a

fathers by the Prophets? yet he affects to know nothing at all of the matter.

And as to the use he makes of the New Teftament, who would expect, that a man who has made Nothing of one half of Gods Revelation, should be very nice in his treatment of the other? In the first place, he has not vouchfafed to follow the Apostle's Direction of comparing Spiritual things with fpiritual, thence to collect their true meaning; but fets down his Texts in fuch an order, as makes them to be all fingle and independent of one another; and that gives all poffible liberty to the Imagination to thrust in what fort of comment it pleases. When he refers to any paralel place (which I think is never done, but on one fide of the Queftion) the Reader is not directed to the text itself, but to the meaning he has faftened upon it. At the beginning of every Chapter, he fets down his own opinion at large, as the Title of it: and you are to believe, that all the paffages of that Division do certainly prove it; which if cleared of his comments, and compared with other texts, are found to prove no fuch thing, but the trary. And this he calls The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity: but if we call it by its true name, it is-Clarke's Doctrine of the Scripture; that

a Heb. I. 1.

very con

is, of half the Scripture. How it came to pass, that he should thus boldly fet down his own refolutions upon the most profound article of the Chriftian Faith, without confulting all the Evidence that relates to it, or rightly examining any part of it; how this came to pass, God is to determine, to whom all things are naked and open. All I have to do with him, is to rescue the Word of God from fuch deceitful handling. And I have prevailed with myself to make these few Reflexions, because I find some modern Objectors of a lower Class, have used this Book in Converfation and in Print, as the Oracle of the Party, taking the Scripture upon truft as his principles would give him leave to retail it. I know it will be accounted an hard thing, and called invidious, to rake thus into the Ashes of a writer, who is not alive to anfwer for himself. And I confefs, I am very far from taking any pleafure in it. But is it not much barder, that the afhes of this man fhould be scattered over the land, to breed and inflame the plague of herefy, till the whole head is fick and the heart faint, and the whole body full of putrifying blains and fores? Arianifm is now no longer a peftilence that walketh in darkness, but that brazens it out against the fun's light, and deftroyeth in the noon day. It is a canker, which

if it be encouraged much longer, will certainly eat out the vitals of Christianity in this kingdom: and when the faith is gone, the Church in all probability will foon follow after it; for if the holy oil be wasted and fpilt, the Lamp that was made to hold it, will be of no farther use.

СНАР. III.

The Plurality and Trinity of Perfons.

I.

That Hebrew name fo often used in the old Teftament, which we have tranflated by the word God, is Elohim, a noun fubftantive of the plural number, regularly formed from its fingular†, and very frequently joined with plural verbs and plural adjectives, to exprefs a plurality in the divine nature: though for another obvious reason, it is generally constructed with verbs and pronouns tnx and ; fee the Heb. of Deut. XXXII. 17. and Hab.

I. II.

of

of the fingular number, and gives a good fenfe, though the Grammar of it be somewhat irregular.

The Jews would perfuade us not to confider this word as a plural noun, but on some particular occafions. Whoever will be at the pains to examine their reasoning, will find it to be very childish and inconfiftent, wholly owing to their hatred against the divinity of Jefus Chrift, and the notion of a Trinity. But when the few is become a Chriftian, and the ftumbling-block of the Cross removed out of his way, he can allow the name Elohim to be plural as readily as other men; and it is one of the principal points he chuses to infist upon, to convince the world that his eyes are open, and he is fincere in his profeffion of the Chriftian religion.

John Xeres, a few converted here in England about forty years ago, published a fenfible and affectionate addrefs to his unbelieving brethren, wherein he lays before them his reafons for leaving the Jewish religion and embracing the Chrif tian. "The Chriftians (fays he *) confefs Jefus to be God; and it is this that makes us "look upon the Gospels as books that overturn "the very principles of religion, the truth of "which is built upon this article, the Unity of "God. In this argument lies the strength of

"what you object against the Christian religion" &c. Then he undertakes to prove that the unity of God is not fuch as he once understood it to be, an unity of Perfon, but of Effence, under which more persons than one are comprehended; and the first proof he offers is that of the name Elohim. "Why elfe, fays he†, is that frequent mention of God by nouns of the plu"ral number? as in Gen. I. 1. where the word "Elohim, which is rendered God, is of the plural number, though annexed to a verb of the fingular number; which demonstrates as evidently as may be, that there are several per"fons partaking of the fame divine nature and " Effence."

II.

Gen. I. 26. And GOD faid, let us make man in our image, after OUR likenefs.

No fenfible reason can be given, why God fhould speak of himself in the plural number, unless he consists of more perfons than one. Dr. Clarke contrived the plan of his Scripture-Doctrine so as to leave out this difficulty with many

+ P. 57.

more