that ever invoked the philosophic muse. ton it may truly be said, that he was one,

Of New

Qui genus humanum ingenio superavit, et omnes
Præstinxit, stellas exortus uti ætherius Sol.*

In private life he was mild and affable, peaceful in his temper, gentle in his manners, and a lover of tranquillity and retirement. Although he went out little into the world, he was social in his feelings, and ready in conversation. Humility and modesty were among his most striking virtues. He was without arrogance or pretension, putting himself on a level with other men, and ascribing whatever progress he had made in knowledge wholly to his untiring industry and patience. As he was a stranger to pride, so he was free from any affected singularities. He was generous in his benefactions, and a patron of true worth wherever it was found. His religious faith was settled on the foundation of reason and the Scriptures; his piety was steady and strong; he was a christian in belief and in practice. In short, the balance of principles and powers which marked the rare structure of his mind, together with the unison in his philosophy, morals, and religion, formed a perfect and wonderful harmony in all the parts of his character.

*Lucret. de Rerum Nat. Lib. III. v. 1056.

AN

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT

OF

TWO CORRUPTIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

IN A LETTER TO A FRIEND.

SECTION I.

On the Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses.

I. SINCE the discourses of some late writers have raised in you a curiosity of knowing the truth of that text of scripture concerning the testimony of the Three in Heaven, 1 John v. 7, I have here sent you an account of what the reading has been in all ages, and by what steps it has been changed, so far as I can hitherto determine by records. And I have done it the more freely, because to you, who understand the many abuses which they of the Roman church have put upon the world, it will scarce be ungrateful to be convinced of one more than is commonly believed. For although the more learned and quick-sighted men, as Luther, Erasmus, Bullin

ger, Grotius, and some others, would not dissemble their knowledge, yet the generality are fond of the place for its making against heresy. But whilst we exclaim against the pious frauds of the Roman church, and make it a part of our religion to detect and renounce all things of that kind, we must acknowledge it a greater crime in us to favour such practices, than in the Papists we so much blame on that account; for they act according to their religion, but we contrary to ours. In the eastern nations, and for a long time in the western, the faith subsisted without this text; and it is rather a danger to religion, than an advantage, to make it now lean upon a bruised reed. There cannot be better service done to the truth, than to purge it of things spurious; and, therefore, knowing your prudence, and calmness of temper, I am confident I shall not offend you by telling you my mind plainly; especially since it is no article of faith, no point of discipline, nothing but a criticism concerning a text of scripture which I am going to write about.

II. The history of the corruption, in short, is this. First, some of the Latins interpreted the spirit, water, and blood, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, to prove them one. Then Jerome, for the same end, inserted the Trinity in express words into his version. Out of him the Africans began to allege it against the Vandals, about sixty-four years after his death. Afterwards the Latins noted his variations in the mar

gins of their books; and thence it began at length to creep into the text in transcribing, and that chiefly in the twelfth and following centuries, when disputing was revived by the schoolmen. And when printing came up, it crept out of the Latin into the printed Greek, against the authority of all the Greek MSS. and ancient versions; and from the Venetian presses it went soon after into Greece. Now the truth of this history will appear by considering the arguments on both sides.

III. The arguments alleged for the testimony of the Three in Heaven, are the authorities of Cyprian, Athanasius, and Jerome, and of many Greek manuscripts, and almost all the Latin ones.

IV. Cyprian's words run thus,*"the Lord saith, 'I and the Father are one.'

And again of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost it is written, And

،

these Three are One." The Socinians here deal too injuriously with Cyprian, while they would have this place corrupted; for Cyprian in another place repeats almost the same thing.† "If," saith he, ["one baptized among heretics] be made the temple of God, tell me, I pray, of what God? If of the

* Dicit Dominus, Ego et Pater unum sumus; et iterum de Patre et Filio et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, Et tres unum sunt. Cypr. de Unit. Eccles.

+ Si templum Dei factus est, quæso cujus Dei? Si Spiritus Sancti, cum tres unum sint, quomodo Spiritus Sanctus placatus ei esse potest, qui aut Patris aut Filii inimicus est. Cypr. Epist. 73, ad Jubaianum,

Holy Ghost, since these Three are One, how can the Holy Ghost be reconciled to him who is the enemy of either the Father or the Son ?" These places of Cyprian being, in my opinion, genuine, seem so apposite to prove the testimony of the Three in Heaven, that I should never have suspected a mistake in it, could I but have reconciled it with the ignorance I meet with of this reading in the next age, amongst the Latins of both Africa and Europe, as well as among the Greeks. For had it been in Cyprian's Bible, the Latins of the next age, when all the world was engaged in disputing about the Trinity, and all arguments that could be thought of were diligently sought out, and daily brought upon the stage, could never have been ignorant of a text, which in our age, now the dispute is over, is chiefly insisted upon. In reconciling this difficulty, I consider, therefore, that the only words of the text quoted by Cyprian in both places are, "And these Three are One;" which words may belong to the eighth verse as well as to the seventh. For Eucherius,* bishop of Lion in France, and contemporary to St

*Eucherius reads the text thus: Tria sunt quæ testimonium perhibent; aqua, sanguis, et spiritus. And then adds this interpretation, Plures hic ipsam, interpretatione mystica, intelligunt Trinitatem; eo quod perfecta ipsa perhibeat testimonium Christo; aqua, Patrem indicans; quia ipse de se dicit, me dereliquerunt fontem aquæ vivæ; sanguine, Christum demonstrans, utique per passionis cruorem; spiritų vero Sanctum Spiritum manifestans. Eucher. de Quest. N. Test.