them also tempted and were destroyed of Serpents The Israelites then were destroyed of Serpents for their tempting that is provoking the Lord Christ with their Sins while in the Appearance of an Angel he led them thorow the Wilderness To this Text Grotius answers that without doubt Let us not tempt Christ is a false Reading and that we ought to read with the Alexandrian Copy Let us not tempt God as some of them tempted and were destroyed of Serpents Dr. Bull replies the Authority of the Alexandrian Copy cannot be opposed to the Syriac Latin and Arabick Versions to St. Ambrose St. Chrysostom and Theophylact. Yes the Alexandrian Copy is much antienter than any of those Versions or Fathers the Latin which is the first was made by St. Jerom above 100 Years after the Alexandrian Copy But why has Dr. Bull suppressed it that one of his own Historians St. Epiphanius has expresly informed us who was the particular Man that corrupted this Text the Heretick Marcion instead of let us not tempt the Lord that is to say God published in his Copies let us not tempt Christ Epiphan l. 1. T. 1. p. 358. Edit Petav. This Corruption is very antient for Marcion one of the first that defended our Saviour's Pre-existence and to support that Doctrine corrupted this Text flourished about the Year 150. But after the Nicene Council 't is no wonder that many Trinitarians followed in this Text the Copies of Marcion as being then near 200 Years old and it was after the Nicene Council that all the Versions and Fathers to whom Dr. Bull appeals concerning this Text appeared But to confirm farther the Pre-existence of the WORD or Son of God Dr. Bull dares pretend that 't is a part of the Jewish Cabbala or traditional Knowledg which that Nation derived from Moses he from God Hereupon he cites some Words of the Apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon which according to him is a very autient Book also some Expressions of Philo Judaeus supposed to be a Jew by Religion as well as by Nation He appeals also to the Chaldee Paraphrases or Translations of the Old Testament by Onkelos and Jonathan as if these spake of the WORD as a Person and the great Messenger of God under the Old Testament And finally he says Masius on Joshua has quoted a certain Rabbi and an old Jewish Book called Tanchumam which speak of the WORD much after the manner as doth the Author of the Wisdom of Solomon He saith first that the Pre-existence of the WORD as a Divine Almighty Person and as the Son of God is a part of the Jewish Cabbala or traditional Knowledg Then to prove this he cites Passages out of Philo the Wisdom of Solomon the Paraphrases of Onkelos and Jonathan a certain Rabbi and the Book Tanthumam He thinks it should seem that these Jewish Writers had their Notion of the WORD from the Jewish Cabbala I cannot but wonder I coufess that a Protestant Divine should believe the Jewish Cabbala or think that the Jews had a traditional Knowledg or Institution concerning God and Religion distinct from the Books of Moses and the Prophets I had thought that all Protestants nay all Christians were agreed that the Cabbala is the Invention of the Pharisees and Masters of the Pharisaical Sect not a Trudition from Moses If the Cabala had come from Moses or had it been acknowledged by the Prophets and antient Jewish Church as of Divine Revelation and Institution it would have been often mentioned appealed and alluded to in the Books of the Old Testament and there is no question that Ezra when he made the Collection of Canonical Books and Monuments immediately after the Return from the Babylonish Captivity would have had an especial Care of the Divine Cabala or Traditional Knowledg He would have committed it to Writing lest it should be lost or corrupted He would have added it to the Canon of Scripture when he collected all other Pieces that had been written by the Prophets or other holy Men He that has left to us the Proverbs of Solomon his Book of Love nay the Story of Ruth would not have neglected the Divine Cabala But I shall put this Dilemma to Dr. Bull let him take it by which Horn he likes best Either the Cabala of the Jews is of humane Invention or of divine Appointment and Revelation If the former why has he quoted in so great a Question as this now before us a spurious Work an Imposture an impious Pharisaical Addition to the Holy Scripture will such fraudulent Arts as these help or credit his Cause If the other if the Cabala is a Tradition of Divine Revelation and Institution 't is of equal Authority with the Writings of Moses and the Prophets and Dr. Bull ought to bind it up with the other two Parts of Holy Scripture namely the Old and New Testaments Dr. Bull may do as he pleases but the Socinians acquiesce in that Judgment which our Saviour himself has made of the Cabala at Mat. 15.6,9 where he calls this Traditional Law the Commandments of Men a mere humane Pharisaical Figment he adds there that by this Tradition of theirs they contradicted and made void the true and genuine Commandments of God It is in vain therefore that Mr. Bull tells us of a Cabala of the Jews of which he precariously and without having read it or so much as knowing what it is supposes that it not only speaks of the WORD but speaks of it as a Person and the Son of God and afterwards falls to citing some Jewish Authors who from this Cabala as he again untruly supposes discourse of the WORDâ—… a pre-existent Person the Son of 〈◊〉 by Generation and God's Messenger 〈◊〉 Minister during the times of the Old Testament I say this Pretence of Dr. Bull is vain because supposing the Cabala did speak of the WORD as a Person and the Son of God pre-existent to the Creation it self and supposing again that the Jewish Authors whom he cites had taken their Doctrine from the Cabala yet what will all this avail when the Cabala it self is so certainly not a Tradition from Moses or God but a mad Collection of Follies and Chimeras the sickly Dreams of the Fanatical Pharisees The Jewish Cabala is so far from owning a Trinity that this very Doctrine of Apostate Christians is the chief Offence that the Jews take at the Christian Religion it is the great thing that their learned Men in all Books and Conferences object to us that we have departed from the first Commandment and have advanced a second and a third God Farther they as little believe the WORD when taken in the Platonick Sense namely for a Person or that God has a Son who was his Minister in the Creation of all things and his Messenger or Angel to the Patriarchs In short neither now nor formerly have the Jews believed that the WORD is the Son of God but only his Power Energy and Virtue Dr. Bull will
