but somewhat differed among themselves and allowed of that difference not being then agreed how much justly of Platonism was to be admitted or held necessary nor knowing how to determine a Matter that seemed so obscure and abstruse The Nature of the H. Ghost especially was then left undetermined The generality not only of the old Christians but even of the new Platonick Doctors own'd him to be but the Power and Inspiration of God or else took him for an Archangel and a created Spirit like the other Angels but above all the Angels And therefore if there were at those times any rigid Platonists that had much the same Notion that the present Trinitarians have of the H. Spirit they contented themselves covertly or modestly to assert or intimate their Opinion but durst not and could not attempt imperiously to condemn those that were not of their Sentiment We see the generality of the Ante-nicene agree that the H. Ghost is not God tho' some call him a Divine Person but none of them would have made difficulty so to have called any Angel those that called him the Power of God as Irenaeus and others yet expresly affirmed that he was not God and so it seems took him not to be a real Divine Person or a real Divine Being but an Act or an Influence and Inspiration of the the Divin Power or an Archangel or both or they knew not what And those that positively called him a Creature were not censuredeven by the highest Platonists of those times And as touching the Nature of the Son or Word of God it seems that then Semi-Arianism did most prevail among the Doctors even perhaps from the 2d Century but yet till the Council of Nice the suppos'd ancient Doctrin afterwards called Arianism was allowed of in the Church at least in a great measure and generally for a good while approved before For most probably many of those ancient Writings that were supressed after the Council of Nice as containing a Doctrin that was then in a great measure grown out of Date tho' the avowed Works of the most excellent learned Bishops of the Church asserted the Scriptural Sentiment for it seems at least the like to which Arius was condemn'd at Nice And we see that several of those Ante-nicene that
the contrary This may be a Sign that they searched after the Truth like other Men as well as they could which is very commendable and is every ones indispensible Duty But it is not the Character of those who are infallible and who must implicitely and absolately be followed as our Rule CHAP. IX A Second General Objection against the Unitarian System Answered THE next Objection on which the Trinitarians commonly lay great stress is That the Work of Redemption and what the Scripture ascribes to our Saviour is above the Capacity of a Man it being impossible for a Creature to become the Object of Worship and hear the Prayers of Men to make Satisfaction for Sins or reconcile God to these that have forfeited his Favour to know the Hearts to forgive Sins to govern the Vniverse to raise the Dead to judge the World and do whatsoever the Father doth In answering this this Reflection cannot but be premised that it is lamentable Men are usually so careless as not to inform themselves rightly of the Sentiment of those whom they condemn or are so unsincere as not fairly to represent it But most certainly this is the Case here As for my part I absolutely take party neither with the Socinians nor with the Arians but think it presumptuous to determine expresly a Mystery which the Scripture has left in a great Generality Howbeit I see plainly and am fully persuaded that the present Objection is wholly groundless and doth not in the least invalidate either of those Systems for it is founded on an either wilfully or otherwise erroneous and mistaken Supposition as if the Arians or Socinians held our Saviour to be a mere Creature or a mere Man Surely it is a Point of Justice and a Duty of Christian Charity not to misrepresent the Cause of any Party but to endeavour to take it in the best Sense and put upon it the favourablest Construction possible But the quite contrary is done in this Objection The Vnitarians therefore answer it thus According to our Sentiment Christ in the business of Salvation or Redemption is not left to work with the bare Strength and Capacity of a Man but is commissionated of God and by him constituted in Authority constantly enlightened and influenced by the Holy Spirit and directed and assisted by the Divine Wisdom and Power dwelling in him For we hold agreably to the Scripture that the Father assisting acting and dwelling in his Son by his Inspiration and the Influences of his Power and Wisdom the Fulness of the God-head inhabiting in him by its constant concurrence enables him to perform all that he is appointed to do Christ therefore in the Execution of his Office is not to be considered as a mere Creature but as a Creature in and by which God works and which acts for God and most eminently represents God and is most intimately possible one with God There is no Vnitarian but holds all this believing that by the said Means there is as strict an Union betwixt the God-head and Christ as there can be betwixt God and a Creature This is particularly what the Arians mean in giving the title of God to our Lord Jesus Christ And this especially is what the Socinians intimate by their seemingly strange Saying that Christ was made God Homo Deus factus What Advantage then over the Vnitarians have the Trinitarians by their Notion of the Incarnation of a supposed Second Divine Person Can any thing be done by a Man supposed Hypostatically or Personally United with a Second Divine Person that cannot be performed by a Man in whom the Fulness of the God-head dwells in the manner aforesaid Since it is the God-head dwelling in Christ that doth the Marvellous Works can he not do whatsoever God pleases and whatsoever God can do And indeed what can the Trinitarians mean by their Term of the Hypostatical Vnion of a Divine Person with Christ's Human Nature but this In-dwelling of the God-head in the Man Christ Jesus Dr. Sherlock at the 210th and 211th Pages of his Answer to the Bishop of Gloucester's Book gives the true Description of the Trinitarian Notion of the Incarnation in these Words The perfect Wisdom and Goodness of our Saviour was not mere Human Nature tho' as innocent and perfect as Human Nature can be in this World but the Divinity dwelling and acting in Human Nature influencing and guiding all its Motions as the Soul governs the Body for this is a true Notion of a God Incarnate that God lives and acts in Human Nature and is the Principle of all its Actions and Motions And is there any thing here that the Vnitarians do not hold Do they assert that Christ did any thing without the Divine Motions or without God's Guidance and Acting in him They firmly believe that the Man Christ Jesus readily and willingly assented to the whole Will of God and that God constantly assisted him and thus wrought in and by him all the Super-natural Works that Christ did What colour of reason then have the Trinitarians to pretend that the Work of Redemption surpasses the Capacity which the Vnitarians ascribe to Christ It is plain that since the Vnitarians assert that God constantly influences and guides assists and acts in and by Christ which it seems is the Summ of what the Trinitarians themselves hold which expresly is all that the Scripture teaches of the Union between God and Christ and which most certainly suffices to impower Christ to do whatsoever God can do the Dispute and Quarrel here of the Trinitarians with the Vnitarians is altogether groundless and unwarrantable We have all the reason imaginable to love God with all our Soul and to be eternally thankful to his Divine Majesty for thus addressing himself to us miserable Sinners wonderfully speaking and acting in and by his Son Christ Jesus to reconcile the World unto himself and enabling him to Save to the uttermost all those that come to God thro' him As was said this is all that the Scripture expresly teaches us concerning this Matter The Scripture represents God doing all things for Christ upon his request The Trinitarians therefore cannot justly find fault with the Doctrin of the Vnitarians concerning our Saviour's Person But the Vnitarians are bound to reject what the Trinitarians add thereto not only without express Authority of Scripture but contrary to the clearest Light of Scripture and Reason Altho' God by the Influence of his Divine Wisdom and Power dwells in Christ and is represented as constantly assisting him and acting in and by him yet the Scripture no where says that God or the Father and Christ make but one Person It cannot be imagined and the Trinitarians themselves do not assert that by God's dwelling in Christ is meant any more than God's constant guiding and assisting him Now it no way follows that because a Son willeth all that his Father willeth and the Father constantly guides and assists his Son therefore the Father and
Innocent to the dreadful and undeserved Death of the Cross God's absolute Authority over his Creatures was most highly vindicated after Adam and his apostate Off-spring had wofully eclipsed the Glory of his Soveraignty and the Authority of his Laws This Second Adam by the sinless and most perfect Obedience of his Life was an high Vindicator thereof but his enduring most inexpressible Torments which he did as Man and dying the most cursed Death of the Cross as our Sacrifice did God the Father as high Honor in the Face of the Sun as all the Sins of Mankind put together could do him Dishonor And by this means this Sacrifice became Satisfactory so as that God would for the sake thereof grant Terms of Pardon and Reconciliation to Fallen Mankind since He now saw it most agreable to all his Attributes to do so Thus far this Learned Prelate In Summ in Answer to the whole Objection Christ is the Excellentest Creature possible and the most like unto God and the fittest to be an Instrument in the Hand of God and God entirely loves him and continually communicates to him the Use of the Divine Power and the Assistance of the Divine Wisdom and the Fulness of the God-head constantly dwells in him and in his State of Humiliatiâ—n he received the Holy Spirit without measure and not in small portions and by intervals like the Prophets and all the Angels and Archangels are wholly subjected to him as their Prince and incessantly attend his Orders God being willing to make him as Great as a Creature can be made and God in fine is as much Vnited to him as it is possible for God to be United with a Creature God remaining still a distinct Being and the Creature a distinct Person And the Vnitarians hold that such an excellent and dignified Creature as this can obtain of God and can perform any thing that is to be perform'd or obtain'd and they do not conceive what more than this the Trinitarians can reasonably think to be requisite It may be observed that according to the Vnitarian System our Lord Jesus Christ is a more precious and worthy Being than all other Creatures together that yet not only the word Satisfaction is no where in Scripture but also that it is not the Notion of Sacrifices and Attonements to make a full Compensation that under the Gospel the Acts of Piety and Obedience which are most acceptable to God are figuratively called Attonements or Sacrifices as Alms-giving Praying with fervour Mortifying carnal Affections which is termed the offering our Bodies in Sacrifice to God and that by many Places of Scripture it appears that this expression to redeem signifies to deliver from some Evil and to put into a better State See Exod. 6.6 and 15.13 Luke 1.68 Ps 49.7 8 15. and 111.9 Luke 2.38 c. An Appendix to the IXth Chapter THERE remains but one Article to be here considered to give a particular and full Answer to every Branch of the Objection mention'd in the beginning of this Chapter It is this that according to the Ideas which the Vnitarian System gives of Christ it seems he cannot be supposed to be able to hear the Prayers of Men or to be a proper Object of Worship But this will particularly appear to be a groundless and unnecessary piece of Wrangling if these Considerations be duely weighed 1. There are divers Kinds of Worship according to the Nature of the Subject to whom it is to be paid See Grotius on Revel 19.10 All that the Trinitarians can ascribe to Christ in following the Scripture consists in reverencing him to the Honour of the Father as the Mediator of the New Covenant and under God the Universal Monarch acting for the Father in whom the Father dwells whom the Father most extraordinarily assists with his Divine Wisdom and Power to enable him in his Mediatory Kingdom to govern the Universe and save to the uttermost those that come to God thro' him and with whom consequently the Divine Nature is as intimately United as possible The Trinitarians acknowledge that the whole Person of Christ is the Mediator of the New Covenant and consequently it seems incontestable that the whole Person of Christ is to be honoured as Mediator or with Mediatory and Subordinate Honour having receiv'd Kingdom Power and Godhead from the Father and acting for the Father Now thus and according to all these and the like respects the Vnitarians worship the Lord Jesus Christ and no otherwise even as one who is appointed to be honoured to the Glory of the Father as one who is exalted to the highest Dignity in the Universe and as one with whom the Divine Nature is as intimately united as possible so as that he is inlightned with the Divine Wisdom and he disposes of the Divine Power and Inspiration as of his own it being made his by his Union to the Divine Nature and by the Father his dwelling in him or by the Divine Assistance and Inspiration without measure attending him always conducting and illuminating him and thereby exalting his Spirit to the highest Pitch of Grandeur Wisdom and Power and making him in the most eminent manner possible one with God 2. The Vnitarians thus holding the Lord Jesus Christ United and Assisted with the Divine Nature the Trinitarians cannot justly pretend that the Vnitarian System represents him as unable to perform any thing which by the Trinitarian Notion of the Incarnation he may be suppos'd to be capable of seeing the Vnitarians hold that he without measure according to the Scripture Phrase is illuminated with the Divine Wisdom and disposes of and is assisted by and enjoys the Divine Power as his own so that he may hear Men and succor them It appears nevertheless as was said incontestable that his Kingdom as was observed being but a Mediatory Kingdom or his Reign being but a Government under God subject to and directed by the Father so that the Father is still to be considered not barely as jointly ruling but as literally the Supreme Ruler the Lord Jesus Christ cannot reasonably be addressed to but as Mediator or as the Vicegerent of the Universe and consequently is to be worshipped but with a Mediatory or a Subordinate Worship Wherefore the Body of the Prayers ought not to be addressed to him as they are in the Litany but the Father generally is to be Pray'd to in the Name or thro' the Mediation of the Son And some Ejaculations and particularly at the end or beginning of the Service a short Address may be offered to the Son to beseech him to Intercede for us to have Mercy upon us and to assist us with his Grace And according to the Vnitarian System the Lord Jesus Christ can be thus addressed to and worshipped This Subject concerning the Worship of Christ as Mediator or as a Man exalted to the High Honor with which it has pleased God to dignify him is fully treated of by Limborch in his Theologia Christiana Lib.
