ed. If Christians were now of one mind, they would be less guarded and precise in the exhibition of their opinions. In this respect, they would, in some measure, write in the manner of the primitive authors. They would not so strongly insist on doctrines, if there were few. or none who denied them. As opposition appeared, and gathered strength, we shall see that the friends of Evangelical truth rose in its vindication; and they took very decisive measures to combat a Heresy which they deemed to be dangerous..

CHAP. V

The conduct of the primitive Christians, towards those persons, who denied the divinity and the atonement of Jesus Christ.

IF

F no satisfactory evidence could be pro duced from the writings of the primitive Christians, to prove that they were Trinitarians; yet if it can be made to appear, that when the Unitarian doctrine was divulged, they, in the most pointed terms, disapproved of it, no reasonable ground for doubt is left that the doctrine of the Trinity was the doctrine of the primitive ages. There is a max

im, founded on experience, that the actions of men speak louder than their words. Their conduct is a more certain indication of their real sentiments, than any professions which they make.

L

If there be proof, that when the Unitarian doctrine made its first appearance in the Gentile Church, it excited alarm; and if those, who first divulged this sentiment, were cut off from the fellowship of the Churches; these facts will prove, that the sentiment was new, and that those who then adopted it, were con-sidered as having forfeited the character of Christians. For it is manifest injustice to deprive men of the privileges of Christians, who have not forfeited the character. If the Deity of Jesus Christ be a doctrine of Scripture, it is an essential doctrine; and those who deny this, pervert the whole system of Christianity. They advance a scheme of doctrine, which effects a material change in the construction of religious worship, and in all those doctrines which are the object of faith.. It might be expected, that those who believe the importance of senti-ments to the practice of Christian duties, would draw a wide distinction between those who received and those who rejected the doctrine of Three Persons in one God. There is evidence,

1. That the Churches, in the earliest ages of Christianity, considered those as Heretics who denied the Deity and atonement of Christ.

2. That they separated such from their com munion.

ནཱ་རཏྠཱ

The Ebionites, and those who adopted the opinions of Cerinthus, were the Unitarians of primitive times. They denied the Deity of Jesus Christ, and those doctrines which result from a perfect atonement. If we can ascertain the opinions which the Christians of that age entertained respecting these, it will be direct to our purpose. They were not, strictly speaking, seceders from the Church; for it is doubtful, whether the body of believers admitted their claim to the character, of Christians. They were Jews, who pretended to receive the Christian dispensation; but they mingled the ceremonial law with the precepts of the Gospel, and denied that Jesus had any other than a human nature. Jerome seems to exclude them from the body of Christians, and to consider them as Jews. He says, "Why do I speak of the Ebionites, who only pretend that theyare Christians." His language implies, that he did not admit their pretensions.

To establish the proposition which we have stated, the detached opinions of individuals. will not be deemed sufficient. By a recurrence to the testimonies of those who gave an account of the Heresies which appeared in the early ages, we shall, with greater certainty, learn the opinions of the Church in general.

When a historian enumeratss the Heresies of any particular age, he does not rest his account on his own separate opinion. As a historian, he exhibits the general sentiment of the Church, and calls that doctrine a Here

sy, which the Church, in his communion, deems to be such..

says,

Irenæus wrote a treatise concerning Heresies. He includes the Ebionites with the Gnostics and Nicolaitans, who are mentioned Rev. ii. 6. Of the Ebionites, he "God will judge them. How can they be saved, if it be not God who worketh out their salvation upon earth." Again, "Those who affirm, that he (Christ) is a man only, begotten of Joseph, persisting in the bondage of their origi nal disobedience, perish, not embracing the Word of God the Father, nor receiving liberty from the Son; as himself says, If the Son shall make you free, ye shall be free indeed. But being ignorant of him, who, of a virgin, is Immanuel, they are deprived of his gift, which is eternal life. But not receiving the Word of incorruption, (or the incorruptible Word) they continue in mortal flesh, are debt-ors to death, rejecting the antidote of life."*

If this writer be considered as exhibiting the faith of the Church in his time, (and as a historian this is the light in which we are to view his statement) we learn, that those were reputed Heretics, who denied the divinity of the Savior. But this is not all. We learn also, that the primitive Christians considered mankind to be, dead in sin "in the bondage of disobedience;" and that those who continue in this state of ruin, and reject, the Savior

Jam. Vind. vol. II. pagë 212.

as the true God, must suffer everlasting death. "This writer evidently considers an atonement to be a necessary prerequisite for salvation; and this atonement must be wrought by a divine Person. The question which he raises can admit no other sense. How can they be saved, if it be not God who worketh out their salvation upon earth?" Here salvation is called the gift of God, and therefore it is of free Grace.

Tertullian, Bishop of Carthage, about the year 200, wrote concerning Heresies. With the Sadducees, Gnostics, and Nicolaitans, he includes the Ebionites in the group of Heretics. In one of his treatises, he fills a whole chapter with a description of this Heresy. In another place, he speaks of Ebion as one of the antichrists, to whom the Apostle John refers, because he did not think that Jesus was the Son of God. Again, he expressly calls that doctrine a Heresy which excludes a Trinity; and supposes it to be one of the devices of satan, to destroy the efficacy of the Gospel. He says, "The devil hath variously contended against the truth. He hath endeavored sometimes, by defending, to destroy it. He maintains one Lord Almighty Creator of the world, that even of this one, he may make Heresy."

Tertullian is not alone in the opinion, that under a pretext of zeal for the unity of God,

*De carni Christi.

Jam. Vind. vol. II. page 224. Ibid. page 227.