Communication from him, of some Created Substance, as you fay in your Letter; and that Eufebius in this Paffage, by your quoting it, supported that Opinion; yet this is far otherwife : For tho' it be true, that he is the only begotten Son of God, because he partakes of him that begat him; yet the Intent of Eufebius in this Place was not to prove that Propofition, but to give a Reason why and how he was God of God, viz. by a Participation of God.

And therefore if you would allow Eufebius to speak for himself, and his own Sense, it is plainly this: That God the Word is the only begotten of the Father; that he is truly God, for he partakes of him, and his Divine Nature and Effence; and because he is anointed with all the Divine, Incommunicable, Paternal Attributes, he is stil'd Christ, and the anointed.

And though he that begat, is faid to be the First and the Greater; yet this must be understood, as others, who have us'd the like Expreffions, have explain'd them, viz. in Rank and Order, not in State and Dignity; and Eufebius, in this very Place, goes on and cites the 45th Pfalm, ver. 6, 7. Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever, &c. as St. Paul hath applied it, Heb.i. and a little after stiles him (m) Copartner in the Throne with the God over all.

What I have to say to your Quotation out of Justin, that P. 12. Christ is the First-born, will be more proper when I come to the Text cited by you out of the Colossians.

Your Two first Quotations out of his Dialogue with Trypho P. 13. are right; only your Translation of weὸ αἰώνων, before the World, (which is indeed equivalent to the literal rendring, before the Ages) will not warrant what you mean by it, as if there were a Time when he was not, as will appear in the Sequel of this Letter, and indeed in this very Passage: For when Trypho had summ'd up Justin's Assertion, p. 267. which he had been proving, viz. That Chrift being God, praexisted before all Ages, was begotten and made Man; he adds, (n) This is not only a Paradox, but is also foolish. Which news how he understood Justin, viz. that he was truly God in the highest Sense; for otherwise, a Jem, who believ'd that Angels had been often sent and appear'd in human Shape, would never have call'd it a Paradox and Folly to affert, that a Creature, tho never fo excellent, fhould come into the World.

Your Third Quoration, Who was God before the World was Dial. made, must be readily agreed to, and 'twill by no means be P. 27. subservient to your Purpose. For

(m) Σκύθρονον τὸ ὅλὶ πάντων θεῖ.

(π) Τὸ γδ λέγειν σε προυπάρχειν θεὸν ὄντα πρὸ αἰώνων τέτον * χρισόν, εἶτα κὶ γυνηθίώαι ανθρωπιν, λυόμενον ύπομείναι κι ὅτ ̓ ἐκ ἀνθρωπο δε ἀνθρώπε, ὁ μόνον αράδοξον δοκεῖ μοι ε ἀλλὰ κὶ μωρὸν,

Justin

Γνώμη.

P. 25.

Justin was proving, that One of the Three who appear'd to 'Abraham, and was call'd and written in Scripture to be God, and was God before the World was made, was another Person different from him who made all Things: I mean, says he, in Number not in Will. And then he proceeds to several such other Proofs of this Doctrine out of the Scriptures.

[Here I must not let slip this Occasion to take notice of your very confident Affertion, 'That the Ancient Chriftians ever allow'd, that the Expressions in the Old Testament, whenever there ' was a visible Person appear'd, were spoken by the Son, as the I'mage of the Invisible God, or as representing and personating his Father, as his Minister and Vicegerent; and that they never • look'd upon them as true in the highest Sense of the Son.' The contrary is most plain by the Instances in Justin, who draws the fame Consequences from them, as do now the Moderns. And Dr. Hammond says, That 'twas the general Opinion of the Ancient Fathers of the Church, that he, who appear'd of old to the and that these his Appearances were Præludia Incarnationis. in the Trinity, Adv. Ju- (8) And Tertullian says, 'twas the Son of God who spoke to Mofes. And Eufebius says expressly, (h) it was Christ who appear'd to dæos, c. 9. Abraham; and he stiles him God, and that Abraham worEccl. Hift. shipp'd him as God: And adds, That it was impious to say that F. 6, 7. these Appearances of God were only of Angels, the Ministers of

On the New

Testament, Patriarchs, was not the First, but the Second Perfon

p. 820.

р. 142.

P. 13.

God.