5. Cap. 18. The Author of the Humble Inquiry at P. 15th 16th of that Book observes this Doctrin concerning Christ's Human Nature being capable to know what passes upon Earth and so to see and hear and assist Men is so far from being with any justice or reason to be by the Trinitarians objected to the Vnitarian System that the greatest part and the most Learned of the Trinitarians agree with Socinus in this Point For the School-Men both Thomists and Scotists and the Lutherans generally ascribe this Universal Knowledge to the Man Jesus Christ And of the Modern Reformed Divines that Author quotes Mr. Baxter Dr. Goodwin together with a worthy Divine of the Church of England who wrote a Book called The Good Samaritan asserting that an Angel might be capable of Ruling the Universal Church on Earth now a Human Soul in a gross and fleshy Body is an Angel shackled and straitned in a dark and close Dungeon where he cannot exert his Powers and Faculties no more than an Infant can reason like a Philosopher but the Impediments being remov'd a Human Spirit is wise free powerful like an Angel knows as he is known perhaps can direct the Course of the Sun or move the Globe of the Earth as easily as a Child can a Tennis-Ball that the Man Jesus Christ as easily inspects the whole Earth as we can view a Globe of an Inch Diameter that he Intercedes particularly as Man and cannot be thought to Intercede in a Case if he do not know it that the Human Understanding of Christ takes in all Occurrences which concern his Church that like the Sun-Beams He pierces into every corner and that as a Looking-Glass wrought in the form of a Globe represents the Images of all that is in the Room so the enlarged Human Understanding of Christ takes in all things in Earth at once The Vnitarians would only add that Christ doth this by the Affistance of the Divine Nature dwelling in him and both enlarging and inlightning his Understanding And indeed if Christ acting in God's stead at the Head of the Universe represented not God to the Glory and Service of God and by God's Appointment and if the Divine Nature the Divine Knowledge Power and Authority dwelled not in the Man Jesus Christ as the Vnitarians hold their Worship of him would be a kind of Idolatry That is to say if the Father by his own Appointment was not worshipped in Christ in whom incontestably He most eminently dwells or which is the same if Christ was not appointed by God to be worshipped to the Glory of the Father to which end it is necessary that the Father should make him partaker of his Nature and Power as has been said for tho' the Foreknowledge of Christ be not Universal and tho' at sometimes he feels greater Influences of the God-head dwelling in him than at some other times yet he must always receive sufficient Influences thereof to enable him to discharge the Parts of his Mediatory Kingdom and the God-head by a Divine Power which is an Influence of the Father's must constantly refide in and be as intimately as possible United with Christ to make him the most eminent Divine Schechina and to capacitate him to represent as he doth and act for the Father at the Helm of Government over all things so that being such a Representative of God as neither is nor ever was the like besides Him He truly exhibits God and the Divine Majesty dwelling in him in a most extraordinary manner In a word We hold that no other is of himself God or properly and eminently God Eternal and Almighty but the Father And we own no other for Inferior Gods but such as are truly so according to the Divine Order and Appointment And we honour them accordingly But God only We worship with properly Divine Worship Howbeit We worship God mediately or relatively in the Person of his Representative and Chief Officer Jesus Christ who under God is the Soveraign Prince and Great Lord or God or Vniversal King who acts most eminently for God that God may be honoured in him and who is appointed thereto to be honoured and bowed to or worshipped to the Glory of God And so we may truly and allowably worship God immediately in his own Person and mediately in the Person of his Lieutenant and most eminent Representative appointed thereunto that God may be worshipped in him in the extraordinary Honour that is paid him 3. The Vnitarians unanimously hold that indeed we constantly are to bow the knee to and worship the Lord Jesus Christ in offering our Petitions to the Father in his Name and thro' his Mediation but that it is not necessary to address our selves otherwise than thus to him and that this is sufficiently to call upon his Name in Prayer And in the most ancient Lyturgies extant there are but very few words addressed to Christ Which shews that originally Christians addressed the current of their Prayers to the Father excepting when in a Vision they saw the Lord Jesus Christ and heard him speak to them which St. Paul acquaints us happened to him once in the Temple 2 Cor. 12.8.9 4. It cannot indeed reasonably be denied but that when God in general is Pray'd to and these Prayers are put up in the Name of Christ then both the Mediatory Honour due to our Saviour is thereby paid him and all is Supremely Worshipped that is to be Adored with Supreme or Direct and Ultimate Worship Our Lord assures his Disciples that whatsoever they shall ask the Father in his Name the Father will give it them John 16.23 No more then can be absolutely needful In a word the Vnitarians honour the God-head above all things and the Man Jesus Christ above all other Creatures What can the Trinitarians do more Or what can they in this Worship justly reprehend Both Christ and the Holy Ghost will nothing but what the Father willeth and they will all that the Father wills Manifestly therefore it is sufficient to address to the Father the Government of the Universe is but one Government tho' God be the Supreme and tho' Christ have a Soveraignty over all Creatures yet considering the Subordination and Good Order and considering the perfect Agreement of their Wills and Affections there is as it were but One Soveraign but the Father is alone in himself the One only true Soveraign the Soveraign properly and eminently all own He sustains the Chiefest Part in the Supreme Majesty Authority and Government CHAP. X. A Third General Objection consisting of Four Branches THE last General Objection which the Trinitarians commonly reckon to be decisive against the Vnitarian Interpretations and System may be conceived as comprising these Particulars and may be Summarily expressed in these Terms The Vnitarians their too much leaning to Human Reason is the Cause of their Error wherefore they should consider that Reason tho' an excellent Light and Guide so far as its Province
to our Decisions and profess the eternal Generation three Persons in one God-head and the Equality of the Son and Spirit with the Father which is to judge for others in a most abstruse and obscure Subject and to require of them as Terms of Union to act against their Conscience as the generality of them believe and be hypocrites and utter lies and grosly equivocate in the greatest Solemnities of Religion whereby many Souls may be caused to perish for whom Christ died See The Consequences of the Modalists System The Athanasian and Nicene Creeds are too express or particular and magisterial for so subling Speculations left in so great a Generality as we see these are in Scripture We have no right therefore to set up such magisterial imperious Terms of Communion according to the Protestant Principles as it appears from what has been said but We are necessarily oblig'd to keep to the Terms of Church-Vnion that we have here described seeing it appears that We are to receive the Vnitarians and not to drive them away out of our Communion it being incontestable upon impartial consideration that the Vnitarian Controversy is of that nature that Men may be Vnitarians and be very sincere and inquisitive and consequently not to be rejected and it being to be remarked that the Generality of the Scripture-Terms is sufficient and safe from the whole it being necessarily to be inferred in the last place IV. That this Generality in Terms of Church-Vnion is a safe Method in so intricate a Matter and is incontestably sufficient all being certainly worshipped when God in general is directly and ultimately Prayed to that is to be adored with Supreme Worship and the Mediatory Honour due to our Saviour being paid him when our Petitions are put up in the Name of Christ as our Intercessor and Redeemer most beloved of God and exalted at God's Right Hand and so is addressed to as the Mediator of the New Covenant as was said In most intricate Matters that certainly cannot but be most safe which is subject to the least Inconveniencies and which is in some measure sufficient And incontestably it is sufficient to worship God with Supreme Worship for all that is God is Worshipped when God in general is Worshipped Wherefore the generality of the Reformed Churches content themselves to address their Prayers in general to God And some of the most Learned Trinitarians maintain that it is not lawful to do otherwise but that formal Addresses to different Most Supreme Persons in Divine Worship set up different Objects of Supreme Worship For the same reasons in the Publick Terms of Vnion a general Profession of the Doctrine of the Trinity in the general Expressions of Scripture is both the safest and is certainly sufficient And all this doth even necessarily follow from the 1st and 2d Inferences For there it appears that God absolutely requires no more for Terms of Vnion What God therefore is content with to that end is to that end incontestably safest as well as sufficient so that if Men instead of taking upon them to be Magisterial Judges would have stuck to the Latitude and Generality of Scripture for Terms of Agreement and Union all had been well We must needs then own that the Scripture-Expressions to be adhered to in Terms of Church-Vnion at least will suffice to all the indispensibly necessary ends of Salvation and that consequently it is sufficient in general to know and believe that the Holy Ghost is the Spirit and Inspiration and Power of God and that Christ is the Only-Begotten Son of God in whom the Fulness of the God-head that may be communicated and that is an Influence of all the Divine Perfections most intimately dwells and that he is in some sense God It is evident that this System furnishes the same Motives to love God and Christ and to practise the Precepts of the Gospel that the other System doth For if one Divine Person with the Influences and Assistances of his Wisdom and Power be suppos'd to do together with Christ all that belongs to our Salvation have we the less reason to be thankful to God and Christ and to hearken to the Gospel-Injunctions than if we suppos'd three Divine Persons or called God three Persons It is as effectual therefore to the ends of Christianity to hold that the Spirit is the Power of God and that Christ most eminently acts for God and is most intimately united with God by the means of the Divine Influence dwelling in him so that when Christ is obey'd and lov'd thereby God is actually lov'd and obey'd Christ being thus lookt upon both as most excellently and most extraordinarily representing God and as being in some sense God Many Trinitarians do expresly assert that the Second Person is but a continual Acting of the Father Why may not the same be said of the Holy Spirit and Inspiration Or why may not the Word and the Spirit be stiled Influences as well as Acts of the Father Howbeit We may certainly very fitly conclude this Subject with the Words of the late Dr. Sherlock at the 7th Page of that Book of his intituled The Present State of the Socinian Controversy where concerning the human and unscriptural Expressions three Persons Of the same Substance Essence and the like he has this judicious remark The Catholick Faith does not depend upon the use of these terms for it was before them Now this is all that I plead for that these and the like unscriptural terms be not lookt upon as necessary for Christian-Communion but that Christians may be so reasonable and just as to Vnite in the Generality of the Expressions of Scripture which it is evident God has judg'd sufficient since He thought fit to use them as He has done that is in the Generality of which they appear susceptible Incontestably then 't is neither Necessary nor indeed consequently Safe nor Just in such most Intricate Matters to go beyond the very express Words of Scripture in Terms and Acts of Church-Communion Besides Are not the Tares as well as Wheat to be suffered in the Church by Christ's Order Math. 13.30 The Scripture-Latitude must needs therefore be THE TERMS OF UNION We need not and ought not to be more express or determining and imposing than the Scripture Tho' the Person of Christ were not fully known yet notwithstanding that there is no other Name by which Penitent Men are Saved He may be the Saviour of all them in every Nation who do righteousness and for his Sake God may accept of their sincere Repentance and Obedience As Amyraldus judiciously observed if a Prince has been graciously pleased to ransom a Captive or pay the Debts of a Poor Prisoner that Redeemed one is not the less ransomed and made free tho' he do not perfectly or exactly know all that belongs to the Person by whom he is redeemed all that is reasonably and indispensably requisite being that he should do what he can to