and all other things that tend to Edification in Christ But here two Doubts arise First whether the Epistles that we now have were the same that are intended in the Epistle of Polycarp or so much as directed to the same Persons or Churches The Reason of the doubt is the Epistles that we now have treat of nothing less than Faith and Patience nay they treat not of Faith and Patience at all much less if it could be are they a Collection of all things that tend to Edification in Christ they are very far from being a kind of Summary of the Christian Doctrine either in Faith or Morals They are Letters of Compliment and Respect not of Instruction or Exhortation The other Doubt is of what Authority and Credit is this Epistle of Polycarp on which the Credit of the Epistles of Ignatius wholly depend Mr. Du Pin answers It is quoted by St. Ireneus Supposing now what Mr. Du Pin has not proved nor can prove that the Epistle of Polycarp intended by Ireneus is in part that Epistle of Polycarp which we now have because both the one and the other are directed to the Philippians I say supposing this yet divers learned Criticks are of opinion that the genuine Epistle written by the true Polycarp and which Ireneus intends concludes with the 12 th Chapter where he solemnly gives them his valedictory Blessing so that the following Chapters which speak of Ignatius his Epistles and other Matters have probably been added by him whoever he was who contrived Epistles in the Name of Ignatius No says Mr. du Pin nor can that be for Ireneus who praises that Epistle of Polycarp quotes also certain Words which are found in the very Epistles of Ignatius But I do not know that Ireneus quotes any Epistle of Ignatius or so much as names the Man but only repeats a Saying of a certain Christian Martyr which Saying the Forger of the Epistles of Ignatius thought fit to insert into those Epistles which himself wrote in the Name and Person of Ignatius In short I say Eusebius and before him Origen owned the present Epistles of Ignatius because they considered the Matter but lightly as not being any way concerned to disprove them And Ireneus older than they quotes an Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians as also elsewhere some Words that are now found in an Epistle imputed to Ignatius but supposing that we now have that Epistle of Polycarp yet it seems likely that the Epistle did then conclude with the 12 th Chapter without any mention of the Epistles of Ignatius and we cannot be assured that Ireneus quotes the Words of one of the Epistles of Ignatius rather than that the Forger of those Epistles borrowed those Words from Ireneus If it be said but why all this Suspiciousness it will be hard to prove any Matter of Fact of remote Ages if such close and strict Proofs be required I answer there is too much Cause to start these Doubts and Suspicions For we have the Epistle of Polycarp to the Philippians as also the Epistles of Ignatius and the Martyrdoms of Ignatius and Polycarp whereof the latter is contained in an Epistle pretended to be written by the Church of Smyrna with this Advertisement at the end of them This Epistle concerning the Martyrdom of Polycarp was transcribed by Cains from the Copy of Ireneus who was a Disciple of Polycarp And I Socrates transcribed it at Corinth from the Copy of Caius After which I Pionius wrote it from the Copy before-mentioned having searched it out by the Revelation of Polycarp who directed me to it having gathered these things together now almost corrupted by Time that Jesus Christ may also gather me together with his Elect ones Here then is an Epistle namely the Epistle of the Church of Smyrna concerning the Martyrdom of Polycarp and as the Advertisement saith other things that were almost corrupted thorow Process of Time namely a Relation of the Martyrdom of Ignatius and seven Epistles of Ignatius all these miraculously discovered to Pionius the good by Polycarp after his Death It should seem Polycarp could not rest even in Rest nor be blessed in Blessedness till he had broke from the Abodes of Bliss and appeared to honest Pionius to make known to him where these Golden Remains were to be found If we should understand the Advertisement so as saying that the Epistle concerning Polycarp's Martyrdom came to Pionius by Revelation and the other Pieces and Epistles were collected by the proper Industry of Pionius yet thus the whole Collection depends on the Credit of Pionius who with most I doubt has utterly ruined his Credit as a Publisher of antient Monuments by his Pretence that at least part of them are by Revelation The Clowns will certainly cry out Away with Impostors let Pionius take his Bandle to himself both his own Collection and Polycarp's Revelation for coming from him we must needs believe them to be true alike Could not this Knave will they say be content to personate first the Church of Smyrna in a most palpable Fiction then the Assistants at the Martyrdom of Ignatius and finally Ignatius himself but he must seek too to confirm his counterfeit Wares by Revelations from Heaven by Visions and Apparitions of departed Saints We demand Authorities out of the Antients concerning the pretended Divinity of our Saviour from Writings and Monuments that are verified by some good humane Testimony our Opposers answer us out of Books which some of their Fraternity received by Apparitions by Revelations from the Dead but if once we allow of such Proofs what end will there be of Fictions The departed Saints were first called up to bear witness to certain Epistles and Books but in the next Age when the first Cheat had taken with many they were made to witness to their Bones and Reliques in order to their being inshrined and worshipped this last sort of Apparitions were every whit as true as the first They will prove they say their consubstantial co-eternal Trinity not only from the Antenicene Fathers but from the Apostolical Fathers that is the Fathers that had Converse with the very Apostles and flourished some of them to the Year 150 but when these Authors are produced they are Barnabas the Apostle the Prophet Hermas the Martyrdoms and Epistles of Polycarp and Ignatius whereof the two former we have seen are rejected as spurious by the Catholick Church the other are grounded on Visions and Apparitions to one Pionius But let us consider the Contents of these pretious Pieces the Pionian 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Martyidom of Polycarp saith That when the Fire began to blaze to a great height the Flame making an Arch like the Sail of a Ship against a full Wind incompass'd the Martyr's Body at a distance without hurting it while from his Body proceeded a Smell like to Frankincense or some other rich Spices The first of these Miracles would make the Boys wonder and shout
Trallians I salute you saith he to the Trallians in the Fulness of the Apostolical Character In short no one can read these Epistles with Judgment and impartially but he will see what was the Aim of the Forger of them namely under the venerable Authority and Name of Ignatius to magnify the Reverence and Respect belonging to Church-men This is the Beginning Middle and End of all these Epistles except only that to the Romans where to cover his Design and discover his Folly he only advises the Christians not to rescue him from the Imperial Guards These are all the Apostolical Fathers and Writings that our Opposers can muster up during the first 150 Years of Christianity that is to the Times when the Socinians and all Protestants confess that the Faith began to be actually corrupted I have proved that the Monuments they have to produce are unquestionably and incontestably counterfeit and therefore I do not think my self concerned to examine the few and impertinent Passages alledged out of them by Dr. Bull but before I proceed to his other approved Doctors 't is but reasonable that I should have leave to search what Authors and Books of these times of which we are speaking favoured the Unitarians and particularly the Socinians The Question between Dr. Bull and the Unitarians is what genuine Monuments or Remains there are of the Period which Church-Historians have called the Apostolical Succession that is of the Time in which those Doctors of the Church who had conversed with the Apostles and