On this page
-
Text (1)
-
Untitled Article
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
Untitled Article
sha every thing that appears in the visible universe ; only one such being need be supposed to exist , to enable us to account for the
shows them to be the production of one individual Bein £ of one will , of one hand . If in the Divine essence there are three dis ~
whole phenomena of nature ^ and it is irrational to suppose more causes than are necessary to ena * ble us to account for every thing we perceive . The supposition of more than one such infinite person
tinct persons , they must either be independent of each other , or two of them at least must be dependent on the other . If independent of each other , are they not three Gods ? and is it not
unis not only unnecessary , it is useless and irrational , 11 is useless ; for a multitude of such persons could effect no niore than one , as every thing that is possible can be done bv one that is infinite .
accountable that a unity of design should appear throughout the universe ? If each of them be the Creator , how can creation be the work of one being ? If each be not the Creator , how can each be
It is absurd to suppose the , existence of more than one absolute infinite person ; for infinity must comprehend every divine attribute in . the utmost perfection ; consequently , a plurality of such persons could possess no more perfections than what are possessed
properly God T If two of the divine persons be dependent , how can each of the three be really God ? for dependence is incompatible with proper Deity . If all the three be self-existent , and coeternal , how cab one of them -be a father , and another a son ? Who
by one such individual person , nor be capable of any operation , or of producing any effect , or in any higher degree , than what one such person is" capable of performing and producing . A plurality of such persons can be no greater nor any thing more , than , one such person is ; . ibr as there car * be no
can solve these difficulties ? Yet solved they ought to be , before the doctrine of the trinity is admitted How can that doctrine ever be reconciled with the light of nature and the di <| tates of reason ? Surely , the wdVks of God will never lead us to conceive of more than one first cause , one infinite
subdegrees in that which is infinite , it can admit of no addition by an increase of persons , It is difficult , if not impossible , to form distinct ideas of three infinite
persistence ; the supposition of more seems to me irrational , and it is absurd to suppose divine revelation to contain any thing irrational . .
sons in one divine essence ^ with * , out supposing three gods ; for what is a distinct person but a distinct intelligent being ?
If any of me readers of your truly excellent Repository , will attempt to solve ; the above difficulties , without crying out against
When we survey the creation , we discover a unity of design in its various parts ; they are connected together land fitted to each other , as parts of one stupewdous whole * This unity of design
rcasppa and throwing dust in my eyes , by talking about mystery and doctrines of £ evelati > n which cannot be understood ^ they shall h&ve the thanks of
A Constant Reader
Untitled Article
Thoughts on tht Unity of God . 67
-
-
Citation
-
Monthly Repository (1806-1838) and Unitarian Chronicle (1832-1833), Feb. 2, 1809, page 67, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse.ac.uk/periodicals/mruc/issues/vm2-ncseproduct1733/page/11/
-