Three sermons concerning the sacred Trinity by John Wallis.
Wallis, John, 1616-1703.


The last Objection which I shall now take notice of, is this; That the Doctrine of the Trinity was not known to the Jewish Church before Christ.

To which I answer, 1. If it were not made known to them, it was not necessary for them to know. For mat∣ters of pure Revelation, are not necessary to be known, before they are revealed, (nor farther than they are re∣vealed:) But may be so to us, to whom they are Re∣vealed.

The whole Doctrine of our Redemption by Christ, was (doubtless) unknown to Adam before his Fall; Page  88 And, had he not fallen, it would have been no fault in him not to have known it at all.

And when (after his fall) it was first made known to him, (in that first promise, that the Seed of the Wo∣man should break the Serpents head, Gen. 3.15.) it was yet so dark, that he could know very little (as to the particulars of it) of what is now known to us. And as God by parcels (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) at sundry times, and in di∣vers manners, declared more of it to Abraham, to David, and the Prophets, so were they obliged to know and be∣lieve more of it: and when in the last days he had de∣clared the whole of it by his Son; Heb. 1.1, 2. it is now necessary for us to believe much more; of which they might be safely ignorant. And, of the Trinity likewise, if it were not then revealed.

2. But Secondly, There were many things, which though not fully revealed, so as to be clearly understood by All; were yet so insinuated, as to be in good mea∣sure understood by some; and would more be so, when the Veil should be taken off from Moses's face, 2 Cor. 3.13, 15, 16.

Thus the Death and Resurrection of Christ, were not understood, even by his own Disciples, till after his Resur∣rection. Yet we must not say that these things were not before intimated in the Scriptures (though covertly;) for when their understandings were opened, to understand the Scriptures, and what had been written of him in the Law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms; they then perceived that it was so written, and that it behooved Christ to Suffer and to Rise from the dead the Third day. Yet this was therein so covertly contained, that they seem no more to have understood it, than that of the Trinity.

And St. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, declares a great deal to have been covered under the Jewish Rites Page  89 and Ceremonies; which, certainly, most of the Jewish Church did not understand; though, in good measure, it might be understood by some.

I might say the like of the Resurrection; which was but darkly discovered till Immortality was brought to light through the Gospel, 2 Tim. 1.10. We must not yet say, it was wholly unknown to the Jewish Church, (of whom many, no doubt, did believe it:) Yet neither can we say, it was generally received; For we know the Pha∣risees and the Sadduces were divided upon that point, Act. 23.6, 7, 8. And so little is said of it in the Old Te∣stament, that those who had a mind to be captious, might have found much more specious pretence of cavilling a∣gainst it then, than our Adversaries now have against the Doctrine of the Trinity.

3. I say Thirdly, as of the Resurrection, there were then divers intimations, which are now better under∣stood (in a clearer light) than at that time they were: So I think there were also of the Doctrine of the Trinity. I shall instance in some of them.

1. That there was, in the Unity of the God-head, a Plurality of Somewhat (which now we call Persons) seems fairly to be insinuated, even in that of Elohim-bara, Gen. 1.1. (In the beginning God created,) where Elohim (God) a Nominative Case Plural, is joined with Bara, a Verb Singular; (which is as if we should say in English, We Am, or They Doth; which would to us sound odly, if somewhat of Mystery be not intended in it.) Nor is it here only, but very frequently, that God is called Elohim in the Plural Number, (and much oftner than in the Singular Number Eloah,) as if, though Jehovah be but One, yet Elohim may be Three: Not Three Gods, but Three Somewhats in that One God. (For though it be Elohim, yet it is Bara: It is So Three, as yet to be One.) Nor is it Elohajim (in the Dual Number) as spoken of Page  90Two, or a Couple; but Elohim (in the Plural Number) as of more than Two.

