"holy prophets, that by these means he might bring them gradu ally to the faith." A. D. 398.

66

IV.

12. Thofe of the Jews, who believe that Jefus is the Christ, are called Ebionites.' Origen contra Celfum.

And when you confider what belief they of the Jewish race, who believe in Jefus, entertain of the Redeemer ; fome thinking that he took his being from Mary and Jofeph, fome indeed from Mary only and the divine fpirit, but ftill without any belief of his divinity: you will under• ftand'---Ditto, Commentaria,

13.

But concerning Chrift, I cannot affirm, whether they [the Nararenes] are involved in the above-ftated crime of Cerinthus and Merinthus, and believe him to be a man born of a man; or avow, as the truth is, that he was begotten of Mary and the holy fpirit.' Epiphanius, Hærefis 29. A. D. 368.

Ébion borrowed his abominable rites from the Samaritans, his name from the Jews, his opinion from the Effenes, the Nazarenes and the Nafareans, and he defired to bear the appellation of a Chriftian. For this Ebion was contemporary with thefe, [the Nazarenes] and fets out from the fame principles with them; and firft he afferted, ⚫ that Chrift was born of the commerce and feed of a man; namely Jofeph, as we have already related. For agreeing in every refpect with the reft, in this only he differed; that he adhered to the Jewish law with refpect to the Sabbath, and Circumcifion, add all other Things enjoined by the Jews and the Samaritans; and befides, he imitates the Samaritans in things not regarded by the Jews.' This man began to propagate his doctrine from the fame country with the lawless Nazarenes; and, agree ing together, they communicated of their perverfeness to • each other.' Ditto, Hærefis 30.

6

66

6

14. "If this be true, we fall into the herefy of Cherintus and Ebion, who, believing in Chrift, were anathematized by the fathers on this account only, that they mixed the ceremonies of the law with the gofpel of Chrift, and held to the new [difpenfation] in fuch a manner as not to lofe the old. What fhall I fay concerning the "Ebionites, who pretend that they are chriftians? It is to this very

66

day, in all the Tynagogues of the Eaft, a herefy among the Jews, "called that of the Minei, now condemned by the Pharifees, and "commonly called Nazarenes, who believe in Chrift, the fon of

God, born of the virgin Mary, and fay that it was he who fuf"fered under Pontius Pilate, and rofe again; in whom alfo we believe. But while they with to be both Jews and chriftians, they "are neither Jews nor Chriftians." Jerom, Epiftola ad Auguftinum. A. D. 378.

15. The

15. The Nazarenes are Jews, who refpect Chrift as a righteous man.' Theodoret, apud Suicerum. A. D. 425. V.

16. Chrift is the first production of the Father. Not as having been made; for God being an eternal mind, from the beginning had the logos in himself, being eternally rational (y) but that the materials of nature yet being in chaos, waiting the operation of the active mind, and the denfe being mingled with the rare, he went • forth to be idea and energy upon them.' Athenagoras, Apologia. A. D. 177.

66

But even then

17. "Before all things God was alone. he was not alone, for he had with hiut his own\ reason. "For God is a rational being. This reafon the Greek call logos, which word we render fermo, and that you may more eafily understand this from yourself, confider that you, who are in the image of God, and like him a ration"al being, have alfo reafon within yourfelf. Recollect, that, when you filently confult with yourself, it is by means of reafon that you do it."-" You will fay, but what is fpeech befide a word, a found, fomething empty, "unsubstantial, and incorporeal? But I fay, that nothing empty and unsubstantial can proceed from God, because it "does not proceed from what is itfelf unfubftantial, nor

can that want fubftance which proceeds from fo great a "fubftance."" Then did this fpeech affume its form and "drefs, its found and voice, when God faid, Let there be light. This is the perfect nativity of the word, when it "proceeded from God. From this time he made him equal

[or like, parem] to himself, and by this proceffion he is "made his fon, first-born, begotten before all things, and "only begotten." Tertullian, ad Praxeam. A. D. 192.