received the pure Faith of the Gospel from their very Mouths flourished And whether those Remains or Monuments do favour the Unitarians or the Trinitarians whether they teach the Doctrine of one God or of three We have seen what Dr. Bull can produce for their pretended Trinity his Apostle Barnabas the Prophet Hermas both of them rejected as false and soolish by the Catholick Church Next the Revelations of Pionius that is the Martyrdoms of Polycarp and Ignatius and their Epistles all which being almost perished and worn out by Time were revealed to Pionius by one from the Dead It is true our Opposers having been so long Masters have made use of their Power to destroy and abolish as much as was possible whatever Monuments of those first Times that too notoriously contradicted the Innovations in the Faith that were made by the Councils of Nice Constantinople and Chalcedon yet as there is no Battel so bloody and cruel but some tho it may be a very few have the good luck to escape from the Massacre so from this Persecution of Books and Writings some illustrious Testimonies and Witnesses to the Truth are come down even to our Times These are the Apostles Creed an unquestioned Epistle of St. Clemens Romanus the Accounts given by unsuspected Historians of the Nazarens or Ebionites the Mineans and the Alogi who all held as the Socinians now do concerning God and the Person of our Saviour the Recognitions of St. Clemens which tho it may be they are not rightly imputed to him yet are a most antient Book and serve to show what was the current Doctrine of those Times they are cited by Origen in divers Places by Eusebius Aikanasins and others Of the Apostles Creed COncerning the Apostles Creed we must resolve two Questions What it teaches and who were the Compilers of it To the first the Creed it self answers I belâ—eve in one God so this Creed was antiently read both in the East and West the Father Almighty Maker of Heaven and Earth In these Words the Father is character'd by these Names Properties and Attributions that he is God the one God Almighty and Maker of Heaven and Earth Concerning the Lord Christ it saith And in Jesus Christ his only Son Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 only begotten Son our Lord. So the Characters of our Saviour are that he is not the one God but the only begotten Son of the only or one God and that he is our Lord. Our Lord he is as he is our Saviour Teacher and Head of the Church both in Heaven and Earth He is called the only begotten Son of the only or one God to distinguish him from all other Sons of God from Angels who were not begotten but created Sons from Holy Men who are adopted Sons and from Adam who is called the Son of God not because he was generated or begotten but made or formed by God himself immediately Well but it may be this only-begotten Son of God is an only-begotten Son in some higher Sense and namely by eternal Generation from the Substance or Essence of God whereby he is God no less than the Father is God But the Compilers of this Creed knew nothing or however have said nothing of any such Generation so far from that they describe his Generation and his Person by humane Characters and by such only Every thing that they say here either of his Person or Generation is not only humane but inconsistent with Divinity He was conceived say they of the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary was crucified dead and buried he arose again from the Dead ascended into Heaven sitteth on the right Hand of God i. e. is next in Dignity to God Our very Opposers confess that every one of these is a Description of a mere humane Person and Generation even they acknowledg that God cannot be conceived be born die ascend and least of all be at God's right Hand or next to God to be God and next to God are wholly inconsistent There is no answering here that the before-mentioned are intended only as the Characters of our Saviour's Humane Nature For a Creed being an Institution or Instruction what we are to believe in the main and sundamental Articles of Religion especially concerning the Persons of the Father Son and Holy Spirit if the first is described as the one or only God and the Son only by Characters that speak him a mere Man and are utterly incompatible with Divinity it remains that the Compilers of the Creed really intended that we should believe the Father is the one God and the Son a mere Man tho not a common Man because conceived not of Man but of the Holy Spirit which is the Power and Energy of God If they had meant or but known that the Son and Spirit are eternal and divine Persons no less than the Father they have done to both of them the greatest possible Wrong because in the same Creed in which they declare that they believe that the Father is the one God Almighty and Maker of Heaven and Earth they believe the Son was conceived born died descended into Hell ascended into Heaven is next to God that is they believe he is a mere Man and concerning the Spirit they believe no higher thing than of the Church we believe in the Holy Spirit and in the Holy Catholick Church It is evident then and incontestable by any fair and sincere Considerer that whoever
flagitious Men in the World I am of opinion we ought to answer that 't is not to be wondred at if a counterfeit Apostle belies the true ones This Crimination of the true Apostles is in the 5 th Chapter of the alledged Epistle The more learned and impartial Criticks freely observe concerning this Epistle that 't is full of strained and dull Allegories extravagant and incongruous Explications of Scripture and abundance of silly and notorious Fables concerning Animals And what all judicious Men think of the Epistle is that it is indeed very antient being quoted by Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen but that it was forged about the beginning of the 2 d Century or the 2 d Century being well advanced when also the Gospels of St. Thomas St. Peter St. Matthias the Acts of St. Andrew St. John and other Apostles were devised and published as Eusebiue witnesses H. E. l. 3. c. 25. But lest this Epistle should be thought to be of somewhat the more Credit because 't is barely quoted by Clemens and Origen the Reader may take notice that Clemens cites also other counterfeit Works of the Apostles as particularly the Revelation of St. Peter as has been noted by Eusebius H. E. l. 6. c. 14. And nothing is more common with Origen than to quote such supposititious Writings as for Instance the Book of Enoch the Revelation of St. Paul the Doctrine of St. Peter and many more concerning which Citations the Reader may see what Mr. du Pin has observed at large Cent. 3. p. 113. Dr. Bull 's next approved Father is the great either Prophet or Impostor Hermas in his Book called the Pastor or Shepherd We grant that St. Paul mentions one Hermas Rom. 16.14 and we doubt not that the Author of the Shepherd would be understood to be that Hormas for he makes himself contemporary with Clemens Romanus mentioned also by St. Paul Phil. 4.3 Vision 2 d. Chap. 4. The Shepherd of Hermas is distinguished into 3 Books whereof the first contains 4 Visions the second 12 Commands the third 10 Similitudes but both the Commands and Similitudes may be called Visions and Prophecies because they are Representations and Charges made to him by Angels The Scene of these Visions is Arcadia and that we may be assured that this Author would be taken for a Prophet and would have his Book pass for a Divine