P. 8.

This you have omitted :

Then follows:

(*) The Unbegotten and Eternal Light being One, how can the Image be other than One? Does not the Splendor, or the Ray, being the Light, preServe in all respects the Likeness of the Prototype? How can it be the Image of the very One, unless it self also be One ?

Then follows a Passage which you have omitted in this Place, because in your own Judgment it does not consist with the Doctrine which you would have Eufebius to affert here ; for you have cited it, p. 8. among the Authorities for the Coeternity of the Son of God; but have done it very aukardly, and indeed have corrupted it, as will appear by

(*) ̓Αγλυνήτε γε ἓν κὶ ἀϊδίκ φωτὸς ὄντὸς ἑνὸς, πῶς ἂν γλύοιτο ἄλλο οῖὰ τις εἰκὼν; ἐχὶ ἢ αὐγὴ ἔσα φῶς χει πάντα τὸ ἐμφερές πὸ πρωτοτύπῳ στόζεσα, πῶς ἢ ἂν ἀυτᾶ τὸ ἑνὸς εἰη εἰκὼν οἰ μὴ μα κὶ αὐτὴ ὅσα.

(*) Ταγὲ μιὰ ἡ προκειμύης ἡμῖν θεολογίας, &c. ὑιὸν γεννὴτὸν ἐ χρόνοις μιὸ τισιν ἐκ ὄντα, ὕςερον ἢ γεγονότα ἀλλὰ πρὸ γκόνων αἰωνίων ὀντα κὶ ωρρόντα κὶ τῷ πατρὶ ὡς ὑτὸν διαπαντός ζωνόντα κὶ ἔκ ἀλλώνητον ὀντα γεννωθρον ἢ ἐξ ἀγεννήτε πατρός μονογενή όντα, λόγον κὶ θεὸν ἐκ θεῖ. (γ) ου χει δια σησιν ἢ τιμίω ἢ διαίρεσιν ἐκ τ τῦ πατρὸς ἐσίας προβεβλημθύον,

ἀῤῥήτως ἢ κὶ ἀνεπιλογίσως ἡμῖν.

(P) Re

(P) Receiving, before all Ages, a real Subsistence by the inexpressible and inconceivable Will and Power of the Father.

This also you have omitted

(P) Before all Ages, being P. 20. substantiated of or according to the inexpressible and inconceiva- cκ σκλῆς. ble Counsel and Power of the Father.

(৭) For, as 'tis said, Who can declare his Generation? For as none knoweth the Father, but the Son: So none knoweth the Son, but the Father who begat him.

I imagine your translating βελή, Will, which it does not fignify, rather than Counsel, which it properly does, was to fupport your Opinion, that the Generation of the Son of God P. 20. was not by Neceffity of Nature, but voluntary by the Will of the Father when it pleas'd him; which you say, is the same Thing as Creation, and so he would be but a Creature.

But surely this cannot be the Meaning of this Passage, for ic would be inconfiftent with the plain and express Assertions in this Place. For,

I. How can that which was begotten, not as not being in any Times, but being before Eternal Ages, beyond our Ratiocination from Eternity, be said to be a Creature?

2, If Eufebius meant to affert his Generation to be a Creation, why did he cite the Prophet's Question, which implies a Negative, that none can declare his Generation, and give our Saviour's Reason for it, because none knows the Son but the Father ? which Text he quotes in another of his Books with this emphatical Expression, καλ' αξίαν, none knoweth the Son perfet- Eccl. Hift ly according to his Dignity, but the Father. 1. i. c. e..

And if he meant he was created by the Will of the Father, p. 5. why did he add those Epithets of Inexpressible and Inconceivable Will? For tho' we cannot conceive what the Nature and Effence may be of such a Created Being, yet we can conceive that Fat, as well as that the World was created by his Will, when he spake the Word, and it was made; if that had been told us as plainly as this has been; or otherwise you must say, that 'tis inconceivable, that an Act of the Will should be an Act of the Will, which is absurd, nay, I may say, 'tis easier to con

(P) Ἐξ ἀιῶν μάλλον πρὸ πάντων ἀιώμῶν ἐκ ὁ το πατρὸς ἀνεκφράσε κι ἀπερινοήτε βελῆς κ δινάμεως ἐσις μλύον.

