"ever active intellect muft ever have con "templated'; and the contemplation which "has ever been. muft ever have been ac "companied with its juft.effect, the "fonal existence of the Son.". * per But there is nothing in the fcriptures, or indeed in the Fathers, that gives any countenance to this, reafoning. As we cannot pretend to draw any conclufions from the neceffary operations of one mind, but from their supposed analogy to those of other minds, that is, our own, thofe who maintain this hypothefis, muft explain to us how it comes to pass, that if the contemplation of the divine perfections' of the Father, neceffarily produced a diftinct perfon in him, fully equal to himself, a man's contemplation of fuch perfections or 'powers, as he is poffeffed of, fhould not produce another intelligent perfon fully equal to himself. It will perhaps be faid (though there is nothing to authorize it) that the impoffibility of producing this in man, is the imperfection of his faculties, or his limited. power of contemplating them. But to cut off off that fubterfuge, I will afk why the contemplation of the Son's perfections, which are fuppofed to be fully equal to thofe of the Father, and whofe energy of contemplation must likewife be fuppofed equal to that of the Father, does, not produce another intelligent being equal to himself; and why are not perfons in the Godhead in this manner multiplied ad infinitum? If, for any incomprehenfible reafon, this mysterious power of generation be peculiar to the Father, why does it not ftill operate? Is he not an unchangeable being, the fame now that he was from the beginning, his perfections the same, and his power of contemplating them the fame? Why then are not more fons produced? Is he become ayor, incapable of this generation, as the orthodox Fathers tfed to afk; or does it depend upon his will and pleasure whether he will exert this power of generation? If so, is not the Son as much a creature, depending on the will of the creator, as any thing elfe produced by him, though in another manner; and this whether he be of the fame fubftance (qu) with him, or not? E 4 I should I should also like to know in what man ner the third perfon in the trinity was produced. Was it by the joint exertion of the two first, in the contemplation of their respective perfections? If fo, why does. not the fame operation in them produce a fourth, &c. &c. &c. Admitting, however, this ftrange account of the generation of the trinity (equal in abfurdity to any thing, in the Jewith cabala) viz. that the perfonal existence of the Son neceffarily flows from the intellect of the Father exerted on itfelf; it certainly implies a virtual priority, or fuperiority in the Father with respect to the Son; and no being can be properly God, who has any fuperior, In fhort, this fcheme effectually overturns the doctrine of the 'proper equality, as well as the unity of the three. perfons in the trinity.. SECTION Of the Nature of the Arian Hypothefis, and of the Proof which is neceffary to make it credible. THE doctrine of the trinity may be reduced, as has been fhewn, to a proper contradiction, or a mathematical impoffibility, which is incapable of proof, even by miracles. This cannot be faid of the Arian bypothefis. Because, for any thing that we certainly know, God might have created one being of such extraordinary power, as fhould make it unneceffary for him to exert any more creative power; fo that all that remained of creation might be delegated to that great derived being. But it is highly improbable that this fhould have been the cafe.. And the more improbable, a priori, any propofition is, on account of its want of analogy to other propofitions, the truth of which is admitted, the clearer and ftronger evidence we require before we give our affent to it. This improbability may may be so great, as to approach very nearly impoffibility. At least the impreffion made upon the mind will hardly be distinguished in the two cafes, and the refiftance to affent fhall be, in a manner, as great in the one as in the other. Confequently, though the doctrine be not incapable of proof by miracles, yet it will be necessary that the propofition which contains it, be very clearly expreffed, that the miracles alledged in support of it be well authenticated, and that the connexion between the miracles and the propofition be very particularly eftablished. Let us now confider whether this be the cafe with refpect to the Arian doctrine. 1. There is fomething in the doctrinę itself, which, if we were not accustomed to it, would appear exceedingly revolting. Such, certainly, is the idea of any being in human form, who was born, grew up, and died like other men; requiring the refreshments of food, reft, and fleep, &c. having been the maker, and while he was on earth, and asleep, the supporter and governor of the world. Had fuch an opi |