which are generally form'd not in Scripture-Terms and about which there is such endless Contentions when they be explain'd to them as well as our Author's Article Jesus is the Messiah Nay he is confident that there is no more Difficulty in understanding this Proposition The Father Son and Holy Ghost are one God or Divine Nature than in that other of our Author see pag. 120. when yet the World knows to its Cost that this Article has exercis'd all the greatest Wits of the Church these fourteen or fifteen hundred Years to understand the Terms and take away the Contradictions and at this Day the English Trinitarians have most fierce Contentions among themselves about the meaning of it The nominal Trinitarians agree with the Unitarians that the Realists that hold three real Persons are Tritheists and the Realists agree with the Unitarians that the Nominals or Modalists destroy the Reality of the Eternal Son and Holy Ghost and are Patripassians or Sabellians Besides Mr. Edw. knows that each of these Parties are at vast difference among themselves they easily find Inconsistences or Contradictions in one anothers Explications so that supposing there be but ten different Trinitarian Hypotheses I think there are more every one has mine against him all which he looks upon as faulty and they on the other Hand do all reject his They reject them I say not as the Bishop of Sarum in his Letter to D. W. pag. 56. would paliate Matter as having the same Acts of Piety and Adoration though different ways of Explaining either the Vnity of the Essence or the Trinity of the Persons but as having different Acts except we can have the same Idea's when we worship three Gods as when we worship one only or when we worship one all-perfect Person as when we worship three such or when we worship one real Person and two nominal Ones as when we worship three Equals or when we worship one self-existent God and two dependent Gods not self-existent as when we worship three Self-existents and the like Again Mr. Edw's Proposition is never once found in Holy Writ but our Author 's often expresly He uses Terms in such a Sense as they are never us'd in Scripture for Divine Nature is never put there for God nor does the word GOD or one God ever signify Father Son and H. Ghost but always one singular Person and throughout the Holy Scriptures from the Beginning to the End God is spoken of and spoken to as one only Person and by Terms and Pronouns that signify singularly and never otherwise God indeed does twice or thrice speak of himself Plurally as Persons of Dignity and Dominion do often But our Author both his Words in Form and his Explications are all taken out of Scripture and in the Days of our Saviour and his Apostles there was no difficulty in understanding them The most illiterate Fishermen and Shepherds and Women knew what was meant by JESVs and what by Messiah The only Question was whether the Proposition Jesus is the Messiah was to be affirm'd or denied But notwithstanding all this Mr. Edw. says Truly if there be any Difficulty it is in our Author's Proposition why pray For here is an Hebrew word first to be explain'd before the Mob can understand the Proposition But by his favour the word Messiah is by our Translators adopted into the English Tongue and the common People the Rabble as Mr. Edw. is pleas'd to call them understand it as well as they do the Christ or the Anointed and also the Explications of those Terms provided they use to read either themselves or hear others read the Holy Scriptures But the word Messiah was in our Saviour and the Apostles Time most common among the Jews therefore our Author designing to represent the Preaching and Faith of that Time chose to use it more frequently than any other Term see pag. 30. But I presume Mr. Edw. brought in this Objection only as a Diversion If he really think as he says it 's a sharp Reflection upon all the Learned Trinitarian Controvertists upon this Point except they take it more candidly for an Invitation to their Reverences and right Reverences to come to the most Learned Mr. Edw. to inform their Understandings and solve all the Difficulties that make them at so great Odds one with another And it 's to be hoped he will give such a clear Explication of the Trinity as will satisfy the Mystery-men or Ignoramus-Trinitarians that at length they may understand what they now profess to believe without Understanding But to return for all this will seem a Digression except the Reader please to remember it is for a Vindication of our Author from Mr. Edw's hard charge of purposely omitting the Epistolary Writings because fraught with other Fundamental Doctrines besides that one which he mentions Among those Mr. Edw. reckons chiefly and more especially The Doctrine of the ever to be adored Trinity eminently attested in those Epistles This Doctrine he has given us in his Proposition above discoursed and has attempted to show against Matter of Fact in all Ages and especially in this present Time that this Fundamental ought not to have been omitted because of its Difficulty or Unintelligibleness for it is he saith less difficult than that of our Author Jesus is the Messiah but how successfully I leave to consideration But if it be Unintelligible or Contradictious at least to the Bulk of Mankind then it 's impossible it should be a Fundamental Article and therefore our Author needed not purposely to omit the Epistolary Writings of the Apostles for fear of finding it there since Mr. Edw. himself cannot find it there nor in the Bible But what says he to our Author 's full Answer to the Question about the Usefulness of the Epistles though the Belief of many Doctrines contained in them be not necessary to Salvation Our Author answers 1. That he that will read the Epistles as he ought must observe what 't is in them is principally aim'd at for that is the Truth which is to be receiv'd and believ'd and not scatter'd Sentences in Scripture-Language accommodated to our Notions and Prejudices What says Mr. Edw. to that 2. for I abridg There be many Truths in the Bible which a good Christian may be wholly ignorant of and so not believe which perhaps some lay great stress on and call Fundamental Articles because they are the distinguishing Points of their Communion What says Mr. Edw. to this 3. The Epistles were writ to those who were in the Faith and true Christians already and so could not be design'd to teach them the Fundamental Articles and Points necessary to Salvation This he shows from the Address of all the Epistles or something noted in them 4. Their resolving Doubts and reforming Mistakes are of great Advantage to our Knowledg and Practice 5. The great Doctrines of the Christian Faith are dropt here and there He has cited some such Passages in the Proof
