three[1] objects of one subject, and thus only the qualities, or attributes, of one God, which are so expressed; or whether it is to be understood in some other sense, human reason, if left to itself, can by no means discern. What then is man to do, or where is he to ask counsel in a point so intricate? There is no other possible help for him, but to go to the Lord God the Saviour, and read the word under his influence, inasmuch as he is the God of the word; and then his understanding will be enlightened, and he will see truths which his reason also will consent to. But in case, O man! thou dost not go to the Lord, although thou shouldest read the word a thousand times over, and shouldest discern therein both a divine trinity and unity, yet in vain wilt thou hope to see the trinity in any other light than as consisting of three divine persons, each whereof singly and by himself is God, and thus as containing three Gods. Such doctrine however is plainly repugnant to the common perception of all men throughout the universe, and therefore its advocates, to avoid the imputation of folly, take refuge in this device, viz. that although in reality there are three Gods, yet faith requires, that they should not be called three Gods, but one; and farther, to guard against the aspersions of censure, they give out, that the understanding, in this case particularly, should be put in chains, and kept bound under obedience to faith. The production of such a paralytic birth was a consequence of not reading the word under the Lord's influence; for whoso-
- ↑ The terms object, and subject, are here used according to the sense of the school-philosophers; in which sense by object is meant some particular quality, or property, resulting from any subject; and by subject, the body, or thing, in which such quality, or property, is inherent; thus colour, in respect to body, may be called the object, and body, in respect to its colour, may be called subject.
