Page images
PDF
EPUB

like an Angel in the Bub, and therefore is rightly there call'd by the Name Jehovah, and He faid I am the God. Thus that Text is plain and eafie, in our Sense; but in yours it is Intricate and Crabbed, and you know not which way to turn it.

(19.) But I come to the Laft Quotation out of Zech. Hill. p. 65. 12. 10. They shall look upon me whom they have pierced. The fame thing is of Chrift Rev. 1. 7. and Joh... 29.37.

SOC. As the Jews in the times of the Prophets did (as it were) pierce God with their Sins of feveral Kinds; So they pierced Him again when they put to Death the Lord Chrift.

CHR. Both thefe Texts in St. John refer plainly to Christ and fay, that it was He who was Pierced; you fay it was not He, but God that was Pierced. This is point blank Denying thefe Texts, instead of Answering them. Again confider the manner of their Mourning for Him, as one that mourneth for his only Son, as the Text fpeaks; They fball look upon. me whom they have Pierced, and they fball Mourn for Him, as one Mourneth for his only Son, and fhall be in Bitterness for Him, as one is in Bitterness for his Firft-born.

This is a Sorrow for one that is Dead, and loft from Us. This is litterally Fulfill'd in the Death of Christ, and His Side Pierc'd with the Spear. This Sorrow has Pity and Compaffion in it, and Trouble and Grief for Another, which cannot be faid of our Repenting towards God, wherein we are not Griev'd for God, but for our Selves. Can we be faid to Mourn for God, as for an Only Son?

SOC. But the Words in the Prophet, are not by St. John Interpreted of Christ, but Accommodated to Chrift and His Sufferings.

CHR. This is the old Diftinction of Accommodated, by which I fuppofe you mean, That the Text was not spoke of Christ, but only that Chrift's Cafe was like

that

that Cafe which the Text fpeaks of; And fo one of these Cafes is only Compar'd or Accommodated to the other. SOC. Yes; That is the meaning of it.

CHR: But what if both these Texts mean the fame Cafe?

SOC. If you can make that Appear, you have done the Business.

CHR. What is the meaning of any Saying being Fulfill'd?

SOC. That is, when that is come to pass, which was meant or intended in fuch a Saying.

CHR. Is the Saying it felf, and the Meaning of that Saying, two different things?

SOC. No fure. For what is a Saying but the Meaning of it? But what do you mean by all these Questions? CHR. If this Text of Zech., was Fulfill'd in Christ, then it was meant of Chrift; and they are not two Cafes whereof one may be Accommodated to the other; but all is one and the felf fame Cafe. Fulfilling is a Compleating of a thing, carrying it to its utmoft Meaning and Perfection. That which is Foretold, is not Fulfill'd, if it be not the fame thing which was Foretold: One thing is not Compleated by the Fulfilling of another Thing.

SOC. This is felf Evident. What do you inferr?

CHR. St. John fays the Scripture in Zech. was Fulfill'd in the Paffion of Chrift; Therefore it is more than Accommodated, Compar'd or made like to it. The Prophet and Evangelift both spoke of the fame thing.

Fob. 19.36. These things were done fays St. Jobn, That the Scripture might be Fulfilled They fball look on Him whom they Pierced. And you having faid in your firft Answer to this Text, that the [me] in Zech. (They shall look upon ME) was meant of God, It follows from St. Johns Interpreting this as Fulfill'd (and not only Accommodated) in Chrift, that Chrift was that Me which is in Zech, and confequently is God. Pray read ver. 36. of the 19 chap. of

St.

St. John These things were done. (viz. Piercing CHRIST with the Spear, and not Breaking of His Legs, as was done to the Others who were Crucify'd with Him) that the Scripture should be Fulfill'd, a Bone of Him fhall not be broken; And again another Scripture fays, They ball look on Him whom they Pierced. Here are two Prophefies Quoted by the Apoftle of this Piercing of Chrift. One of them I believe this Author will not fay was only Accommodated to Chrift, viz. The not Breaking of His Legs; unless he thinks they could Break GOD's Legs; and then you may Contrive an Accommodated Senfe even in this too: For Grieving of God may be call'd Breaking of His Bones, as well as Piercing Him. And you must either Accommodate both, or none of thefe Texts; The Apoftle puts them together, and Accommodats them both alike. And therefore Zech. 12. 10. must belong as much to Chrift, as Exod. 12. 46. Numb. 9. 12. Or Pfal. 34. 20. And it was underftood all along in this Senfe, even before the Council of Nice.