imply an Influence of the Divine Virtue yet God the Holy Ghost and the Inspiration a Divine Person certainly are not Scriptural Terms And the Vnitarians generally believe that in such intricate Matters and particularly concerning the Object of Worship and the making Something distinctly an Object of Worship We must not go beyond express Injunctions According to Scripture they worship Christ to the Glory of the Father as was said And in particular they ultimately worship the Father for his giving the Divine Inspiration The Governors of the Church are humbly desir'd to give Publickly their Opinion of these the like aforementioned Reasons this undoubtedly being a Subject that deserves all the illustration that according to the Obligations of Christian Charity they can give to it Tho' all that is possible ought to be done for Peace-sake yet on the other hand nothing ought to be done against Conscience and tho' some of the Vnitarians might condescend to most of the Scholastick Trinitarian Expressions yet they cannot generally approve them III. What is inferr'd from the Vnitarian Arguments remains in force so that it is an indispensible Duty to profess and establish the Gospel-Terms of Communion and to keep to the seeming and most manifest and apparent Generality of the Expressions of Scripture for Terms of Church-Vnion tho' the Trinitarians and some Vnitarians should opine that the Vnitarians may with a good Conscience joyn in Communion with the Trinitarians and even tho' there were in God what might truly be call'd three Persons For 1. If there be Somewhats in God that may be call'd three Persons which yet indeed seems absolutely both impossible in it self and not expresly implied in Scripture but contrary to many Texts yet not only that Doctrine seems absolutely unintelligible but certainly it is most obscurely revealed and but drawn from most intricate and uncertain Deductions and on the other hand the Vnitarian Arguments against the calling any thing in God three Persons are incontestably such that Men may be sincerely inquisitive and really think them to be solid Upon such most abstruse Difficulties We ought not to act rashly and condemn or reject sincere and inquisitive Persons God cannot be supposed indispensibly to require of every one to believe explicitely what he has left so difficult and obscure nor consequently to have allow'd any one to determine this Point Magisterially so as to make the Determination of it a necessary Term of Church-Communion Then it follows it is God's Will that as has been said in Terms and Acts of Church Union we should content our selves with the Expressions and Generality of Scripture And so the Human Imposition of the Athanasian and Nicene Creeds and of Publickly Praying to the Holy Ghost and in Publick Assemblies and Church-Service using the term three Persons is a piece of Presumption and Spiritual Tyranny and Oppression The Scripture says not expresly that the Son and Spirit are equal to the Father c. 2. The Generality of the Scripture-Terms as was shewn is undoubtedly sufficient For tho' God might be said to be three Persons yet not only it cannot be thought as has been remarked that under the benign Oeconomy of the Gospel God has made that indispensibly Necessary which at least seems so intricate and obscure and about which sincere and inquisitive Persons may mistake but besides as was also before observ'd when God is worshipped is not all ador'd that is the Object of Divine Worship The Trinitarians own that the unscriptural term Persons is us'd so improperly of God that what is meant thereby is most unaccountable perfectly incomprehensible Now that is an invincible Argument that that term is not necessary The Vnitarians do not deny the Incomprehensibility of the Divine Nature Supposing then that by the Divine Word and Spirit be meant Somewhats more then Wisdom and Inspiration as the Vnitarians who are not for determining in such obscure Matters will not contradict but that it may be so yet seeing that that whatever it be is absolutely unknown unintelligible it concerns Us not to ascribe Names to it cannot be indeed the Subject of our disquisition Howbeit at least we should take care not to advance any thing concerning these Matters that appears inconsistent with any Text but should rather stick to that which is safe and sufficient And it is certain the Scripture no where says we should Pray to the Holy Spirit in particular and it expresly sets forth Christ as the Mediator betwixt God and Men so that it is incontestably sufficient to come to God thro' the Mediation of Christ and to honour Christ as the Mediatory King under God tho' united to God as intimately as possible as was said For tho' all things are subjected to Christ yet it is to the Glory of God the Father and to the end that God may be most glorified and may most universally and illustriously reign in and by and thro' Christ So that in making Christ the King of Kings or the Universal King under God and the Head of the Church God did not abdicate the Government or divest himself of his Majesty but still remained ever the Most Supreme and reserved to himself to direct Christ and to favour his Intercession and to receive thro' him the Homages of Men Christ doing all in the Name of God And accordingly the Apostles directed their Prayers to God Acts 4 24 c. and commanded the Faithful to address themselves to him Phil. 4 6 thro' Jesus Christ as it is in the following Verse Phil. 4 7 that in his Name and thro' his Mediation they might obtain their Requests of the Father according to Christ's Promise John 14 13 John 16 23 that what they should pray for to the Father in his Name he would second by his Intercession so would do it for them that the Father might be glorified in the Son For our Saviour says expresly in John 16.23 Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in my Name He will give it you 3. The Arguments for the Scripture-Terms of Church Vnion with respect to such most intricate and abstruse Matters as the Platonick or Scholastick Speculations concerning the Doctrin of the Holy Trinity are evermore solid and invincible and as was observed a contrary Method is wholly inconsistent with the Principles of Protestants which import That the Scripture is a sufficient and the only Rule That there is no living Magisterial Judge of Controversies That Particular Christians are in such a case to examin and judge for themselves c. 4. Many sincere and inquisitive Persons may scruple other Terms than these which are incontestably good sufficient and the only warrantable ones for Terms of Church-Communion in such abstruse and intricate Matters And as was shewn it is certain the term three Persons is unscriptural and consequently cannot be absolutely necessary Wherefore surely Christian Charity obliges us not to hazard unnecessarily in such difficult Matters the Destruction of those Souls for which
in the stead of God they do in some measure represent Him We see Exod. 23.21 that the Angel that conducted the Children of Israel had that High Name and Dignity for says God my Name is in Him There is nothing more common in Scripture than for those Beings to be said to be what they represent as also what they are figured by As Christ sais that He is the Door and the true Vine and that the Consecrated Bread is his Body So Angels and other God's Messengers are said to be God and are called Jehovah See Gen. 18.1 c. Gen. 19.13 compared with the 18th 24th and 29th Verses Gen. 31.11 and 13. Exod. 3.2.4 and 6. Exod. 4.16 compared with Exod 7.1 Exod. 14.19 and 24. 1. Sam. 3.21 c. Bishop Taylor in his Sermon on 1. Sam. 15.22 observes it is a Saying of the Jews that Apostolus cujusque est quisque every Man's Messenger is himself or is said and may be said to be himself and must be censed and reck'ned as himself The Names of some of the Chief Angels are God or the Great God which shews that God is the same with Prince or Sovereign such as was said As Gabriel which signifies the Mighty God and Michael which signifies Equal to God or Like the Highest Agreably to which Denominations the Samaritans thought they might give to Simon Magus the Name of the Great Power of God because probably they conceited him to be assisted of some Mighty Angel Act. 8.10 This Man is the Great Power of God The Superior Angels are called Gods by Clemens Alexandrinus Strom. L. 5. P. 598. The whole Army sais he of Angels and Gods is subjected to the Son Whereby as by many other Passages it appears the Primitive Christians thought it not repugnant to Christianity and the Scripture-stile to call others Gods besides Almighty God The Title of God is particularly given to some Men in Scripture Exod. 7.1 Moses is said to be God or a God to Pharaoh because he was sent on a wonderful and extraordinary Errand to him by God and was enabled to save and to destroy him Behold sais God there to Moses I have made thee a God to Pharaoh and Aaron thy Brother shall be thy Prophet This Text may put us in mind or cause us to observe that as we shall see was remark'd by Eusebius Pamphilus De Ecclesiastie Theolog. Lib. 2. Cap. 17. St. John's Expression which we are considering should not be rendered the Word was God but the Word was a God there being no Article here before the Term God as there was in the foregoing Sentence where it was said that the Word was with God which Sentence therefore should have been Translated was with the God by excellency or the Supreme God the Sovereign of all This Passage of St. John would appear more easy to our Apprehension if instead of the term God we did read Lord or Sovereign because in the Stile of our Modern Languages we are not used to appropriate the Title of God to any Creatures as the Scripture doth but are only wont to give the Appellation of Lord in common tho' in divers Senses to God and to some Great Men in Authority Thus then we may conceive the First Verse of St. John's Gospel to run according to its true Signification In the beginning of the New Oeconomy while John the Baptist was Preaching the Baptism of Repentance as the immediate Introduction of the New Dispensation the Messiah himself was then in the World And the Messiah was with the Lord as Moses was with the Angel in the Mountain before the giving of the Law And the Messiah was then constituted a Sovereign Lord or the Chief of those Princely Ministers and High Officers who have the Title of Lord or God communicated to them tho' in an Inferior Sense to what it imports when it is attributed to the Eternal and Supreme Lord of all And the Word was with the God and the Word was a God Our Saviour himself observes John 10.34 that the Title of God was given to Men in the Holy Scripture Is it not written in your Law I said Ye are Gods If He called them Gods unto whom the Word of God came or to whom God gave a High Commission and the Scripture cannot be broken say ye of Him whom the Father has Sanctified and Sent into the World Thou Blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God We must needs then ever remember that the Stile of Scripture differs from ours and that we must not Interpret every thing according to the Sound of Words but consistently with the whole Scripture and the clear notions of Reason Verba non Sono sed Sensu sapiunt is an excellent Rule and a Sentence of St. Hilary's quoted in Bishop Taylor 's Second Sermon upon Tit. 2.7 A notable Example of the Title of God being given to Men is that of the 45th Ps at the 6. and 7. Ver. where the Author of this Psalm addresses himself thus to Solomon upon his Marriage with Pharach's Daughter and his being declared King or Heir of the Kingdom by his Father David Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever Thou lovest Righteousness and hatest Wickedness wherefore O God thy God has vnointed thee with the Oyl of Gladness above thy Fellows Here Solomon is expresly called God It is undoubted that this Psalm in a mystical Sense is applicable to the Messiah and to his Spiritual Marriage with the Church But the mystical and secundary doth not take away the first and literal Sense And it would be most Unreasonable to pretend that this Psalm has no literal Signification It appears to be the usual way of the Holy Spirit under the Old Testament to Shadow the things pertaining to the Christian Oeconomy by real Acts or literal Events then verified or belonging to those times under the former Dispensations And accordingly we find all the reason in the World to ascribe a literal Sense to this prophetical and mystical Psalm and to understand it primarily or originally of the said Wedding of King Solomon We find it has always been generally so understood We find it as sitting for that Solemnity as it could be supposed to have been if it had been made for it and we see it is entituled a Song of Love or a Wedding Poem The Prince is represented as having his Title newly confer'd upon and assured to him and as being preferred before his Fellows or Brethren by his God or King This suits very well with Solomons Case and with the Secinian System But it is inconsistent with the Trinitarian Notions as much as the Trinitarian Interpretation is repugnant to the Truth of the Divine Unity For if there be but one God can it be said to Him thy God has c If the term God be here taken in the most eminent Sense of it there are two Supreme Gods the one spoken to and the other spoken of and said to be the God
and the special People of God may well be called his own And his own received him not These Men to whom were given the Divine Oracles and among whom Christ was born and lived and did mighty Works and was baptized and proclaim'd the Messiah by John the Baptist and by the Hoâ—y Ghost these blind and sensual Men liked him not they thought his Doctrin too pure to be a Religion fit for them and his Person too mean and despicable to be their Deliverer Thus the World knew him not and received him not notwithstanding all the Attestations of Heaven that this was their Maker their Saviour and the Mighty Prince that God design'd them Verse 14. And the Word WAS Flesh So we must render it and not was made It is the same Expression that is used at the beginning of the 6th Verse where it is said There WAS a Man sent from God If the Trinitarian Sentiment was not impossible concerning three eternal and supremely Divine Persons as it expresly seems to be yet it could not truly be said that God was made Flesh But the Trinitarian Sentiment appears to imply many express Contradictions It seems therefore every way against Reason to render this Text as the Trinitarians do It must then be Translated as we have done For as was observed the term doth bear that Sense The Word was Flesh Flesh that is to say a mortal Man encompassed with all the infirmities or appearing in the low form and meanest circumstances of Human Nature not implying Sin See Hebr. 2.14 Mark 13.20 Gen. 6.12 Deut. 5.26 Jerem. 