Service of God by the free Directions of their own Nature That to this end he sent his only begotten Son into the World teaching them That the best service of God consisteth in being like him and for their encouragement therein promising them upon their Repentance pardon of Sins past and everlasting Life This saith he is the Sum of the Gospel i. e. of his Naked Gospel Here is not a word of that Grace and Truth that came by Jesus nor that God was in Christ reconciling the World to himself Making him to be sin for us who knew no sin that we might be made the righteousness of God in him Not a word of that Redemption which St. Peter speaks of made for us by the precious Blood of the Son of God or that Christ redeemed the Church by his own Blood dying for our Sins and rising again for our Justification Revel 1. washing us in his own Blood from our Sins Not a word of that which St. Paul made his whole work to preach Christ crucified that others with him might know him and the power of his resurrection that we may be found in him not having our own righteousness but that which is through the faith of Christ the righteousness which is of God by faith Phil. 3.8 9. Nor that without the shedding of this Blood there could be no Remission of Sins But though the Apostle counts this knowledge of Christ Jesus his Lord so excellent that all things else are but loss and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dogs meat in comparison with it Yet the Doctor prefers his Natural Faith or his Carnal Reason above all this for there is not one word of all this to cover the Nakedness of his New-born Gospel but as the Socinians say God sent his only begotten Son into the World to teach them not to die for them how by the free Directions of their own Nature without any grace or assistance of the Spirit of God or any Revelations of that Grace and Truth that came by him That the best service of God consists in being like him to which end he supposeth the free Dictates of their own Nature are sufficient Deus nil fecit promising them upon their Repentance pardon of their Sins past and everlasting Life Which John Baptist and other Prophets had done before him Not a word of Christ's giving Repentance or that eternal Life is the gift of God which he grounds on that Repentance which flows from the free Directions of their own Nature What part Faith hath in all this is his next Enquiry which is to shew that it hath no part at all Enquiry II. He says is to shew What Changes or Additions later Ages have made in Matter of Faith He tells us p. 50. c. 2. That our Lord honoured it as the Great King did Daniel above all his Princes That he came into the World to advance it That he promised it eternal Life and both he and his Apostle make it half the Gospel we meet it in every page of the New Testament and on sight of its glory we talk as St. Peter did when confounded at the brightness of our Lord we know not what But our Author hath no sooner cried his Hosanna to Faith as the Jews did to Christ but presently proclaims his Crucifigite and casts this Daniel into a Lion's Den to be rent by such furious Beasts he first casts her from the Throne wherein Christ placed it and what the Gospel makes the Mother-Grace he makes the Mother-Error p. 51. c. 1. his words are This is the Mother-Error that whereas Faith is no better than a Retainer to Holiness we place it in the Throne as an Absolute Prince and think it our Duty to enlarge its Dominions as far and exalt its Prerogative as high as we can as if it were some precious Diamond valuable for its Brightness Hardness or other irrespective Vertue of its own Doth this Author know what he says or consider whereof he affirms these things If it be of that implicite Faith required in the Church of Rome or that naked Faith of the Gnosticks or Solifidians viz. a bare profession of Faith in Christ separate from Obedience he only beats the Air but if of that Faith required in the Gospel and professed in the Church of England the nature whereof he cannot but know then he striks at the very Life of Christian Religion for that is a Faith working by Love a Faith in Christ's meritorious Death Passion Resurrection and Intercession which the Socinians will not admit of A Faith that purifieth the Heart that teacheth us that Christ dying for all all were dead in Sins and Trespasses and that he died for all that henceforth they should not live to themselves but unto him that died for them and rose again this is the true Christian Faith grounded on the Grace of God which bringeth salvation and hath appeared to all men teaching them that denying ungodliness and worldly lusts they should live righteously soberly and godly in this present world This the end of manifesting the Gospel as St. Paul Rom. 16.26 This the Obedience of Faith This is the Faith which we preach in the Church of England and which the Doctor so opposeth and vilifieth It is evident that the Faith which this Doctor would degrade is that which hath for its Object Christ crucified bearing our Sins making an Atonement bearing the Chastisement of our Peace reconciling us to God by the Sacrifice on the Cross All which he would resolve into a Natural Faith in the Veracity of God and so makes our Faith in Christ crucified the chiefest Notion of a justifying Faith to be of none effect But let us hear the Reason he gives for his degrading of Faith p. 50. c. 2. We consider not saith he that two of the reasons which induced our Lord to call so importunately for it are expired Those Reasons I suppose we had p. 19. c. 2. 