(4) Τὴν τὸ γλυεὰν ἀυτέ, φησὶ, τὶς διηγήσε) κι ώσπερ ἐδείς ἔγνω ἢ πατέρα εἰ μὴ ὑἱὸς, ὕτω κὶ Η ὑτὸν ἐδεὶς ἔχνω εἰ μὴ μότ να ὁ γλυνήσας αὐτὸν πατὴρ.

ceive

>

1 John i.

5.

John viii.

12.

John xiv. 6.

Heb. i. 3.

Nicene

Creed.

ceive, that He, who was always in Being, as Eusebius here says, may be form'd by Almighty God into Something more excellent, than it is to conceive a Creation out of Nothing.

3. If you will insist that C&λή shall fignify Will, you should at least have translated in Crλῆς, of the Will, as you do Θεὸς en Os, God of God: For all the Attributes of God being Eter nal and Effential to the Godhead, the Will is so too; and as the Father is Light, Truth, Wisdom, &c. the Son is said to be so also, as partaking of and anointed with all the Paternal Dignity, in the Language of Eufebius before-mention'd; and in that of St. Paul, the bright Efflux of his Glory, and the express Image of his Person; and therefore the Son of his Will does no more denote his Creation, than the Son of his Love, or the Son of God Col. i. 13. do. Nay, 'tis in this manner that the Nicene Council has express'd his Coeternity and Consubstantiality, (k) Light of Light, very God of very God, begotten not made: So that when you can prove, that the Reverend Fathers of that Council intended by those Expreffions, that the Son of God was a Creature, then you may interpret your Quotations of the like Expreffions in the like manner; and add, if you please, that this is the Doctrine and Faith of the Church of England too; but till then, your confident Boastings of your Testimonies will not shake, but rather root us in Faith; fuch Blustring will be like Wind to the ftrong Oaks, 'twill only fix the Roots more fast in the Ground. Eufebius gives us an Account of the Notion which Plato and his Disciple Plotinus had of a Trinity, and speaks of it with I think this Inference may justly be drawn from it, That if such Great Men did not think such a Notion to be absurd, surely you have been too forward and rash to censure it as inconsistent with the Light of Nature and common Sense. But, on the other Hand, if your Eufebius has been too much pleas'd with their Notions, and has any where us'd Expreffions suited to it, I leave you to follow your admir'd Example, and to deduce Christianity from Heathen Philosophers, and to explain Divine Mysteries by the Reafonings of Man.

Prepar.

Evang.1.4. fome Admiration of their great Penetration:

C. 5, 6.

P. 37.

You bid me suppose my self in a Court of Judicature, and review the Evidence you have produced; and then confider, whether I could with a safe Conscience determine on the Side of the Athanafians. My Answer is, That such Evidence as you have given for your Cause, would not be accepted in any Court by any upright Judge, and confequently you may easily conclude what the Judgment must be: Nay, I will add, that such a Witness

(*) Φῶς ἐκ φωτὸς θεὸν ἀληθινὸν ἐκ θεῦ ἀληθινό, γλυνηθέντα

1

would hardly escape unpunish'd; for 'tis his Duty to speak the Truth, and the whole Truth: But to mif-translate your Authors, to cite them by halves, and with oc's, leaving out plain and express Affertions against you, and adding of your own to them; to distort their plain Words, and to interpret, or, rather, to declare dogmatically their Meaning contradictory to what they say, is such a Proceeding, as is no less than an Attempt to impose upon Mankind in the most provoking Manner.

Nay, you have not only corrupted your own Testimonies, but you are prepar'd to baffle the best that can be brought against you, which is the Scripture, in the very Foundation of all Religion; for you are so fond of your Notion of a made God, and that the Son of God is a Creature, and consequently not Eternal, that to avoid the Consequence of the Application to him of the Expressions which in the Scriptures are us'd to denote the Eternity of God the Father, you have ventur'd upon a very bold Affertion, That this Eternity of the Father is only P. 25. • suppos'd to be express'd without Proof; it no way appearing, that the Sacred Writers meddle beyond our Faculties with any such • absolute Eternity, either à Parte ante, or Parte post, as the Schoolmen have fince done.