of his Proposition We shall find those necessary Points best in the Preaching of our Saviour and the Apostles 6. The Epistles besides the main Argument of each of them do in many places explain the Fundamentals and that wisely by proper Accommodations to the apprehensions of those they were writ to Which he shows particularly in the Epistle to the Romans and that to the Hebrews also in the general Epistles At length These Holy Writers saith he inspir'd from above writ nothing but Truth and in most places very weighty Truths to us now But yet every Sentence of theirs must not be taken up and look'd upon as a Fundamental necessary to Salvation without an explicite Belief whereof no Body could be a Member of Christ's Church c. For saith he pag. 299. 't is plain the contending Parties on one side or t'other are ignorant of nay disbelieve the Truths deliver'd in Holy Writ as I noted before This little I have transcribed out of our Author for the sake of those who perhaps have not his Book but have Mr. Edwards's and that it may appear how unfairly to say no worse Mr. Edw. deals with our Author saying pag. 111. He passes by these inspired Writings with some contempt also he suggests his insincerity to the Reader But I have seen a Letter from a Gentleman of no ordinary Judgment who says Mr. Edwards has not only mistook Mr. Lock but abus'd and belied him for he says Mr. Lock cites only the Gospels and Acts but declares or insinuates his contempt of the Epistles as if they were not of like Authority with the Acts or Gospels but Mr. Lock has no where intimated any such Opinion His Book saith he shows He has read the Scriptures with very great Observation as well as Judgment he suffers nothing to escape him that belongs to the Subject he manages He names our Author Mr. Lock which I am assured he does by common Fame and Conjecture he has no other Grounds for it as neither have I no more than Mr. Edwards Whether we are mistaken or not in his Name I know not but I think I have proved that Mr. Edw. is much mistaken in his Judgment concerning his Book or has perversly censur'd him and it He is so far from contemning the Epistles as Mr. Edw. accuses him that whoever will take the Pains to reckon he will find he has quoted them and refer'd to them near FOURSCORE times And Mr. Edw. is no less Injurious in his Censures upon other Writers In the very Socinian Doctrine it self saith he there seems to be an Atheistical Tang. For proof he cites the Considerations on the Explications of Doct. of Trin. pag. 5. Where saith he the Self-existence of God which is the Primary Fundamental and Essential Property of the Deity is peremptorily pronounc'd by them to be a CONTRADICTION It 's strange a Man of Mr. Edwards's Undertaking should give forth such a Calumny His Ldp. of Worcester says If God was from Eternity he must be from himself That Author answers that that is an Espousing the Cause of the Atheists and he gives this Reason If God is from Eternity he must be of none neither of or from himself nor from any other not from himself for then he must be before he was and neither from himself nor from any other because all Origination of what kind soever is inconsistent with an Eternal Being Is this now peremptorily to pronounce that the Self-existence of God is a Contradiction or is it not to vindicate the Self-existence of God from a false Notion of it occasion'd by the Bishop's words But what will Mr. Edw. say to the Author of the XXVIII Propositions c. who they say is the Bishop of Glouc. who peremptorily denies nay says It is a flat Contradiction to say that the second and third Persons of the Trinity are Self-existent Prop. 8. Consequently neither of them is God because as Mr. Edw. says Self-existence is the Primary Fundamental and Essential Property of God which yet neither the Son nor the H. Ghost have I wish Mr. Edw. would either reconcile himself to the Bishop or the Bishop to him before he charges an Atheistical Tang upon the Socinian Doctrine upon account of the denial of God's Self-existence which he may see strongly affirm'd in the Reflections on the said Propositions c. As for Socinus's denying the Praescience of Contingencies I am not nor is our Author concern'd in it but which is more dishonourable to God to be the Author of all the Sin and Wickedness that ever was or ever will be in the World or to deny his Fore-knowledge of the certainty of that which is not certain Socinus and Crellius have denied such an Immensity of God which makes him to be essentially and wholly in every point of Space because such Immensity would take away all Distinction between God and Creature and has indeed an Atheistical Tang for the greater part of Atheists hold the Universe to be God hence Lucan Jupiter est quodcunque vides quocunque moveris Which opinion some of the Antient Fathers have wrote against as Clemens Alexandrinus and others Mr. Edw. may charge them all with a Tang of Atheism if he please As for God's Spirituality modest Divines confess it easier to say What it is not than what it is Mr. Edw. perhaps has attain'd to such a perfection of Knowledg in that Matter as may make him able to teach them what they are now ignorant of But Socinus nor Crellius nor any other of them ever denied contrary to most express and often repeated Scriptures and common Reason the most glorious Attribute of God's Vnity which gives Excellency to all his other Attributes for were Self-existence Omniscience Immensity and Spirituality and all other Attributes common to more than One where would the Excellency and Majesty of God's Name be How should we love and adore him with all our Hearts and Strength when there are others that require it and have as equal right to it as he But Mr. Edw. will count himself highly injur'd if I charge him with denying God's Unity but hold a little be not angry If you be Take heed it be not more for your own sake than for God's sake Do you not say that the infinite Nature of God is communicable to three distinct Persons pag. 79. and pag. 120. That the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one God or Divine Nature Are not these Terms convertible namely That one God is Father Son and H. Ghost that is three Persons and what are three Almighty and only wise Persons but three Gods The Father is one God the Son is one God distinct from the Father and the Holy Ghost is one God distinct from the Father and Son Thus your Proposition amounts to this That one God is three Gods that the Unity of God is a Trinity of Gods That Vnity or Oneness is no longer an Attribute of God but Trinity or Threeness But we cannot be