Excuse this Digreffion; and I return to your Quotation out of Juftin, taken from p. 284, 285. And I ask,

Why did you stop so unfairly by drawing a Line after these Words, Begotten voluntarily (by the Will) of the Father; for the very next Words are, (i) But not such as we fee begotten among us: And then he goes on to illuftrate the Generation of the Son of God by the Similitude of a Word spoken by us, and of a Fire kindled by another Fire, which is not lessen'd by that which was kindled by it, but remains still the fame. (k) To me, says he, will bear Witness the Word of Wifdom, himself being that God begotten of the Father of all things, * and being the Word, and Wisdom, and Power, and Glory of * him that begat him, as Solomon says. And here is inserted a

(8) Qui ad Moyfen loquebatur ipse erat Filius Dei. (1) Ώρθαι κύριθ ὁ θεὸς α είρη) διά τις κάμοὶ ἄνθρωπο το Αβρααμ ὁ ἢ ὑποπεσπών-προσκυνεῖ μὲν ὡς θεὸν, ἰκετές ὡς κύριον μ' έδ' υποβεβηκότω ἀγγέλων κὶ λειτοργῶν

θεῖ τὰς ἀναγραφεῖσας θεοφανείας ὑπονοεῖν θέμις.

(1) ̓Αλλ' & τοι τον ὁποῖον κὶ ἐφ ̓ ἡμῶν λυόμλνον όρωμώ.

k

(*) Μαυρήσε ἢ μοι ὁ λόγο τ σοφίας, αὐτὸς ὢν ἔτο ὁ

θεὸς ὑπὸ τὸ παβο το ὅλων γλυνηθείς κὶ λόγο κὶ σοφία κὶ διία

μις κ) δόξα το χωνήσαντο υπάρχων.

4

し

great Part of the 8th Chapter of Proverbs, as a Proof of what Justin had faid; and then, as a further Proof, he quotes the Ist of Genesis, Let us make Man, &c. which, he fays, was spoken at least to the Son of God, (as Origen does also in his Comment on St. John, l. 5. p. 257.) and makes it an Evidence of his Divinity, and exposes the absurd Answers of the Jews; and then adds the other Text, Man is become like one of us, as full Proof of the Son's Divinity, saying, (1) Does not the Saying, Like one of us, denote at least Two who subsisted together with each other? And can the Doctors shew it was spoken to Angels, and So make Man's Body the Creature of Angels?

Then follows the latter Part of the Quotation, which you have rendred very differently from the Original, as will appear by comparing them.

Mr. WHISTON.

In the GREEK.

(m) But indeed this Begorten of the Father was with the Father before all his Works, and with him the Father conferr'd, as the Word by Solomon has declar'd; For that he himself was begotten by God, both

But the Production which really proceeded from the Father before all Creatures, was • with the Father, and to him • did the Father speak, as the • Word declares by Solomon; • For in the Beginning, before • all Creatures, this very Off-the Principle, before all his • spring was produced by God; Works, and his Offspring, which • which by Solomon is stil'd is by Solomon calld wif• Wisdom. dom.

To this very ill Translation you add your own worse Comment. [Alluding to Prov. viii. 22, c. where 'tis said, God created Wisdom the Beginning of his Ways for his Works.]

Justin does indeed quote the 8th of the Proverbs, as I have before observ'd; but 'tis to prove the direct contrary, both of what by your Translation you with him to say, and of your

(1) ἐκῶν εἰπὼν, ὡς εἷς ἐξ ἡθῶ, κι ἀριθμὸν τὸ ἀλλήλοις Εινόντων κὶ τὸ ἑλάχισον δύο μεμιώνκει ἢ οἱ διδάσκαλοι ἀποδείξαι διύαν) ὅτι ἀγγέλοις ἔλεγεν ἡ ὅτι ἀξγέλων πτίημα τω τὸ σῶμα τὸ ἀνθρωπειον.

(m) ̓Αλλὰ τότο τὸ τις ὄντι ἀπὸ τὸ παβός τους βληθέν γλώνη μα πρὸ πάντων της ποιημάτων ζωήν τες παβὶ κή πτῳ ὁ πατης προτομιλεῖ, ὡς ὁ λόγΘ διὰ τὸ σολόμπο, ότι κὶ ἀρχὴ πρὸ πάντων του ποιημάτων τοι ̓ αὐτὸ κες γλύνημα ὅπὸ τὸ θεῖ ἐγωνητο ὃ σοφία ἀπὸ τὸ σολομο καλείται.

B 4

Con

P. 13.

P. 30.

P. 15.

Conftruction of the 8th of the Proverbs; and therefore you use him and your Reader very hardly, to say, he alludes to this Chapter for the Support of both.

And you have taken great Liberty in translating αρχή, (not ἀρχῆ) In the Beginning, for 'tis turning the Nominative into the Dative Cafe.

I think it is plain, by the whole Tenor of Justin's Discourse, that it is so far from countenancing your Opinion, that it overthrows it; and therefore I will make no further Comment upon it, but what Trypho's Answer, which you quote, gives me Occafion to do: He says, Let him be own'd by you, as Lord Christ and God, as the Scriptures declare: But for us, who are the Worshippers of that God, who made him, we stand in no need of such a Confeffion, or such a Worship.