Revelation he introduces the Angel in his 2 d Vision Chap. 4. as commanding him that he should prepare 3 Copies of these Visions one for Clement then Bishop of Rome to be sent by him to all the Churches another for Grapte who should instruct out of it the Widows and their Children the third Hermas himself was to read to the Presbyters of the City of Rome This is the Book and Author in which Dr. Bull finds or thinks he finds some Passages in favour of our Saviour's Divinity as I said at first we must carefully examine what is the true Character of this Work and Writer By what has been said it is evident to every one that this pretended Hermas either was a Prophet or an Impostor there is no Middle between these two when the Person pretends to Visions to Conferences with Angels and such like extraordinary things That the pretended Hermas was not a Prophet is certain to me by these Arguments 1. He owns in the third Command that he was a most egregious and common Liar he saith expresly that he scarce ever spake a true Word in his whole Life but always lived in Dissimulation and that to all Men. He weeps hereupon and doubts whether he can be saved but his Angel assures him that if for the time to come he will leave off his Lying he may attain to Blessedness He that was so addicted to lying 't is no wonder that he has counterfeited also Visions and Colloquies with Angels or that to gain Credit to his Chimeras and Follies he father'd them on Hermas an Apostolical Man and Friend of St. Paul as others before him had laid their spurious Off-springs to the Apostles themselves But 2. Some of his Celestial Visions contain manifest Falshoods particularly he maketh his Angel to tell him that the whole World is made up of twelve Nations Simil. 9. Chap. 17. Being a Person altogether ignorant of secular Learning as appears in all his three Books 't was almost impossible but that in his feigned Conferences with Angels he should sometimes make them to speak divers things both false and absurd 3. To add no more on this Trifler he has been judged to be no Prophet by the whole Catholick Church in that his Book is not reckoned among the Canonical Books of Scripture were it a real Revelation from God by the Ministry of Angels as the Author pretends and so esteemed by the Catholick Church it must have been put among the Canonical Books It is true when it first appeared it imposed on some Churches by the Boldness of its Pretence and therefore was read in those Churches as other genuine Parts of Scripture were but even then very many of the more Judicious rejected it and as the Church began to fill with learned and able Persons it was not only every where laid aside but censured as both false and foolish Of so many of the Antients as condemned it we need only take notice of Eusebius who speaking of the Books used by Christians whether privately or in publick says Some Books are received by common Consent of all others are of questioned and doubtful Authority and finally others are supposititious and counterfeit of which last kind saith he are the Acts of Paul the Revelation of Peter the Shepherd of Hermas and the pretended Epistle of Barnabas Euseb H. E. l. 3. c. 25. Dr. Bull 's third Author is Ignatius but neither is this Writer a whit better or honester than the pretended Barnabas or the counterfeit Hermas I do not mean to deny that we have still the Epistles that are quoted by the Antients Origen and Eusebius under the Name of Ignatius but this I affirm that they were forged under Ignatius his Name about the time that so many other Impostures were published under the Names of Aposiles and of Apostolical Men of which the Learned know there were almost an infinite Number Let us see first what the Criticks of the contrary Perswasion have to alledg for the Epistles of Ignatius we may hear Mr. Du Pin for them all because he has written last and more largely than any other He observes that St. Polycarp being thereto desired by the Philippians sent them the Epistles of Ignatius to which he also prefixed an Epistle of his own directed to the same Philippians Well we acknowledg that Polycarp writing to the Philippians tells them towards the Close of his Epistle that he had sent them according to their Desire the Epistles of Ignatius that had by any means come to his Knowledg or Hand He adds that in these Epistles Ignatius treats of Faith and Patience
made this Creed either they did not know that any other Person but the Father is God or Almighty or Maker of Heaven and Earth or they have negligently or wickedly concealed it The Latter is a Supposition that none will make therefore the other is the Truth of the Matter and it remains only that we enquire who were the Framers of this Creed The Creed that bears the Name of the Apostles Creed was always reckoned both by Fathers and Moderns to be really composed by the Apostles for a Rule of Uniformity among themselves in their Preaching and of Faith to all the Converts till about the middle of this present Age G. J. Vossius published a Book wherein he denies that either the Apostles or the 120 Disciples who are mentioned Acts 1.15 and who assisted and voted with the Apostles in publick Matters were Authors of this Creed He thinketh it was only the Creed of the particular Church of Rome and that the Original of it was this Because it was the Custom to interrogate Persons that were to be baptized whether they believed in God the Father in the Lord Christ the Son of God and in the Holy Ghost in whose Names Baptism is administred therefore in process of Time it became a Form of Confession for Persons who were admitted to Baptism to say I believe in God the Father in Jesus Christ his only-begotten Son and in the Holy Ghost Afterwards some few more Words were added to these as a fuller Description both of the Father and Son and as Heresies grew up new Articles were added to the Creed in opposition to them and to distinguish Catholicks from Hereticks Against all Hereticks and Schismaticks in general this Article was made I believe in the Holy Catholick Church against the Sects of the Gnosticks this Article I believe the Resurrection of the Body This is the Conjecture of Vossius Because it was so evident that this Creed makes only the Father to be God and that it speaks of the Son by only humane Characters and says not the least Word of the Divinity of the Holy Spirit therefore this Book of Vossius was received with a mighty Applause among all the Denomiantions of Trinitarians Papists Lutherans Calvinists and all others They saw themselves delivered by this Book from such an Allegation and Aughority against the Doctrine of the Trinity as was more than equivalent to all their pretended Proofs from the Fathers or from the Holy Scriptures For what are all the Fathers if indeed they were all of their side when opposed by the College of Apostles And what are some incidental and very dubious Expressions of some particular Writer of Holy Scripture against a Creed composed by the Concurrence and Consent of all the Apostles and of their Senate or Council the CXX A Creed in which they not incidentally in which case Men often speak loosly and incorrectly but professedly and designedly declare what is the true Faith to be believed by all Christians concerning the Father Son and Holy Spirit I say for this Reason 't is not to be much wondred that Vossius his Book was so kindly received or that the Trinitarians of whatsoever Perswasion have generally ever since followed the Conjecture