This may perhaps be called a Criticism, (and it is so.) But I am loth to say, it is purely Casual, and not designed. For many times little Circumstances, and unheeded Ex∣pressions (as at first they may seem to be,) may (by the Divine Wisdom) be fore-designed to some considerable purpose. As, that of, Not a bone of it shall be broken, Exod. 12.46. Numb. 9.12. Psal. 34.20. And that of, they pierced my hands and my feet, Psal. 22.16. And, they shall look upon him whom they have pierced, Zach. 12.10. And that, they part my garment among them, and on my ve∣sture they cast lots, Psal. 22.18. And, they gave me gall for my meat, and in my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink, Psal. 69.21. Which are most of them, but Poetical Ex∣pressions; and seemingly casual, and undesigned, as to their Literal Sense; but were providentially ordered, as being literally to be fulfilled; as we find in Joh. 19.23, 24, 28, 29, 36, 37. and in the places parallel of the other Gospels.

I might instance in a great many such, which at first might seem Casual, but were Providentially designed. I shall content my self at present with one more; which is that of St. Paul, (which perhaps may be thought to look as like a Criticism as what I mention) Gal. 3.16. Now to Abraham and his Seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to Seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy Seed which is Christ. Now the promises made to Abraham, to which he refers, are those Gen. 22.16, 17, 18. (which, I think, is the only place, where, in pro∣mises made to Abraham, such mention is made of his Seed.) By my self have I sworn, saith the Lord; For be∣cause, thou hast done this thing, and hast not withheld thy Son, thine onely Son; That in blessing I will bless thee, and multiplying I will multiply thy Seed, as the stars of the heaven, Page  91 and as the sand which is upon the sea-shoar, and thy Seed shall possess the gate of his enemies; and in thy Seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

By Abraham's Seed, here, is manifestly meant his Chil∣dren whom God promiseth to multiply. And it might seem to be very indifferent whether to say, thy Seed, or thy Children. But St. Paul was so nice a Critick, as to take advantage of his saying Seed (in the Singular Number) and not Seeds or Children (in the Plural) as thereby signally denoting (as principally intended) that One Seed, which is Christ. Yet are not the rest of the Seed to be quite excluded (even in that last Clause of it, In thy Seed shall all the Nations of the earth be blessed,) as appears by Act. 3.25. And ye (men of Israel, ver. 12.) are the Children of the Prophets, and of the Covenant which God made with our Fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy Seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Whence 'tis evident, that seemingly unheeded Criticisms are some∣times Providentially designed. And such I take this of Bara Elohim, to be. And it is taken notice of to this pur∣pose, both by Jewish and Christian writers.

The like Plurality seems plainly intimated in the same Chapter, Gen. 1.26. Let VS make man in OVR image and after OVR likeness. Yet even this Plurality is no other than what in another consideration, is an Vnity; for so it follows, ver. 27. So God created man in HIS own image. These Plural Somewhats, therefore, are but One God.

And 'tis but a childish excuse to say, It is the Stile of Princes to speak in the Plural, We and Vs instead of I and Me. 'Tis indeed a piece of Courtship at this day, (and perhaps hath been for some Ages:) But how long hath it been so? 'Tis not so old as Moses; much less so old as the Creation. King Pharoah, and Senacharib, and Page  92Ahasuerus, were wont to say I, Me, Mine, (not We, Vs, Ours.) And Nebuchadnezzar, even in the Height of his Pride, Dan. 4.30. Is not this great Babylon that I have built, by the might of MY Power, and for the honour of MY Majesty. Here's nothing of We and Our. This was not Stilus Regius in those days. And if we should here ex∣pound it by such an equivalence; And God said, Let Me make man in My image; it would scarce sound like good Sense. (For 'tis not usual to speak Imperatively in the First person Singular.) It seems therefore to imply a Plurality, though not a Plurality of Gods.

The like we have Gen. 3.22. Behold, the man is be∣come like One of Vs. Is this also Stilo Regio, instead of, The man is become like one of Me?

So, Gen. 11.6, 7. And the LORD (Jehovah) said, Let VS go down, and confound their Language.