From this Passage it is plain, that Trypho acknowledges that the Scriptures declare Christ to be Lord and God, and tho he says, p. 289. (n) That he was astonish'd with the many Texts cited by Justin, and particularly knew not what to say to that of Ifaiah, I am God, and will not give my Glory to another; yer, with the Obstinacy of a Jew, he still stiles him a made God, (and thus far you tread his Steps, tho' 'tis an odd Sort of Chriftianity that is learn'd from a few.) Eut then his Objection to this Notion is surely very just, That they, who worship the God that made him, have no Need of such a God, or such a Worship; and it is incumbent on you, who profess this Dotrine, to give fome Answer to it; for till you do, the Jews are not like to be your Proselytes, tho' you boast against us, that 'tis our Doctrine which gives them Offence.

I proceed to your other Testimonies, which you represent so partially, and in fuch a manner, as, by the like Method, a Man may prove, even out of the Scriptures, any the most abfurd and impious Propofition,

In your Quotation out of Athenagoras, in which the Son is faid to be the First Production of the Father, not as a Being made; you add of your own, (for 'tis not in the Book) out of nothing. Thus you qualify a plain and absolute Propofition of your Author; and to refute his positive Affertion, that the Son was not a Being made, you would have him understood to mean, by impofing upon him your Senfe, not made of Nothing, leaving your Reader to chuse which of the contradictory Propofitions (which I have before taken notice of) he pleases, as to the Substance of which he was made, provided he will agree with you that he was made.

(1) Ὑπὸ της τοσέτων γραφῶν δυσωπό μυθ ἐκ διδα τὸ φῶ εί ὁ γραφῆς ἣν ἔφη Ησαίας καθ' εν ὁ θεθ ἐδενὶ ἑτέρῳ δὲναι τω δόξαν ἀπό λέγει ὅτως εἴπων ἐγὼ κύριθ ὁ θεὸς τῶτὸ με ὄνοματιὼ διξὰν μὲ ἑτέρω ὁ μὴ δώσω.

Thus

Thus you treat Ireneus also, for you own that he says Christ P. 26. was God's Eternal Word, unmade; and yet you suppose his Meaning also to be, not made out of Nothing. Irendus further says, that he always coexisted with the Father, and was ever with him: To which your Answer is very pretty, viz. and he avoided saying, that God created him: Pray how was it poffible for him to say this last, after he had said the first? Eternal, Unmade, and yet Created, could be faid by none, who knew what a Contradiction was; and only by one, who could have a Notion of a made God,

You quote out of Tertullian, What other Characteristick is P. 16. there of God than Eternity? I agree, that without it he would not be God; and therefore all your Quotations, and your own Assertions, that our Saviour is God, are vain, and serve only to amuse or abuse the World, if you do not believe him to be Eternal,

But to return to Athenagoras.

Perhaps it may be too nice an Objection to your Translation of δι' υιβολιών Cνήσεως, out of your Depth of Understanding, to tell you that βολὴ is Excess, and may be not a Compliment, but a Reproof of their Curiosity in defiring to pry into Mysteries unfathomable. But let this pass.

(*) Why did you omit what immediately preceded your Quotation, viz. The Father and the Son being One; the Son being in the Father, and the Father in the Son, in Unity and Power ' of the Spirit; the Son of God is the Mind, or Wisdom, or Word of the Father.

And immediately after your Quotation follows:

(P) And we say that the Holy Ghost working in the Prophets, is • the Efflux of God flowing from and reflected back to him, as • the Rays of the Sun: Who then would not wonder, that should ' hear them call'd Atheists, who acknowledge God the Father, • God the Son, and the Holy Ghost, shewing both their Power

in Unity, and their Distinction in Order?

Surely Athenagoras is a Christian Writer before the Days of Athanafius, and does here affert the Three Persons to be One God; and yet in your Letter to the Bishop of London, you P. 19. challenge any Man to produce one that does fo; and I observe, that you there allow Tertullian does so, but you therefore

(ο) Ἑνὸς ὄντα το πάτρὸς νὰ τὸ ψε, ὄντα ἢ τὸ μὲ ἐν πα πατρὸς ἐν ἡῷ ἑνότητι κὶ δυναμει πνώύματα : νὲς ές κιλό 2ο το πατρὸς ὁ φὸς τὸ θεκ.

(Ρ) Καὶ πι αὐτὸ ἐνεργῶν τοῖς ἐκφωνᾶσι προφητικῶς ἄγιον των ώμα ἀπόῤῥοιαν εί) φαμλύ τὸ θεῖ ἀπορρέον κὶ ἀναφερόμμαν ὡς ἀκτῖνα ἡλίγ· τις αν ἐκ ἐπιῤῥησαι λέγοντας θεὸν πατέρα κὶ ὑτὸν θεὸν κὶ πνώμα ἄκον δεικνύτας κὶ ἐν ἑνώσει διύαμιν κα · τιὼ ἐν τῇ τάξει διαίρεσιν ἀκέσας ἀπέος καλομλύας.