of Vossius If now and then a learned Man has dissented from the new Opinion he has always been laugh'd out of Countenance by the Croud of Pretenders to Learning Vossius says 1. St. Luke in his Acts of the Apostles would never have omitted so memorable a Transaction as the compiling a Creed by all the Apostles for a Rule of Doctrine to themselves and their Successors in the Pastoral Office and of Faith to the Converts He has set down many lesser Matters the Election of Matthias into the Apostolate of Judas the Conclusion of the Apostles and Elders assembled in Council concerning the Ritual and Judicial Parts of the Mosaick Law and even divers petty Matters relating only to private Persons and is it credible that he should not say a Word of the Rule of Faith of a Creed made by the joint Consent of all the Apostles and intended for the general and perpetual Use of both Pastors and People But besides that this Creed is never spoke of in the Acts none of the Apostles mention or so much as allude or refer to it in any of their Epistles it is incredible not to say impossible that there should not be so much as a hint given of this Creed in all the Apostolick Writings if indeed it had been composed by the Apostles as their Joint Work for the Use of the whole Catholick Church There are abundance of false Steps made in this reasoning of Vossius 1 It is evident enough that divers most important Matters were ordained by the joint Council and Authority of the Apostles and the CXX which yet St. Luke did not think necessary to be inserted into his History of the Preaching Travels and Persecutions of the Apostles The Institution of the Lord's Day instead of or with the Sabbath or seventh Day appointed by God himself in the 4 th Commandment the Form of Church-Government whether you will say by Bishops or by a Presbytery or in the Independent Way the solemn manner of ordaining the Church-Pastors by Imposition of Hands and Prayer made for them the Love-Feasts the Holy Kiss all these every one will confess are Institutions not of one Apostle but of the College of Apostles and their Council the CXX and yet St. Luke has not told us either when or by whom they were ordained but is as silent of their Institution by the Apostles as of their composing the Creed 2 'T is not hard to guess at the Reason why none of these great Matters or the compiling the Creed are particularly recorded in the Acts of the Apostles namely because they are not bare Memoirs or transient things but such as were to be kept up and perpetuated by Example and Practice Every one sees that the Lord's Day the Form of Church-Polity or Government the Ordination of Church-Pastors the Love-Feasts and the Holy Kiss are Institutions that needed not to be recorded because the constant and universal Practice of them by the Apostles and the whole Church was more effectual to preserve them than any Register or History would be The like is as evident of the Creed it was to be orally taught to every Convert in every Place as the Mark of their Christianity therefore being committed to so many Witnesses and Memories it was considered not as a transient thing of which there was Danger that it might go into Oblivion if not recorded but as laid up safely in the Minds and Memories of all the Faithful Farther 't is an Observation made by all Church-Historians that the Antients of a long time purposely forbore to commit the Creed to Writing partly because they would not expose the Mysteries of Religion to the Contempt Raileries and Opposition of the Heathen partly to oblige their own People to be more
the better Moiety of the Roman Empire were called the Orient The Church of Rome tho she was not as she now calls her self the Mistress yet being the Patriarchal Chair of all the West she was the Example of the Churches of the West Part of the Empire I affirm now that these two Creeds as also that of Aquileia perfectly agree with the Vulgar by which he means the Apostles Creed as we now have it Mr. du Pin's Table which we confess to be exact enough will show us no Difference but what will confirm every intelligent Reader that without peradventure they are all but one Creed made by the same Author or Joint-Authors There is more Difference between the ten Commandments as recited by Moses at Exod. 20. and as repeated again by the same Moses at Deut. 5. than between these Creeds Mr. du Pin will sooner perswade a prudent Reader that the 10 Commandments in Deuteronomy were not the Commandments spoke on Mount Sinai and recorded Exod. 20. than that the 4 Creeds in his Table are not the same or came not from the same Hands The whole Difference of the 4 Creeds consists in these unsignificant Words and Expressions The Oriental Creed said I believe in one God the Father Almighty Invisible and Impassible The Roman I believe in God the Father Almighty and the Aquileian said I believe in one God the Father Almighty the present or Vulgar Creed adds Maker of Heaven and Earth The Roman and Aquileian and Present say And in Jesus Christ his only Son our Lord the Oriental transposes the word only thus and in our only Lord Jesus Christ his Son The Oriental Roman and Aquileian said who was born of the Holy Ghost and of the Virgin Mary the Present by way of Explication who was conceived of the Holy Ghost born of the Virgin Mary The Oriental and Roman said was crucified under Pontius Pilate and was buried the Aquileian crucified under Pontius Pilate buried descended into Hell the Present crucified under Pontius Pilate dead buried descended into Hell But descendit ad inferos he descended to those below or as we render it into Hell is confess'd on all Hands to be an accidental Addition in the Creed of Aquileia and from that Creed was taken into the Present Creed on this Occasion In some Churches it was said was buried in others went to those below which every one sees are equivalent Expressions and intended to signify the same thing but the Church of Aquileia desiring that her Creed should be most full and compleat took in both the Expressions tho at the same time as Ruffinus who was of Aquileia acknowledges she meant no more by both than other Churches by the single word buried And hence it was that the other Churches and Copies of the Creed which said descended into Hell or descended to those below did omit buried and so at this day doth the Athanasian Creed But it was not long before this Variety of expressing the same thing begat Mistakes for by occasion of this Expression descended to those below divers began to imagine a local Descent of Christ into Hell Some of them said to triumph over the Devil others said to release those Damned who believed and repented at the sight of him others had still other as ungrounded Conceits But the Disputes about the Reasons of our Saviour's Descent to those below made the Article taken in general to be believed and therefore it was added at last to the Roman Creed which with this and some other Alterations makes the Vulgar or Present Creed All the Creeds say the third Day he arose again from the Dead The Oriental Roman and Aquileian said he ascended into Heaven sitteth on the right Hand of God the Father the present to the word Father adds the word Almighty They all said from thence he shall come to judg the quick and the dead The Oriental Roman and Aquilean said And in the Holy Ghost the Present more explicitly I believe in the Holy Ghost The Oriental Roman and Aquileian said I believe the Holy Church the Communion of Saints the