12.12 1. Cor. 15.50 That is then it seems of somewhat a greater force and significancy than if the Evangelist had barely said that the Messiah was a Man the saying that He was Flesh being as much as to say that as to his Nature and Being he was but a Man an ordinary Man like other Men a very Man or true Man made up of Soul and Body subject to Want and Temptation to Hunger and Thirst and to all the like Frailties and Accidents of Human Nature By the last quoted Texts it appears that this is imported by the term Flesh which in the Oriental Languages is a proper expression to that purpose tho' in our Tongue like many other Scripture Phrases it seems odd but we ought to remember that the Bible was not originally written in English we must therefore carefully attend to the stile of the Scripture and explain one Place by another that we may understand it right But tho' it be certain the Messiah the Prime Minister and Chief Messenger of God was a poor mortal Man subject to the Pains and Sufferings incident to Humanity from which miserable state and wretched circumstances being perfectly innocent he might have been exempt but to which for the sake of Men and for the Redemption of Mankind he freely subjected himself yet as the Evangelist at the same time doth here observe he was not without some conspicuous and most illustrious Rays of Glory the Glory of being own'd by God for the Messiah the Glory of bringing and procuring the most excellent Revelation and the Glory of working as great and as many Miracles as he pleas'd and when he pleas'd such a Glory as declared that the Father dwelt constantly in him and as bespoke him to be the great Messenger or divine Word and the only-begotten or most beloved Son of God Such a Glory was seen in him as the Glory of the Son of God or as a Glory worthy of the Son of God by excellency Nevertheless to all other outward appearances and circumstances he was content to be as the meanest and most contemptible Men. And the Word was Flesh Now it was very pertinent to the Design of the Evangelist to use that expression For it seems to be his chief Aim to shew that Christ the Word was but a Man It is commonly thought that he wrote his Gospel purposely to oppose the Heresies of Cerinthus We are told Iren. L. 1. C. 25. and Euseb L. 3. C. 25. Cerinthus maintained that Jesus born of Mary was not the Word or Christ but that the Christ or the Logos that is to say the Word the Divine Messenger or Wisdom or Proclaimer of the Wisdom of God was an Hypostasis or real Person subsisting of it self an Eternal and Divine Substance different from Jesus but dwelling in him while he was on Earth and working wondrous Works by him Now in opposition to this St. John asserts that the Word was Flesh was truly a Man and but a Man a frail mortal Man like other Men tho' indeed the most dignified of all Creatures as he declares at the First Verse where he calls him a God which is the Highest Name that Cerinthus gave to the Word Well says St. John the Word was a God but then this God was but a Man tho' he was the Son of God the Prince of all Creatures and the designed Lord of Men and Angels The Word was a God and the Word was Flesh That is then as if the Evangelist had said The Gnosticks call the Word a God so do I too but at the same time I declare that the Word is such a God as is but a Creature and is no other but the Man Jesus who was God's only begotten Son being born of a Virgin by the Power of God and who was anointed with and constantly assisted by the Holy Spirit This is the Christ and the God Word Those then are mere Fables which the Gnosticks and Cerinthians hold of the Christ his being an I know not what uncreated Logos and Divine Hypostasis proceeding out of the Bythos or Abyss and ordered by the Father to dwell in the Man Jesus After all it is not absolutely certain whether St. John wrote against Cerinthus We have not so much as the Assertion of any one of the Ancients for it before St. Jeâ—om And as for Cerinthus his Opinions tho' it may be that some of 'em were extraordinary bad yet we know nothing of them but by the report of his Adversaries And t is no new thing for such to give but an indifferent and imperfect account of the Sentiments of those that differ from 'em and to raise Stories disadvantageous to them which good Men such as was Ireneus took afterwards upon trust Howbeit we see that St. John decares the Word to be the Man Jesus Christ and in many Places of his Gospel shews him to be a Creature And if Ireneus was well informed himself and has informed us right Cerinthus held this erroneous Opinion that the Word is a real eternal Divine Person and consequently that there are more Divine Persons than one Those of Ireneus his Party most probably found fault with Cerinthus because besides his Superstition for the Law he had not the same Notion of the Word that they had Cerinthus it seems believed the Word to be a real Divine Person equal to the Father as the real Trinitarians do And
Primitive Doctrin and that 't is most credible it is agreeable to the true sense of Scripture it being the general Sentiment of the Disciples of the Apostles and their Successors in the following Ages And further to evince the Antiquity Vniversality and Credibility of the Trinitarian Doctrin some add that the ancient Jews and the Heathens have believed a Trinity in Vnity to which purpose they quote Plato Philo's Works the Cabbala or Tradition delivered from Father to Son since the time of Moses and the Chaldaïck Paraphrase wherein the Word of God seems to be represented as a Person To all this the Vnitarians answer in the following Particulars 1. The Jews have never held the Doctrin of three Persons in God And as for the Authority of the Heathens it cannot much credit the Trinitarian Cause 2. The Passages in Pliny's Letter and in the Dialogue entituled Philopatris are incontestably invalid Arguments 3. No very considerable Argument can be drawn out of the Ante-nicene Authors because they were but few that wrote and it was not impossible for them to deviate from the Simplicity of the Gospel 4. Many excellent Works of the Primitive Writers have been suppressed and destroyed which were most express for the Vnitarian Sentiment 5. Of the few remaining Writings that are ascribed to the Fathers of the first three Centuries 't is very credible that some are corrupted and some supposititious 6. Howbeit it still in a great measure appears that the generality of the Primitive Christians were Vnitarians and even that the generality of the remaining Authors of the first three Centuries were far enough from being of that Opinion which now is called Orthodox it being evident that they incline more to the Vnitarian than to the Trinitarian Sentiment of the latter Ages 7. The prevailing Sentiment of the following Ages is of no weight against the Vnitarians 8. The Prevalency in general of an Opinion is no Argument that it is agreable to Truth and acceptable to God 9. The only Authority therefore that we can and ought to rely upon is that of the Bible 1. The Jews have never held the Doctrin of three Persons in God and as for the Authority of the Heathens it cannot much credit the Trinitarian Cause The Vnitarians readily grant the Trinitarian Sentiment to be Heathenish seeing it effectually sets up a Plurality of Gods or several supremely and really Divine Persons And they think it very probable that at first some Christians took this Doctrin out of Plato's School whose Philosophy was generally studied and admired tho' perhaps the original meaning of it as to this Point was little understood or considered by the generality of his Disciples For there is much reason to believe that Plato and those of the same Sentiment with him who believed but one God at first personalized the essential or chief Attributes of the Deity to accommodate themselves to the Theology of the Heathens to hide and take off the Odium of their own Notions of the Divine Vnity which otherwise would have been looked upon as next to Atheism wherefore they would seem to hold more Divine Persons or more Gods than one it being reckoned essential to Religion to own a Plurality of Gods These Philosophers therefore so reasoned about the Divine Attributes as if they really held several distinct Gods Indeed 't is very credible that many of 'em afterwards were induced to Error by those Expressions and Philosophized so high about them that they lost themselves and understood not what they said But as for Plato 't is very likely that he meant by his several Persons but the several Attributes of the same Divine Being only he was willing to vail his Sentiment for fear of exposing himself to Socrates his fate having no mind to suffer for his Opinion This appears in his Letters to Dyonisius wherein he tells him It is difficult to find out the Father of the Universe and when you have found him it is not lawful to divulge it to the People I shall then speak of this subject enigmatically that every one may not be able to understand me He sets up therefore a Trinity above all other Gods or Angels and as may be gathered from his Cautiousness from his Sentiment and that of Socrates of one God and from the Current of his Expressions by this Trinity he understood infinite Goodness infinite Wisdom and infinite Love or Power but to wrap up his Doctrin under mysterious terms he represents this Trinity as being three Divine Hypostases or Persons He says the first is the Origin of the other two the Good Being or the first Principle is the Father of the Reason or Wisdom which he has begotten and made and produced and so it might be considered by some as a Creature God and the First-born of the Good Being and the Love or Power is the third most excellent God and the second Production of the Good This Theology most obscurely expressed Plato's Followers have explained according to their own Imaginations till they made it by their Explications still more obscure and more unintelligible But of what Authority are these Philosophical Fancies and Heathenish Mysteries Tho' it seem to some that they may be accomodated to some Expressions in Scripture yet there is no reason to interpret Scripture by that fanciful and fantanstical Rule as is well observed by Beza who calls those Philosophical Conceits Platonica Deliria in his Annotations on John 1.1 Whether or no some Heathen Sages before Plato may then have had the like thoughts and design with him so that he was in some measure but an imitator of them what is that also to Christians What if Parmenides had learned of the Pythagoreans and Pythagoras of Pherecides the Notion of three Hypostases so that the accommodation of Polytheism to a dissembled Unitarianism was perhaps older than Plato by an Age or two And what if the Authors of this Theology whoever they were took these Hypostases to be real Deities Ought such an Egyptian Darkness to be of any weight with Us And can we make it a Question Which is the best either to regard these Heathenish Philosophical Whimsies or to be guided by the clear Light of Reason and the most express Texts of Scripture After all the Platonick Cant is so obscure that for ought that can be pretended to the contrary all that Platonism implies of a Trinity may amount to no more than Semi-Arianism or even Arianism As for the Opinion of the Jews Tho' it be certain that the People of God were Vnitarians yet it is not impossible but that a few of their Metaphysick Wits might Philosophize after the way of Heathen and be infatuated with Plato and conceive as well as many Christians that those strange and admired Speculations might agree with Scripture and be reconciled with the Doctrin of the Unity of God But of what consequence is the Particular Fancy of three or four Visionaries to the whole Body of the Jews Because these
Eusebius tho' he professed the Nicone Trinitarianism was a Semi-Arian and favoured the Arians and perhaps he thought good to excuse Hegesippus notwithstanding what he himself professed as several learned Men in the Church of Rome defend Jansenius at the same time that they openly abjure Jansenism 5. Of the few remaining Writings that are ascribed to the Fathers of the first three Centuries 't is very credible that some are Corrupted and some Suppositious For instance the Shepherd of Hermas and the Epistle of Barnabas in Easecius's time were reckoned to be Supposititious Euseb Hist. Eccl. L. 3. C. 25. And Dalaeus has particularly concended that the Epistles of Ignatius deserve no credit Indeed those Sentiments have been thought by some and in particular by the Socinians to have been foisted therein which the Semi-Arian Fathers did afterwards openly maintainâ— Yet some contend that those Writings expresly contain the same Doctrin that was originally Apostolical and afterwards defended by Arius when it had been disguis'd by the Platonists Howbeit it is certain those that had either particular Opinions of their own or particular interests to serve made often no scruple to forge some Writings favouring them which in order to gain them the more credit they ascribed to some Great Men. Several Apocryphal Books were put out under the Apostles's Names How much more then says Dalaeus would they make bold with others Nay he observes that the Fathers themselves have been guilty of such Frauds See the third Chap. of his first Book De usu Patrum And you need but read his following Chapter to see that the genuine Writings of the Fathers have been corrupted St. Jerom complains of the Impudence of Copists in corrupting of Books Ep. 28. ad Lucin. T. 1. p. 247. And yet he owns that himself in translating Origen omitted what was noxious or dangerous that is what suited not to his own Sentiments and says that St. Hilary and others did the like You may see the Quotations and many more Allegations to the same purpose in that Chapter of Dalaeus where he quotes Epiphanius his Saying that the Catholicks scrupled not to correct or put out some things in the Scripture it self fearing the use that the Hereticks might make of those Passages Dalaeus determines not whether Epiphanius spake true or not herein but he infers from thence that those ancient Catholicks would have made no difficulty to correct in like manner as much as they could the Writings of the Primitive Fathers where they widely differ'd from the Sentiments that had prevailed and where those that were reckoned Hereticks might have found too undeniable Authorities for their Opinions After this can those be blamed who will be determined by nothing but the Current of Scripture and the most incontestable Axioms of Reason Such Catholicks as Dalaeus represents to us we may think made no great scrupse to invent Stories that might favour them or to give easily credit to such tho' upon the weakest Grounds and to use such like shifts to defend what they took for Truth Witness the Book of Hermas and what Jerom owns of himself and of the freedom he thought in such cases lawful to take A Man says he argues as he pleases He may make a shew of presenting you with Bread as says the Proverb and all the while he may hold nothing but a Stone He may say one thing and think another Consider the Arguments made use of by Origenes Methodius Eusebius Appollinaris They are often forced to alledge many things which they did not believe but which were necessary to support their Sentiments I say nothing of the Latin Authors Tertullian Cyprian Minucius Victorinus Lactantius Hilary lest I should seem to accuse others rather than defend my self Ep. 50. ad Pamm T. 2. p. 136. When I write my Books says he I call for my Copist or Amanuensis and I often dictate the thoughts of others that I have read tho' I don't believe 'em my self and sometime don't very well remember their Sense Ep. 89 ad Aug. T. 2. p. 304. and 525. After this found your Faith not on Scripture and Reason but on a History concerning Simon Magus related in Epiphanius or another concerning Cerinthus which Irenaeus had heard Those Stories or Traditions after all might be true and not prejudice the Vnitarians as it might easily be shewn For the Vnitarians do not believe as Cerinthus is reported to have done that a Divin Person and that distinct from the Father dwelled in Jesus Besides he is said to have had many other grievous errors If it were true therefore that St. John would not be in the same Bath with him what is that to the Vnitarians And if Simon Magus believed three Divin Manifestations or Powers why should it be thought that he believed nothing that is true But if he asserted three distinct Divin Persons as Dr. Sherlock thought must be inferred from Epiphanius his monstrous Story that he pretended he was both the Father and the Son and affirmed his lewd Woman Helena to be the Holy Ghost why may we not think he might be among corrupted Christians the first Founder of the Dr's Notion or that which now passes for Orthodox that is that of the Platonists and Realists It may be indeed Simon Magus pretended that the Father and Son were manifested in and by him c. But if it be as Dr. Sherlock would have it the Matter is of no importance to Us but rather concerns the Platonick Trinitarians For those ancient Fathers Ireneus and Eusebius who evidently incline more to the Vnitarians then to the Scholastick Trinitarians assert that Simon Magus was the Father and Author of all the Heresies and particularly the Homousian See Sandi Nuâ—l L. 1. Secul 2. De Gnostic Iren. L. 1. C. 20. 30. L. 4. C. 58. Euseb H. E. L. 11. C. 13. Howbeit pin who will his Faith on Simon Magus or Cerinthus his Sleeve who if not misrepresented were thorow-pac'd Platonists or even Improvers of Platonism Yet the Stories themselves reported concerning their Heresies may perhaps want a little Confirmation considering the Humor of some of those times as we have seen and what Eusebius H. E. L. 1. C. 1. testifies that he had a World to do to compile his History finding so little Light in any Writing before him the continual Persecutions having caused that Confusion as to the Ecclesiastical History the generality of Christians contenting then themselves with the Writings of the New Testament Dalaeus towards the beginning of the fourth Chap. of his said Book seems to intimate that we have nothing much to be relied on but the Holy Scripture which says he has always been preserved with much greater care than other Writings which all Nations have learned which all Languages have translated and which all Sects have retained the Hereticks as well as the Orthodox the Schismaticks as well as the Catholicks the Greeks and Latins Muscovites and Aethiopians c. We may then conclude this