1. The Difficulties of believing 2. The Danger of professing it To which there needs no other Answer then what he himself hath given p. 50. c. 1. That Faith must necessarily be called for with importunity suitable both to the Difficulties and Dangers which at that time encompassed it and to the serviceableness which at all times accompanies it For is there not now also need of Faith to strengthen us against the Temptations of the World the Flesh and the Devil Or is our Fight now only against Flesh and Bloud are there not Spiritual Wickednesses also Are there not such Lusts as are as dear as a right Hand or Eye that must be cut off And what is it that giveth us the Victory over these and a world of others but our Faith Were not our Faith serviceable to these ends he might have some excuse for calling our Saviour a humersome and capricious Lord as he doth p. 51. c. 1. and p. 57. c. 2. that without any other motive than his unaccountable will imposeth a
the Gnosticks and Nicolaitans whose deeds God hated Mahomet was of the same Opinion with those Hereticks for though the Doctor says he professed all the Articles of the Christian Faith yet it 's evident he denied the Deity of Christ though he owned him to be a true Prophet and Messenger of God in which respect the Doctor might say he owned as much of the Christian Faith as the Socinians do and we may say he was for a Naked Gospel as well as the Doctor The Question therefore which the Doctor makes whether Mahomet or Christian Doctors have more corrupted the Gospel and hindred the success of it is easily resolved for the Gnosticks Cerinthians Ebionites c. all which called themselves Christian Doctors and Reformers of the Gospel as he calls Mahomet Were those Christian Doctors who by their corrupt and Antichristian Errors defamed the Gospel and opposed the Deity of its Author And these and such others made way for Mahomet by shewing that they held a Gospel whereof every Article was to be found in the Alchoran And had our Doctor lived in the days of Mahomet it 's not unlike but he might have been one of those Christian Doctors that would have reformed the Gospels according to the Alchoran As for any new Additions or Impositions in Matters of Faith the Doctor knows the Church of England utterly disclaims them And to avoid such traditionary Impositions the Church of England retaining whatsoever is agreeable to the Scriptures and Primitive Churches hath reformed herself from all the corrupt Innovations and Impositions of the Church of Rome as well in Matters of Doctrine as of Government and Discipline And now to the Doctor 's Question Whether Mahomet or the Christian Doctors have more corrupted the Gospel c. This was the Tempting Opportunity says the Doctor offered to the Impostor and he laid hold on it to set up himself for a Reformer Sir W. Temple p. 107. of the Second Part of his Essays may inform him who was the fore-runner of Anti-Christ as the Fathers termed Arius About the Year 600 the time when Mahomet appeared the Provinces of the East were over-run with Arianism who denied or undermined the Divinity of Christ and allowed only his Prophetical Office The Countries of Arabia and Egypt were filled with great numbers of the scattered Jews who on the destruction of their Country in Adrian's time had fled into these Provinces to avoid the utter ruine of their Nation threatned by that Emperour Arabia and Egypt were inhabited by Gentiles who were given to pleasures and Riches Mahomet to humour and comply with these three sorts of men and by assistance of Sergius a Monk an Arian Heretick who fearing the Censure of the Church of Constantinople which then resolved to suppress that and the Heresie of the Monothelites fled into Arabia and was entertained by Mahomet's Master where he grew into acquaintance with Mahomet and became his only Confident framed a Scheme of Religion which might take in the common Opinions and Dispositions of all those three Parties which yet might be agreeable to his own temper and designs He professed One God Creator of the World and that God sent Moses his first and great Prophet to give his Laws to Mankind which were not obeyed by the Jews nor received by the Gentiles therefore in later Ages he sent Christ who was the second Prophet and greater than Moses to preach his Laws in greater purity but to do it with gentleness patience and humility which found no better reception or success among Men than Moses had done and therefore God had now sent his last and greatest Prophet Mahomet to publish his Laws with more Power to subdue them by Force and Violence who would not willingly receive them that such as would not obey should be ruined but the obedient should have the possession of his and their Enemies as a Reward in this Life and a Paradise hereafter with all sensual enjoyments especially of beautiful Women newly created for that purpose these prevailed with Arians Jews and Gentiles in those parts c. Hence it appears what this Reformer was and what were the tempting opportunities which he laid hold on To please the Jews Mahomet observed Circumcision in imitation of Abraham and recommended to them the Laws of Moses to please the Gentiles he permitted Polygamy to the number of four Wives and as many Concubines as they could maintain and to please the Christians he permitted them to have a Naked Gospel and a Natural Faith in Christ as a Messenger of GOD greater than Moses but not God or the Saviour of the World for they deny that he was crucified but was taken up alive into Heaven but these are not all the Articles of the Christian Faith he denied the Crucifixion of our Saviour his Resurrection Ascention and that he should come to Judge the World to reward or punish Men according to their Works Sandius p. 347. mentioneth some other of Mahomet's Doctrines As that God is One both in Essence and Person and that there are not Father Son and Holy Ghost that Christ is to be worshipped but not with that Divine Worship as his Lord and God is He says That Jews and Gentiles and every one that worshippeth and feareth God and doth Good Works may be saved and he quotes Baronius saying That the Mahomitans do worship Christ as the Arrians and Nestorians do p. 348. The Author of Mahomet's Life Printed before the English Alchoran says He was ordained to be a Scourge for the Christians who in multitudes at that time had forsaken the Truth to follow the Sects and Heresies of the Arrians Nestorians Donatists and others By such as these the Candlestick by God's just Judgment was removed out of the Asian Churches at first and the pure Light of the Gospel is much darkned in these later Ages by Anti-Trinitarians Servetians and Socinians who have well nigh extinguished that Gospel which is the Light of the World and would leave Mankind as naked and as much ashamed as our first Parents when they had eaten of the forbidden Fruit. I confess that when I first read that Mahomet profest all the Articles of Christ's Faith I was not aware that the Doctor might mean according to his New Gospel or the Socinian Creed but on enquiry into the Alchoran and computation of Time when the Alchoran was written viz about the year 600 before which time the whole World as St. Hierome observed was become Arrian and Sergius the Monk that had a chief hand in contriving it was an Arrian I found that the Doctor makes a very great Agreement in Matters of Faith between the Alchoran and his Naked Gospel so that as he says Mahomet set up for a Reformer of the Gospel in his time so we have another Sergeus who sets up for a Reformer of the Gospel according to the Alchoran in our time as by the following particulars will appear The English Alchoran as it is Reprinted 1688 is that
which I quote p. 3. speaking to the Christians Mahomet says Say not God hath a Companion equal to him because you know the contrary P. 4. God created the Heavens and the Earth and then ascended into Heaven P. 44. Zachary prayed to God for a Progeny the Angels declared to him from God That he should have a Son called John he shall affirm the Messias to be the Word of God Jesus is with God as is Adam God created him out of the Earth I do not associate God him with any one and acknowledge no other Lord but him P. 46. There is no God but God alone the Omnipotent and Wise P. 86. There be some that alter the Scripture in reading it and will make us believe that what we read is in the Scripture though it be not they blaspheme and know it well God gave not to Men the Scripture Knowledge and Prophesies to say to the People Worship me instead of God but that they should say Observe exactly what you read in the Scripture God doth not command you to adore Angels or Prophets P. 48. We believe in what was inspired by Moses Jesus and generally by all the Prophets Abraham was not of them that believe in many Gods P. 49. Follow ye the Law of Abraham that is pleasing to him he profest the Unity of the Divine Majesty he was not of them that believe in many Gods P. 94. Certainly they that believe Messias the Son of Mary to be God are impious The Messias commanded the Children of Israel to worship God his and their Lord. Paradise is forbidden to him that shall say God hath a Companion equal to him Such as affirm there are Three Gods are impious P. 86. The Messias the Son of Mary is a Prophet and Apostle of God like to the Prophets that came before him His Mother is Holy say to him Who can hinder God to extirminate the Messias and his Mother P. 86. Of the Jews he says few of them shall believe because of their Malice and Blasphemies vomited against Mary They said We have slain the Messias Jesus the Son of Mary the Prophet and Apostle of God Certainly they slew him not neither crucified him they crucified one that resembled him such as doubt it are in a manifest Error for God took him up to himself Such as have the knowledge of the Scripture ought to believe in Jesus before his Death he shall be a Witness against them in the Day of Judgment P. 80 81. You shall hear many Christians that have an inclination towards true Believers and have Priests and Religious that are humble and their eyes full of tears say Lord we believe in thy Law write us in the Number of them that profess thy Unity P. 95. He shall say in the Day of Judgment O Jesus didst thou injoyn thy People to Worship Thee and thy Mother as two Gods Jesus shall answer Praised be thy Name I will take heed of speaking what is not true I delivered nothing but what thou commandest me to speak viz. Worship God your Lord and mine p. 99. Infidels believe not in his Unity p. 101. The Jews say That the Son of God is most just and powerful The Christians say That the Messias is the Son of God their words are like the words of Infidels but God shall lay on them his Curse p. 153. Consider how they blaspheme they adore their Doctors and Priests and the Messias