Present to the word Church adds the word Catholick or Universal All the Creeds said the Forgiveness of Sins In like manner they all said the Resurrection of the Body saving that the Aquileian said of this Body The Present concludes with the Life everlasting the other three mention not the Life everlasting because it is supposed and included in the foregoing Article the Resurrection of the Body I say now let any one read the ten Commandments at Exod. 20. and compare them with the same ten Commandments at Deut. 5. and he will perceive that he may better deny them to be the same Commandments than that these four various Copies are Copies of the same Creed The Variations of the 4 Copies are so inconsiderable the Causes of that Variation so obvious and evident that he that will call them not various Readings of the same Creed but 4 several Creeds proceeding from so many several Compilers in my opinion ought if obstinate in his Error to take Physick But if these are only various Readings of the same Creed without doubt we have gained our Point that the Apostles were the Authors of it For I desire to know how it was morally possible that the East and West which is to say all the Churches of Christendom should in all Kingdoms Provinces and Episcopates happen to have the very same Creed both for Number and Order of Articles and Manner of Expression if they did not receive it from the very same Persons from whom they received the Gospel and the Scriptures namely from the Apostles and other first Missionaries and Preachers of the Heavenly Doctrine It is granted to us that there had been no General Council when this Creed as we have made it appear was the common and only Creed both of the West and Orient therefore when all the Fathers without excepting any that speak of this Creed tell us they have received ex traditione Majorum by Tradition of their Predecessors that this Creed was made by the Apostles they give us such an Account as justifies and proves its own Truth for no other Cause can be thought of how it should become the common and only Creed of Christians 2 Mr. du Pin saith Ruffinus in the 5 th Century is the first Person who asserts that this Creed was composed by the Apostles and that too from popular Tradition indeed a great many other Fathers say the same thing but they all had it from Ruffinus First Mr. du Pin reckons Ruffinus to the 5 th Century only to lessen his Authority and Credit in this Question for it is certain and acknowledged by Dr. Cave and afterwards by Mr. du Pin that Ruffinus flourish'd at Aquileia in the Year 360. at which Time and Place he had a great Friendship and Intimacy with St. Jerom. It is true because he lived to be old he saw the Year of
Brother of our Lord if these believed that Christ was a Man only it will certainly follow that the Article concerning our Saviour's Divinity can be no longer defended Judic Eccl. p. 42. I do not thank him for this Concession for who sees not that if the Churches of Jerusalem and Judea planted by the Apostles and which indured in a most flourishing Condition under 15 successive Hebrew Bishops to the times of the Emperor Adrian were Unitarians then is the Unitarian Belief concerning our Saviour incontestably true and the certain Doctrine of the Apostles But before I argue this Point it will not be unprofitable to the Reader who is not versed much in these Questions if I give a short Account of the Occasion and Reason of these Names Nazaren Minean Ebionite The followers of the Doctrine of Jesus were first called Christians at Antioch a City of Syria out of the Bounds of Judea but in Judea it self they were from the first called Nazarens and Mineans Nazarens from Nazareth the Place of our Saviour's Education Mineans from an Hebrew Word which signifies Hereticks Tertullus when he accused Paul before Felix makes this to be his Fault that he was a Ring-leader of the Sect of the Nazarens Acts 24.5 To the other Name Minean or Heretick St. Paul himself refers in his Defence against the same Tertullus This I confess saith Paul that after the way which they call Heresy so worship I the God of my Fathers Acts 24.14 These two Names Nazaren and Minean are indifferently used by the Fathers in the following Ages that is they were applied to the same Persons and Sect so we learn from St. Jerom writing to St. Austin in these Words There is to this day over all the Orient a Jewish Sect who are called Mineans and by the Vulgar Nazarens who believe in Christ the Son of God St. Epiphanius in the Account he gives of this Sect says the Nazarens and Cerinthians began at the same time and that all Christians were at first called Nazarens Epiph. Haeres Naz. c. 1. What he says farther of them shall be alledged in its proper Place in the mean time these Testimonies which no Man controverts are sufficient to show what was the Cause of this Name and how antient it is and that the Sect thereby intended not only indured but overspread the Orient at what time St. Jerom wrote to St. Austin which was about the Year 416. What is meant by the Orient was declared before when I treated of the Creed Ebionites is another Name of the antient Unitarians and first genuine Christians tho not without a Mixture if their Adversaries after having destroyed all their Writings and Defences may be accepted as Witnesses against them of very bad People among them It is not certain whether they have been thus named from one Ebion a particular Man or from the poor and low Opinion they had of our Saviour's Person owning him indeed to be the Christ but the Son of Joseph and Mary Some of the Antients affirm the one some the other of these Nor is the Matter worth disputing because they are by all granted to have been Contemporaries with the Apostles and that they held the Lord Christ was a Man only the Christ the Son of Joseph and Mary by Generation the Son of God by Holiness Adoption and Exaltation The Question now between Dr. Bull and us is not concerning the Ebionites for he and all others grant that the Ebionites held concerning our Saviour that he was a mere Man but concerning the Nazarens and Mineans namely whether the Nazarens and Mineans supposed the Lord Christ was a Divine Person and God or only a Man a Prophet the true Messias or Christ the Son of God not only by Holiness Adoption and Exaltation as the other Ebionites said but by his miraculous Generation in the Womb of Mary by the Spirit or Power of God We affirm the latter of these but not altogether confounding the Mineans and Nazarens with the Ebionites For tho they were both of them Jews or Proselytes of the Jews yet there was this Difference between the Ebionites and the Nazarens that the former believed the Lord Jesus was the Son of Joseph and Mary by Nature the Son of God by Adoption Exaltation and Holiness but the Nazarens said he was the Son of God also by his miraculous Conception being conceived by the Spirit or Power of God and born of Mary who had never known any Man But this also is to be noted that tho the Nazarens held our Saviour's miraculous Conception by the Spirit of God and the Ebionites contended that he was the Son of only Joseph and Mary yet because they both agreed in these two main Points that Jesus Christ was a Man only and that the Law by Moses ought to be observed by all Jewish Christians not by the Gentile Christians together with the Gospel therefore the Vulgar and even those Learned Writers of the Catholick Party who consider'd them only in what they agreed namely that the