Strange Doctrine! but most welcome to Atheists and Debauchees; and farewel to all Faith and Morality, and to all Religion which consists of them.

If the Gospel, which brought Immortality to Light, has not plainly and fully declar'd an Eternity so much as à Parte poft, then neither are our Souls immortal, nor the Joys of Heaven, nor the Torments of Hell everlasting; at least the Light of Nature will not be sufficient to convince the Generality of Mankind of these Truths, since both the Light of Nature, and of the Gospel too added to it, has not been effectual (God knows) with too many of the World, in the several Ages of it. But if the Expreffions in Scripture of Eternity à Parte post, should fignify no more than, according to your Construction, a Duration to the End of the Age, or of the World, then the State of good and bad Men will end with it; and, which is most absurd, the Happiness of the one, and the Misery of the other, will be at an End before the Perfection and Completion thereof will begin; which will not be till the Day of Judgment, after this World is dissolu'd, and the Elements are melted 2 Pet. ii. away with fervent Heat.

Your Reason you give, why the Sacred Writers meddle not with Eternity, is, because it is beyond our Faculties: Perhaps Eternity, à Parte poft, is not so. Many wicked Men think so little of Death, that one may conclude they fancy an Eternal Duration even upon Earth; and some ancient Philosophers and modern Atheists have declar'd their Belief, that the Earth will

C 4

12.

P. 35.

John xvi.

13.

will last for ever, and that Matter was Eternal, even à Parte

ante.

But if your Reason be good, how comes your Scheme of Religion to be form'd? For you own, that the Generation of the Son of God was in an ineffable Manner, that is, above our Faculties: Did you find this in the Scriptures? This Part certainly is; but then they meddle beyond our Faculties; and indeed a Revelation from Heaven does imply something, which by Nature we could not know : But if you do not find the rest of your Scheme of Religion there, as most certainly 'tis not; then you have undertaken a Subject, which the Sacred Writers thought too hard for them; and if your Doctrines be true, then there are some Truths, which the Holy Ghost, who was to lead us into all Truth necessary to our Salvation, has not discover'd to us, but have been referv'd for you. Who can declare his Generation? says the Prophet. It seems he did not foresee that you would undertake to do it, tho' you acknowledge it to be ineffable; nay, so particularly, as to tell us plainly it was a Creation, and even the very Time of it, viz. a P.16, 30. little before the Creation of the World, when ' Almighty God ' refolu'd on that great Work, perceiving that Wisdom was necef'sary for it, he presently creates her in himself, or out of his • Substance, into a real Being or Person; tho' of this you are doubtful; for (as I observ'd before) you cite another Authority, ' that it was not of the Unbegotten Substance of the Father, but was it self begotten by the Divine Power; and that • He was the Ancientest of God's Creatures; even so ancient, that your Author car'd not to assign the Date of his Generation, or Creation.

Ifa. liii. 8.

P. 26.

P. 32.

P. 15.

De Ifide

:

But you say from Tertullian very truly, What other Charateristick is there of God, but Eternity? And are the Scriptures filent in this, without which the Father himself would not be God? Could the Heathen Philosophers speak of this in so plain and lofty Terms; and did the Holy Ghost not assist, but so indulge our Weakness, as not to speak of it? tho' the most important, because the Foundation, of all his other Effential Attributes.

Plutarch says, the Temple of Ifis had this Inscription: (d) • I am all that ever was, and is, and shall be ; and no Mortal has & Ofiride, uncover'd my Veil: And tho we must own, that we fee darkly, and thro a Veil, (for who can comprehend the infinite Perfections of God?) yer, that God must be Eternal, is so plain a Truth, that none who truly believ'd a God, ever deny'd it.

P. 554

(4) Ἐγώ εἰμι πᾶν τὸ γεγονὸς κὴ ὂν κὶ ἐσόμθυον κὰ ἢ ἐμὸν πέτ πλον ἐδείς πω θνητός ἀποκάλυψεν.

And