account for on any other hypothefis than that of the doctrines of the pre-existence and divinity of Chrift, not having been taught till very late. At prefent, the facts which forced the Fathers upon this hypothefis are forgotten, and the orthodox themselves wonder that they should have adopted a scheme so abfurd and improbable. But the different manner in which fuch an hypothefis is received, is a proof of a great difference in the circumstances and views of things in the different periods. We fee nothing to make fo ftrange an hypothefis neceffary. They would not have had recourse to it, if it had not been neceffary.

СНАР

CHAPTER VIII.

Of the Nazarenes and the Ebionites, fhewing that they were the fame People, and that none of them believed the Divinity or Preexistence of Chrift.

thing in the person or nature of Christ superior to those of other men. In like manner, all the preaching of Christ, of which we have an account in the book of Acts, is that Jesus was the Messiah, whose divine mission was confirmed by miracles, especially that of his own resurrection, and by the gifts of the Spirit. And all the controversies of which we find any account, either in that book, or in, the epistles, respected either the Jewish teachers, who would have imposed the observance of the law of Moses upon all the Gentile converts, or else those who held the principles of the Gnostics.

The erroneous doctrines of these persons are distinctly marked, so that no person can read the New Testament without perceiving that there were persons who held these doctrines, and that they were the cause of great uneasiness to the apostles. But there is no trace of any other opinions at which they took the least umbrage,

As to the effect of the publication of John's gospel, from which so much seems to have been expected by the christian Fa, thers, it is impossible that we should learn

any

any thing concerning it in the New Teftament, because that was one of the laft of the books that was published. However, we have no account in ecclefiaftical history that it produced any change at all in the fentiments of chriftians. Though it is faid to have taught a new and a fublime doctrine, it does not appear to have been received with any degree of furprize. There are no marks of the publication having given any peculiar pleasure to fome, or aların to others; or that it occafioned the leaft divifion among chriftians on the fubject.

We may, therefore, very fafely conclude, that those chriftians for whofe ufe this gofpel was written, faw it in a very different light from thofe Fathers who gave the preceding account of it. We know, indeed, that to them it did not appear to teach any other doctrine than what was contained in the three former gofpels. For by the logos of which John treats in this famous introduction, they never imagined to be meant Christ, and therefore they could fee nothing of his perfonal pre-existence or divinity in it. In their opinion, the logos was that wisdom

2

wisdom and power of God, by which all things were made.

Though this gospel was written in Greek, there were not wanting among the Jewish christians men of learning who would not have failed to give an account of it to their more ignorant countrymen, or to tranflate it for their ufe, if it had been thought neceffary. Yet, notwithstanding this, all the Jewish chriftians continued in the very fame ftate in which the chriftian Fathers represent them to have been before the publication of this gofpel, viz. believers in the fimple humanity of Chrift only, and acknowledging nothing of his pre-existence or divinity. The fame was alfo the state of the Gentile chriftians in general, long after the publication of this gospel.

As no entire writings of any Jewish christians are come down to us, all that we know concerning them must be derived from the writings of the Gentile christians; and as thefe chriftians were trinitarians, and had very little communication with the Jewish chriftians, we can

VOL. III.

M

not