Being Nay in some sense all Creatures may be said to have been in God from all Eternity at least potentially tho' not brought forth or produc'd from all Eternity but only when Almighty God created this Universe And even some of these Philosophers and among them Tertullian particularly expresly asserted that mere Creatures in particular Human Souls were made out of the Substance of God Howbeit Platonism implying that the Son and the Spirit are above all other Creatures the Platonists generally held that the Son at least or even the Son and the Spirit are most peculiarly of the Substance of God were most peculiarly in him and were most peculiarly united to him so as that whereever the Son went and whatever he did God as it were had always a strict hold of him and wrought with in and by him Nevertheless as was said they represented the Son and Spirit as Distinct and Inferior Beings so that they own'd the Father to be properly the Supreme Being and to be the only Person consequently that is properly God or a God in the eminent Sense of the word Justin Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus and in a word all the Primitive Doctors that were converted out of Heathenism had been taught Platonism and when they were become Christians they openly professed in all-their Writings that they were still great admirers of that Philosophy and they maintain'd that the Christian Trinity and Plato's Trinity was much the same Thus they introduced Platonism in the Christian System accommodating the one to the other as near as they could Justin Martyr it seems particularly began openly to Platonize and the rest followed after him And then they for the most part represented the Platonick Trinity very like Arianism any of 'em at most making it Semi-Arianism so that the generality of Christians might it seems mistake it for Arianism the good Fathers either purposely or otherwise expressing themselves very obseurely in a most Obscure Matter tho' some more Platonically than others These in comparison of those that followed were Moderate Platonists and scarce any or but few went further in the 2d Century or at least till towards the end of the 2d Century whereas afterwards it seems there arose among Christians several violent Opinionists and sierce Semi-Arians and then many rigid and thorow-paced or very heathenish Platonists true Polytheists that perhaps went even farther than Platonism it self and maintain'd much the same Notions concerning the Son that are laid down in Dr. Sherlocks Books Not but that in the beginning of the 4th Century at the time of the Council of Nice there were a great many of the most Learned Bishops that were still Semi-Arians and several but Arians most credibly according to the Doctrin that anciently was chiefly in vogue before Semi-Arianism was establish'd by Justin Martyr The Semi-Arians or Mildest Platonists like the Arians defended the Unity of God by saying that the Father only was the Supreme or Principal God and that God the Word was not only Lesser than he but also Subject to him wherefore they concluded it might truly be said that in Heaven and in the whole World there is but One Godhead or but one God tho' there be God the Father and God the Son as in a House where there is a Son Subject to his Father it may be said that there is but one Government one Mastership or one Master the one not being essentially different from the other when both of them perfectly agree This is so well known to have been the sense of the generality of these Ante-nicene Fathers whose Writings have in some measure been preserved as well as of many since that it is needless to take much pains to prove it Howbeit it will not be improper to give here some Instances of it And first for the conveniency of some Readers it may be useful to make these Chronological Remarks Justin Martyr flourished about the 130th Year after Christ's Nativity Hegesipâ—us and Irenaeus about the Year 170. Victo Bishop of Rome about the Year 190. And Zepherin his Successor about the Year 200. Tertullian about the Year 210. Origen about the Year 230. Novatian and Dyonisius Alexandrinus within a few Years of that time Arnobius whose Disciple was Lactantius about the Year 295. The famous Council of Nice was held in the Year 325. These few Observations sufficing for the Purpose in Hand we may now proceed to aver what we have said concerning the Sentiment of the Ante-nicene Platonists to which end we may consider these Passages out of the Writings of those of them who were most learned and esteem'd in their Generations Dalaeus towards the middle of the fifth Chap. of his first Book De Vs Pat. not distinguishing Semi-Arianism from Arianism opines that it is impossible to clear St. Justin from being an Arian that Father asserting that the God who appeared to Moses and the Patriarchs was the Son and not the Father inasmuch as the Father never changes Place neither comes up nor down and no Man therefore ever saw the Father but the Son only has been seen who is the Father's Minister and a God also by the Father 's Will. Now says Dalaeus is not this to attribute to God the Son a Nature and Being different from that of God the Father Nay he might have added is not this also to ascribe to him an inferior and a precarious Being As the same Justin Martyr says to the same purpose in other Places God in the beginning before all the Creatures that is to say before all the other Creatures or mere Creatures and immediately before the Creation of the World for that is the strain of these Platonists generated of himself a certain Rational Power one while called the Son another while Wisdom an Angel God Lord and Word For he may be called by all these Names both because he Ministreth to the Will of the Father and was voluntarily Begotten of the Father Colloq cum Tryph. p. 221. We account the Son in the Second Rank and the Prophetick Spirit in the Third Order Apol. 2. p. 47. At the 43d Page of this Book he puts the Prophetick Spirit in the same Classis with the good Angels and indeed names him after them which shews that he took him to be one of them We Honour the Father and the Son says he and the Host of the other good Angels who accompany and resemble him together with the Prophetick Spirit Which seems to be as if he had said We Honour also the good Angels and in particular the Prophetick Spirit who is one of them and their Chief Irenaeus who even was a Disciple of the Contemporaries of the Apostles his Master Polycarpus having been a Disciple and Companion of St. John and of some others that had seen the Lord and who was himself as well as Polycarpus generally in great esteem among Christians tho' every one knows he was also a follower and great admirer of Plato speaks much to the same
from what has been alledged in the last Chapter There we have seen it was the current Opinion of the ancient Platonists as well as of the strictest Vnitarians not only that the Holy Ghost is not God but also that the Son is not the God that has no other God above him has not consequently the same Essence with the Father and is not Eternal and Omniscient like him What pretence then can the Nicene and Post-Nicene Doctors or their Disciples have to plead Antiquity and Vniversality and to tell Us that upon that account We ought to submit to their Sentiment Some think that the Nicene Creed imports very little or no more than Semi-Arianism Howbeit whether or no the Nicene Platonists went further than the remaining Ante-Nicene Writers or than most or any of them it is evident that the Post-Nicene are gone beyond the Ante-Nicene or Semi-Arians and thus 't is evident the Doctrin is varied from that of the Ante-Nicene Platonists and consequently 't is in vain for the present Scholastick Trinitarians to pretend to Antiquity or Tradition 2. We plainly see what led the generality of the Nicene Doctors into farther Error Namely the too much leaning to Plato and more and more following or as they might imagin improving his Conceits if they went farther than the Ante Nicene Many of the Ante-Nicene for two Ages before had begun to Platonize as we before observed And what was so unhappily begun by the Christian Platonists or Converted Philosophers was still it seems carried to a greater excess in process of time by the Men in Authority and their Followers at least in point of rigidness and violence Howbeit all the Unscriptural Niceties and Terms of Art of the suppo'd Orthodox are found in the Philosophy of Plato or it's Followers which those Fathers professed to admire Can we then question from whence they drew ' em See Le Clerc's Life of Eusebius p. 69. c. Some think it very clear that the Semi-Arians are the true Platonick Trinitarians And some esteem that Plato's Orthodoxy goes yet farther and that Dr. Sherlock's or the Nicene or Post-Nicene Notions are true Platonism Howsoever it be when Men had overshot themselves they might easily go further 3. It is notorious that the most part of the Nicene Doctors were uncharitable and consequently unchristian revengeful violent and ambitious Prelates who sought nothing but to do spite to one another to impose imperiously upon one another and to put one another out of their Places Now are not the Decisions of such Men to be much valued And are not such Men fit to dictate to others and to exercise Dominion over the Conscience of their Fellow-Servants They did so much intimidate those that followed the ancient Doctrin and even the Emperor himself that for the most part these did wretchedly prevaricate Are those the Ways that Christianity prescribes Or is not this the Method to suppress the Truth and maintain what wants good Arguments to support itself by 4. For the same reasons the Judgment of the Post-Nicene Fathers is altogether insignificant Those whom fallible Men condemn as Hereticks may be the true Orthodox and those who pass for and stile themselves Orthodox may be erroneous and may mistake in most abstruse Matters Howbeit the Nicene Popes and their Followers domineering in the Church as if they had been infallible got their Determinations back'd with most severe Edicts insomuch that it was made no less than Death but to keep any Vnitarian Writings Thus Christians taught one another Cruelty and tho' but just escaped themselves out of the Heathenish Persecutions they inhumanely Persecuted one another No wonder then if for the most part they led one anther as Mules are driven with stripes especially considering the plausible Pretence that this Zeal was for the honour of Christianity Such Measures are rightly exposed in these Words of Dr. Whichcot All those of a Party are bound to one Opinion and to believe as their Party believes Therefore I except against those that have blindly gone on without Consideration For these have not acted by the Guidance of Human Reason Select Serm. p. 24. 5. What right had these Men or any of them to set up for Universal or Magisterial Judges of abstruse Controversies Who gave them Authority to decide for other Men and to lord it over their Faith What title had they to straiten the Terms of Union and to exclude out of the Church all that dissented from them in those at least most nice and intricate Speculations Who commissionated them to invent and impose herein new Words and Decisions or new and magisterial Creeds Who order'd them to determine Magisterially to their own Fancies the Generality of the comprehensive expressions of Scripture 6. Notwithstanding the violence of the rigid Platonists their novel and unscriptural Decisions have not been constantly and universally submitted to but there are still and there have always been many Vnitarians There were many good Bishops at and after the Council of Nice that could by no means be prevail'd upon to renounce their Faith and their Constancy encouraged multitudes of others to adhere to the ancient Doctrin Not only the generality of Christians even then were so far from holding the Holy Ghost to be God that the prevailing Platonists at Nice durst not determine it but also Gregory Nazianzen himself once owns that if they of his Party had commonly Preached that Sentiment it would have caused confusion in the Church and scandalized good Christians See Petav. De Trin. L. 2. C. 7. § 2. why could they not as well have carried the condescension one step farther and then all had been well and we see Hilary calls the Holy Ghost but the Gift which he prayes not to but asks of the Father But moreover maugre the extremest Severities procured by the Nicene Fathers against the Vnitarians the Doctrin of Christ's being a Creature remained still rooted in the Hearts of so many Christians that about some 20 Years after Constantine's Death the whole Christian World as St. Jerom expresses it appear'd to be Vnitarian Then good Gregory comforted himself and his few Auditors with these Reflections The Vnitarians have the Churches but We Trinitarians are the Temples of God they have the People but the Angels are with US my Flock indeed is little but they hear my Voice Serm. 35 against tho Arians But indeed the Vnitarians had not only the People but they had also the Priests and the Bishops Vnitarianism the ancient Doctrin or that which since the proceedings against Arius is call'd Arianism was confirmed and established by ten several Councils And that of Rimini was the most Numerous Assembly of Bishops that ever met tope her Not only several Princes and Kings and People for many Ages have been Vnitarians but some Emperors also were converted to Vnitarianism But those that succeeded them and that had been brought up in the Trinitarian Sentiment not only made use of the most violent Means to change