18. “ How did he beget him? (that is Chrift.) The fa"cred fcriptures inform us, that the fon of God is the fpeech "or reafon of God, and the other angels the breath of God, (fpiritus Dei.) But fpeech is breath, emitted together with a voice, expreffive of fome meaning; and, fince fpeech " and breath proceed from different principles, there is a great difference between the fon of God and the other angels. For they are mere filent breathings, (fpiritus taci"ti) because they were produced, not to teach the know"ledge of God, but to minifter. But he, being alfo a breathing, yet proceeding from the mouth of God with a voice and found, is the Word; and this, because he was "to be a teacher of divine wisdom."" Our breathings are "diffoluble, because we are mortal: but the breathings of "God are permanent; they live and feel, because he is "immortal,

66

"immortal, the author of life and fenfation." Lactantius, Inftitutiones. A. D. 303.

Such is the general evidence which Dr. Prieftley, either in his principal work, or in his fubfequent defences of it, has adduced in fupport of his propofitions. We do not pretend to have done any thing like detailing all the teftimonies he has exhibited. But we have failed very unintentionally, if we fhall be found to have kept back any thing of confiderable moment. All that remains for us under this head is, to caution the inconfiderate reader against drawing any peremptory conclufion from ex parte documents, and to intreat him to fufpend his judgment till he fhall have seen, what we propofe to lay before him in our next review, the arguments, by which the value of the above teftimonies is endeavoured to be invalidated, and the direct evidence that has been produced in oppofition to our author's hypothefis.

Though the controverfy before us be certainly only of sccond rate importance, and though it deal much in dry, abftrufe and unprofitable learning, yet the great and merited reputation of the difputants, particularly of Dr. Prieffley, has drawn upon it an uncommon degree of attention. Indeed, whatever becomes of the prefent difpute, and however we decide upon his character as a divine, it must certainly be acknowledged that as a philofopher, and, what is much better, as a man, our author will reflect lafting honour on the age and country that produced him. Poffeffed of a more extenfive fhare of learning than perhaps any other man living, endowed with the moft undifputed and first-rate talents, and diftinguished by an unparalleled rapidity of conception and facility of expreffion; thefe qualities are indeed accompanied with an answerable promptitude of feeling, which forms perhaps the weak fide of this illuftrious character. But, whatever may be decided refpecting the ftyle he has employed towards thofe who have infulted or offended him, and even in fome cafes where he had received no perfonal offence, certain it is that his natural temper and manners are perfectly mild, fimple and unaffuming. That difdain of literary reputation, by which he is animated in the purfuit of what he conceives to be the cause of rectitude and truth, is, in a moral view, as noble and as venerable, as it is fingular. The members of our church, if it fhould be thought proper to diffuade them from the indifcriminate perufal of his theological works, may however fafely and advantageously study his character, as a model of evangelical virtue. It is to a proverb difficult and ungraceful for an author to discourse of himself. But there is fomething fo dignified, ingenuous and fair, in Dr. Priestley's manner of thinking, that it may be af

firmed,

firmed of him, that there is no fubject of which he treats in fo attractive and beautiful a manner.

6

With respect to myfelf,' fays he, in his Preface to the volume before us, I do not know that I can do any thing more. Being perfuaded, as I am, from the study of the fcriptures, that Chrift is properly a man, I cannot ceafe to think fo; nor can I poffibly help the influence of that perfuafion in my hiftorical refearches. Let other perfons write as freely on their respective hypothefes as I have done on mine; and then indifferent perfons, and efpecially younger perfons, whofe minds have not acquired the stiffnefs of ours, who are turned fifty, may derive benefit from it.

Firm as my perfuafion now is concerning the proper humanity of Chrift (a perfuafion that has been the flow growth of years, and the refult of much anxious and patient thinking) I do not know that, in the course of my enquiry, I have been under the influence of prejudice more than all other men naturally are. As to reputation, a man may diftinguish himself just as much by the defence of old fyftems, as by the erection of new ones; but I have neither formed any new fyftems, nor have I particularly diftinguifhed myself in the defence of old ones. When I first became an Ärian, and afterwards a Socinian, I was only a convert, in company with many others; and was far from having any thoughts of troubling the world with publications on the fubject. This I have been led to do by a feries of events, of which I had no forefight, and of which I do not fee the iffue.