2. And as these places intimate a Plurality, so I know not but that of Gen. 18. may intimate this Plurality, to be a Trinity. That the appearance there of three Men to Abraham, was a Divine Apparition (though Abraham did not at first apprehend it so to be) is evident. For it is expresly said by Moses, ver 1. The LORD (Jehovah) appeared unto him in the plains of Mamre; and he lift up his eyes, and lo Three Men stood by him. So that this appear∣ance of Three Men, was an appearance of the Lord Je∣hovah. And though we do not find that Abraham doth any where use the word Jehovah in that discourse, (but Adonai all along:) Yet Moses the Relater (where him∣self speaks) says every where Jehovah; though when he recites Abraham's words, it is Adonai: But even Adonai is a word Plural (as well as Elohim) that is, my Lords, (the Singular is Adoni, my Lord; but seldom said of God.)

Whether it were, that the name JEHOVAH were not then known to Abraham (according to that of Page  93Exod. 6.3.) or that Abraham was not at first aware who it was with whom he was then discoursing; or for what other reason he did avoid using the name Jehovah; I shall not trouble my self curiously to enquire: But sure we are that Moses tells us, This Apparition of Three Men (as at first they seemed to be) was an Apparition of the Lord Jehovah.

We need not doubt therefore, but that God appeared there, in this Apparition of Three Men; which is there∣fore a fair intimation of a Trinity of Persons.

It might perhaps be cavill'd at, if this were all: And so might that of Jonah's being three days and three nights in the Whale's belly, when brought as an Argument to prove our Saviour ought so long to lie in the Grave. But St. Paul tells us, 1 Cor. 15.3, 4. that Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures; and that he rose again the Third day, according to the Scriptures. (And Christ in like manner, Luk. 24.46.) Yet I know not any thing more clear to that purpose in the Scriptures (of the Old Te∣stament) than either this of Jonah's being so long in the Whale's belly (to which Christ himself alludes, Mat. 12.40.) or that of Hos. 6.2. After two days he will re∣vive us, and the third day he will raise us up. Which seems not to be more express (for the Resurrection of Christ on the Third day) than this of Jonah. But such covert Intimations there are in the Old Testament; of things afterward more clearly discovered in the New.

Nor was this unknown to the ancient Jewish Doctors, as appears by what Ainsworth (in his Notes on Gen. 1.) cites from thence, (out of R. Simeon, Ben Jochai in Zoar;) Come see the Mystery of the word Elohim: there are three Degrees, and every Degree by it self Distinct; and yet not∣withstanding they are all one, and joined together in One, and are not divided one from another, (only, there he calls Degrees what we now call Persons.) So that it was Page  94 not unknown to the Jews of old, whatever the present Jews think of it.

3. What these Three are, (the Father, the Word, and the Spirit,) seems to be likewise intimated in the Story of the Creation, Gen. 1. where they seem to be distinct∣ly named.

In the beginning (Elohim) God created the Heaven and the Earth, ver. 1. where no man doubts but God the Father is implied, though perhaps not He only.

And ver. 2. The Spirit of God moved upon the face of the Waters. Where Ainsworth tells us from the ancient Rab∣bines whom he cites, they call him, The Spirit of Mercies from before the Lord: The Spirit of Wisdom, called, the Spi∣rit of the Living God: And, The Spirit of the Messias. Of the same Spirit, we have elsewhere mention; My Spi∣rit shall not always strive with Man, Gen. 6.3. Take not thine Holy Spirit from me, Psal. 51.11. The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, Isai. 61.1. They vexed his Holy Spi∣rit, Isai. 63.10. and elsewhere. And if it be said, that by the Spirit of God, is meant God himself: we say so too, for we do acknowledge, that the Holy Ghost, is God himself.

And, of the Word, there is a like intimation, ver. 3. God Said (or spake the Word) Let there be Light, and there was Light. And in like manner, ver. 6, 9, 11.14, 20. God Said, Let there be a Firmament, &c. So Psal. 33.6, 7. By the Word of the Lord were the Heavens made, &c. He Spake and it was done, He Commanded and it stood fast. And Psal. 148.5. He Spake the Word and they were made, He commanded and they were created. Con∣sonant to that of Heb. 11.3. By faith we understand that the Worlds were made by the Word of God. And 1 Pet. 3.5, 7. By the Word of God the Heavens were of old, and the Earth, &c. And by the same Word they are kept in store, or preserved. In which places, by the Word, so often men∣tioned, Page  95 and with such Emphasis put upon it; seems to be meant, that Word mentioned, Joh. 1.1, 3, 10. In the beginning was the Word, (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,) All things were made by Him: The World was made by Him; just as in Heb. 11.3. the Worlds were made by the Word of God.