heard let us make out your Contradictions never so clearly nay you impute it to us as a heinous Crime that we make it an Argument against the belief of your Trinity that it cannot be understood without Contradiction You impute to us most injuriously that we are to admit of nothing but what is exactly adjusted to Nature's and Reason's Light pag. 68. That therefore the Trinity is a Doctrine that can't be born because it can't be understood pag. 69. and that the English Vnitarians declare they cannot believe it because Reason does not teach it pag. 72. This is a Topick the Trinitarians do always inlarge upon and urge with a great deal of Pomp in themselves and Ignominy in the Unitarians as Persons that prefer their own Reasonings before Divine Revelation how clear soever And though this Calumny has been answer'd and wip'd away and retorted upon them a hundred Times yet Mr. Edw. will still confidently charge it He cites the Letter of Resolution for proof of it and therefore has read it but passes by the Answer to this Imputation which is to be found in the very first Page of it where thus First 'T is not true that we prefer Reason before Revelation on the contrary Revelation being what GOD himself hath said either immediately or by inspired Persons 't is to be preferr'd before the clearest Demonstration of our Reason And in the Consider on Explic. on 4 Serm. and a Sermon of the Bishop of Worcester the Author says He utterly mistakes in thinking that we deny the Articles of the new Christianity or Athanasian Religion because they are Mysteries or because we do not comprehend them we have a clear and distinct Perception that they are not Mysteries but Contradictions Impossibilities and pure Non-sense But now that the Trinitarians do most expresly prefer their Reasoning Consequences and wire-drawn Deductions before Holy Scripture besides that it has been done in the Notes upon the Athanasian Creed and other Tracts I shall shew further from Mr. Edwards's Fundamental Doctrine but now recited if at least the Trinitarians will acknowledg him for their Orthodox Champion 1. It 's manifest he means by the one God not one Divine Almighty Person but three such but nothing is more evident in Holy Scripture than that God is one Person only For proof of it I have referr'd my Reader to the Scriptures from beginning to end in more than twenty thousand Texts even as often as God is spoken of or to or speaks of himself except as I have said But Mr. Edw. says expresly that his God is three distinct Divine Persons to wit the Father of the Son the Son of the Father and the H. Ghost which proceedeth from the Father and the Son 2. He says that these three distinct Divine Persons each of which is God in the most perfect Sense is the only true God or the one God or Divine Nature The Proposition which he advances as necessary to Salvation and more easy to be understood than that Jesus is the Messiah is That the Father Son and Holy Ghost are one God or Divine Nature Whereby it 's manifest that by ONE GOD he means not one Person but one Divine Nature and by one Divine Nature he means such a Divine Nature as is communicable to three distinct Persons see pag. 79. So that his three Persons which are one God are so one God as they communicate in one Divine Nature in like manner as Peter James and John are one Man because they communicate in one Human Nature as do also all the Men in the World Now I shall cite some Texts of H. Scripture which do expresly declare that God is ONE and that cannot otherwise be understood than that he is one Person or singular intellectual Nature Essence or Substance Here let me premise first How Equivocally Mr. Edw. and the Trinitarians express themselves in this great and necessary Point on which depends our Eternal Salvation and whereby the Bulk of Mankind for I think that 's a far more decent Phrase than Mr. Edw's Rabble or Captain Tom and his Myrmadons or the venerable Mob cannot escape being deluded He and they confess also that there is but one God though three Persons in that one God but by one God they do not mean as I have shewed from Mr. Edw. one singular intellectual Nature Essence or Substance compleat for that is a Person and if they did the Contradiction would presently appear to every Capacity to wit that three Divine Persons are one Divine Person but they as Mr. Edw. say The Father Son and Holy Ghost or the three Divine Persons are one God or Divine Nature Essence or Substance Hereby they conceal from their poor honest Reader thirsting after Truth that God is one intellectual Perfect Nature Essence or Substance and make him believe by that concealment that though there are three Divine intellectual perfect Natures yet there is but one Divine Nature or God I am also willing to premise that the Grecism of a solitary Adjective Masculine or Article without a Substantive where the Discourse is of intellectual Beings doth frequently if not always connote PERSON and our English Translators have in many Texts render'd it Person as the clear Sense of the Greek Text not as a word supplied in another Character to explain the Text but in the same Character as a verbal Translation Instances of this rendring are these among many others Mat. 27. 24. Of this just Person Luke 15. 7. Ninety nine just Persons Acts 17. 17. The devout Persons Eph. 5. 5. unclean Person 2 Pet. 3. 11. What manner of Persons In these places there is nothing in the Greek to answer the word Person but what is implied in the Adjective To come now to the Texts that assert the Vnity or Oneness of God against Mr. Edw's Trinity or Threeness or that God is one intellectual Nature or one Person against Mr. Edws's one Divine Nature or three Persons see Jam. 2. 19. according to the Greek Thou believest that God is ONE thou dost well Gal. 3. 20. But God is ONE Mark 12. 29. The Lord our God the Lord is ONE saith our Saviour out of the Law to the Scribe that asked him which is the first Commandment of all And Jesus answer'd him the first of all the Commandments is Hear O Israel the Lord our God the Lord is one And thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy Heart c. And in the 32d ver The Scribe said unto him Well Master thou hast said the Truth for God is ONE and there is none other but he And ver 34. Jesus saw that he answer'd discreetly Our Bibles refer us to Deut. 6. 4 5. whence our Lord takes this his Answer and where we find the same Words which by Ainsworth are also render'd The Lord our God the Lord is one Now in these Scriptures the Numeral Adjective Masculine being without a Substantive and Singular it forces us to understand in
