and fimple creed propofed. For it is there faid, that "the faith of chriftians is to be

lieve that there is one Almighty God, "and no other, and that he alone is to be

66

worshipped by Jefus Chrift, in the holy fpirit*.

In the times in which the doctrine of the trinity was much agitated, the articles of the apostles creed were not thought to be fufficient; and fome of the more zealous bishops propofed the Nicene creed, and other tests to thofe who were in communion with them. Theodoret made his catechumens recite the Nicene creed at

baptifm+. Epiphanius alfo proposed a large creed to be used at baptifm, in oppofition to heretics. But this practice does

* Θεον παοκρατορα ενα μόνον υπάρχειν, πας ον αλλά εκ επικαι αυτον μόνον σεβειν καὶ προσκυνεῖν, δια Ιησε 28158 73 κυρις ημών, εν τω wavayın veμalı. Conftitut. Apoft. lib. 6. p. 343.

† Τις γαρ και εκατον έλος τω παναγίω προσιόντας βαπλισμαλι, την εκλέθεισαν εν Νικαια παρα των αγιων και μακαρίων πατέρων πισιν εκμαρ θανειν παρασκευαζομεν. και μυςαγωγωνίες αυτές ως προσελαχθημεν, βαπλίζομεν εις το ονομα το Παῖρος, κα) το 1ι8, ε τε αγιο Πνεύμαίος, ενικώς εκα την προσηγορίαν προσφεροντες. Εpift. 145. Opera, vol.

3. P. 1023.

† Ancoratus, fest. 121. Öpera, vol. 2. p. 123.

not

not appear to have been general. A copy of the apostles creed, much enlarged, with a kind of comment, may be seen in the works of Cyril of Alexandria *.

CHAPTER VI.

Of the Doctrine of Plato concerning God, and the general Syftem of Nature.

IT

will be feen, that what was called orthodox chriftianity after the council of Nice had received a confiderable tinge from the tenets of Gnofticifm, of which a view has been given in the last section. But the proper fource of it was the philosophy of

Plato.

The doctrine of the perfonification of the logos, or the divine intellect, confifting of the attributes of wisdom, power, &c. was certainly introduced by the Platonists, and

*

Opera, vol. 2. p. 699.

from

from them it was adopted by the christian. Fathers ; but it appears to me, from a pretty careful examination of the writings of Plato, that this was not done by himfelf, though the confufion of his ideas gave occafion to it, or fomething like it, in his followers.

According to Plato, the universe was made by the fupreme God, whom he often ftiles ay, or the good, without the inftrumentality of any fubordinate being whatever, only making it according to a pattern previously formed in his own mind. Language to this effect is frequent in his writings; but there is a manifeft confufion in his account of the ideas of the divine mind, by means of which the plan of the universe was formed; fo that he fometimes makes them to be a fecond principle of things, and the world itself, which was produced from those ideas, a third principle. But I do not find that he ever proceeded fo far as to make the divine mind, ves, or λoy, a second God, a diftinct intelligent being.

1

The Demiurgus, or immediate maker of the world, according to the following pafVOL. I.

Y

fage,

fage, was evidently the fupreme Being himself, and not any subordinate agent, or principle, whatever. "You will fay," fays he, "that all animals that are produced, and "perishable, and which formerly were not, “ either have their origin from fome God, "who made them, or according to the opi"nion of the vulgar. What opinion? That "nature produced them as a felf-moving "caufe, without (daro) intelligence; or "with a divine knowledge, and reason (y) which comes from God*."

I have not met with any paffage more favourable to the doctrine of a fecond God, employed in making the world, in all the writings of Plato, than this; and yet it is evident that the logos here fpoken of, as that by which God made the universe, was, in his idea, fynonymous with Savoia and exisμ”, or his understanding, and by no means any other proper perfon or agent.

Ξεν. Ζωα δη παντα θνητα καὶ φυλα- μων αλλά τι η θες δημιεργών φησομεν υςερον γιγνεσθαι, πρότερον εκ ονία • η τω των πολλών δογματι καὶ ρηματι χρώμεν οι ; Θεαλη. Ποιω· ΞεΘ. Τω την φυσιν αυτα γενναν, από την 6 αλιας αυτοματης, και ανευ διανοιής φύσης, η μελα λογω τε, και επίσημης θείας, απο 988 phiftes, p. 114.

γιγνομένης.

So

That

That, in Plato's idea, it was the supreme Being who himself accomplished the work of creation, is evident from his representation of him as rejoicing at the conclufion of it. "When he faw the fyftem in mo❝tion, and confidered the beautiful image "of the eternal gods, the generating Fa"ther rejoiced, and was glad, and thought “to make it more to resemble the pat"tern*." The refemblance between this paffage and that of Mofes, Gen. i. 31. And God Jaw every thing that he had made, and behold it was very good, is very striking; fo that it is no wonder that many perfons fhould have thought that Plato had seen the writings of Mofes, and copied from them, But I think that if Plato had taken this from Mofes, he would have taken more; and in other refpects the theology of Plato is very different indeed from that of Mofes, though they both agree in representing the fupreme Being himfelf as having made all

* Ως τε κινηθεν τε αυλο ή ζων ενενόησε, των αιδίων θεων γενομενον αγαλμα, ο γεννησας πατηρ ηγάσθη τε, και ευφρανθεις επι δη μαλλον ομοιον προς το παράδειγμα επενενόησεν απεργάσεσθαι. Timzus, p. 480.