Nor was this notion of the Word (Personally taken) unknown to the Jewish Doctors. For what we have Psal. 110.1. The Lord said unto my Lord, (Dixit Jehova Domino meo) the Chaldee Paraphrase, renders by Dixit Jehova, (Bemeimreh) in Verbo suo meaning, by His Word, the Messias; and of whom our Saviour himself expounds it, Mat. 22.44. And it is frequent, in that Paraphrase, by the Word to design the Messias; * as S. Joh. doth, Joh. 1.1. In the beginning was the Word.

And I put the more weight upon this, because (as here, Gen. 1.2, 3. so) we have in several other places, the Word and Spirit mentioned as concerned in the Creation, Psal. 33.6. By the Word of the LORD (Jehovah) were the Heavens made, and all the Hosts of them by the (Spirit, or) breath of his mouth, (Berwach.) Where we have Je∣hovah, his Word, and Spirit. Job 26.12, 13. He divideth the Sea by his Power, and by his (Wisdom, or) Vnderstand∣ing he smiteth through the proud; By his Spirit he garnisheth the Heavens, his Hand hath formed the crooked Serpent.Page  96 Where we have the Power of God, the Wisdom of God, and the Spirit of God. And Job 33.4. he Spirit of God hath made me, and the Breath of te Lord hath given me Life. So, Psal. 104.24, 30. O LORD (Jehovah) how won∣derful are thy Works, in VVisdom thou hast made them all. Thou sendest forth thy Spirit, they are created, and thou re∣newest the face of the Earth.

And it is not amiss here to take notice, that as 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 signifies as well ratio as oratio; so Christ (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) is called the Word of God, and the Wisdom of God. And as in Joh. 1.1, 3, 10. it is said of the Word, that in the be∣ginning was the Word, all things were made by Him, and the World was made by him: And Heb. 11.3. The Worlds were framed by the Word of God. So the same is said of Wis∣dom, Prov. 3.19. The LORD by VVisdom hath formed the Earth, by Vnderstanding hath he established the Heavens. And Prov. 8.22. &c. The LORD possessed me (Wisdom) in the beginning of his way, before his works of old; I was set up from everlasting, from the beginning, ere ever the Earth was;—When he prepared the Heavens I was there,— When he established the Clouds above,— When he strengthened the Fountains of the deep,— When he appointed the Foundations of the Earth, then was I by him, &c.

And accordingly the Holy Ghost is called the Power of God, Luk. 1.35. The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the Power of the Highest shall over-shadow thee. And 1 Pet. 1.5. Who are kept by the Power of God, through Faith unto Salvation▪ which doubtless is not without the operation of the Holy Ghost, working and preserving faith in us.

Suitably hereunto, God's Power and Wisdom are oft con∣joyned. He is Wise in Heart, and Mighty in Strength, Job 9.4, &c. He is excellent in Power, and in Judgment, Job 37.13.

But, (without laying too great a stress on every par∣ticular,) there seems a foundation clear enough to con∣sider the Word of God, and the Spirit of God, as clearly Page  97 distinguishable, even in the great Work of Creation; and that the holy Writers, even in the Old Testament, have considered them as distinct; and that even the Jewish Writers have owned them as such.

I know very well that those who have a mind to be cap∣tious, may cavil at these places, as the Sadduces of old did at those passages in the Old Testament tending to prove a Resurrection.