every place Person So that we nothing doubt but the Translators would have render'd every where God is ONE PERSON if they had not been prepossessed with the Opinion of God's being three Persons the like to which they have done in many other Places But in that Answer of the Holy Jesus to him that called him Good Master Mat. 19. 17. it 's not possible to avoid it 1. That God is a Person 2. That he is but one Person and 3. That he is GOOD in an eminent Sense above all other Persons whatsoever For thus he says Why callest thou me GOOD None or no Person is good but one Person the God How strangely perverse would it be to understand this Text in the Trinitarian sense viz. None or no Person is good but one the Father Son and Holy Ghost or thus None or no Person is good but one i. e. the Divine Nature Again 2. Consider we these Texts and see what sense we can make of them if God be not one Person only Mal. 2. 10. Hath not ONE GOD created us must we say with Mr. Edw. Hath not ONE Father Son and Holy Ghost or one Divine Nature that is not a Person created us Rom. 3. 30. There is one God who justifies c. Trin. There is one Father Son and H. Ghost that justifies Zech. 14. 9. Hebr. In that Day the Lord shall be ONE and his Name ONE How should the Lord be one and his Name one if the Lord be three distinct Persons and his Name Father Son and Holy Ghost Isa 37. 16. O Lord of Hosts God of Israel thou dwellest between the Cherubims thou art the God even thou alone of all the Kingdoms of the Earth thou hast made Heaven and Earth Psal 86. 10. Thou art great and dost wondrous Works thou art God alone 2 King 19. 19. That all the Kingdoms of the Earth may know that thou art the Lord God even thou only Isa 44. 24. c. I am the Lord that maketh all things that stretcheth forth the Heavens alone that spreadeth abroad the Earth by my self Nehem. 9. 6 c. Thou even thou art Lord alone thou hast made Heaven the Host of Heaven worshippeth thee Isa 37. 20. That all the Kingdoms of the Earth may know that thou art the Lord even thou only 2 King 19. 15. Jude 4. denying the only Lord God and our Lord Jesus Christ 1 Tim. 2. 5. There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus Ephes 4. 6. One God and Father of all who is above all and through all and in you all Isa 46. 9. For I am God and there is none else I am God and there is none like me 1 King 8. 23. Lord God of Israel there is no God like thee in Heaven above or in Earth beneath Ver. 60. That all the People of the Earth may know that the Lord is God and that there is none else Isa 44. 6. I am the First and I am the Last and besides me there is no God Ver. 8. Is there a God besides me yea there is no God I know not any Isa 45. 5. I am the Lord there is none else there is no God besides me Verse 6. There is none besides me I am the Lord and there is none else Ver. 14. Saying surely God is in thee and there is none else there is no God Ver. 21. Have not I the Lord and there is no God else beside me a just God and a Saviour there is none beside me Ver. 22. Look unto me and be ye saved all the ends of the Earth for I am God and there is none else Deut. 4. 35. Unto thee it was shewed that thou mightest know that the Lord he is God and there is none else beside him 1 Chron. 17. 20. O Lord there is none like thee neither is there any God besides thee Exod. 34. 14. For thou shalt worship no other God for the Lord whose Name is Jealous is a jealous God Deut. 32. 39. See now that I even I am he and there is no God with me 2 King 5. 15. Behold now I know that there is no God in all the Earth but in Israel 2 Sam. 22. 32. For who is God save the Lord See the same words in Psal 18. 31. 1 Cor. 8. 4. There is none other God but one I conclude with the first and chiefest of the Ten Commandments given from Mount Sinai Exod. 20. 3. Thou shalt have no other Gods before me I the Lord thy God am a jealous God and that of the Lord Jesus when himself was tempted Matth. 4. 10. Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God and him only shalt thou serve The meaning plainly is I am a Jew and subject to the Law of the Jews I am commanded therein to worship the Lord my God and to serve him only These Scriptures do so clearly prove that God is a Person or a perfect intellectual Nature or Substance and that he is only one such that to deny either of these Propositions is to me to deny the Truth of Holy Scripture not only in some obscure and doubtful Text but in the Current of it and in the chief Fundamental of all Religion And Mr. Edw. in asserting there are three such Persons in one Divine Nature renders in effect the whole Bible void and useless for the proof of any Proposition whatsoever it be If this that God is an absolutely perfect Being and therefore a Person for Persons are the most perfect of Beings or Substances and but one such cannot be plainly and undeniably prov'd from Scripture it 's utterly in vain to attempt to prove any thing For it 's manifest that to assert THIS is the chief Aim and Design of all the Holy Writers and that they are most zealous and vehement in it And herein lies the Controversy between the Trinitarians and the Unitarians we assert with the greatest plainness and fulness and clearness of Holy Scripture as ever any thing was or can be exprest that God is ONE in the most perfect sense of Oneness which is by all Men that understand the Word in a personal Sense But the Trinitarians do on the contrary contend that God is not One but Three in that personal Sense and One in a less perfect Sense which is not Personal but common to many Which is a Sense that dethrones God and makes him either a Third of the one God or one of the Three that created and governs the World and is to be ador'd by Men and Angels For they cannot deny but that in worshipping the Father our God we worship one God But they rage against us because we do not worship besides him and distinct from him the Son as perfectly God as he as different from him as a real Son is from a real Father and another Person as really God as either the Father or the Son and as really different from the Father and Son as he that is sent is