also the Son of Mary who commanded them to worship One God alone there is but one sole God there is nothing equal to him they would extinguish the Ligqt of God but he shall not suffer them How the Naked Gospel agreeth with the Alchoran in most of these particulars might be shewn but he that reads it will be soon satisfied that it is a Commentary on that Text. But since the Doctor or some one for him hath written his Vindication I shall briefly consider what is said in Defence of those Propositions condemned by the University And first I observe That in these Propositions and what may be added to them from the Naked Gospel the quintessence of the Arian and Socinian Controversies is contracted and composed Secundum Artem and by him or some other on his behalf recommended as a safe means to promote a General Comprehension and an enlarged Charity but to the destruction of Catholick Verity Now because these Propositions are not only published in several Impressions of that Libel but defended by the Author or some other on his behalf and the Gangreen begins to spread among prophane and unstable Wits which too much abound it seemed necessary to provide an Antidote against those old Errors to which the Author hath given a new Resurrection like that which he maintains of our Bodies not in the same form but another more agreeable to his new Divinity and Philosophy and equally opposite to the written Gospel as understood by the Primitive Fathers and received by the Church of England The difference which the Author fancieth to be made in the Gospel is the preaching of the Doctrine of the Eternal Deity of our Saviour which this Author explodes as not to be comprehended by his Reason and not agreeable to that Natural Religion which he makes the Foundation of the Gospel now if there be any alteration made it is by those which have denied the Eternal Deity of our Saviour for as I said while St. John was yet living Ebion and Cerinthus began that Heresie Ebion taught That Christ was a meer Man and had no existence before he was born into the World of which the Church of Ephesus then complained to St. John desiring him to write in Confutation of that Heresie and Justin Martyr and Ireneus brand this Heresie as did Ignatius before them and St. John before him who called such as denied that Jesus Christ was come in the Flesh Deceivers and Antichrists Cerinthus held a pre-existence of Reason or the Word which he says descended on our Saviour at his Baptism and ascended from him into Heaven when he was crucified for which Opinions St. John meeting him in a Bath fled from his company as fearing least the Walls of the Bath wherein he was might fall on him Against these Heresies St. John being importun'd wrote his Gospel purposely to assert the Divine Essence of the Son of God as he tells us ch 20.31 These things are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ the Son of God and that believing ye might have life through his name And besides the Historical part of that Gospel the whole is one continued Argument for the Confirmation of this Truth which we shall have occasion to speak of more at large and shall only observe here what he says 1 Job 5.20 We know that the Son of God is come and hath given us an understanding to know him that is true This is the true God and eternal life And in the 2 Epistle v. 7. Many deceivers are
presume by his short line of Reason and Discourse to fathom the deep things of God which the Apostle says are past finding out When the Socinians say though it be contrary to Reason and Scripture That Divine Worship must be given to a Creature as they affirm Christ to be why may not the same Scriptures be believed when they tell us that Christ is One and equal with the Father God over all c. though Reason cannot apprehend how the Divine Essence can be communicated to more than one Person yet is it good Logick though no Socinian Reason that though the Divine Essence be singular yet it may be predicated of more than One without Multiplication or Division But are the Socinians the only Masters of Reason that all Mankind must stand or fall at their Tribunal Are they the Light of the World and all Men else in Darkness Yea even Christ himself who hath taught many things as contrary to their Doctrines as Light is to Darkness then we may say that neither God is true as well as that all Men are Lyars The Socinians grant That the Man that makes Reason his Judge ought to have divers necessary qualifications as that his Reason be clear and uncorrupt that the Person be of great Probity and Sincerity free from Vice and prejudicate Opinions well instructed and exercised in Human and Divine Knowledge one that hath studied discoursed and meditated on the Things he doubts of considering what is said pro and con by learned Men. And when all these Things meet one thing more is necessary the Illumination and Assistance of the Spirit of God And hath this Spirit and sound Reason forsaken the Universal Church in all Ages and confined itself to the Raccovian Catechists or is every private Man thus qualified Are not the most carnal ignorant or obstinate ever learning and never able to come to the knowledge of the Truth being lead away with divers Lusts which darken their Understandings and cause them to imprison the Truth of God in Unrighteousness and lean more to their own Understandings than to the Revelation and Assistance of the Holy Spirit I doubt not but the Socinians will grant that such Men