στός ἐσιν ὃν

St. Barnabas, in his Cath. Epift. c. 7. P. 43. fpeaking of Christ's coming to Judgement, fays, that when they Jews fhall fee him, they will fay, Is not this he whom vipes we heretofore did Crucify.

Now tho' St. Barnabas does not here Quote this Text of Zech. 12. 10. yet it is plain that he Refers to it; and means, the Looking upon him whom they pierced, to be underftood of Chrift.

Irenaus Quotes this fame Text of Zech. 12. 10. as fpoke of Christ. (adverf. Heref. l. 4. c. 66.) and Cyprian (adverf. Jud. 1. 2. c. 20.) Tertullian (adverf. Jud. C. 14. Refurrect. Carnis c. 22. and adverf. Marcion. 1. 3. c. 7.) And generally all the Fathers.

De

ταυρώσαμεν;

SOC. The more Learned and Judicious Trinitarians confess that the Trinity, and Divinity of Chrift, and of the P. 67 Holy Spirit, are not indeed taught in the Scriptures of the

P. 67.

that the Tri

Old Testament; But are a Revelation made to us in the
New, So faith Tertullian, adverf. prax. c. 3.

CHR. Tertullian fays not a word like it in that place. It is but feldom this Hiftorian Quotes Book or Chapter of any Author, And you may fee here a good Reafon for it. But it was an unlucky or rather happy Erratum of the Author or Printer, (if you make the right use of it) to lead the Reader to this place of Tertullian, for he Difcourfes there of the Trinity fo very Learnedly as might have inftructed your Author and cur'd him of his Mistakes about the Trinity, if he had minded it.

Tertullian is there Difputing against these Hereticks who think that the

Teftimony NUMBER * and DISPOSITION of Tertullian of the TRINITY is a DIVISION nity is Collect of its UNITY; when the UNITY ed out of the deriving the TRINITY out of it Unity. felf, is not destroy'd by it, but is fupported. Therefore they bragg that we Preach TWO or THREE, but that they Worship ONE God. As if the UNITY, being unreasonably unreasonably Collected, did not make Herefy; and the TRINITY being rationally weigh'd did not establish the Truth.

[blocks in formation]

These are the Words of Tertullian, and I would defire you to confider two things in them. First that he fays the Unity does deduce the Trinity out of it felf. This fhews the Trinity to be even natural to the Unity; and therefore that there could not be an Unity, unlefs there were a Trinity. And to explain this, he fays after, that the Unity is to be Collected. Unitas Collecta: This is a Great Confirmation to what we have already Difcours'd of the Natural Unity of the Perfons of God.

That

That in every Unity there must be feveral things to be United: Thus the Unity of a Body, is an Union of Parts: The Union of a Soul, is the Union of Faculties; and the Union of God, is the Union of Perfons. The very word Union, implies Diversity; for a thing be United to its felf. Even in Self-Reflection, the fame Soul must be confidered as Agent and Patient, as when I love my Self. And what is but a Shadow, a Diverfity of Faculties in man (without which there could be no Self-Reflection) must be Personal in God (without which God could not know or love Himself; and fo could not be God) Therefore, as Tertullian fays, The Unity not being reafonably Collected, makes an Herefie in the Chriftian Faith Indeed your Unity is not Collected at all, or put together: it is made up of Nothing, or (which is the fame) it is the Union of a thing with it felf, a Unity without any Union, or an Union where nothing is United: On the Contrary, our Doctrin of the Trinity, being Rationally weigh'd, and Confider'd, does Establish the Truth, that is, gives the only True and Rational account of the Unity of God. And it will follow from hence, that we deserve the Name of Unitarians much more truly than you do? Your Unity is a Herefie, according to Tertullian, ours is the Truth.

SOC. I fancy our Author must have mifquoted that place of Tertullian.

CHR. Yet it has not been wholly improper to our Subject as you have seen.

But

SOC. I am fure, that is not what he intended. what fay you to Two or Three other Authors he Quotes in the fame place?

CHR. I have them not at hand. And I think it not worth the while to fearch for them; because if Tertullian and Twenty Others faid what he alledges, it would make nothing for his caufe. And Secondly, you

L 2

may

« PreviousContinue »