And not those only, but even some of our own; who would have us think, that the Fathers before Christ had only Promises of Temporal blessings (not of Heavenly and Eternal:) Though St. Paul tells us, (when, of the hope and resurrection of the dead he was called in question;) that he did so worship the God of his Fathers, believing all things which were written in the Law and the Prophets, and had hope towards God (which they also allowed) that there should be a Resurrection of the dead both of the Just and Vnjust; and that it was a promise made of God to their Fathers, to which their twelve Tribes instantly serving God day and night, hoped to come; which were no other things than what Moses and the Prophets had said should come to pass; and which to King Agrippa (who if not a Jew, was at least well acquain∣ted with their Doctrines) should not seem strange, Act. 23.6. Act. 24.14, 15. Act. 26.2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 22. And Heb. 11.13. that all these died in faith, not having received the promises; (that is, they died in the belief of better things than what they had yet received:) But saw them afar off, and were per∣swaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed, they were but strangers and Pilgrims upon Earth. And our Savi∣our proves it out of the Old Testament, (Mat. 22.32.) by such an Argument, as if one of us should have urged, it would perhaps have been ridiculed: I am the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob; Now God is not the God of the dead, but of the living. And the Apostle pursues the same Argument, Heb. 11.9, 10, 14, 15, 16. Page  98They sojourned in the Land of promise, as in a strange Land, dwelling in Tabernacles (movable from place to place) for they looked for a City which hath foundations (a fixed City, not flitting as were those Tabernacles,) whose buil∣der and maker of God: Declaring plainly that they did seek a Country: Not such as that from whence they came; but a bet∣ter Country, that is, a Heavenly: wherefore God is not asham∣ed to be called their God; for he hath prepared for them a City; where he directly argues, that God's Promise, to be their God, was a Promise of Heaven.

And no doubt but the Prophets, and Men of God, had taught them all along, to put a Spiritual Sense, upon those (seemingly) Temporal Promises, (though the Sad∣duces would not believe it, but cavilled at it;) in so much that not only the Pharisees and Doctors of the Law; but even the Women embraced it (even before Christ's Resur∣rection;) I know saith Martha (of her dead Brother Laza∣rus) that he shall Rise again in the Resurrection, at the last day, Joh. 11.24. And, of such Spiritual Senses, we have copious Instances, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and else∣where frequently.

And as they did without any reluctances, readily em∣brace the Doctrine of the Resurrection, when more clearly declared by the Apostles, (as a thing not wholly new to them;) so neither do we find in them any Reluctance to that of the Trinity (for which, in likelihood, they had in like manner been before prepared:) but readily closed with the Form of Baptism, in the Name (not Names) of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mat. 28.19. And that Solemn Benediction, 2 Cor. 13.14. The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the Communion of the Holy Ghost be with you all, Amen. Where we have all the Three Persons reckoned together; as they are also in that cele∣brated place, 1 Joh. 5.7. The Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost; these Three are One. And as they had been Page  99 before by Christ himself, Joh. 14.26. The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My Name, He shall teach you all things. And Joh. 15.26. The Comforter whom I will send unto you from the Father, even the Spirit of truth, which Proceedeth from the Father, He shall testify of Me. And (to name no more places) Mat. 3.16, 17. Jesus, when he was baptized, went strait∣way out of the Water: And lo, the heavns were opened unto him, and he (John the Baptist) saw the Spirit of God de∣scending like a Dove, and lighting upon Him: And lo, a voice from heaven saying, This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

4. There is yet another Consideration which doth con∣firm this opinion, that the Doctrine of the Trinity was not unknown to the Jewish Church before Christ: From the footsteps thereof yet extant in Heathen Writers.

'Tis well known (to those conversant in such Studies) that much of the Heathen Learning (their Philosophy, Theology, and Mythology) was borrowed from the Jews; though much Disguised, and sometimes Ridicu∣led by them. Which things though they be Fabulous, as disguised in a Romantick dress: yet they are good Evidence that there was a Truth in History, which gave occasion to those Fables.

None doubts but Ovid's Fable of the Chaos (of which all things were made) took its rise from Moses's History of the Creation: And Deucalion's Flood, from that of Noah: and the Titan's fighting against the Gods, from the Builders of Babel's Tower: And that of Two-faced Janus, from Noah's looking backward & forward to the World before and since the Flood. And many the like, of which we may see in Natalis Comes, in Bochartus, and others: And of which we have a large Collection in Theophilus Gale's Court of the Gentiles. And in Dr. Duport's Gnomologia Homerica; wherein is a Collection of Homer's Sayings,Page  100 which look like Allusions to like Passages in Sacred Scri∣pture; and seem to be borrowed (most of them) from those Books of it, which were written before Homer's time; who yet is one of the most Ancient and most Fam∣ed of Heathen Writers.