the Son are but one Person But it is evident that the Father being an intelligent Being and the Son a distinst intelligent Being from the Father the Father and the Son must necessarily be two Persons For a Spirit as long as he exists cannot but have always in himself distinctly from all other Spirits what constitutes a Person and can say some things of himself distinctly from others Thus how strictly soever God and Christ be United Christ can say of himself that he is a Creature so many Ages Old God can say that he is Self existent and never had a Beginning Now here are two he 's or two l's and consequently 2 Persons for these are Personal Pronouns each of them denotes a distinct Person And the Scripture is so far from asserting God and Christ to be one Person that it constantly distinguishes Christ from God Indeed in the Scripture-stile a special Messenger and Representative may beare the Name of him whom he most especially acts for and represents And Christ may moreover be termed a God in an Inferior Sense as Kings and Princes are called Gods in Scripture He may also be called God inasmuch as a Divine Influence most intimately dwells in him But the Scripture not only no where says that Christ is literally the same God with the eternal God or is the Whole of the Father but it teaches the contrary For it all along represents Christ as a Man in whom God dwells and whom God exalts to the highest Dignity over all other Creatures And Christ himself expresly says that the Father is greater than be Which manifestly imports that tho' God dwels and acts in him yet God is distinct from him and still keeps the Supreme Authority to himself reserving to himself the Power to act in him when or so far as he pleases for he was not pleased for instance to enable him to dispose wholly of the Gifts of the Spirit till after his Ascension and he had not revealed to him when should be the Day of Judgment but kept to himself the Times and Seasons c. Thereby then it appears that Christ is but a Man acting for God and to that end assisted of God as was said tho' the Trinitarians generally will not allow him to be truly a Man but only a Human Nature which is but an imaginary Shadow of a Man When they call him God-Man they mean only a Divine Person united with their General Conception of a Human Nature that has no real Subsistence which is not truly a Man For as the Bishop of Gloucester excellently well observes p. 63d of his Reflections upon the late Examination of the Discourse of the Descent of the Man Christ Jesus from Heaven to say that the Man Jesus has no Subsistence of his own is to say that he has no other Subsistence than an Accident has in union with the Substance to which it belongs and this makes him inferior to any Man God ever made Nay this actually unmans him Therefore the Bishop rightly calls this monstrous Doctrine Scholastick Gibberish Whereas the Scripture not only never calls Christ a God Man but in a great many places calls him a Man John 8.40 John 1.30 Acts 13.38 1 Tim. 2.5 c. and expresly says that as to his Person and Human Circumstances he was in all things like unto us Sin excepted Hebr. 2.17 Hebr. 4.15 1 Cor. 15.21 Now if he be a Man he has a Subsistence of his own for so has a Man and if he has a Subsistence of his own he cannot be supposed to be united to the Godhead and to be a God but as the Vnitarians hold he is Namely inasmuch as God constantly guides him and acts in and by him in the High Station in which He has placed him which after all the Trinitarians as we have seen own is all they mean by the Incarnation or Personal Union and so it is most incontestably evident that notwithstanding the Difference that the Trinitarians make between Them and the Vnitarians they can give no reason for their pretence that according to the Vnitarian System the Lord Jesus is Vncapacitated for the Work of Redemption And if he were So according to the Vnitarian from what has been said it manifestly appears he should as much be So according to the Trinitarian Scheme For both found his Capacity upon the In-dwelling or Assisting Godhead in him To this the Trinitarians reply that except the Godhead and the Man Jesus Christ were supposed to make but one Person Christ could not be said as be is to do those things which none but the Divine Power doth Therefore it must be infer'd that this one Person Christ is God-Man and implies a Divine and a Human Nature Personally-united together For the Scripture attributes the Miracles of our Saviour to his own inherent Power and his Revelations and Prophesies to his own Personal Knowledg For it is said that he knew what was in Man that he rebuked the Wind and the Sea that he will raise the Dead at the last Day c. To this Plea the Vnitarians answer that by the same reasoning when our Saviour promised his Disciples John 14.12 that They should Do greater Works than those he had done the Trinitarians cannot avoid concluding that they should do those Miracles by their own Power and that they should then be considered as indeed Personally-united with the Godhead But cannot the Trinitarians consider that Men may be said to do those things which are effected by the Means and Helps which they make use and can dispose of Is not a General said to take a City which his Army storms at his Orders Is not a Physician said to do a Cure that is effected with God's Blessing by the Remedy he has prescrib'd In like manner may not Men be said to do those things which are wrought by the Power which God has invested them with or granted them the disposal of To come then to the objected Particulars Christ works Miracles raises the Dead forgives Sins and doth whatsoever the Father does by desiring God to do these things at his request which the Father alloweth him to ask and to expect of him Therefore all things whatsoever that he sees or knows the Father doth or can do and that are requisite to the fulfilling the Work of Salvation Christ begs the Father to do them and the Father doing them at this his most beloved Son's Intercession Christ is censed or reckoned to do them The way that all Intelligent Beings Do those Things that God has put in their Power is by Willing them and Vsing the Means which God or Reason has shewn they may be effected by For instance For a Man to move his Hands or Feet his Soul needs but to will it to nourish his Body he must take the things and apply them as God has appointed to that end Now it seems all the Means which God has appointed for Christ to do whatsoever the Father doth
is to know them to know the Father will do them for him and to desire them of the Father For tho' it be said that Christ did and is to do most wonderful Works yet the Scripture is very far from saying that he doth them of Himself or by his own Power Himself says the quite contrary John 5.19 The Son can do nothing of himself John 14. â—0 The Father that dwelleth in me He doth the Works Matth. 12.28 I cast out Devils by the Spirit of God And John 11.41 42. Father I thank thee that thou Hearest me always How could Christ have declared more expresly that he doth not the Supernatural Works by his own Power but by the Means which have been said Namely By knowing that the Father will do them for him and By desiring the Father to do them by his Divine Power and by what Means He pleases to use Seeing that the Father has promised our Saviour to hear him always he may truly say that all things which the Father has are his And therefore it is certain that not only there never was such another Prophet as Christ but also that he is the most Excellent and most Dignified Creature that can be But yet we see it doth not follow that because he doth what none but God can do he is therefore hypostatically united with a Divine Person and that distinct from the Father The Scripture shews us How Christ doth all Supernatural Things he himself tells us he desires the Father to do them and the Father always grants his requests and doth what he desires and he desires nothing but what he knows the Father will grant and the Father has promis'd and constantly gives him whatsoever is necessary for the Discharge of his Office Christ then may truly say that as the Father has Life in himself or at his disposal so has he given to the Son to have Life in himself For as the Father doth all things by Willing them so Christ doth all things by Desiring them As God has put Power in the Natural Sun to vivify all Seeds in the Earth so he has in an infinitely more excellent way invested Christ the Sun of Righteousness with Power to quicken the Dead But still the Power of the Lord Jesus is the Divine Power And we see that as we have said God makes Christ to be Partaker thereof So that as the Father has Divine Power in him so has He given to the Son to have Divine Power in him insomuch that when the Father has shewn him a Miraculous Thing the Son can do the same likewise by the Assistance of the Divine Power which dwells in him and which he constantly has the use of by Willing and Asking or affectionately Desiring Thus Christ knows the Hearts by the same Means by the Divine Power that is in him or annexed to him and that reveals them to him See the Brief History of the Vnitarians on John 2.25 and Revel 2.23 So that as Dr. Sherlock himself says at the top of the 196th Page of his last Book the Knowledg of Christ is from the Father's dwelling in him And by that Means Christ Governs the Vniverse and will Judge the World As to Christ's Efficacy in obtaining Forgiveness for all those Sinners whom he persuades and excites to forsake their Sins and to become Obedient and New Creatures it is the strangest thing in the World to imagin that God cannot grant that which is altogether agreable to the Propensions of his own Nature to his most beloved Son even upon that Act and Submission of his which argues the most perfect Obedience and makes the most solemn Reparation to the Divine Justice and Authority As Dr. Whichcot expresses himself upon this Subject Pages 62 d and 63 d of his Select Sermons We are in the hands of him that is Primarily and Originally Good And He will certainly commiserate every Case so far as it is compassionable Now the Case of a Sinner is compassionable if he be Penitent God might then surely accept of Christ's Sacrifice as as sufficient Attonement seeing that it so fully confirms God's Hatred to Sin and his Good Will to those that Obey him and is consequently the powerfullest Motive and the likeliest Means to engage those for whom that Sacrifice is offered and who are not yet incorrigible to forsake their evil Ways to accept the Offers of Grace and to be reconciled to God Christ's Death is the fullest Confirmation of God's Good Will to those that obey him seeing that upon the account of his Son 's perfect Obedience He has exalted him to the highest Glory even of being Partaker of the Divine Nature and Power And it is also the fullest Confirmation of God's absolute Hatred to Sin seeing He would not pardon the Sins of Men without this Consideration Condition that he who was Innocent the most Perfect Excellent Creature pleaded for the Fallen Race of Mankind should as their Advocate suffer in their stead expiate their Sins with his Blood and thus exhibit a most solemn Demonstration of the Demerit of Sin But this no where is represented in Scripture as a perfectly equivalent Satisfaction in the most rigorous sense And neither Scripture nor Reason shew that God can Pardon but upon such Terms See the aforesaid Sermons of Dr. Whichcot Pag. 301 c. on Act. 13.38 As the Bishop of Gloucester observes at the 85th and following Pages of his aforesaid Reflections on the Book of Dr. Sherlock against him Christ's meriting of God the Father cannot be understood in the highest sense of meriting as we may merit of one another that is by doing acts of Kindness and Beneficeace from mere Good Will or no antecedent Obligation to the Person to whom the Kindness is shewn 'T is nothing but the wretched Popish Doctrin of Merit that has made it an offensive word in relation to God But taking Meritum and Mereri in the Fathers sense there is no offence to be taken at it as respecting God For they meant no more than having a right to be rewarded by him from the performance of that Obedience or Service to which he has annexed the reward by a most gracious Promise But as it is impossible to do God Almighty a Kindness or Benefit so I cannot understand how the Son of God himself could in this sense merit of his Father the Redemption of Mankind since he did or suffered by vertue of the Union nothing but what the Will of his Father obliged him unto Lo I come said he to do thy Will O God And his perfectly complying with this Will was his meriting our Redemption of his Father as He willed to make him the Author thereof upon that Condition And therefore Mr. Calvin says well Totum Meritum Christi pendet à Voluntate Divina Now will any Man say that Christ as Man did not thus merit Then by the most wonderful Submission and Self-Resignation of the Man Christ Jesus who was most
Sun causing the Seeds of things to grow unto Perfection and into a beautiful Order Indeed the Sun is not properly a Creatour nor are Men properly Creatours but they are Instruments in the Hands of the Creatour God is pleas'd to make use of them in the effecting of those Works but all the while He concurrs with them as well as prepares the Subject for them He not only provides the Matter and Means and endues the Instruments with a fit Capacity but He also upholds and assists them and works with as well as by them In like manner the Vnitarians observe it is not said that the Word is the Creatour or Maker but that by him God made the Universe When the Word was created or that most excellent Person which is the most express Image of the Divine Wisdom and is therefore in that sense call'd the Wisdom of God the first Being which God then produced and which with the Instrumental Concurrence of the Word He fashioned and perfected was according to the most illustrious Vnitarians another very eminent Creature which not only for distinction-sake but also for his excellent Perfection and the designation of his Office was called the Holy Spirit and the Power of God But tho' the Word had a part in the fashioning or modelling of him or in the medial and instrumental pouring vital or spiritual influences upon him yet he had so little share in the Work in comparison of that which God had in it that not the Word himself but God only is to be reckoned as the Producer or Maker of that Holy Spirit And for the same reason God only is called the Author of all the other Creatures tho' both the Word and the Holy Spirit had a hand together with God in the drawing of them out of the Chaos God prepared the Chaos and having created the Word and by the Word the Spirit by the breathing and moving of the Spirit he gave Motion to other Creatures that were set into a sit Order to that end Yet all Creatures and even the Holy Spirit are said to belong to the Word because in the creating of them God designed to Subject them all to the Word and accordingly they were all Subjected to him from the beginning tho' then so only as Servants are Subject to a Son in his Minority in his Father's House whereas after Christ's Passion and Exaltation they were Subjected to him as to the Master of the House himself or as to a Son com to Age to whom the Father commits the Government of the House If by the Word in the beginning of St. John's Gospel be to be understood