proves it. * In infinuating, that allowing three Perfons of the fame Effence with joint Power is Polytheism-and base, in many Infinuations; fuch as when they have af ferted, that there is nothing revealed about the Effence; and, becaufe some Ef fence must be underived, have fuppofed the underived Effence in one Perfon, fo, nothing revealed, or which can be supposed, about the Effence of the other two Perfons; nor about their Effence being derived from the Effence of that Perfon, which they fuppofe to be underived; nor of the Manner of that Derivation, though all Mankind have allowed that is the Effence. That People are not to pry into the Affair, ‡ but to believe them, that the Effence of those two Perfons is derived. In afferting, that the Superiority to one, and the Titles given to each Perfon, arife from his Power or Dominion; when it appears, that it was agreed that their Power was to be exercised, fometimes by one, fometimes by another, though cach could not tranffer his Effence to another. And when it appears, by their own fhewing, that the

*

Perfon

+ Part II.

Part II. §. 21.

19.252

Chap. II. Part I. Note on Numb. 535. in many Places. §. 1-7.

and Notes.

Person they chiefly oppofe, had agreed, allowed, that that Part of their Power, which his Enemies term Superiority, was to be exercised by the Father, and was become a compound Perfon, as a Servant, for the Time, fo, had not, could not have his original Titles. By many falfe Quotations; by wrefting many of those cited, unless they plead Ignorance; in omitting Texts in the New Teftament, which are moft to the Purpose; in not distinguishing when the Father is the Effence, when a Perfon of that Effence. In not distinguishing which Texts were spoken of the Divinity, which of the Humanity, and which of the compound Perfon. In blaming the Socinians, &c. for applying Texts spoken of the Humanity, to mean the Man, and applying them to the Divinity, to make it dependant. Though they have allowed, that the three Perfons are in fome Manner one, the fame; when they are treating of their Effence, the Effence of two must be derivative, and they must be one the fame in Power. Yet when they are treating of their Power, they forget themselves, and then the Power of two must be derivative; and not one, not the fame, but the Power of one Perfon; fo at laft they are one, the fame

In referring Texts,

fame in no manner. spoken of the Divinity, to be explained away by Texts spoken of the Humanity,' even without regarding the Time, fo the State of the Divinity, or of the Humanity, each respective Text fpeaks of; or any other Distinction, or Confideration, but to confound one by another, fo as to make the Divinity seem to be dependant. In allowing a Number of Texts to be unanswerable, which determine the Point, and yet not fubmitting to be determined by them. Laftly, after they refer themselves and others to the Scriptures, in bringing the Evidence of thofe, who were as ignorant as themselves, to evade the Meaning of the Texts which are clear, and determine the Point, as Deut. vi. 4. cited by Jefus, Mark xii. 29. The first of all the commandments is, hear, O Ifrael, Jebovah (the Effence exifting) our Aleim (the Perfons who swore to redeem Man) is one (the fame) Jehovah (Effence exifting.) ver. 32. There is one eos (Heb. Jehovah Aleim) and there is none other but he. Acts vii. 32. Exod. iii. 6. Heb. I (Jehovah) am the Aleim, Gr. ó Jeds, of thy Fathers, the Alcim of Abraham, the Aleim of Ifaac, and the Aleim of Jacob. Gal. iii. 2c. but eos is one. John x. 38.

-The

Ibid. x. 30. I and 1 John v. 7. Thefe. Ifa. ix. 6. 1918 a Father everlasting.

אל גבור

-The Father is in me, and I in him. Ibid. xiv. 10, 11. I am in the Father, and the Father in me. my Father are ev one. three are eis To Ev. εἰς mighty God, y ' Johni.1. And Seos God was the royos Word; with infinite Numbers of fuch in the Old, already fhewed; and many in the New Teftament. I muft fhew they are meer Drivellers; and none muft, any longer, pretend that they have given us the Meaning of the Scriptures about the Perfons in, or the Manner of expreffing, this Union. I pretend not yet to be fufficiently prepared to explain the New Teftament; nor do I defign to attempt going further, now, than juft to hint the Manner of wording that Affair. In Confequence of the Covenant, the Man, by being begotten by, and taken into the Effence, became the Son of the Effence, of God; one of the Effence, by being taken into the Man, became the Son of Man; so one of the Aleim became like unto Man. As the Man Jefus, by this Union, was made the Son of God; fo, God, that Perfon, we call the Son, was made the Son of Man, and fo he alwayscalled himself. And though, after this Union, the joint Perfon could not be divi

3

·ded;

ded; yet, when 'tis intended to denominate the one, chiefly, or exclufive; or the other, only as inclufive, if other additional Words do not vary it, 'tis done in this Order; by that Person of the Effence becoming the Son of Man, and the Man Jefus becoming the Son of God, &c. We, who believe, by Faith are changed from being the Children, Sons of Hell, by Adoption to be Children, Sons of God, Brethren of the Effence; fo, Heirs, joint Heirs of the Inheritance. This is the highest Honour a Mortal can mention, admits no other Title to be compared with it, Will any one, who has the leaft Glimpse of this, treat those Fools civilly who would banter him out of his Faith; fo, into his old State?

What Distinction this divine Person had in the Effence, before the Covenant, we know not; no, not even by the Names which were framed to correfpond with the Exhibition of it. After he had taken Flesh upon him, he fays, John iii. 13. No Man hath afcended up to Heaven, but he that came down from Heaven, the Son of Man which is in Heaven. Ibid. vi. 62. and if ye shall fee the Son of Man afcend up where he was before? As all Power was in the Effence, jointly; the Part the Father executed (as we muft fay) feparately,

What