THE EXCEPTIONS Of Mr. EDWARDS in his Causes of Atheism Against the Reasonableness of Christianity as deliver'd in the Scriptures EXAMIN'D And found Unreasonable Unscriptural and Injurious ALSO It 's clearly proved by many Testimonies of Holy Scripture That the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ is the only God and Father of Christians London Printed in the Year MDCXCV To the Author of the Reasonableness of Christianity as delivered in the Scriptures SIR IN reading your Book of that Title I readily perceived your Design intimated in your Preface to be therein most industriously and piously pursued So that you have with full Evidence of Scripture and Reason shewed against the manifold obscure and tedious Systems that the Fundamentals of Christian Faith necessary to constitute a Man a true Member of Christ's Church are all comprehended or implied in this plain Proposition That Jesus is the Messiah Whereby you have happily provided for the Quiet and Satisfaction of the Minds of the honest Multitude or Bulk of Mankind floating in Doubts and Fears because either they cannot understand or can find no clear Evidence in Holy Scripture of those intricate Points requir'd to be explicitly believ'd upon pain of eternal Damnation You have also argued clearly the Reasonableness and Vsefulness of the Christian Revelation against Atheists and Deists These things consider'd 't was no marvel that the Systematical Men who gain both their Honour and Profit by the Obscurity and Multitude of their Fundamental Articles should raise an Outcry against you like that of the Ephesians magnifying their DIANA They have more cause for it than Demetrius had But that they should traduce your Work as tending to Atheism or Deism is as strange from Reason as many of their Articles are from Scripture And that Mr. Edwards has done it and forc'd it in among his Tendencies to Atheism is I think to be imputed to the Co-incidence of your Book 's being publish'd and striking strongly upon his inventive Faculty just when it was in hot pursuit of the Causes of Atheism rather than to any the least Colour or Inclination that way which Mr. Edwards can spy in it in his cool Thoughts For I am much perswaded on the contrary that there is no Atheist or Deist in England but if he were ask'd the Question would tell Mr. Edwards that their obscure and contradictious Fundamentals were one Cause or Inducement to his casting off and disbelief of Christianity In this Mind I have undertaken to vindicate your Doctrine from the Exceptions of Mr. Edwards against it But whether I have done it as it ought to have been done I cannot be a competent Judg. If I have mistaken your Sense or us'd weak Reasonings in your Defence I crave your Pardon But my Design in this Writing was not to please you whom I know not nor any Man whatsoever but only to honour the One God and vindicate his most useful Truths I am SIR Your very humble Servant Mr. EDWARDS 's Exceptions against the Reasonableness of Christianity examined c. IT seems to me that Mr. Edwards printing his Causes of Atheism whilst the Reasonableness of Christianity was newly publish'd was put upon it by his Bookseller to add some Exceptions against that Treatise so much noted for its Heterodoxy that so the Sale of his own Tract might be the more promoted whence it comes to pass that his Notes being writ in haste are not so well digested as might be expected from a Person of his Learning and Ingenuity In pag. 104. he takes notice of A PLAUSIBLE CONCEIT which hath been growing up a considerable Time c. but tells not his Reader what that Conceit was till he hath charged it upon a very Learned and famous Author whom he is pleased to call a wavering Prelate and another of the same Order and a Third of a lower Degree but more particularly fully and distinctly upon the late Publisher of The Reasonableness of Christianity c. Here at length in his next Page he tells us That this Author gives IT us over and over again in these formal words viz. That nothing is required to be believed by any Christian Man but this THAT JESVS IS THE MESSIAH I think if he had not been in haste he would have cited at least two or three of those Pages wherein we might find those formal Words but he has not one and I do not remember where they are to be found for I am almost in as much haste as Mr. Edwards and will not seek for them It 's true he says That all that was to be believed for Justification or to make a Man a Christian by him that did already believe in and worship one true God maker of Heaven and Earth was no more than this single Proposition That Jesus of Nazareth was the Christ or the Messiah But then he takes to be included in this Proposition 1. All synonimous Expressions such as the Son of God The King of Israel The sent of God He that should come He of whom Moses and the Prophets did write The Teacher come from God c. 2. All such Expressions as shew the manner of his being the Christ Messiah or Son of God such as his being conceived by the Holy Ghost and Power of the most High his being anointed with the Holy Ghost and Power his being sanctified and sent into the World his being raised from the Dead and exalted to be a Prince and Saviour after the time he was so c. 3. Such Expressions as import the great Benefits of his being the Messiah as having the Words of Eternal Life his having Power from the Father to remit Sins to raise the Dead to judg the World to give eternal Life to send the H. Spirit upon the Apostles whereby they might work Miracles and preach the Light of Life to Jews and Gentiles and the like For all those Quotations of Scripture which the Author as Mr. Edwards observes has amassed together out of the Gospels and the Acts of the Apostles which take up about three quarters of his Book for the proof of his Proposition are indeed expository of the meaning of that Proposition and are included in it Not that it was necessary that every one who believed the Proposition should understand and have an explicite Faith of all those particulars for neither the Believers during the Life of Christ nor the Apostles themselves understood many of them no nor presently after his Death and Resurrection for they had still divers erroneous Opinions concerning the Nature of his Kingdom and the preaching to the Gentiles and other things And in the beginning of Christ's preaching though Philip believ'd that Jesus was the Messiah the Son of God the King of Israel yet he seems to be ignorant of his being born of a Virgin for he calls him the Son of Joseph John 1. 45. But as he that believes that William the 3d is the true King of England c. believes enough to make