are not fit Judges for themselves or others in Matters of Salvation Who then shall judge for them If they choose another it will be probably one of whom they have such a good Opinion as most inclined to their own Sentiments And how are they assured that he is not tainted with some of the same Failings as himself is he ought therefore to consider what the Church of GOD hath held in all Ages what the most general Councils after mature deliberation have approved of and above all what is most consonant to the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament and make these his Rule and then he will plainly see how contrary the long approved Doctrines of Original Sin and of Eternal Death the Wages of Sin the Necessity of Satisfaction to the Divine Justice and in order thereto the Incarnation of the Son of God which are as clear in the Holy Scriptures as the Sun in the Firmament are to his clouded and carnal Reason we may not wonder that there are in all Ages Men of perverse Minds c. because we have been foretold there should be such or that the Sophistry of such Men may raise prejudices against the most evident Truths even against the Being of a Deity and the first Principles of any Religion but for any who hold the Scriptures to be the Word of God and yet deny the Fundamentals of the Religion therein taught and shine as the Sun throughout one end to the other is against Reason as well as Scripture what is more plain than the Creation of the World by God in Gen. 1. yet may an Atheist urge the same Reason by his Metaphorical Sense of that History as the Socinians do by their absurd Interpretation of that of St. Joh. 1. and apply the particulars of the History of the Creation to the Erection of the Jewish Pedagogy and Policy by Moses as the Socinians do the first Institution of the Christian Religion to be the Sense of the Creation of the World by Christ Who was with God and was that God by whom the World was made as is most express Col. 1. and Heb. 1. See the Bishop of Worcester against Crellius Whence is it that the Ancient Fathers and Modern Doctors have lost their Reason and the Socinians found it that they as the Chineses say are the eye of the World Quid est quod Velleius intellegere possit contra non possit as Cicero de Natura Deorum Sure they have as good Intellectuals and as good helps to improve them and have given as great Testimonies of their Probity as any Socinian whatsoever their boast of Reason therefore may be checkt with that of Lucan of the British Druids Solis nosce Deos Coeli numina vobis aut Solis nescire datur Socinus grants That we ought not to forsake the common and usual sence of the Scripture and apply a Metaphorical Sense when the matter is capable of it And if his Disciples would grant but one thing more viz. that we ought not to wrest little words and particles which may admit of various significations contrary to their common import to which the subject matter doth determine them the Controversies between us and them would be soon decided for as the R. R. Bishop notes concerning that great Point of the Satisfaction of Christ which is so obstinately denied that it cannot be more clearly expressed by any Man than it is in the Scripture and if any Company of Learned Men should purposely write of it as the Apostles have done the Socinians would find the like evasions from the Sence of the one as they have to elude the other We say then that no Man of sober Reason assisted by the Illumination of the Word and Spirit of God can dissent from the Revelations of the Gospel because first it doth propose such things as are above the reach of human Reason but not contrary to it for one Light may be greater than another but not contrary to another and that Mind or Reason which is improved and elevated by the Light of Faith beyond the Sphere of its natural activity and is endowed with a spiritual understanding doth not only believe those Mysteries to be true but also may perceive many Reasons for their credibility which are hid from others that have not the same Opticks such as he may infer from the Wisdom of God who proposeth them and from the Nature of the Things proposed And if the Socinians talk of human Reason in the Concreate i. e. such as yet remain in the natural and corrupted Man of which St. Paul speaks 1 Cor. 11.14 it cannot be expected that this should agree with the Gospel for if to the eye of the body many things appear otherwise than in truth they are which
omits that the Word was God that it was in the bosom of the Father ought to be explained with respect to this express Declaration of the Saviour of the World so that if he said he was the Son of God it was because the Father had sanctified him and sent him into the World and according to this Passage I may says he lawfully explain any other Passage wherein Christ is called God or Son of God for they are all taken from the Economy or Ministry of Christ We shall meet this Gentleman again anon in the mean time we must not be uncivil to the Doctor who hath been so civil as to grant That Christ was first sanctified and afterward sent whereas others were first sent into the World the common way and afterward sanctified To them God sent his Word by their Betters but it is not sent to me by my Betters but by me to my Inferiors Now if Christ were first sanctified and then sent into the World then he had a Being before he came into the World and that Being must be as a Creator or a Creature or a middle