proof of his being a Son, in his complex character as the glorious EMANUEL.

There yet remain two texts, which are not only reckoned proofs of Christ's natural sonship, but are supposed sufficient to prove the terms Father, Son, Word, and Holy Ghost, natural, necessary, and essential in Deity. One is our LORD'S command to his apostles," Go* ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." From which it is argued in favor of Christ being a Son, as he is GOD, "That as baptism is a solemn act of divine worship, it must be administered in the name of a divine person, therefore Son in the text must express his divine nature. Whereas if the term Son refers to one, as he is mediator, then we are baptized in the name of two divine persons in their highest titles; and in the name of the other, in his lower and inferior title and character."

Ans. This reasoning is extremely weak, for it takes for granted that the terms Father and Holy Ghost, are titles that express the divine nature of two persons; but these I have shewed to be economical, consequently the argument is without any foundation, and can conclude nothing in favor of natural sonship: and I think by considering the subject a little, it will appear a fair evidence of the names Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, being economical. As this was the way our LORD commanded his apostles to initiate the Gentile nations into the christian religion, in or into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, these names must have a special relation to the religion they were to take on the badge of, or the use of them

* Matt. xxviii, 19.

would be insignificant in that ordinance, especially to heathens, who had no notion of three consistent with the unity of Deity, nor the religion they under these characters were displayed in.

To say they were baptized into the belief of a trinity abstractedly considered, is saying they were baptized into what neither they nor the apostles knew any thing about, seeing there is no such revelation in Deity. Besides, this would not have been baptizing into the christian religion; as it is most certain, that absolute Deity is equally related to jewish and christian religion, that is, has no manner of relation to either. The knowledge we have of God, is in what he hath revealed; faith in God is founded upon that knowledge we attain from revelation, which is a display of his perfec tions in creation, providence, and redemption; in the last of which, he hath made himself known as three distinct agents, under the names of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, each represented as having peculiar work in that divine transaction. So that the whole of redemption is contained in the work of the Father, the work of the Son, and the work of the Holy Ghost; consequently being baptized into their names, is professing to believe the whole of the christian religion, which these names are so necessarily connected with in every part, as to be the sum of the whole, and in such manner, as every christian may say, take these names from my religion, and what have I more?

The other text is," There are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one." As I have proved, the terms Father, Word, and Holy Ghost, to be economically applied to God, it might

* 1 John v. 7.

here suffice; for if it is a truth, there is no text in revelation that will contradict it. But lest the friends of the other opinion should imagine they are left in full possession of this text, I shall very briefly shew how little it is to their purpose.

Here again I meet with the philosophical gentleman formerly mentioned, who deduces several arguments from this text, to prove his beloved tenet, eternal generation: and as he reduces his reasoning into the form of syllogisms, I shall lay them before the reader, who may judge how much they are to his purpose.

"The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, are the three subjects spoken of in the text, 1 John v. 7.-But the three subjects spoken of in the text, are spoken of as persons in godhead.-Ergo, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, are spoken of in the text, as persons in the godhead: that is, one as a divine person is called the Father, another as a divine person is called the Word, and a third as a divine person is called the Holy Ghost."

"The subjects or divine persons spoken of in the text, 1 John v. 7. are spoken of as they are.But the subjects or divine persons spoken of in the text, are the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost.Ergo, the subjects or divine persons spoken of in the text, are spoken of as they are, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost."

Here, reader, is a brace of syllogisms for you. -Carefully view the two great pillars on which a fundamental article of religion stands,-so absolutely necessary in this gentleman's account, that to deny it, he says, is to "make faith vain,-salvation void,-a chimera,-all christianity a mere

phantom,-to sap the foundation of all christian religion, and enervate the hope of eternal happi

ness.

But one would think as the whole of religion depends upon this article, it would be so clearly revealed in the word of GOD, that every one, the clown as well as the philosopher, might know and understand it. Is it then mentioned in express words? No. Can it be found by comparing texts together? No, not without forced interpretations. Is there any other revelation than the bible, to certify us of its truth and importance? No, without we take the dictates of men for a revelation. What evidence then is it attended with to merit our credit; and how shall we come by that evidence? We must become logicians, and learn to reason metaphysically: consequently the best logicians are the best christians: or it is logic that makes the christian. This cardinal point must then, (as I dare say it does) remain unintelligible to the generality of mankind, since it requires a train of syllogistical reasoning to bring the evidence on which it rests to their view; or they must, (which is a much shorter way) believe it upon the authority of the learned; but still this will not be their faith, but the logician's: and if they pretend to judge for themselves, they lie open to imposition, as nineteen of twenty among professing christians do not know the difference betwixt a well formed syllogism upon rules of ratiocination, and a sophism artfully composed: so that they are still at the mercy of the rabbies.

How miserably has religion been tortured by learned contenders for the faith delivered to systematics, who have mustered great numbers of syllogisms pro & con, adorned with all the trappings of mood and figure; and by all appearance, rather

contending who should appear the most acute reasoner, or best logician, than who should most elucidate the truth, which has been left buried under therubbish of scholastic subtilties? What advantage has religion received from all the dialectical subtilties of Tho. Aquinas, Duns Scotus, and other modern critics, who have attempted to reduce it to a system of scholastic niceties, fitter to be the sport of school-boys than the study of sober minds? Thanks be to GOD that all necessary truths in religion are clearly revealed in his own word. On this all our hopes and comfort depend. The evidence arising from such abstruse reasoning in favor of religion, which not one in a hundred knows any thing about, will give the immortal soul very little satisfaction, upon a serious consideration in view of death and judgment.

As I write not for the literati, but to further the instruction of such as can and do read their bible, and choose it for their guide, it would be entirely beside my plan, to enter into a course of intricate reasoning; I only beg their leave to step aside for a moment to speak with this gentleman in his own stile.

Sir, your syllogisms cannot be admitted as fair arguments to prove the point you maintain. The first, you found upon there being three subjects in the text, whereas according to your own method of reasoning there are four. A logical subject is that of which something is predicated. Now, unity is as capable of predication as trinity: for it is as true that the unity in the text is three, as that the three are one. Now, as there are four subjects in the text, your syllogism, sir, should have run thus, "The Father, the Word, the Holy Ghost, and the unity, are the four subjects spoken of in the text. 1 John v. 7. But the four subjects spoken of in the