him a good Subject though he understands not all the grounds of his Title much less all his Power and Prerogatives that belong to him as King So he that believes upon good Grounds that Jesus is the Messiah and understands so much of this Proposition as makes him or may make him a good Subject of Christ's Kingdom though he be ignorant of many things included in that Proposition he has all the Faith necessary to Salvation as our Author has abundantly proved But Mr. Edwards says This Gentleman forgot or rather wilfully omitted a plain and obvious Passage in one of the Evangelists GO TEACH ALL NATIONS c. Mat. 28. 19. From which it is plain says he that all that are adult Members of the Christian Church must be Taught as well as Baptiz'd into the Faith of the Holy Trinity Father Son and Holy Ghost and then they must believe it and consequently more is required to be believed by Christian Men than that Jesus is the Messiah He infers from this You see it is part of the Evangelical Faith and such as is necessary absolutely necessary to make one a Member of the Christian Church to believe a TRINITY in Vnity in the God-head or in plainer Terms that though God is one as to his Essence and Nature yet there are three Persons in that Divine Essence and that these three are really the one God I must confess that if Mr. Edwards's reasoning be good the Author is totally confuted three quarters of his Book at least are writ in vain and the old Systems must stand good and the Bulk of Mankind will certainly be damned or it will be a wonder if any of them be faved But give me leave to tell him I do not see what he says we do see that Text will well enough consist with our Author's Proposition For I would ask him whether the Apostles follow'd this Commission or not If they obey'd it then in Baptizing in the Name of Jesus the Messiah and exhorting those to whom they preached to be baptiz'd in the Name of the Messiah after their preaching the Messiah to them they did in effect baptize in the Name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost otherwise they did not pursue their Commission for we never find them baptizing in those express Terms but always in the Name of Jesus the Messiah or the Lord Jesus or the Lord and the like So that Mr. Edwards must either charge the Holy Apostles with Ignorance of or Disobedience to their Lord's Command or acknowledg that they did really baptize in the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost when they did but expresly baptize in the Name of the Son or Messiah forasmuch as all that were so baptiz'd did believe in the Father of that Son of God as implied in the Son and in the Holy Ghost as the Anointing of the Son and which also was given to those that were so baptiz'd But as for his Inference viz. That it 's absolutely necessary to believe a Trinity in Vnity in the Godhead or that God is one as to his Essence and Nature yet there are three Persons in that Divine Essence and that these three Persons are really the one God This will condemn not only the Unitarians and the Bulk of Mankind but the greater part of Trinitarians the Learned as well as the Vulgar For all the real Trinitarians do not believe one Essence but three Numerical Essences Here Dr. Sherlock Dr. Cudworth the Bishop of Gl. the late Arch-bishop Mr. H w and all that hold as the Council of Nice did with that Council it self and the whole Church except some Hereticks for many Centuries are by Mr. Edwards expung'd out of the Catalogue of Christian Believers and consequently condemn'd to the horrible Portion of Infidels or Hereticks The Mystery-men or Ignoramus Trinitarians they are condemn'd too for they admit not any Explication and therefore not Mr. Edwards's There remains only Dr. South and Dr. Wallis and the Philosopher Hobbs who Mr. Edwards says is the great Master and Lawgiver of the profess'd Atheists pag. 129. and that Party which have the absolutely necessary Faith of three Persons in one Essence But if you ask these Men what they mean by three Persons Do they mean according to the common sense of Mankind and especially of the English Nation three singular intellectual Beings No by no means that is Tritheism they mean three Modes in the one God which may be resembled to three Postures in one Man or three external Relations as Creator Redeemer Sanctifier as one Man may be three Persons a Husband a Father and a Master This is that Opinion of Faith which the Antients made Heresy and Sabellius the Head of it Thus it is absolutely necessary to make a Man a Christian that he be a Sabellian Heretick But perhaps Mr. Edwards may be of Mr. H w's Mind for he says These three Persons are really the one God but then no one of them singly is so but every one a Third of God If so Mr. Edwards is indeed a Unitarian for he gives us one God only but then he is no Trinitarian for he has put down the Father himself from being God singly and so the Son and Holy Ghost As to what he says of being Baptized into the Faith and Worship of none but the only true God that has been answer'd a hundred times He cannot look into any of the Unitarian Books but he will find a sufficient Answer to that Inference Were the Israelites baptiz'd into the Worship of Moses but they were baptized into Moses 1 Cor. 10. 2. Or when the Apostle Paul supposes he might have baptized in his own Name Did he mean that he should have baptized into the Worship of himself as the most high God Then Mr. Edwards minds his Reader that the Author had left out also that famous Testimony in Joh. 1. 1. In the beginning was the Word Jesus Christ and the Word was with God and the Word was God Whence saith he we are obliged to yield assent to this Article That Christ the Word is God Here Mr. Edwards must mean that this is a Fundamental Article and necessary to Salvation otherwise he says nothing against his Author who has prevented his urging any other Text not containing a Fundamental in his Answer to the Objection from the Epistles and other Scriptures For saith he pag. 299. They are Objects of Faith They are Truths whereof none that is once known to be such may be disbelieved But yet a great many of them every one does and must confess a Man may be ignorant of nay disbelieve without Danger to his Salvation As is evident in those who allowing the Authority differ in the Interpretation and Meaning of several Texts Vnless Divine Revelation can mean contrary to it self The whole Paragraph ought to be read which I have abridged And if this Text of John 1. 1. be not one of those that by reason of