Lord Christ is not God but Man only called both of them Ebionites as we shall presently see Dr. Bull is a very litigious Opposer it will therefore be expedient for the prevention of a great many Elusions and Subtleties to take notice in the first place what he grants to us concerning the proposed Question What the Nazarens held concerning our Saviour's Person What Authorities has he owned and how far has he yielded this Question in the yielding of which he professes that the Socinians have carried this whole Controversy concerning the Quality of our Saviour's Person for it can be disputed no longer he saith whether our Saviour was a Man only if the Nazaren Christians were of that Belief He grants that Origen assures us That the Jews who believe in Christ observe the Mosaick Law together with the Gospel and that all Jews who own Jesus to be the Christ are called Ebionites Orig. contr Cels l. 2. p. 56. I wish instead of his wondring at this Account given by Origen he had been so sincere as to let the Reader know that Origen having lived long in Syria nay in Palestine which is to say in the very midst of the Nazaren or Jewish Churches could not but know their true State and Opinions He saith all the Jews that are Christians are called Ebionites and does not he and with him all the Antients every where tell us that the Ebionites were all of them Unitarians nay were called Ebionites from their poor and low Opinion of our Saviour that he was a Man only not God Let Dr. Bull produce any of the Fathers who have ever named the Ebionites who do not also explicitly confess that they believed our Saviour to be a Man only In short the Nazarens are granted by all and by Dr. Bull in particular to be those Christian Jews that were gathered into Churches in Jerusalem and Palestine by the Ministry of the Apostles themselves Origen who lived
and Discipline were also Unitarians that is held with Hegesippus that the Lord Christ is a Man only For he saith apud Euseb l. 4. c. 22. That he travelled to Rome where he lived under the Popes Anicetus Soter and Eleutherus successively Popes of Rome but both here and in all other Episcopates they keep the Doctrines taught by the Law and the Prophets and by our Saviour Briefly he owns that he found the Churches every where to be Orthodox and uniform of which if he was an Unitarian as I think I have proved the Meaning can be only this that they believed as the Jewish Christians do the Lord Christ is a Man the Prophet and Messenger of God on whom the Logos or Divine WORD rested This perfectly agrees with the Account that the old Unitarians in Eusebius give namely that they had kept the Doctrine deliver'd by the Apostles and which was professed every where till the Opposition made to it by the Popes Victor and Zepherin who succeeded to Eleutherus as he to Soter and Soter to Anicetus with which Orthodox Popes Hegesippus had conversed The short is We grant that Eusebius says the Jerusalem-Bishops professed the true Knowledg of Christ We answer he borrowed this from Hegesippus whom he took for his Author especially in what concerned the Apostolick Times and the Times that followed to the taking of Jerusalem by the Emperor Adrian in the Year 135 that is while the 15 Bishops concerning whom our present Question and Debate is governed the Churches of Jerusalem and Judea But Hegesippus being himself a Jewish Christian that is one that believed our Saviour to be a Man only when he said the Jerusalem-Bishops professed the true Knowledg of Christ he undoubtedly meant that our Lord was a true and mere Man against the Docetae and other platonizing Christians who held his Pre-existence and denied that he was a Man Dr. Bull is not ashamed to infer from St. Austin's Saying that the Nazarens confess Christ is the Son of God that they held he is so the Son of God that he was born of God from all Eternity I say he is not ashamed of this Inference tho he knows that all Ebionites believed Christ was a Man only and yet Epiphanius says of them divers times as St. Austin does of the Nazarens that they own the Lord Christ is the Son of God For tho the Ebionites did not believe the miraculous Conception yet they said the Lord Christ is the Son of God progressione Virtutis quatenus ad sublimia coelestiaque provectus est i. e. by Holiness and by his Exaltation to the right Hand of God Epiphan Haeres Ebion c. 13. Iren. l. 3. c. 30. But let us recite the very Words of St. Austin de Haeres c. 9 10. The Nazarens as they confess Christ is the Son of God so they observe the whole Law the which Christians have been taught that 't is to be understood and taken spiritually not carnally The Ebionites also say that Christ is a Man only and observe the cernal Precepts of the Law These Words the Ebionites also say that Christ is a Man only would be Nonsense if the Nazarens of whom he speaks immediately before had not likewise so held In like manner he would put a false Meaning on these Words of St. Jerom The Nazarens believe in Christ the Son of God who was born of the Virgin Mary the same say they who suffered under Pontius Pilate and rose again from the Dead in whom also WE i. e. we of the Church believe One would have thought that when the Nazarens say here We believe in the Son of God that was born of the Virgin Mary was put to Death under Pontius Pilate and rose again from the Dead they had sufficiently declared that the Son of God in whom they believed was the Man Christ Jesus not a Son of God that could not be born of the Virgin Mary or die or rise again But because St. Jerom says in whom also we believe Dr. Bull cries out Look here the Nazarens believed in that Son of God in whom the Orthodox believed We think so too Doctor because both Parties believed in the Son of God who was generated and born of Mary died and rose again tho the Orthodox so called invented also another Son of God a Son that could not be generated and born of Mary a Son that could not die a Son as old as his Father a second Almighty another Creator first made known by the Council of Nice Next Dr. Bull produces as Passage out of Justin Martyr to prove that there were some Christians who observed the Mosaick Law and yet believed in such a Christ who was before Luciser and the Moon and who could these be but the Nazarens I answer whoever they were they were not the Nazarens most of the Gnostick Sects who also observed the Mosaick Law beld the Pre-existence of our Saviour What hinders but that they might be the Cerinthians Besides it is uncertain whether Justin meant to say that there were some Christians who keep the Law of Moses and yet believe that Christ was before Lucifer and the Moon to make out this Sense Dr. Bull is forced to add these Words to the Words of Justin such a Christ as you before described Judic Eccl. p. 52. which Addition seems also contrary to the Context where 't is inserted by Dr. Bull for Dr. Bull contends for a Christ in that Context who was before Lucifer and the Moon and the Context describes a Christ that was crucified and to whom GOD has committed the Judgment of the Dead and Living and has given to him a Kingdom that shall have no end This seems to be a mere Ebionite or Socinian-Christ a Man not God Lastly he quotes the Title of the 12 th Chapter of the 6 th Book of the Constitutions of St. Clement that is as Dr. Bull himself confesses falsly intitled to Sr. Clement The Words are these Of those who confess but yet live after the manner of the Jews Dr. Bull would have it thought that this Title speaks of those who confess that Christ is the most High and Eternal God These Mr. Bull thinks could be no other but the Nazarens But to come at that Conclusion Mr. Bull must first prove not only that the Nazarens believed the Lord Christ is God the WORD but that there were no other Denominations of Christians who observed the Mosaick Law and also believed that Christ is God the WORD But he knows that the Cerinthians and most of the Gnostick Sects did Judaize and also believe the Pre-existence of our Saviour and that he is God the WORD But let us grant to Dr. Bull whatever he contends for from this Citation and see how it will advantage his main Cause The Question is concerning the Nazarens whether they held as the Church now does that there is more than one Divine and Eternal Person are there two or three such Persons is the
