Bafil's

ingly flight Turn in his Translation. Words are ἴσε καὶ ταυτῦ κατὰ δύναμιν. That is, Equal and the very fame, in respect of Power. The Doctor drops equal, which would have difcovered Bafil's meaning; and renders it, One and the fame in Power. And thus Bafil's Words, which are utterly repugnant to the Doctor's Hypothefis, are improved into a Conceffion in favor

of it.

Pag. 102. (alias 94) He gives us a low and lame Construction of a noble Paffage in Irenaus. The Words, κατα τὸ θεϊκὸν καὶ ἔνδοξον, He renders, in a divine and glorious Manner: The true rendring is, in his divine and glorious Charailer: Namely, that which He had as God, and Son of God. Irenæus, in that Chapter, is reprefenting the Son as acting at different Times, in a different Character or Capacity. When He appeared to the Patriarchs, then He acted in his highest Capacity, in his divine Character. What that Character is, Irenæus explains, a little above, in the fame Chapter: It is, as He is the Word, the Framer (or Maker) of all

* Σαφῶς τὸ ἓν, ἀντὶ τοῦ ἴσε καὶ ταυτῇ κατὰ δύναμιν παραλαμ Cavar. Bafil. Contr. Eun. l. 1. P. 35.

† Καὶ αὐτὸς δὲ ὁ λόγω τοῦ Θεοῦ τοῖς μὲν πρὸ Μωϋσέως πατρίας. χαις, κατὰ τὸ θεϊκὸν καὶ ἔνδοξον άμελει· τοῖς δὲ ἐν τῷ νόμω. ἱεραπο κὴν ...... τοίξιν ἀπένεμεν, μετὰ δὲ ταῦτα Ανθρωπα βρόμα, δε Iren. 1. 3. c. 11. p. 191.

† Ὁ * απάντων τεχνίτης λόγω, ὁ καθήρμον ἐπὶ τῶν Σεραβίμ, ο συνέχων τα πάντα, Iren. p. 190

̓Απὸ τοῦ πατρὸς ἡγεμονικὴν αὐτῇ ..... καὶ ἔνδοξον γενεὰν.

Illam quæ eft a Patre, principalem, & efficabilem, & gloriofam generationem ejus enarrat, dicens fic, In principio erat Verbum, & Verbum erat apud Deum. & Deus erat Verbum, Et omnia per ipfum falta funt, & fine ipfo fuum eft nibil. Iren. p. 191.

Things,

Things, who fitteth upon the Cherubims and containeth all Things, who is the Son of God, and God. This fhows what is meant by the ò Deixor voor, and, at the same time, shows that, according to Irenæus, the Aly, who is God, then acted in his own proper Character, and not in the Perfon of the Father only, which the Doctor would infer from this Paffage. For it must be observed that the Son was s (Joh. 1. 1.) before the Time that He is fuppofed by the Dr. to have acted ev μogo, as God's reprefentative: and it is of that Antecedent Character Irenæus speaks, as is plain from his referring to Job. 1. 1.

Pag. 115. (alias 106.) He cites a place of Juftin Martyr, where Herenders the Words, which you fee in the *Margin, thus. "It was not God the Creator of the Univerfe, which then faid to

66

Mofes, that He was the God of Abraham, "and the God of Ifaac, and the God of Jacob. An uncautious Reader might imagine from this Paffage, put into this View, that the Son is not God abfolutely, nor Creator of the Universe, according to Juftin. But the meaning is, that That divine Perfon, who called Himfelf God, and was God, was not the Perfon of the Father (whole ordinary Character is that of Maker of all Things) but another divine Perfon, viz. God the Son. The unlearned Reader fhould be told,

* Οὐχ ὁ ποιητὴς ἢ ὅλων ἔξαι Θεὸς ὁ τα Μωσεῖ εἰπὼν αὐτὸν εἶναι Θεὸν 'A¤quàμ, μỳ ©÷òv 'Ioaàx, xỳ Oròv 'lax. Juftin. Mart. Dial. 180. Jebb.

