and dead." Ch. xiii. ver. 38: "Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins." Ch. xvii. ver. 3: 66 Opening and alleging, that Christ must needs have suffered, and risen again from the dead: and that this Jesus, whom I preach unto you, is Christ."

Thus we find the Apostles never hesitated to hazard their lives by declaring before the Jews, that their master was a Prophet, the expected Messiah, the Son of the living God; which was equally offensive to their countrymen, as if they had called him God himself; yet in none of the Sermons do we ever find them representing him as the true God. In the same manner, Jesus himself never assumed that character to himself, although he repeatedly avowed that he was the Messiah, the Son of God, whereby he knew that, according to their law, he would draw the penalty of death upon himself. As to the nature of those doctrines of Christianity deemed essential in the earliest times, I shall content myself with making a few extracts from the Ecclesiastical History of Mosheim, a celebrated author among Trinitarians, which will prove that the doctrine of the Trinity, so zealously maintained as fundamental by the generality of modern Christians, made not its appearance as an essential, or even a secondary article of Christian faith, until the commencement of the fourth century; and then it was introduced after long and violent discussions by the majority of an assembly, who were supported by the authority of a monarch. Mosheim, Vol. I.

p. 100: "Nor in this first century was the distinction made between Christians of a more or less perfect order which took place afterwards: whoever acknowledged Christ as the Saviour of mankind, and made solemn profession of his confidence in him, was immediately baptized, and received into the Church." P. 411: "Soon after its commencement, even in the year 317, a new contention arose in Egypt, upon a subject of much higher importance, and with consequences of a yet more pernicious nature; the subject of this fatal controversy, which kindled such deplorable division throughout the Christian world, was the doctrine of three persons of the Godhead; a doctrine which in the three preceding centuries had happily escaped the vain curiosity of human researches, and been left undefined and undetermined by any particular set of ideas. The Church indeed had frequently decided against the Sabellians and others, that there was a real difference between the Father and the Son, and that the Holy Ghost was distinct from them both; or, as we commonly speak, that three distinct persons exist in the Deity; but the mutual relation of these persons to each other, and the nature of the distinction that subsists between them, are matters that hitherto were neither disputed nor explained, with respect to which the Church had consequently observed a profound silence:-nothing was declared to the faith of Christians in this matter, nor were there any modes of expression prescribed as requisite to be used in speaking of the mystery. Hence it happened, that the Christian doctors en

H

tertained different sentiments upon this subject without giving the least offence, and discoursed variously concerning the distinction between Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost, each one following his respective opinion with the utmost liberty." On this quotation I beg leave to remark, that if, in the first and purest ages of Christianity, the followers of Christ entertained such different opinions on the subject of the distinction between Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, without incurring the charge of heresy and heterodoxy, and without even breaking the tie of Christian affection towards each other, it is a melancholy contrast that the same freedom of opinion on this subject is not now allowed, nor the same mutual forbearance maintained amongst those who call themselves Christians. Mosheim, p. 412: "In an assembly of Presbyters of Alexandria, the Bishop of that city, whose name was Alexander, expressed his sentiments on this head with a high degree of freedom and confidence, and maintained, among other things, that the Son was not only of the same eminence and dignity, but also of the same essence with the Father: this assertion was opposed by Arius, one of the Presbyters, a man of a subtile turn, and remarkable for his eloquence." Page 414: "The Emperor Constantine, looking upon the subject of this controversy as a matter of small importance, and as little connected with the fundamental and essential doctrines of religion, contented himself at first with addressing a letter to the contending parties, in which he admonished them to put an end to their disputes; but when the

Prince saw that his admonitions were without effect, and that troubles and commotions, which the passions of men too often mingle with religious disputes, were spreading and increasing daily throughout the empire, he assembled at length, in the year 325, the famous Council of Nice, in Bithynia, wherein the deputies of the Church Universal were summoned to put an end to this controversy. In this general council, after many keen debates and violent efforts of the two parties, the doctrine of Arius was condemned; Christ declared consubstantial or of the same essence with the Father; the vanquished Presbyter banished among the Illyrians, and his followers compelled to give their assent to the creed or confession of faith

which was composed by this council." //It must not escape the notice of my readers, that so late as the year 314, the doctrine of the Son being of the same nature with the Father was supposed to be a matter of small importance, and little connected with the fundamental and essential doctrines of religion.

The reason for the majority being in favour of the three persons of the Godhead at the Council of Nice may be easily accounted for, as I noticed before. More than nine tenths of the Christians of that age, including the emperor and princes, were Gentile converts, to whom the idea of a plurality of Gods was most familiar and acceptable, and to whose reason as well as practice the worship of a deity in the human shape was perfectly consonant, as appears from the following quotation, as well as

from the Roman and Grecian histories. Mosheim, Vol. I. p. 25: "The deities of almost all nations were either ancient heroes renowned for noble exploits and worthy deeds, or kings and generals who had founded empires, or women become illustrious by remarkable actions or useful inventions: the merit of these distinguished and eminent persons, contemplated by their posterity with an enthusiastic gratitude, was the reason of their being exalted to celestial honours." We find also in the Acts of the Apostles, Paul declared to be God by the people of Melita, and both Paul and Barnabas regarded as gods by the inhabitants of Lystra; and the Saviour was ranked in the number of false gods even by professed Heathens. Acts, ch. xxviii. ver. 6: "Howbeit, they looked when he (Paul) should have swollen or fallen down dead suddenly; but after they had looked a great while, and saw no harm come to him, they changed their minds, and said he was a God." Ch. xiv. ver. 11: "The gods are come down to us in the likeness of men." Mosheim, Vol. I. p. 65: "Many who were not willing to adopt the whole of the doctrines of Christianity were nevertheless, as appears from undoubted records, so struck with the account of his life and actions, and so charmed with the sublime purity of his precepts, that they numbered him (Jesus) among the greatest heroes, nay even among the gods themselves." Page 66: "So illustrious was the fame of Christ's power grown after his resurrection from the dead, and the miraculous gifts shed from on high upon his apostles, that the Emperor Tiberius is said to have pro