from him that sent him And this is so evidently true that as I have observ'd almost one half of the Trinitarians consent with the Unitarians in condemning the other Party of Trinitarians as Confessors of three Gods But that I may give yet fuller Evidence of this Fundamental Truth of the Unity of the Person of God against the Trinity of Persons in him I shall in the third place produce some Texts that ascribe some Perfections to the Person of God singularly and with exclusion of all other Persons in that Sense and Degree Such are those where the Holy Jesus says None or no Person is good but one the God which I have urged before and that in John 17. 3. where the Blessed Son in his Prayer to God wherein it were absurd to say that he pray'd to himself calls him Father and the only true God and that in distinction from himself whom he describes by the Names of Jesus Christ him whom the Father hath sent This Particle only imports some Excellency in the Attribute of true which is here given to God his Father above and with exclusion of all others or it signifies nothing Rom. 16. 27. To God only Wise be Glory through Jesus Christ for ever Amen Here again the Attribute of only Wise is ascrib'd to the Person of God in distinction from Jesus Christ as the Medium of the Glory which is given to the only Wise God 1 Tim. 6. 15 16. God is called the blessed and ONLY Potentate the King of Kings and Lord of Lords who ONLY hath Immortality c. which are all personal Titles from which all other Persons are excluded by the exclusive Particle only for there can be but one Potentate who is King of Kings in the highest Sense and much more when only is added When Christ is called King of Kings and Lord of Lords Rev. 17. 14. and 19. 16. it 's manifest it 's to be understood in a derivative Sense because all Power in Heaven and Earth was given to him as the Lamb that had been slain and therefore he is represented as clothed with a Vesture dipt in Blood in that 19 Chap. ver 13. Who only hath Immortality that is as Dr. Hammond says God is Immortal in himself not in three Selfs and all Immortality of others is derived from him In the same Sense is the Lord God Almighty called in Rev. 15. 4. only Holy because he only is Holy of himself and as it is understood 1 Sam. 2. 2. There is none Holy as the Lord. Now in these and such-like Passages of Holy Scripture the Trinitarians and Mr. Edw. must understand by God three Persons by Father the Father Son and Holy Ghost by Thou Ye by Him Them by Himself Themselves and those Words the Scripture hath in the singular Number must be understood by them plurally It 's no marvel then that they call their Doctrine a Mystery and that there is so much dissension among themselves concerning it since it cannot be understood in any Sense which is not either contradictious in it self or so to the full Current of Holy Scripture In like manner 4thly all those Texts which are not a few in which God is named the most High the most high God the Lord the most High God most High the Highest whether these Titles be Subject or Attribute must all be understood not of one Person or a singular knowing and willing Substance but either of a Substance that is not a Person or else of three equal Persons And all this by virtue of that scholastic and unreasonable Distinction between Person and Essence or as Mr. Edw. words it The infinite Nature of God communicable to three distinct Persons Pag. 79. which Distinction being absurd in it self when understood they obtrude upon the World under the Name of MYSTERY and Incomprehensible 5thly Besides that the Holy Scriptures are so abundant in those Texts that clearly shew him to be one Person only as I have fully manifested yet I may still urge from the same Texts and others that the Father only whom the Trinitarians acknowledg to be but one Person is that God that God alone that one God that God who is One the most high God and no Person else besides him I produced before the Text in John 17. 3. to prove that the Perfection of being THE ONLY TRUE GOD is ascrib'd to him as being one Person only Now I urge from the same Text that that Person is the Father of the Son in express distinction from the Son and all others Next that Text in 1 Cor. 8. 5 6. Though there be that are called Gods whether in Heaven or in Earth as there be Gods many and Lords many but to us there is but one God the Father of whom were all things and one Lord Jesus Christ by whom are all things and we by him Which words do plainly assert that that Person who is the one God of Christians in exclusion of all those that are called Gods and in some Sense may be so is none but the Father and in distinction from the Lord Jesus who was made Lord and Christ in a most excellent manner after his Resurrection This Text must be understood by the Trinitarians thus There is none other God but three Almighty Persons There are Gods many and Lords many but unto us Christians there is but one God or Divine Nature the Father Son and Holy Ghost each of which is the one God of Christians and not the Father only See next Ephes 4. 4 5 6. There is one Spirit one Lord one God and Father of all Where the one God and Father of all is clearly differenced from the one Spirit and the one Lord. Now see Mat. 24. 36. But of that Day and Hour knoweth none or no Person for of necessity it must be so understood no not the Angels of Heaven but my Father only St. Mark hath it neither the Son but the Father These parallel Texts prove 1. That the Person of the Father is the Person of God for none but that Person could then know the Day and Hour of Judgment And 2. that the Father only is that Person of God in exclusion of all other Persons both Angels and Men and of the Son himself What shall we say of them who in flat Contradiction to this Scripture and the Son himself assert That the Son knew the Day and Hour of Judgment as well as the Father Let us next compare that Passage in 1 Tim. 2. 5. which I cited before with 1 John 2. 1. The former saith There is one God and one Mediator between God and Men the Man Christ Jesus The latter says If any Man sin we have an Advocate with the Father Jesus Christ the Righteous By which consider'd together it appears that the one God and the Father are the same Person for only a Person is capable of being interceded to and the Mediator and Advocate the same So that the Father is the Person of