Nature a made God as the Arians call him the Arians say more That he was God's Instrument or Agent in creating the World which is so evident in the Scripture that no Man of sence can deny that diligently reads John 1. Colos 1. and Heb. 1. Now if God to qualify him for so great a Work as that of the Creation did communicate to him the great Attributes of Divine Wisdom Omnipotence and Omnissience which are Infinite why might he not communicate to him also that other Attribute of his Eternity in his Generation But to come to the Doctor 's Argument viz. That Christ spake nothing to the Jews of what he was from Eternity in himself but what he was in relation to the World Doth not the Doctor grant he was first sanctified and then sent into the World And what is that Sanctification but his being ordained by God to be the Redeemer and Saviour of the World So Crellius says l. 1. sect 2. c. 31. To sanctify signifieth in Scripture to separate one and choose him to a singular Office Now Christ by an everlasting Decree was set apart to be the Lamb slain as an All sufficient Sacrifice for the Sins of all Mankind his Sanctification or Ordination to the Office of a Redeemer was by that Decree of which the Psalmist gives us a Copy Psal 2. I will declare the decree the Lord hath said to me Thou art my Son this day have I begotten thee which the ancient Jews affirm to be spoken of the Messias And the Hodie the day was from all Eternity for the Redemption of Mankind could not be effected but by an Infinite Price as Scripture teacheth The Argument urged by our Doctor and the Socinians is That our Saviour on so pressing an occasion ought to assert his Right yet spake nothing of what he was from Eternity So Crellius and our Doctor But we affirm that our Saviour was not obliged so to do on this occasion it was sufficient for him to clear himself from the Accusation of being a Blasphemer which he doth by an Argument out of their own Law which may be thus illustrated The Doctor stiles himself A true Son of the Church of England to which it may be said that he being an Arian or Socinian doth blaspheme i. e. speaks evil of the Church of England in making himself who is a Socinian a true Son of that Church which owns no such for her Sons that are of that Belief Now how will the Doctor vindicate himself from this Accusation will he say I was baptized into the Faith of that Church in the Name of the Father the Son and the Holy Ghost I was for Twenty five Years a Professor of Divinity in that Church a Rector of Exeter-Colledge This would be an impertinent Argument for there have been many of that Church which are gone from it some to the Church of Rome others to Socinian Conventicles the most proper Argument would have been to shew that in our Law the Articles of our Religion our Litany and Homilies the Arrian Religion or Socinian Religion asserted or that neither in his Writings or Sermons he hath affirmed any other Doctrine than what is established in that Church for the Question is not concerning the Dignity of his Person or his Birth or Qualifications but whether he be a true Son of that Church and can shew the consonancy of his Faith to that of the Church of England This was our Saviour's Argument to vindicate himself from the Jews Accusation who accounted him a Blasphemer in that he being a Man made himself the Son of God he doth not argue from his being the Son of God or from his doing such Works as no other Man did but proves from their Law wherein the Title of God is given to Men that were inferiour to him viz. to Princes Priests and Prophets he was not concern'd to tell them whether he was the Son of God by distinguishing between a Son of God by Nature and a Son by Office he doth not deny but still asserts the first both before v. 30. I and my Father are one and after ver 38. The Father is in me and I in him And his being sanctified and sent into the World proves the same viz. that he was the Son of God for otherwise God sent not his Son and sanctified him before he came into the World but first sent him into the World and then sanctified him to be his Son which though contrary to what the Doctor grants from the Text yet the Socinians generally deny and ascribe his Sonship to his Birth his Baptism Unction to his Office his Resurrection and Exaltation on any thing but his Eternal Generation and Ordination to be the Saviour and Redeemer of the World for which Office all the Angels of God were not sufficient And now we return to the thoughtful Gentleman This Gentleman thinks to thrust home this Argument to the Ruin of the Catholick Doctrine For he says it is written with the Finger of Truth and unanswerable p. 3. col 2. But that the Orthodox are wont to swallow all sorts of Contradictions and to cast dust in the eyes of the simple This Reproach notwithstanding we will go hand in hand with him in search of that Truth which this Scripture propounds for we are agreed that our Saviour delivers his Doctrine in profound Wisdom having regard to the Circumstances of Place Time and Person by these Particulars we shall examine the Text laying down this general Observation That St. John was desired by the Church of Ephesus who were pestered with the Heresies of the Gnosticks Ebion and Cerinthus who denied the Deity of the Son of God and ascribed the Creation to certain Aeones or Angels denying it to be ascribed to Christ both which Errors he particularly refutes 1. Then consider the Persons with whom he had to