• The conclufion that I have formed, with respect to the subject of this work, and my exertions in fupport of it, are, however, conftantly afcribed by my opponents to a force of prejudice and prepoffeffion, fo ftrong as to pervert my judgment in the plaineft of all cales. Of this I may not be a proper judge; but analogy may be fome guide to myfelf as well as to others in this cafe.

Now, what appears to have been my difpofition in other fimilar cafes? Have I been particularly attached to bypothefes in philofophy, even to my own, which always create a stronger attachment than thofe of other perfons? On the contrary, I will venture to fay that no perfon is generally thought to be lefs fo; nor has it been imagined that my purfuits have been at all defeated or injured, by any prepoffeffion in favour of particular theories; and and yet theories are as apt to mislead in philofophical as in any other fubjects. I have always fhewn the greatest readiness to abandon any hypothefis that I have advanced, and even defended, while I thought it defenfible, the moment I have fufpected it to be ill founded, whether the new facts that have refuted it were difcovered by myfelf or others. My friends in general have blamed me for my extreme facility in this refpect. And if I may judge of my felf by my own feelings, after the clofeft examination that I can give myself, I am juft the fame with refpect to theology.

In the courfe of my life I have held and defended opinions very different from thofe which I hold at prefent. Now, if my obstinacy in retaining and defending opinions had been fo great as my oppo-" nents reprefent it, why did it not long ago put a stop to all my

changes,

changes, and fix me a Trinitarian, or an Arian? Let. thofe who have given stronger proofs of their minds being open to conviction than mine has been, throw the first stone at me.

I am well aware of the nature and force of that oppofition and obloquy to whica I am expofing myfelf in confequence of writing my Hiftory of the Corruptions of Chriflianity, the most valuable, I truft, of all my publications; and efpecially in confequence of the pains that have been taken to magnify and expofe a few inaccuracies, to which all works of a fimilar nature, have been, and ever must be fubject. But I have the fulleft perfuafion that the real overfights in it are of the fmalleft magnitude, and do not at all affect any one pofition or argument in my work, as I hope to fatisfy all candid judges; and as to mere cavil and reproach, I thank God, I am well

able to bear it.

The odium I brought upon myself by maintaining the doctrines of materialism and neceffity, without attempting to cover or foften terms of fo frightful a found, and without palliating any of their confequences, was unspeakably greater than what this bufinefs can bring upon me. At the beginning of that controverfy I had few, very few indeed, of my nearest friends, who were with me in the argument. They, however, who knew me, knew my motives, and excufed me; but the christian world in general regarded me with the greatest abhorrence. I was confidered as an unprincipled infidel, either an atheist, or in league with atheists. In this light I was repeatedly exhibited in all the public papers; and the Monthly Review, and other Reviews, with all the fimilar publications of the day, joined in the popular cry. But a few years have feen the end of it. At least all that is left would not disturb the merest novice in these things. The confequence, which I now enjoy, is a great increase of materialists; not of atheistical ones, as fome will fill reprefent it, but of the moft ferious, the most rational, and confiftent Chriftians.

A fimilar iffue I firmly expect from the prefent controverfy, unpromifing as it may appear in the eyes of fome, who are ftruck with what is fpecioufly and confidently urged. For my own part I truly rejoice in the prefent appearance of things; as I foresee that much good will arife from the attention that will by this means be drawn upon the fubject; and as I hope I refpect the hand of God in every thing, I thank him for leading me into this bufinefs; as I hope to have occafion to thank him, fome years hence, for leading me through it, and ith as much advantage as I have been led through the other.

It is, indeed, my firm, and it is my joyful perfuafion, that there is a wife Providence over-ruling all inquiries, as well as other events. The wisdom of God has appeared, as I have endeavoured to point out, even in the corruptions of christianity, and the spread of error; and it is equally confpicuous in the discovery and propagation of truth.

I am far from thinking, that that great Being who fuperintends all things, guides my pen, any more than he does that of my fiercest opponent; but I believe that by means of our joint labours, and

those