God as well as the Advocate is the Person of the Mediator But if the Reader desire to see this Point viz. that the Father only is the most high God fully and learnedly argued and defended let him read Crellius's two Books of One God the Father out of which I have transcribed much In what a many Places of Scripture is Christ called the Son of God and the Holy Spirit the Spirit of God In every of which either God must be taken for the Father only or Christ must be the Son of himself and the Holy Spirit the Spirit of himself both which are absurd Again how many places of Holy Scripture are there where some Prerogative is given to the Father above Christ as John 14. 28. My Father is greater than I How asham'd are the more ingenuous Trinitarians of that Answer to this Objection against the Deity of the Son which says The Son was less according to his Human Nature John 10. 29. My Father is greater than all It 's manifest from the Context that the Son himself is included in that word ALL. 1 Cor. 11. 3. The Head of Christ is God Christ is not the Head of himself therefore the Father only is God How often do Christ and the Divine Writers call the Father his God John 20. 17. I ascend to my Father and your Father to my God and your God In Rev. 3. 12. he calls the Father my God four times Mat. 27. 46. and Mark 15. 34. he cries out My God my God why hast thou forsaken me His God was only the Person of the Father and not God the Divine Nature which according to Mr. Edw. is common to three Persons Ephes 1. 17. The God of our Lord Jesus Christ the Father of Glory Heb. 1. 8. Where Christ is called a God he is also said to have a God who anointed him Was he his own God and the God that anointed him or was the Father only John 10. 18. This Commandment have I received of my Father He only is God who gives Commandments to the Son John 12. 49. The Father that sent me he gave me a Commandment what I should say and what I should speak John 14. 31. As the Father hath given me Commandment so I do John 15. 10. As I have kept my Father's Commandment and abide in his Love See Chap. 4. 34. and 6. 38. and 8. 29 55. and 17. 4. and 18. 11. Add those places wherein it 's clearly taught that Christ obey'd God Rom. 5. 19. Phil. 2. 8. Heb. 5. 8. God calleth Christ his Servant Isa 42. 1. Mat. 12. 18. Isa 49. 5 6. with Acts 13. 47. Isa 2. 13. and 53. 11. Ezek. 34. 23 24. and 37. 24 25. He is called a Minister of the Sanctuary Heb. 8. 2. All these Texts and a hundred more say the Trinitarians are answered by the Distinction of a Divine and Human Nature in one Person or the second Person of God his having a Human Nature So you are to understand that this Person of God who is here said to be a Servant to receive Commands and obey them c. is yet as perfectly Great as he from whom he receiv'd those Commands who has no Prerogative above him The Servant is as great as his Lord and he that Obey'd as he that Commanded and he that is sent as he that sent him yea the same God is Servant and Lord the Obeyer and Commander the Sent and the Sender When all these Prerogatives of the Father above the Son and consequently above the Holy Spirit will not prove the Father only to be the most High God of what use can the Holy Scriptures be to us What shall be the Difference between Holy Scriptures and profane Writings May not all the Greek Fables of their Gods be justified by the same or such like Distinctions O Father of Mercies enlighten their Understandings and remove their Prejudices that they may no longer deny thee the Glory due to thee above all Neither is it to be passed by that to the Father only is ascrib'd in Holy Scripture the Creation of Heaven and Earth to Christ never though in a certain way of speaking common to the Sacred Writers many things or all pertaining to the new Covenant or Gospel are said to be created that is medelled or put into a new and better State by him So in that antient Confession of Faith call'd The Apostles Creed the Creation of Heaven and Earth is appropriated to the Father and both in those Apostolical Times and to this day Prayers and Praises are offer'd to the Father through-Christ and the Gift of the Holy Spirit is begg'd of him which clearly shews the Prerogative of the Father above the Son and Holy Spirit and consequently that he only is that Person whom we ought to understand by the Name of GOD. In fine The God of Abraham of Isaac and of Jacob the God of the Fathers and the Father of Christ are Descriptions of one and the same Person So Acts 3. 13. The God of our Fathers hath glorified his Son Jesus and Heb. 1. 1. God who spake in times past to the Fathers by the Prophets hath spoken to us by his Son So that they who make the Son to be the God of the Fathers make him to be his own God and Father But because I think it may give farther Light and Evidence to this great Point wherein the Glory of God even the Father is so much concern'd I will yet further show from many plain Texts set so as they may give Light one to another that the God of the Fathers and the God and Father of Christians or our God and Father and the God and Father of our Lord Christ our Heavenly Father and his Heavenly Father his God and our God is one and the same Person I present them by Couples the first speaking of Christ the second of us See Rom. 15. 6. That ye may glorify God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Phil. 4. 20. Now unto God our Father be glory for ever and ever 2 Cor. 1. 3. Blessed be God even the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ the Father of Mercies Rom. 1. 7. Grace be to you and Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ Col. 1. 3. We give thanks to God and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ Eph. 1. 2. Grace to you and Peace from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ 2 Cor. 11. 31. The God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ knoweth that I lie not 1 Thes 1. 1. Grace be to you and Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ Heb. 1. 8. Unto the Son he saith Thy Throne O God is for ever and ever Thou hast loved Righteousness and hated Iniquity therefore God even thy God hath anointed thee with the Oil of Gladness above thy Fellows Phil. 1. 2. Grace be unto you and Peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ Ephes 1.