macy of this connexion would seem to infer, that the soul is no more than the lively parts of the blood, called the animal spirits, and would, therefore, be dissipated by the destruction of our bodies. In answer to this, it may be observed:

(1.) That the mind must be distinct from the animal spirits.

The identity of an individual consists in his consciousness that he is the same thinking being at one time of his life, that he was some years before. Since, therefore, the individual always remains the same person, the soul, by whose acts he is enabled to judge of this, must be likewise incapable of change. On the contrary, the animal spirits are of such a subtile nature, that they are in a constant state of alteration, and new ones ever succeeding the former. These, therefore, cannot be our thinking principle, which must be free from such alteration.

(2.) The spirits are the organs by which the mind acts. Its operations, therefore, are naturally effected by their decay.

Thus, when the eye is injured, the power of receiving ideas by that organ is consequently impaired. As a man is unable to work, when the instruments he uses are blunted and disordered, so the exercise of the thinking faculty may be affected by any derangement in our animal spirits; still the nature of the one may be quite different from that of the other.

3. It is objected, that we cannot conceive how the mind should give motion to matter, if their substances be different.

But it may be answered, that God is of a different nature from matter, yet he produces impressions on it.

It is certain that the thoughts of the Supreme mind give motion to matter. It is equally certain that he is of a different nature from it. All but Atheists admit this. None others, therefore, can suppose the preceding objection of any weight.

II. We proposed to consider the leading doctrine of revealed Religion. The main doctrine of revelation, is that of the Trinity in Unity. With respect to this, we assert that,

а

Though this doctrine could never be learned from the operations of reason alone, it is yet certain, that a tradition of it was very general, not only among the ancient Jews, but also among the heathen philosophers. Thus, the compilers of the different targums, frequently ascribe the actions of "God" to his " Word." For instance, when it is said, "God created the world," they add, "6 it was done by his Word." See Jer. Targ. in Gen. 1. 27, and Targ. Jon. in Is. 44. 24. And so universally acknowledged was it by the Platonic Philosophers, that the primitive Fathers used to defend their tenets from the objections alleged against them, by retorting those objec tions on their adversaries. Tertull. in Apol. c. 21. and Euseb. Evang. 1. 1. c. 16. 19. The reader may consult Dr. Allix's Judgment of the Jewish Church. Scott's Christ. Life, v. 3. p. 15. note,

and Whitby's Comment. on John. 1.3.

1. The doctrine of a Trinity of persons in the Godhead, is declared in Scripture.

In the Old Testament this doctrine was not clearly revealed. It was intimated in the use of the plural word Elohim being joined with a singular verb, and other allusions. But it must be allowed, that these allusions were not distinct.

In the New Testament, however, it is plainly expressed. Thus our Saviour charged his disciples to go and " make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father, of the "Son, and of the Holy Ghost." (Matt. xxviii. 19.) Now, baptism is the rite by which men are received into a state of acceptance with God, and consequent pardon of their former sins. Baptism then, which contains such promises, can only be offered in the name of God. But we are baptised in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, therefore, must be God. Again, a name can never be predicated of an attribute, or of any other thing than a person. The Father, Son,

* In order to discuss this question fully, we should prove each person to be God in substance, power, and eternity. But as the divinity of the Father has never been denied, and that of the Son and of the Holy Ghost shall be considered hereafter, we have here mentioned only those texts which assert a Trinity of persons more directly.

This is the true meaning of the word translated teach. See Schleusner in voc. μαθητεύω.

and Holy Ghost, therefore, must be distinct persons. In this text, then, is clearly asserted, the doctrine of the Trinity in the unity of the Godhead.

66

"The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, the "love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, be with you.” (2 Cor. xiii. 14.) Here is prayer addressed to three different persons, without the addition of any mark of inequality. The absence of that mark of inequality proves their distinct personality, and the circumstance of a prayer being offered to them, infers their divinity.

St. John, in addressing the Seven Churches, says: "Grace and peace, from Him which is, "which was, and which is to come; and from "the seven Spirits which are before his throne; "and from Jesus Christ." (Rev. i. 4.)

On this text we may observe, 1. By Seven Spirits, must be meant some person or persons, since he could not wish for blessings from an attribute. 2. The words must mean, therefore, either angels or the Holy Ghost. They cannot allude to angels, for their is no instance in all Scripture, of prayer being addressed to them; and particularly in this book there are numerous authorities against such a practice. Besides, they surely would not be placed in order before Christ. 3. The Holy Ghost, therefore, is the person intended by the Seven Spirits, as from him all the various gifts and spiritual operations

flowed upon the Church; and hence may be seen the reason of using the number seven, for it was in common use among the Jews, to denote perfection and variety. 4. His being placed before Christ is perfectly natural, on the supposition of their equality, and is moreover in unison with the Apostle's method, who was about to speak solely of our Saviour in the following period.

"There are three that bear record in heaven, "the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, "and these three are one." 1. John. v. 7. This text, if genuine, is decisive. It has, however, been suspected as spurious.

2. This doctrine was received in the primitive Church.

We have the testimony of Tertulliana and Novatian, to the opinion of the Roman and Asiatic Churches; that of Irenæus to the faith. of the Asiatic and Gallican Churches; and as to

a Adv. Praxeam. c. 31. Tertullian was a presbyter of the Church at Carthage. He wrote an apology for the Christians, in consequence of the persecutions which took place in the reign of Severus. See Lardner's Works, v. 2. p. 250. Ed. Lond. 1788.

↳ De Trinit passim. Novatian was a presbyter of the Church of Rome, and founder of a sect called Novatians. See Lardner's Works, v. 3. p. 363.

с

Adv. Hæres. 1. 1. c. 19. and l. 4. c. 37. Irenæus was Bishop of Lyons, and preached the Gospel among the Gauls. See Cave's Lives of Prim. Fath. and Lardner's Works, v. 2. p. 87.