Plato hath borrowed so much of his Philosophy, History, and Theology, from the Jewish learning, as that he hath obtained the Title of (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) Moses disguised in a Greek dress. And, may seem, because the name of Jews was odious, to cite them rather by the names of certain Barbarians, Syrians, Phoenicians, Egyptians &c. From that Title of God in Exodus, I AM, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, (or from the Equivalent names of Jah and Jehovah) he borrows his (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉,) the Being, (or that which Is,) the very Being, the true Being; which are the Titles he gives to the Supreme God. For his Immortality of the Soul, he reckons the best Argument to be (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.) a Divine Revelation, which he had by Tradition from cer∣tain Ancients, who lived (as he speaks) nearer to the Gods, (as if he had borrowed even this Phrase from Deut. 4.7. What nation is so great, who hath God so Nigh unto them?) And much more, as hath been noted by others.

And I am so far from thinking (as the Socinians would have us) that St. John did but Platonize, and borrowed his 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 from Plato's Trinity; that I rather think, that Plato borrowed his Trinity (as he did many other things) from the Jewish Doctrine, though by him dis∣guised: And take it for a good Evidence, that the Do∣ctrine of the Trinity, was then not unknown to them.

Aristotle, in the last Chapter of his Book, De Mundo; which is de Dei Nominibus: He tells us that God, though he be but One, hath many Names: And amongst those many, he reckons that of the Tres Parcae (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉) or as we call them, the Three Destinies (Atropas, Clotho, and Lachesis; whom he doth accommodate to the three di∣versities Page  101 of Time; past, present, and future,) to be One of these Names. Which, though numbred as Three, are but this One God.〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. (And cites Plato to the same purpose) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. So that it seems both Plato and Aristotle were of opinion, that Three Some∣whats may be One God. And this, in likelihood, they derived from the Jewish Learning.

I might say the like of their three Judges in another World, Minos, Radamanthus and Aeacus. which thing though it be Fa∣bulous, yet it implies thus much, That they had then a Notion, not only of the Soul's Immortality, but also of a Trinity of Persons in another World, who should take Account of mens Actions in this World. And both these Notions they had, no doubt, from the Jewish Learning; from whence their most sublime Notions were derived.

To these I might add that of their three-shap'd Chimaera; which their Poets feign to have been. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, as is to be seen in Homer one of their most Ancient Po∣ets. And that of Cerberus, their three-headed Porter of the other World.

Which Poetical Fictions, though invented perhaps to ridicule the Trinity; do yet at last argue that they had then some notices of a Trinity, (of Three Somewhats which were yet but One.) For, if they had no notice of it, they could not have ridiculed it.

Our Adversaries, perhaps, may please themselves with the Fan∣sy, that Chimaera and Cerberus are brought in to prove the Trinity.

But they mistake the point: We are not now Proving the Tri∣nity, (which is already settled on a firmer Foundation;) but in∣quiring, whether this Doctrine were then known. And as we think it a good argument to prove the Christian Religion, to have been known in Lucian's time, (and known to him,) because Lucian doth Scoff at it; which he could not have done, if he had known nothing of it: So is it a good Argument to prove the Doctrine of the Trinity to have been then known, when it was ridiculed.

And it proves also, that there might be then prophane Wits to ridicule it, as there are now to Blaspheme the Trinity, as a three-headed Page  102 Monster; and, that this 〈◊〉 Wit of theirs, is not their own, but stollen from wittier Heathens.

But, whether it were, or were not, known to the Jewish Church before Christ, (of which there be great Presumptions that it was so known, as well as that of the Resurrection:) it is enough to us, that we are taught it now. And, if any will yet be so obstinate as not to believe, either the Resurrection, or the Trinity; upon pretence that neither of them was known to the Jewish Church, (or at least, not so clearly, but that they may be able to cavil at places from the Old Testament alledged to prove either;) we must leave them to the Wisdom and Judgment of God, till he shall think fit to instruct them better.

Now to God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost; Three Persons, but One Eternal and Ever blessed God; be Praise, Ho∣nour and Glory, Now and for Evermore, Amen.