not only the First created Spirit but also a Divine Virtue and Influence united to and assisting that most excellent Creature it is easy to conceive that the Word might be Instrumental in Creating the Chaos or the World out of the Chaos Howbeit nothing in Scripture or Reason contradicts the System implying that the Chaos is an eternal Emanation of God that it is a confus'd Mixture of unactive Material and Spiritual Natures that Creating is the putting some of them in a certain Motion and Order that all Spiritual Creatures have a Material Vehicle that the Material Vehicle being prepared God with what somtimes is called his Word what is called his Breath forces into it some Portion of the Spiritual Nature scattered in the Chaos that what the Scripture somtimes also calls the Word that is the Soul of the Messiah and the Holy Spirit thereby then meaning a Creature are the largest Portions of the Spiritual Part of the Chaos that God ever put together and that the Word and Holy Spirit being created God made use of them to Create or Breath upon and Put into a fit Motion and Order the rest of the Creatures By the H. Spirit then so far as that title may be applied to other beside God may be understood the Chief of the Elect Angels or of the Seven Archangels 1 Tim. 5.21 which are represented immediately surrounding standing before the Throne of Glory Rev. 1.4 Most probably such a glorious Creature as incomparably surpasses all the other Archangels in Excellency of Nature is then primarily to be understood by the H. Spirit Yet it may be also that the whole Body of Angels under him consequently every Angel may sometime be thereby meant For the term Holy Spirit may be a Collective Word implying then several Holy Spirits or all the Holy Angels every Holy Angel being a Holy and Pure Spirit And what all the Subordinate Angels do at the Command of their Cheif is reck'ned as done by him who when he has receiv'd the Orders of the Word divides to them their Tasks and originally is the Holy Spirit or Holy Angel by excellency and so in that respect these Works are represented as performed by One Holy Spirit and the whole Body of Holy Angels is then reputed as if it were but One Holy Angel as in speaking of what is done by Devils the Scripture mentions but One of those Impure Beings as if there were but one such the Evil One or the Vnholy Spirit what all the Devils do being ascribed to their Chief who Commands and Directs them in all things Howbeit there is no reason why we may not think that One Immense Spirit next to God and the Word may not be suppos'd to do all that is attributed to the Holy Spirit For the Excellency of the Holy Spirit may be so great as to have incomparably greater Powers and Perfections than all the Angels and all other Inferior Creatures put together and even almost to equal the Word except in Dignity One Sun and One Moon pour their Influences effectually upon all the Seeds and Creatures in the World And do we think that God could not frame an excellent Spirit or two excellent Spirits so powerful as to be able to do the like to all Human Spirits on Earth and to shine upon them all and enlighten and guide them and suggest good Motions to them and watch alone over them if not with the Concurrence also of other Angels which yet cannot be doubted of as Spiritual Stars in comparison of those other most excellent Spirits Yet all these Holy Spirits are but the disposing Instruments and Ministers of the Divine Power which at their working together works by and with them The Word has the disposition of the Divine Power of that which is his particular and ordinary Attendant and even of that which God himself immediately exercises and of that also the disposition of which is given to the Holy Spirit and to the Angels For the Word having receiv'd that Priviledge has made the Holy Spirit partaker of a vast Share of the Divine Power above all Angels according to this System And to every Angel according to his Station is alloted likewise by the Word 's Appointment Authorized thereunto by God a certain Portion of the Administration of the Divine Power which always accompanies
Majesty and Authority dwelling in him It has been necessary to make all these Digressions particularly concerning the Holy Spirit further to illustrate the Arian System concerning the Holy Spirit 's Nature and Person as well as that of the Word in order to shew â—â—â—st evidently that tho' the Word the H. Spirit were Instrumental in the Creation of the World yet the Arians need not be understood to make three Creatours properly nor three Gods according to the groundless imputation of the Platonick and Scholastick Trinitarians Not but that the Word might and did from the beginning bear the Title of God in an Inserior Signification even if it were but inasmuch as he represented God and commanded in God's stead or in God's Most Supreme Authority to the Highest Creatures next to Him to settle which Honour upon him extend it in the Highest Degree and so to continue it to him in the Oeconomy of the Gospel God required this Condition of him that he should freely undertake the Redemption of Mankind for otherwise Mankind had perished and consequently the First-Born tho' he had continued as he was remaining Innocent should not have had Men for his Subjects Howbeit the Arians do not say that the created Word is eternal and infinite and self-existent or self-moving nor consequently that he has all Perfection or any Perfection and Power of himself now every one knows this is the Description of him who is literally and properly God and this belongs only to the Father and therefore with the Apostle it may well be said that tho' there be many who are called Gods in Heaven and Earth yet the Vnitarians or true Christians do hold but One who literally is God all which may be 〈…〉 be God belonging to the Father Nevertheless the Word not only most eminently Representing God under the Oeconomy of the Gospel but being most 〈◊〉 United with the God-head as has been shewn an Influence of the Fathers 〈…〉 Virtue constantly dwelling in him so as to become in a manner Part of his 〈◊〉 in that Sense probably he may also bear the Title of God and may very 〈…〉 so tho' there be no other Divine Person but the Father And God Almighty then in the 〈…〉 all by the Ministry and by the Mediation or at the Request and upon 〈…〉 the Word as also the Word doing all in the Name and Power of God 〈…〉 he Word doth herein is truely censed or reputed to be done by God and what God doth also in that respect may be said to be don by the Word For Instance If God directs the Word to send one of his Angels on a certain Errand both God and Christ may be said to have sent that Angel If God says that He will com shortly meaning in the Person of his Word and Divine Schechina it follows that tho' Christ says also that he will com shortly yet God and Christ the Word of God by excellency need not be confounded together Which Title the Word was originally given him as was intimated in that he was designed to direct or signify and carry the Commands of God to the Creatures immediately under him in order to have the Will of God every where notified and put in execution accordingly So God says by him Let this be don and it is don himself shewing the Example of Obedience and doing what is incumbent upon him God having shewn him what is to be don for the Matter for instance being prepared and God working first thereupon the Word then with the Divine Assistance doth all that he sees the Father do and he sets the Angels a doing all that they are enabled to perform And so in the beginning the Work was effected in disposing the Chaos into the Beauty and Order and Regularity of a World the Word being the General under God And what could be Impossible to such a Creature assisted of God as has been said It is to be noted that not the Word but the Holy Spirit is call'd the Power of God because since the Creation it is by the Holy Spirit that ordinary Miracles are commonly wrought So that properly or chiefly the Office of the Word now especially is to command and that of the Holy Spirit or of the holy Angels is to execute After all there is nothing so express in Scripture concerning this intricate Subject but that many may opine that the Socinian System concerning the Holy Spirit or the Manner of the Creation attributed to Christ may be the truest Nevertheless it is certain several Passages seem very much to favour the Arian Hypothesis and there is nothing in it that is absurd or in it self incredible and apparently impossible As to the other Instances which the Trinitarians give of the pretended unaccountable Assertions held by the Vnitarians they are much easier than the former to be accounted for and have indeed but little difficulty in them The next Instance is That one in whom the Fulness of the Godhead dwells should need the Assistance of Angels The Answer to this is that the Vnitarians do not say the Godhead needs the Assistance of Angels but only for divers reasons some of which have before been intimated is pleas'd to make use of their Service And it cannot becom the Trinitarians to find this strange seeing they hold Christ to be personally-united with the Deity and yet they know the Scripture in many Places teaches that the Angels minister to him and are employed by him an Angel assisted and strengthned and comforted him in his Agony and when he was apprehended he said that if he would have resisted he would have made use of the Protection of Angels of whom he might presently have had more than twelve Legions for the asking It seems indeed unaccountable that a God Almighty or a Person that were God Almighty should employ Angels in his own Defence But the Indwelling of the Godhead in Christ makes him not properly and literally to be the Almighty God but only imports that God in every respect illuminates him and assists him by what Means He pleases and as far as is Necessary for the discharge of that most eminent Office of Redeeming Men of Declaring and Performing the whole Will of God Governing the Universe and at the helm of the World Representing God and Acting in the stead of God This Indwelling of the Fulness of the Godhead therefore hind'red not but that Christ somtimes might not Know som things and when it pleased God in the time of his humiliation particularly when for that while he was for the most part divested of the Glory which he had before the Creation of the World might have occasion for the Ministry and Assistance of Angels tho' probably it was he as was observ'd who at first assigned to every one of the Angels their Share of the concomitant and concurrent Divine Power which especially since his Exaltation as we have said they employ according to his Directions As to what is in
honoured with a like Honour with the Soveraign yet it is paid him particularly upon the Soveraign's Account in Honour to Him and in Obedience to his Commands who has so appointed it And thus the Scripture teaches We are to Honour our Lord Jesus Christ as one to and upon whom the highest Dignity Glory and Power that can be bestowed upon one in Commission has been in that manner confer'd and granted Namely to the Glory of the Donor and Disposer of it And this leads us to the last Particular that we have undertaken to speak to which is this CHAP. XIV An Answer to the fourth Branch of the Objection 4. THE Vnitarians produce sevâ—ral Texts of Scripture which seem most express and evident for the Vnitarian System I shall here mention but these few referring the Reader for the rest to the Apologia pro â—â—enico Magno or to Crell's Treatise Touching one God the Father in which Books may be found Several of the most select Arguments out of Scripture besides also several taken from the incontestable Principles of Reason all which of both sorts are there fully enlarg'd upon and do seem manifestly and unanswerably to evince the truth of the Vnitarian Doctrin I. The first Argument I shall mention shall be the last quoted Passage of the 2d Chap. of the Philippians where the Apostle declares that We are to own Jesus Christ as one exalted and made Lord and that we are thus to honour him to the Glory of God the Father So that as was said the Honour we are to pay to Our Lord Jesus Christ is not to terminate ultimately on him but on the Father for whose Sake and at whose Command the said Honour is given to the Lord Christ upon the account of his Exaltation as the inestimable Reward of his Obedience and upon the account of the most High Commission granted to him by God Now who doth not see that this invincibly demonstrates that properly Christ is not God himself For if he were literally God Almighty himself it would be absurd not to adore and honour him for himself ultimately for that would imply that the Divine Nature is not to be honour'd for it 's own sake It were in vain to alledg that the Trinitarians hold the Son has received his Divine Nature from the Father that so they may also worship him to the Glory of the Father They say that the Son had the Divine Nature eternally and not by a free Gift but by absolute Necessity and that it is the same numerical Divine Nature and Essence with that of the Father so that he is as much God and is as necessarily so as the Father from which Principles therefore it would need follow that the Son should be honour'd ultimately for himself or which is the same should be honoured with properly Divine Honour as well as the Father Then if things had been so the Apostle should have said We must honour Christ's Human Nature or the Man Christ Jesus to the Glory of God the Son But the Apostle doth not present us with any such Notions But he tells us that Jesus Christ is to be own'd as a Lord and the greatest Lord under God and is thus to be honoured to the Glory of God the Father What can be more express If the Son be literally God Almighty he cannot be exalted any higher and he must needs be honoured ultimately for himself with Supreme Divine Honour But says the Apostle the Father exalted him c. Whereas if the Son had been himself literally God his whole Person must needs have sat necessarily at the Helm of the Universe as well as the Person of the Father and it could not have been otherwise except a Divine Person could have ceased to be properly Divine that is to say except God could have been annihilated Now the Reader may please to make an application of this as well as the following Arguments to Dr. Sherlock's Rule mentioned before and by which he owns this Controversy is to be tried II. The Second Argument shall be that which the Dr. at the 197th and following Pages of his Book intituled The Scripture Proofs of our Saviour's Divinity explained and vindicated has carefully pointed out to us and taken great pains to prepare for us and make us sensible of it's great weight And indeed it seems a most express and decisive Argument It is that which is grounded on the 36th Verse of the 24th Chap. of St. Matthew to which the 32d Verse of the 13th of St. Mark is parallel the import whereof is That Christ declaring he did not know what God knew Namely when should be the Day of Judgment it follows necessariâ—y and most manifestly that he is not God himself The Dr. in the Place aforequoted represents the force of the Argument in these words There is an obvious Objection against the perfect intuitive Knowledge of our Saviour from what he himself tells us concerning the Destruction of Jerisalem c. For were he true and perfect God of the same Substance with his Father he could be ignorant of nothing Now how doth the Dr. solve this Objection as he calls it The common Answer to this says he is by distinguishing between the Knowledge of Christ as God and as Man That tho' as God he knew all things yet there were some Secrets for some time concealed from his Human Nature Well! Doth the Dr. know of some better Solution No. Is he then very well satisfied with this common Answer No. He neither likes this nor can tell what to say more satisfactory These are his words The common Answer to this is c. as was said in the foregoing Paragraph And this says he must be the true Answer or I know not how we shall find a better and yet it seems very hard that the Son who is but one Person tho' he have two Natures should be said not to know that which he did know whether he knew it as God or as Man This I confess is a Difficulty and always will be so while we know so little of this Personal Union that is to say of the Union of the Godhead with the Man Christ Jesus But then Dr if we know so little of it why do you call it a Personal Vnion and that of an eternal Son or an eternal Person with the Spirit of Christ But since you are pleas'd to call it so you must stand to it and must not pretend to evade by saying you know not how far it goes or what communications the Human Nature of Christ receives from its Union with the Godhead This is not the Point nor is it at all to the business in hand from which you ought by no means to be suffered now to flinch away when it manifestly appears to be against you and invincibly shews the solidity of the Vnitarian Sentiment For you have said and the Trinitarian System expresly asserts that the whole Son is but one Person and therefore