Ff4

that

that what is here faid by Justin, was in difpute with a Jew, who would not acknowledge more divine Perfons than One. It was Justin's Bufinefs to fhow, that there was a divine Perfon, one who was God of Abraham, Ifaac, and Jacob, and was not the Father; and therefore there were two divine Perfons. The learned Doctor, upon his Principles, could not, in that way have confuted the Jew; fo far as I apprehend of Jufin's Argument: For the Jew might reply that it was an Angel fpeaking in the Perfon of God; and that therefore the Father only was God notwithstanding. But Juftin infifts upon it, that there was another Perfon, befides the Father, who was really God of Abraham, &c. If this is to be taken for a Conceffion, it may be easily

feen on what Side it is.

Pag. 116. (alias 108.) The Doctor does not do Juftice to Hilary. Instead of called Lord and God, which is diminutive, it fhould have been, declared to be Lord and God: But this may appear flight. Such another flight inaccuracy appears in his affecting to tranflate God his Father, inftead of God the Father (p. 104. 179.) which however shows too much leaning to a Caufe; and helps to convey a falle Idea to the English Readers.

Pag. 251. (alias 219.) He has a long Citation from Novatian; in which all proceeds fo fair and plaufible, that a Reader, already poffefs'd with the Doctor's Scheme, and carrying it in his Head, may think that every Thing falls in natufally with it. But, at length, the Doctor comes to

* fome

* fome cross Words, and fuch as, if fuffered to appear, would have made the Reader conftrue all backwards, and have given quite another Light to all that goes before or after. Here He stops fhort, breaks off in the middle of a Sentence, paffes over the offenfive Words, draws a Line, skips to the next Sentence, and goes gravely on to amufe his Reader. A Writer is not to be blamed, in fome Cafes, for taking what is to his purpose, and omitting the reft: But, as the Cafe is here, the best and, indeed, only Light to direct the Reader to the true meaning of what is cited, is left out. The word Divinity, for inftance (which occurrs twice in that Passage) an English Reader will be apt to take in the Doctor's Sense; and indeed can hardly do otherwife: But had the whole appeared, He could not but fee how much the Doctor is mistaken. I must obferve to you, that (p 336, 337.) the Doctor deals with Novatian, and this very Paffage, almost in the fame manner, again: Excepting that growing a little bolder, He takes more freedom in his Tranflation. Mind the Words (p.337.) By the Son in † acknowledgment return'd; and compare, per Subftantia Communionem, a little before. Novatian, in this

Unus Deus oftenditur Verus & Eternus Pater, a quo Solo Hæc vis Divinitatis emissa, etiam in Filium tradita & directa rurfum per Subftantia Communionem ad Patrem revolvitur. Deus quidem oftenditur Filius cui Divinitas tradita & porrecta confpicitur, & tamen nihilominus unus Deus Pater probatur. Novat. C. 31,

The Latin is, reciproco meatu illa majeftas atque divinitas ad Patrem qui dederat eam rurfum ab illo ipfo Filio mifla revertitur & retorquetur. Ibid. ċ. 31,

place,

place, had no thought of Acknowledgments, nor any thing like it: But was intent upon quite another Thing; explaining and illuftrating, as well as He was able, the Union and Communion of Subftance in Father and Son; and showing how all recurs to one Head and Fountain : On which account the Father might be reafonably ftiled the one God, in as much as the Son is fo intimately one with Him, as to be reckon'd, in a manner, to Him, and not another God from Him. It is all but one Divinity, or divine Subftance, of the Father in Both.

Pag. 254. We may obferve another Turn, by way of Tranflation. The * Greek you may fee in the Margin, which the Doctor renders thus: "That Jefus Chrift, our Lord and God in car"nate, is not the Father, nor, as the Sabel "lians would have it (that fame Perfon who is ftiled) the only God; This the Holy Scri

46

66

ptures every where Teftify. The literal and plain Tranflation is thus: That Jefus Chrift, our Lord and God incarnate, is not the Father, nor (in the Sabellian Senfe) the only God, the Holy Scriptures every where Testify. This meaning, you fee, is clear, plain, and eaty, without the Doctor's Embarafinents; and is undoubtedly the true Sense of the Author. But fuch a hint as this might have made an unlucky discovery to the Reader; Namély, that a Man

Ὅτι ἢ ὁ σαρκωθεὶς Κύρια καὶ Θεὸς ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦς Χρισὸς ὁ Πατὴρ οὐκ ἔσιν, εδ', ὡς ἐκεῖνοι φαῖεν, ὁ μένα Θεός, ἅπασαι μαρτυροῦσιν αἱ Dicy rear. Athan. Contr. Sabell. p. 47•

may