perfonality, diftinct from that of the fource from which it fprang. And it was not 'till 400 years after that time that Chrift was thought to be properly equal to the Father. Whereas, on the other hand, though it is now pretended that the apostles taught the doctrine of the divinity of Chrift, yet it cannot be denied that, in the very times of the apoftles, the jewish church, and many of the gentiles also, held the opinion of his being a mere man. Here the tranfition is quite fudden, without any gradation at all. This must naturally have given the greatest alarm, fuch as is now given to those who are called orthodox, by the prefent Socinians; and yet nothing of this kind can be perceived. Befides, it is certainly moft probable that the chriftians of those times, urged as they were with the meannefs of their master, fhould incline to add to, rather than take from, his natural rank and dignity. Maxim 9. H. p. 20. &c. L. p. 73. 134.

V. Maxims of Historical Criticism, by which the preceding Articles may be tried.

1. WHEN two perfons give different accounts of things, that evidence is to be preferred, which is either in itself more probable, or more agreeable to other credible teftimony.

2. Neither is entire credit to be given to any fet of men with refpect to what is reputable to them, nor to their enemies with respect to what is difre· putable;

$ 2

putable; but the account given by the one may be balanced by that of the other. Summary View,

No. 10.

3. Accounts of any fet of men given by their enemies only are always fufpicious. But the confeffions of enemies, and circumftances favourable to any body of men, collected from the writings of their adverfaries, are deferving of particular regard.

4. It is natural for men who wish to speak difparagingly of any fect to undervalue their numbers, as well as every thing elfe relating to them; and it is equally natural for those who wish to speak refpectfully of any party, to reprefent the members of it as more numerous than they are. Summary

View, No. 13.

5. When perfons form themselves into focieties, fo as to be diftinguishable from others, they never fail to get fome particular name, either affumed by themfelves, or impofed by others. This is neceffary, in order to make them the subject of converfation, long periphrases in difcourfe being very inconvenient. Summary View, No. 8.

6. When particular opinions are ascribed to a particular clafs of men, without any diftinction of the time when thofe opinions were adopted by them, it may be prefumed, that they were fuppofed to hold those opinions from the time that they received

received their denomination.

No. 4.

Summary View,

7. When a particular description is given of a class of persons within any period of time, any perfon who can be proved to have had the proper character of one of that clafs may be deemed to have belonged to it, and to have enjoyed all the privileges of it, whatever they were. Summary View. No. 9.

8. When an hiftorian, or writer of any kind, profeffedly enumerates the several species belonging to any genus, or general body of men, and omits any particular fpecies or denomination, which, if it had belonged to the genus, he, from his fituation and circumstances, was not likely to have overlooked, it may be prefumed that he did not confider that particular fpecies as belonging to the genus. Summary View, No. 7.

9. Great changes in opinion are not usually made of a fudden, and never by great bodies of men. That hiftory, therefore, which reprefents fuch changes as having been made gradually, and by eafy steps, is always the more probable on that account. Summary View, No. 16.

10. The common or unlearned people, in any country, who do not speculate much, retain longest any opinions with which their minds have been much impressed; and therefore we always look for the oldest opinions in any country, or any class of S 3

men,

men, among the common people, and not among the learned. Summary View, No. 13, 14.

11. If any new opinions be introduced into a fociety, they are most likely to have introduced them who held opinions fimilar to them before they joined that society. Summary V. No. 15.

12. If any particular opinion has never failed to excite great indignation in all ages and nations, in which a contrary opinion has been generally received, and that particular opinion can be proved to have existed in any age or country when it did not excite indignation, it may be concluded that it had many partizans in that age or country. For the opinion being the fame, it could not of itself be more refpectable; and human nature being the fame, it could not but have been regarded in the fame light, so long as the fame ftrefs was laid on the oppofite opinion. Summary View, No. 1.

II, 12.

13. When a time is given, in which any very remarkable and interefting opinion was not believed by a certain clafs of people, and another time in which the belief of it was general, the introduction of fuch an opinion may always be known by the effects which it will produce upon the minds, and in the conduct of men; by the alarm which it will give to fome, and the defence of it by others. If, therefore, no alarm was given, and no defence of

it was made, within any particular period, it may be concluded that the introduction of it did not take place within that period. Summary View, No. 2, 3. 6.

14. When any particular opinion or practice, is neceffarily or customarily accompanied by any other opinion or practice; if the latter be not found within any particular period, it may be prefumed that the former did not exift within that period. Summary View, No. 5.

It will be perceived that the whole of this hiftorical evidence is in favour of the proper unitarian doctrine (or that of Chrift being a mere man) having been the faith of the primitive church, in oppofition to the arian no less than the trinitarian hypothefis.

were

As to the arian hypothefis in particular, I do not know that it can be traced any higher than Arius himself, or at leaft the age in which he lived. Both the gnoftics and the platonizing chriftians equally far from fuppofing that Chrift was a being created out of nothing; the former having thought him to be an emanation from the fupreme being, and the latter the logos of the Father perfonified. And though they fometimes applied the term creation to this perfonification, still they did not suppose it to have been a creation out of nothing. It was only a new modification of what exifted before. For God, they faid, was always rational (Moy) or

had