rendered determined may be translated judged or condemned and so Erasmus has interpreted it as if St. Paul had said to declare that actually he did not rely on the force of Eloquence but on the Power it self of the Gospel which he knew was attended with sufficient Evidences without setting it forth with the Ornaments and Advantages of an Elaborate Oration as he might have done which declaration is incontestably the scope and whole intent of the Apostle's reasoning I have condemned my self to be among you or I have judged it fittest to be among you as knowing nothing but Christ Crucified lest the Testimony of the Cross and Sufferings of Christ and the Demonstration of the Spirit should be thought insufficient Evidences therefore when I came unto you I came not with excellency of Speech but barely contented my self most simply to set before you the Testimony of God The current of the Discourse shews that St. Paul did not deny his knowing any thing besides Christianity but only asserted that he judged a Demonstration of all his other Learning unnecessary in comparison of that and in order to the end which he proposed to himself namely the Conversion of the Corinthians wherefore according to our Version he determined to be or determined to appear as knowing nothing else but Christ Crucified and wholly neglected to make a shew of his Eloquence It is undeniably evident that this is his meaning But it is as evident that there is no such restriction in our Saviour's expression and that he fimply denies his knowing at all the Day of Judgment and expresly asserts that none but the Father knew it This Argument it seems therefore will remain to the end of the World such a one as the Dr. desired a positive Proof that Christ properly is not God Almighty himself And the Vnitarians hold that to deny it is to fly wilfully in the face of Evidence For as to the Knowledge of that Day the Son puts himself into the same rank with the Angels and all other Creatures and says that he knows it no more than they which is as express a denial of his knowing it as it is possible to be To this Head and for a further Illustration of this Argument we may add the Saying in the first Verse of the first Chapter of the Revelations that God gave that Revelation to Jesus Christ For by those words it appears that Jesus Christ had not that Revelation of himself and consequently that Jesus Christ is not the Supreme God tho' yet he be God or a God and God's Representative in whom the Father in an extraordinary manner dwells as was said If that Person designed or signified in Scripture by the Name of Jesus Christ were literally the Supreme God that Verse would bear this Sense that the Supreme God gave to another Person who is also the Supreme God a Revelation which he had not till then that it was given him otherwise if he had it before it needed not to have been given him On the other hand if he had it not 't is plain this is an indigent God not the same with the Giver and consequently not the Supreme God To this some answer that this Person received the whole Godhead from all eternity from the Father and therefore whatever he enjoys at any time or whatever knowledg he has he may be said to receive it from God there by God meaning the Father But we reply this visibly is precariously said For if from all eternity Christ had all knowledg from the Father what occasion was there for taking notice here that he had this particular knowledg from God There appears not to be here any particular reason for it Therefore the last refuge is in the distinction of the two Natures And so either the Meaning is that the Father gave that Revelation to the Man Christ But then we reply that was not necessary if another All-knowing Person was hypostatically-united with that Man Or else it only remains the Meaning must be supposed to be that the Second Person of the Trinity gave that Revelation to the Man Jesus Christ To this we reply The Name Jesus Christ denotes the whole Person and according to the Trinitarians that Person implies the Supreme God as well as the most highly dignified Creature and therefore God then could not be said simply or in general terms to give any thing to Jesus Christ III. The Vnitarians do very much wonder that any one who has read the Scripture should ask for a Text where it is taught that Christ is not literally the Almighty God himself seeing that in Two Hundred and Seventy Three distinct Passages of the New Testament Christ is expresly distinguished from God Whence rationally we ought to infer that Christ is not literally and expresly that God from whom he is distinguished and that therfore when he is called God it must be understood in an infeferior Sense according to the Significations we have mentioned in which that Title is used As in a Country as it is in France where the King 's Eldest Son when he is spoken of either singly or together with other Princes or Lords is by way of eminency called My Lord it is obvious that then another Lord who is also tho' in an inferior sense called My Lord but not simply or as by a distinguishing character but as by a common title to which is and must be added something to notify the Person spoken of or who at least is never simply stiled My Lord when spoken of together with the King 's Eldest Son being thus distinguished from My Lord or from Him that is called My Lord simply and by way of eminency then I say the other Lord is thereby declared not to be that My Lord himself the King's Heir but an inferior Lord. What the Trinitarians then here say that the Title of God tho' most particularly and eminently appropriated to the Father as it is in Scripture does not exclude other Persons thus expresly distinguished from him from being the same God not only is a mere begging of the question and is without grounds but is expresly contrary to all reason That Subtersuge therefore of the Trinitarians is wholly vain And indeed did St. Peter suppose that Cornelius knew of the Evasion of the Trinitarians when preaching the Gospel to him he distinguished in the current of his Discourse Christ from God Acts 10.36 IV. At the 19th Verse of the 5th of St. John our Saviour himself tells us that the Son can do nothing of himself but what he sees the Father do Now in good truth could one that were literally the Almighty God say this concerning himself Can the Almighty and All-Wise God be supposed able to do nothing but what he must be taught how to do it Surely it were a monstrous Supposition to reckon He needed to be taught any thing Whereas if God's Only-Begotten Son be not properly God Almighty himself but the Word Incarnate according
to the Arians such as we have described who from the beginning was a God in the highest signification of the inserior senses in which that title is used in Scripture and who is assisted of God in the manner we have declared it is very rational and true to say of him that he cannot do the Divine Works of himself but that he doth them only as he is taught and assisted by the Father to do them To which agrees what he says at the 10th Verse of the 14th Chapter of the same Gospel the Father not a Second Divine Person that dwels in me he properly doth the Works inasmuch as it is he that assists me to do them And accordingly Christ declared that tho' he had a vast Power even then granted him and was enabled to do mighty Miracles yet God the free Donor and Disposer thereof had reserv'd infinitely more Prerogative to himself and the Disciples were not to doubt but that God from whom Christ had all that he had was still greater than he John 14 28. V. In like manner a Person that were literally the Almighty God himself could not say to the Father as Christ doth John 17.5 Glorify thou me with thine own self with the Glory which I had with thee before the World was For whatever the Trinitatarians may say or think of it a Person that were literally the Almighty God could no more be at any time without his Glory than he could ever be without his Nature and Essence or could cease to exist For the Highest Glory is inseparable from the Supreme God for as he exists necessarily from all Eternity so he is necessarily All-Perfect and consequently All-Glorious But the Word being such as we have described having received all his Perfection from the mere free Bounty of the Father and holding the Height of his Glory precariously from the Hand of the Supreme God and as but during the Pleasure of the Almighty this Sublime Creature then I say that is called the Word might be divested of the greatest part of his Glory for a time and be reduced to and contracted into the Narrowness and Lowliness of an Innocent Human Soul for the Undertaking and Performance of a peculiar Office during which considering the Anguish and Difficulties attending it this Person may well be supposed to groan and long for that excellent and inestimable Glory and Happiness which he enjoyed with God before the World was being then glorified and dignified with an extraordinary and an eminent and intimate partaking even of the Divine Nature Soveraignty and Power which in becoming Man he in a great measure actually deposited into the hands of God to receive again indeed afterward with Interest whereas as was said it is impossible for the Almighty God at all to deposite at any time his Perfection Power and Glory See the afore-quoted Treatise of Crellius Book 1st Section 2d Chapter 18th on the Argument That all things are given to Christ from the Father VI. The last Argument of the Vnitarians which I shall now take notice of and that also briefly considering all that has been said here and elsewhere is That it is expresly declared in several Places of Scripture that the Father Only is the Supreme God John 17.3 This is Life eternal to know thee only Father to be the true God and Jesus Christ to be thy Messenger It is evident that that must necessarily be the Construction of the words For the Adjective Only when it is employed to exclude other Subjects from the partaking of the Predicate belongs to the Subject and not to the Predicate Now it is incontestable seeing the Reason of the Thing and the Scope of the Argument that is the Resolution of these grand Articles Namely Who is the true God And Which is the Way to eternal Life and indeed it is agreed by all that in this place the word Only is employed to exclude other Subjects from the partaking of the Predicate Wherefore all others besides the Father are hereby necessarily excluded from being the true God For if all others were not so then none could be suppos'd to be hereby excluded and so the reasoning would be insignificant See Crell in the beginning of his afore-quoted Treatise Ephes 4.4 5 6. There is one Spirit one Hope one Lord one Baptism one God and Father of all who is above all The Father only is that God who is above all or who is properly the True and Supreme God 1 Tim. 2.5 There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus That it is the Father only who is that one God is then evident in that Christ is opposed to that one God And the Mediator between God and Men is said to be a Man and not a God-Man See Crell on that Text. 1 Cor. 8.6 To us there is but one God the Father To which Place we may joyn the 9th Verse of the 3d. of St. James's That one then who is properly the God is the Father of whom are all things And under him there is but one Universal Lord by and for whom the Father prepared all things that this most God-like Lord might be at the Head of them to the greatest Glory of the Father the eternal and Supreme the only Wise perfectly and in himself and the only one the true God See 1 Tim. 1.17 compared with Rom. 15.6 and 16.27 1 Tim. 1.17 Vnto the King eternal immortal invisible the only wise God be Honour and Glory for ever Rom. 16.27 To God only Wise be Glory thro' Jesus Christ Rom. 15.6 With one Mind and with one Mouth glorify God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ So Jam. 3.9 Thus we see the Vnitarians not only shew some most express or expresly seeming Contradictions in the Platonick or Scholastick Trinity which Contradictions cannot be denied to be most express unless it can be shewn expresly and invincibly that they are not such but they also produce several Texts which appear most express and evident for the Vnitarian System Upon which account they think they are the more authorized and incontestably warranted to consult also as they do in this Matter the Light of Reason which as was said furnishes them with several unanswerable Arguments of the Impossibility of the Scholastick or Platonick Trinity of real Divine Persons in one God as may be seen in the Apologia pro Irenico Magno and consequently of the Reasonableness of the Vnitarian System and the Vnitarian Interpretations They reckon that the Arguments taken from Reason and those taken from Scripture do very much strengthen one another Howbeit they chiefly insist on those taken from Scripture as appears from that Treatise of Crellius which has been so often quoted Here then it is very fit to remember Dr. Sherlock's Words which we quoted before and which are to this purpose That if any Text be produced which proves Christ properly or in his own Person to be but a Creature this ought