the Bible acknowledge this truth. This is the unity of the Deity which is held by Unitarians and Trinitarians alike. But the Unitarians maintain that the " one God" acknowledged by both parties is simply one; - they hold his simple unity, and for this opinion they quote a Scripture declaration, "God is one." The Trinitarians, on the other hand, are not satisfied with this doctrine of the simple unity; they hold a compound unity, called a trinity in unity. Now, to make their ground as strong as that of the Unitarians, they should be able to quote a Scripture declaration that " God is three." But they cannot do this. Their peculiar doctrine of the Godhead stands not on an express Scripture testimony, but on a process of inferential reasoning. Even though their process of inferential reasoning could not be at once shown to be false, we should be obliged to reject its result when we discover its discrepancy with so plain a declaration of God's word. But it can be shown to be false. This is not the place, however, to enter on a discussion of such a nature. Our aim in these remarks is only to submit a few reasons in justification of Unitarians for departing from the popular doctrine of a triune Deity. The Trinitarians are very apt to speak of the Unitarians as relying too much on human reason. Such a charge, whenever made, is improper and unjust, and might be forcibly retorted. The doctrine of the Unitarian rests directly on Scripture, and can be stated in the very language of Scripture. The doctrine of the Trinitarian cannot be so stated. It is constructed by an exercise of human reason, and can only be stated in the language of human creeds. Their conduct in this respect seems to us very inconsistent and extraordinary. To borrow the words of a late distinguished convert from the Trinitarian to the Unitarian faith, "they first construct the doctrine upon inference and human reason, and then prostrate reason to receive it." The only text in the Bible where the three terms, Father, Word (or Son), and Holy Spirit are mentioned together and called one, is 1 John v. 7:-"For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; and these three are one." But what man who values his character as a Biblical scholar, would say that this text is genuine Scripture? That it is an interpolation is now admitted by eminent critics of every denomination. Yet it was clung to as a proof for the Trinity, by many parties, long after the critical evidence had spoken decisively against its genuineness. And even yet it is offered as the first prooftext for that doctrine in the Westminster Confession of Faith. The Scriptures plainly teach God's simple unity. The Deity is always spoken of as one. He is never styled three. Our Saviour repeats the declaration of Moses already referred to as the first of all the commandments. "Jesus answered him, The first of all the command "We have some wranglers in theology," says the eminent Bishop Lowth, "sworn to follow their master, who are prepared to defend any thing, however absurd, should there be occasion. But I believe there is no one among us in the least degree conversant with sacred criticism, and having the use of his understanding, who would be willing to contend for the genuineness of the verse 1 John v. 7." ments is, Hear, O Israel! the Lord our God is one Lord." * "In that day," saith the Prophet, "there shall be one Lord, and his name One." † Elsewhere in the Prophecies he is styled "the Mighty One," ‡ "the High and Lofty One," § etc. And the Apostle Paul not only says that there is one God, but he writes expressly that "God is one." The general tenor of || Scripture is in harmony with the texts cited. From all which it appears not only that there is "one God," but that that one God is one, one simply and indivisibly. The Unitarian and the Trinitarian alike believe that there is "one God." But while the latter affirms that in "the unity of the Godhead there be three persons," ¶ the former maintains that in the unity of the Godhead there is only one person, he affirms that "God is one. Following up his affirmation respecting the three persons in the Deity, the Trinitarian asserts that "the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God." tt While the Unitarian, on the other hand, following up his affirmation respecting the one person only in the Deity, asserts that the "Father" is the "only true God." Thus distinct and different do their statements stand concerning the doctrine of the Godhead. The Unitarian can state his faith in the very language of the sacred Scripture. But the Trinitarian "** *Mark xii. 29. † Zech. xiv. 9. Isa. i. 24. ¶ Westminster Confession, chap. iii. § 3. ** St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, chap. iii. v. 20. is compelled to resort to the language of human creeds and confessions. 4. The argument from ecclesiastical history is against it. It is worthy of remark, that the Jewish people never held the doctrine of a threefold God. We know that during a long course of centuries, their nation was the depository of the records of divine revelation. Inspired prophets and teachers were raised up amongst them, time after time, but none of these ever taught the doctrine of the Trinity. Nor did our Saviour and his Apostles ever teach such a doctrine. If we had one enunciation from them that "there are three persons in the one God," the question would be set at rest. In the first ages of the Church, there was no such distribution of persons in the Deity known to Christians. For three centuries after the death of our Lord, the Apostles' Creed was the only publicly recognized symbol of faith. And even this, the origin of which is obscure, was of a later date than the time of the Apostles themselves. Now the Apostles' Creed is essentially Unitarian in doctrine, and the fact that it was the only, creed known during those first ages of the Church, clearly shows us that the Christians of those times were believers in the simple unity of God.. Since neither the Jewish people nor the first Christians knew the doctrine of the Trinity, whence then, it may be asked, did it come? We reply, that it can be traced to its origin in the refined speculations of the Gentile philosophy. Plato, the celebrated Athenian sage, who flourished about 360 years before Christ, taught the doctrine of one great First Cause. We are not prepared to say that he taught a Trinity; but according to the interpreta tion put upon his writings by the later Platonists, there were in the divine nature three "principles," or "hypostases," which they termed To Agathon, the Supreme Good, Logos or Nous, the mind or reason of God proceeding from the former principle, and Psyche, or soul. According to the Platonic philosophy, these three, taken together, constituted the one Divinity. Such was the fashionable philosophy at Alexandria when the simple doctrines of the Gospel found their way to that great city. Here Christianity came in contact with it and was corrupted by it. The Divine religion which our Saviour taught was too simple for men who had always been accustomed to refined and abstruse speculations. As Christianity found its way among the learned, they ingrafted upon it some of their favorite philosophic notions. The threefold division of the Deity was a prominent doctrine of the reigning philosophy, and this notion was introduced into the Christian system by the philosophizing Christians, as they have been called. It was resisted by the great body of believers as a strange and novel doctrine. To the learned, however, it was acceptable, and they willingly promoted it. The following extract from Tertullian, one of the early Christian writers, will shed a flood of light upon the matter. "The simple," says he, (not to call them ignorant and unlearned,) "who are always the greater part of believers, since the rule of faith itself transfers them from the many gods of the heathen to the one true God, not understanding that the one God is indeed to be believed, but with his own economy [that is, his distribution into three persons], are startled at the economy. They |