continued there till the city was taken by Adrian. But what became of those who were driven out of the city by Adrian, does not appear, It is most probable that they joined their brethren at Pella, or Beræa in Syria, from whence they had come to refide at Jerufalem; and indeed what became of the whole body of the ancient christian Jews (none of whom can be proved to have been trinitarians) I cannot tell. Their numbers, we may fuppofe, were gradually reduced, till at length they became extinct, I hope, however, we shall hear no more of them as an evidence of the antiquity of the trinitarian doctrine.

A few of the Nazarenes remained, as Epiphanius fays, in the Upper Thebais and Arabia. He also speaks of the Ebionites as exifting in his own time, and joined by the Offens *. Austin says that they were in fmall numbers even in his time+.

* Μονοι δε τινες εν σπάνει ευρισκονίαι, η π8 εις, η δύο Νασαρηνοι υπερ την ανω Θηβαίδα, και επέκεινα της Αραβίας, Hær. 20, Opera, vol. 1. p. 46.

+Ji funt quos Fauftus Symmachianorum vel Nazarenorum, nomine commemoravit, qui ufque ad noftra tempora jam quidem in exigua, fed adhuc tamen vel in ipfa, paycitate perdurant, Contra Fauftum Man, Opera, vol. 6. P. 351.

CH A P T E R

XIII.

Unitarianism was the Do&trine of the primi

tive Gentile Churches.

HAVING proved, as I think I may pre

sume that I have done, to the satisfaction of every impartial reader, that the great body of Jewish christians always were, and to the last continued to be, unitarians; believing nothing concerning the pre-existence or divinity of Christ, it may with certainty be concluded, that the Gentile converts were also universally unitarians in the

age of the apostles, and that, of course, the great majority of the common people must have continued to be so for a very considerable time. There is no maxim, the truth of which is more fully verified by observation and experience, than that

great bodies of men do not foon, or without great causes, change their opinions. And the common people among christians, haying no recollection of the apostles having 2

taught

taught the pre-existence or divinity of Chrift, would not foon receive fuch ftrange doctrines from any other quarter.

In what manner the fpeculative and philofophizing chriftians came to receive these doctrines, and what plaufible arguments they used to recommend them, I have fully explained. But fuch caufes would affect the learned long before they reached the unlearned; though, in time, the opinions of those who are refpected for their knowledge, never fail to diffuse themselves among the common people, as we fee to be the cafe in matters of philofophy, and fpeculation in general.

Actual phenomena, I fhall undertake to fhew, correfpond to this hypothesis, viz. that the Gentile chriftians were at firft univerfally unitarians; that for a long time a majority of the common people continued to be fo, being till after the council of Nice, pretty generally in communion with the trinitarians, without abandoning their own opinion. It will alfo appear, from the most indifputable evidence, that the Arian hypothefis, which makes Chrift to have been

a great

a great pre-existent spirit, the maker of the world, and the giver of the law of Mofes, was equally unknown to the learned and to the unlearned, till the age of Arius himself. As to the opinion of Christ having been a pre-exiftent fpirit, but either not the maker of world, or not the giver of the law, it is quite modern, being entirely unknown to any thing that can be called antiquity,

a

called the catholic church, is evident from there being no creed, or formulary of faith, that could exclude them. And we have seen that a creed was formed for the express purpose of excluding the Gnostics, who, of course, could not, and we find did not, join the public assemblies of christians, but formed assemblies among themselves, entirely distinct from those of the catholics.

There was no creed used in the chriftian church, besides that which was commonly called the apostles, before the council of Nice, and even after that there was no other generally used at baptism. This creed, as has been seen, contains no article that could exclude unitarians; and there was nothing in the public services that was calculated to exclude them. The bishops and the principal clergy, zealous for the doctrine of the trinity, might, of their own accord harangue their audiences on the subject, or they might pray as trinitarians; but if the unitarians could bear with it, they might still continue in communion with them, there being no law, or rule, to exclude them,

Accord

;