a

if Hiftory, like Metaphyfical Arguments, were to be made merely by strength of Wit. He forgets that the Mystery of the Refurrection was one of those plain familiar Things, which the Pride of their Reafon refused to submit to. He confiders not that the Jews, and the earliest Hereticks (much of the fame Temper with the Pagan Philofophers) were offended at nothing more than at the Mystery of God Incarnate; which we learn from Ignatius, Juftin, Irenæus, Tertullian, and other antient Writers: And He need but look into Justin, Tatian, and Origen, to find that the Pagans, + in particular were in the fame Sentiments, and join'd in the fame common Charge against the Christian Doctrine. Nay, it may farther appear, from other d Evidences, that the very Mystery of the Trinity, which is the Rock of Offence to fome even at this Time, gave very early Offence to the Pagan Wits; and was much difrelish'd by Them: So averse were They to the receiving of Mysteries: And the Pride of Reason wrought, at that Time, much after the fame manner, as it does at this day; Hu

a Secundum nullam Sententiam Hereticorum Verbum Dei caro factum eft. Iren. 1. 3. c. 11. p. 189.

b Incredibile præfumpferant Deum Carnem. Tertull. Contr. Marc. 1. 3. c. 8.

c Alii quoque Hæretici ufque adeo Chrifti manifeftam amplexati funt Divinitatem, ut dixerint Illum fuiffe fine Carne; & Totum illi fufceptum detraxerint Hominem, ne decoquerent in illo Divini nominis poteftatem fi Humanam illi Sociaffent, ut arbitrabantur, Nativitatem. Novat. c. 18.

d Lucian. Philopatr. Athan. Orat. p. 564.

man

man Nature being always the fame. now high time to proceed.

But it is

Whether his (the Doctor's) whole Performance, whenever He differs from us, be any thing more than a Repetition of this Alertion, that Being and Perfon are the fame, or that there is no Medium between Tritheifm and Sabellianifm? Which is removing the caufe from Scripture to natural Reafon, not very confiftently with the Title of his Book.

I

T is of fmall Importance to obferve how the Doctor has proved fuch Points, as He and We Both agree in. He might have spared the unneceffary Pains and have took a fhorter way with us, had his Caufe been fuch as could be served by clofe Argument. He need not have told us fo often that the Father is eminently tiled the one God, or that the Son is Subordinate. We allow all That: The Confequence which He draws from it, and covertly infinuates to his Reader, is the Thing we doubt of. This was the Point which fhould have been labour'd, for the Conviction of wife and confidering Men. He has a deal to fay in Defence of what no Body oppofes; and may there triumph fecurely without an Adversary : But when He comes to the point of Difference,

the

the pinch of the Queftion, there it is that He difcovers his want of Proof, and how little he has to depend on, befides that one precarious Principle intimated in the Query; which indeed runs thro' his whole Performance, and is often fuppos'd, but never prov'd.

d

e

By this Principle He eludes the Force of the first Chapter of St. John's Gofpel; And He refers to it again upon b Acts 20. 28. 1 Tim. 3. 16. Job. 5. 18. By the fame Principle, He evades the Force of a Job. 8.58. Joh. 12.41. Joh. 5. 23. And fo He might have done with any Number of Texts, however full and express for the Received Doctrine: For, by the fame * Maxim, He draws over the Nicene-Creed, and does not despair of bringing in the hAthanafian allo. From hence it is vifible, wherein the ftrength of his Performance lies; and what it is that He chiefly trufts to. It is not Scripture, it is not Antiquity, but a Philofophical Principle; to which Scripture, Fathers, Councils, Creeds, every Thing, must yield. And indeed had it been a principle of true and found Philofophy, every reasonable Man would be willing to pay the utmoft Deference to it: But it appears, at length, to be that kind of vain Philofophy, which is often intruding where it has nothing to do. The Subject is fublime and above Comprchenfion. We have no intrinfick

Qu. XXII. Evidence, no Ideas to build any thing certainly upon. Extrinfick Evidence, Divine Revelation, is here all in all; And the only proper use of our rational Faculties, is to inquire into the true and genuine Senfe of it. To phi lofophize here from the Nature and Reason of the Thing it felf, of which we know little, is chufing to be still in the Dark, when we have Light before us; and is not, properly, following our Reason, but our Conceits, Fancies, and fond Conjectures. You are pleafed to fay, in Defence of the learned Doctor, that if He had done no more than proved intelligent Being and Perfon to be the fame, it must for ever remain an unanswerable Difficulty, &c. Right, if He had proved what He has not, something might be faid. I have * before observed to you, that the word, Being, bears two Senses; and that you your Selves will not call any thing a Being, but a separate Being. Excufe the Trinitarians for being referved, after your Example, in fo tender a point; and for endeavouring to fpeak properly, as well as to think justly, in things pertaining unto God. All that the Doctor hath proved, or can prove, is only this; that Separate Perfons are fo many intelligent Beings; which we readily admit: But united Perfons, or Perfons having no feparate Existence, may be one Being, one Subftance, one God, notwithstanding. And that you may not think that I Skreen my felf under dark Words, or obfcure Diftinctions, I will tell you frankly the

* Qu. 9. p. 167.

mean

meaning of what I have now faid.

It is lit

tle more than this, that Perfons fo united as to make one Being, may be one Being. I fuppose the Affirmative, that They may be fo united; having fufficient Grounds for it in Scripture, and in Catholick Antiquity. It lies upon you, in this Cafe, to prove the Negative, viz. that no Union, whatever, can make two Perfons one Being, one to lov, one God: You are to show the Suppofition to be impoffible, in the Nature of the Thing: That is (as I humbly conceive) you are to prove what you can know nothing of; and are to work up a Demonftration without Ideas. There the Matter rests, and, I am perfwaded, must reft, till you please to come out of Metaphyficks; and to put the Caufe upon the Foot of Scripture and Antiquity, the only Lights in this Matter. Strange that, at this Time of Day, Any need to be told (what * Unbelievers only doubted of formerly) that Scripture is our Rule to go by, for forming our Notions of God; and not the light of Nature, which is darkness in Comparison.

You are offended at the Querift for faying that the Doctor admits no Medium between Tritheism and Sabellianifm. I should have faid, it seems, no Medium for his Adverfaries,

οὔτε γὰρ φύσει, οὔτε ἀνθρωπίνῃ ἐννοίᾳ, οὕτω μεγάλα καὶ θεῖος γινώσκειν ἀνθρώποις δυνατὸν, ἀλλὰ τῇ ἄνωθεν ἐπὶ τοὺς ἁγίας άνδρας Tyvinauta natadboy depsa Juft. Mart. Paran. p. 60.

Πανταχόθεν τοίνυν εἰδέναι προσήκει, ὅτι ἐδαμῶς ἑτέρως τεὶ Θεοῦ ἢ το ὀρθῆς θεοσεβείας μανθάνειν οἷόν τε, ἢ παρὰ ἢ προφητῶν μόνον, το αλάτι θείας ἐπιπνοίας διδασκόντων ὑμᾶς. Ibid. p. 129. Ed. Οx.

Z

and