rerum omnium commeantem. l. 1. 10. Seneca, fpeaking of God, fays, Quocunque te flexeris, ibi illum videbis occurrentem tibi; and Plautus says finely, Eft profecto Deus, qui que nos gerimus auditque et videt. The Greek Dramatifts are very clear and explicit under these articles. In a fragment of Euripides one says, Οξυς θεων οφθαλμος τα παντ' ιδειν.; which, as Mr. Barnes obferves, is exactly parallel with Hefiod's, Παντα ιδων Διος οφθαλμος, και παντα νοήσας. * Of all the heathens Plato perhaps had the most exalted fentiments, and, as a learned author expreffes it, 66 came nearest to the truth," He was indeed converfant in the Jewish Law to fuch a degree as to be described under the character of Mofes fpeaking Greek, according to the fame author's obfervation from Eufebius and others. He calls God Angyos, and emphatically the To ov. Origen cites this remarkable expreffion from him, which is produced by Grotius ; Μετα μεν Διος ημεις, αλλοι δε μετα αλλων δαιμονων.

66

But, it may be, this eulogy is premature. "In "the facred commentary of the Perfian rites, the following words, fays Sir Ifaac Newton, are as« cribed to Zoroaftres.” Ο Θεός εςι κεφαλήν έχων ιερα κος. έτος εςιν ο πρωτος, αφθαρτος, αίδιος, αγενητος, αμέρης, ανομοιότατος, ηνιοχος παντος καλέ, αδωροδόκητος, αγαθών αγαθώτατος, φρονιμων φρονιμωτατος. εςι δε και πατηρ

* See Tragad. Incer. v. 8. and Barnes's Note. See Ibid. v. 335.

ευνομίας

ευνομίας και δικαιοσυνης, αυτοδίδακτος, φυσικος, και τες λειος, &c.

"This, fays he, was the antient God of the "Perfian Magi." The fame great author acquaints us, that Hyftafpes, father of Darius, was co-founder of the religion of the Perfian empire with Zoroaftres; which religion, fays he, "was compofed " partly of the inftitutions of the Chaldeans, in "which Zoreaftres was well fkilled; and partly "of the institutions of the antient Brachmans, who "are fuppofed to derive even their name from the "Abrahamans, or fons of Abraham, born of his fe"cond wife Keturah, and inftructed by their father "in the worship of ONE GOD, without images, &c." (See NEWTON's Chronol. Ch. 6. p. 350, 351.)

One is almost afraid to say, this confummate Philofopher could himself be mistaken in this or in any matter; could poffibly be liable to the weakness of inadvertence, or the littleness of prepoffeffion. Yet the author of the Effay on Spirit makes use of Sir. I. Newton's words when he declares, that God is a relative term, which has reference to fubjects. Surely it has been obferved with great truth, that of all terms the term God is perhaps the most abfolute. It is the name of the Supreme, felf-existent Being, independently on ten thousand creations. We know not wherein the effential happiness of the Deity confifts; but we know that the mere production of worlds contributes

A a

butes nothing to it. It is true, God is our Creator, our King, our Father, &c; but does he ftand related to us under these characters by neceffity, or by bounty of grace? We worship him as our Maker, we honour him as our Sovereign, we fear him as our Judge, we love him as our Father, &e, &c; but before the great day of univerfal manifeftation we shall not fee him, and even then moft probably shall but imperfectly fee him as he is.

Page 160. (y) proof upon proof.] The refinements of learned men have differved the cause they wifhed to promote. According to the traditions of the Chinese, as European miffionaries have reprefented them, Confucius, their great philofopher, who lived above five hundred years before Chrift, ufed often to fay, It is in the Weft that the true Saint is to be found; and even before him it was a faying of Laokun, that eternal reafon produced ONE; ONE produced Two; Two produced THREE; and THREE produced all things. How far the conclufion of Simplicius's comment upon Epictetus may deferve more attention, I will not determine. It is to be found in Dr. CAVE's Prim. Christian. being a prayer " in which mention is made of three Per"fons, the Lord, (or Father;) the Saviour, (or "Chrift ;) and the light of truth;" which even in Scripture, fays Dr. C., is " a common periphrafis of the Holy Spirit." If we may believe Socrates in his Ecclefiaftical Hiftory, (as the fame author refers

refers to him,) Ignatius heard the angels in a vifion praifing the Trinity in alternate hymns, &c; which introduced alternate hymns into the Church. Mr. Hooker feems inclined to fufpect the authority of this story; and it is certain nothing is said relative to fuch a vifion in all the genuine epiftles of this antient Father, which are feven; though in one of them, viz. that to the Ephefians, he talks of Jefus Chrift's being fung, and of finging to the Father by Jefus Chrift: *which makes the omiffion more extraordinary.

The abfolute Divinity of Jefus Christ has, with more hafte than judgment, been afferted by fome from our Saviour's words to the leper, I will; be thou clean and by others from his power to forgive fins; nothing in all this implying a felf-inherent authority. Dr. Whitby quotes the following paffage from a no less illuftrious Father than Irenæus, with respect to the remitting power. "By remitting the "fin, &c, he fhewed who he was; for if none "can remit fins but God, and yet our Lord did "remit them, &c, it is manifeft that he was both "the Word of God, and the Son of man, receiving "the power of remiffion from his Father, as God "and Man." Surely he could receive this power as man only.

It is not my intention to derogate in the leaft from the merit of Mr. Jones's performance, (the

Catholic Doctrine of a Trinity,) which upon the whole is admirable and fatisfactory. His fcriptural parallels are for the most part happy; and his mode of reasoning is always ingenious, and generally conclufive. Perhaps it rather fails in the application of the following text; God was IN CHRIST, reconciling the world to HIMSELF. 2 Cor. 5. 19.

"It is allowed on all hands, fays Mr. Jones, that "the world was reconciled by Chrift Jefus to the one, only, great and fupreme God. But, this very fame God (for the word is but once used in the "whole fentence) was in Chrift; manifeft in the

flesh, and reconciling the world to himself. And "were there no other paffage of Scripture to be "found, this alone is fufficient to overthrow the "whole doctrine of Arianifm; which, as far as the "Scripture is concerned, depends upon this one affertion, that the word GOD, in Scripture, NEVER fignifies a complex notion of more persons than one ; " but ALWAYS means one person only, viz. either the perfon of the Father fingly, or the perfon of the Son

cr

fingly. Which is abfolutely false: for here it fig"nifies both. The text confiders God as agent and

patient at the same time, and upon the fame oc"cafion; as the reconciler of the world, in the per

fon of the Son; and the object to whom the re"conciliation was made, in the perfon of the Father; yet there is but one word (GOD) to express them

"both