Lord Christ the eternal God Yes says Dr. Bull for the Constitutions chap. 11. have a Confession to that purpose and the 12 th Chapter is concerning those that confess that is so confess and yet live after the manner of the Jews that is observe the Mosaick Law and these most certainly were the Nazarens But if the Nazarens confessed in the Form there mentioned they were far from believing as Dr. Bull and the Church now believe Let us hear the Confession at chap. 11. to which the Title urged by Dr. Bull does refer It saith We teach but one God the Father of Christ not a second not a third not a manifold God but one eternal God One would think this were Socinus or J. Crellius de uno Deo Patre but towards the Conclusion the Author or Authors show that he held the same Doctrine with Arius for tho he had said there is but one God who is Eternal or from Eternity yet he owns that Christ is not a mere Man but is also God the WORD That is there is but one true one eternal God yet the Son or WORD is also God in an inferiour Sense namely a God that was generated in time and is set over the Works of the Creation Monsieur du Pin deals ingenuously when he owns that the Author of the Constitutions seems to have been an Arian he rightly adds that the Constitutions as we now have them were forged after the times of St. Epiphanius for that Father quotes them far otherways than nay contrary to what they now are Eccl. Hist Cent. 1. p. 29 30. If the Reader compares this Section with what I have alledged in the foregoing he will perceive that 't is with the greatest Justice and Truth in the World that the present Unitarians claim the Nazarens or first Jewish Churches and Christians as of our Party Of the Alogi or Alogians c. FRom the Nazarens that is the Jewish Christians I go on to the Alogi or Alogians who were the antient Gentile Christians They were called Alogian or Alogi because they denied the Logos or WORD of which St. John speaks in his Gospel Epistles and Revelation they said that all those Pieces were written by Cerinthus under the Name of St. John to confirm Cerinthus his Conceits about the Logos and the Millenium or thousand Years Reign of Christ here upon Earth For tho the Alogi held that the Lord Christ is a Man only as also did Cerinthus yet Cerinthus of the antient Unitarians had these two things peculiar to himself 1. That the World was made not immediately by God but by God by the Ministry of his Angels 2. That the Lord Christ was a Man only the Son of Joseph and Mary but there rested on him the Logos or Divine WORD which he also called the Christ by which Cerinthus intended the Spirit Energy or Power of God that Power by which he created Original Matter and made the World but as the Christ or WORD descended on Jesus at his Baptism so it left him at his Crucifixion The Alogians believed none of these things they said they had only received from the Aposiles that the Lord Christ was the great Prophet promised by Moses in the Law and the Messias or Christ intended in the Prophet Daniel and who in the Fulness of Time was sent by God to unite both Jews and Gentiles under one common Institution or Law of Religion Epiphanius is the first who gave to them the Name of Alogi before him that is before the Year 368 they were simply called Christians without any other Name that might signify them to be a particular Sect. They were those Christians of the Gentiles who retained the sincere Apostolick Doctrine concerning the Unity of God and the Person of our Saviour without corrupting it more or less with Platonick Notions or Gnostick Novelties they were very antient co-eval with the Apostles and flourished as the prevailing Party in the Period called the Apostolick Succession or to about the Year 140. Epiphanius all along speaks of them as the antient Unitarians of the Gentiles He says also expresly Theodotus adjunxit se Haeresi Alogorum Theodotus joined himself to the Sect and Churches of the Alogians Theodotus appeared about the Year 190 by joining himself to the Alogian Sect we learn that before he was of the Number of the new Platonick Christians who held the Pre-existence of our Saviour Eusebius is strangely out or prevaricates too notoriously when he says Hist Eccl. l. 5. c. 28. that this Theodotus was the first who held that our Saviour was a mere Man for not only the Alogians so held but so also did both sorts of Ebionites and that by Confession of Eusebius himself elsewhere particularly H. Eccl. l. 3. c. 27. But Eusebius takes all Occasions tho never so fraudulently to depress the Unitarians whom he had undertaken to confute in the Person of Marcellus Bishop of Ancyra We may take notice too that the Excerpta at the End of Clemens of Alexandria his Books of Stromata which bear the Title of the Oriental Doctrine of Theodotus were not Particulars of the Doctrine of Theodotus the Unitarian for the Doctrine of Theodotus was diametrically opposite to the Contents of those Excerpta but the Excerpta are nothing else but a Fragment of the Hypotyposes of St. Clemens himself which also is observed by the learned Valesius in his first Note on Euseb H. E. l. 5. c. 11. and again on lib. 6. c. 14. In few Words that the Alogi held our Saviour was a Man only is not questioned by any that they belonged at least to the Apostolick Succession is proved because 't is confessed by the Trinitarian Historians that the Theodotians who appeared about the Year 190 joined themselves to the Alogian Churches and because Epiphanius speaks of them throughout as flourishing in that Period We have therefore deservedly here reckoned them among the antient and first Witnesses of the true Doctrine As to the Reasons which they gave and which I affirm not against the Gospel and other Works which we now account to St. John I have already briefly intimated them in the Considerations on the 4 Sermons of his Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury It was 400 Years before the Epistle to the Hebrews was received as Canonical any where in the West and but in few Places of the Orient and other Books of the New Testament especially St. John's Revelation were not presently admitted by the Catholick Church it ought not therefore to seem strange that the modern Unitarians allow of the Gospel and other Pieces of St. John tho they are aware that many of the Antients and particularly some Unitarians suspected and too hastily rejected them As it often happens that Time detects Frauds and Falshoods so also not unfrequently it discovers and vindicates oppressed Truths The last Monument or Remain of the Apostolick Succession which agrees with the Socinian Doctrine concerning our Saviour are the