1. Erafmus. 2. Grotius. 3. Petavius. 4. Epifcopius. 5. Sandius. THE Fifth DIALOGUE. XX. A has General View and Application of what been faid. 1. The Word God in Holy Scripture is taken moft Commonly in a Complex Senfe, as including all the Three Perfons: And fometimes it is taken Perfonally for the Father. 2. The Socinians hold a Trinity more Unaccountable than what is held by the Christians. 3. The Socinians own their Interpretations of the H. Scriptures to be Contrary to the Church. 4. Pretended Obfcurity in Scripture, not the Cause. 5. The Rule of Interpretation in the Cafe of the Anthropomorphits, will not serve in Cafe of the Trinity. 6. Nor in the Cafe of Trans-Subftantiation. 7. Concerning Myfteries.... THE Sixth DIALOGUE. XXI. F the Satisfaction made by Chrift for our Sins 1. The Objection, That by this God made the Satisfaction to Himfelf. Anfwer'd. 2. How the Legal Sacrifices were Accepted as Satisfaction. 3. The Neceflity of Satisfaction from the Nature of Justice. Wherein Jam. 2. 13. Explain'd. 4. Of Christ Confider'd only as a Mediator. 5. Reasons the Socinians give for the Death of Chrift. To Confirm His Doctrin.: To fhew God's Hatred to Sin. 6. Christ Confider'd in His Types, 7. Several Texts fhewing, That our Redemption is by the Death of Christ. 11. The Objection, That if Christ Underwent the whole Punishment of Sin, He must have had Defpair. 12. That He must have fuffer'd Eternally. Both Answer'd. XXII. Of the Eternity of Hell. 1. Of the Punishment being Proportionable to the Offence. 2. The Chief End of Religion. 3. If Religion may be Preach'd, without Leave of the Civil-Govern ment. 4. All this Apply'd to the Doctrin of Satisfaction. 5. Of Chrift Introducing the Covenant of Repentance. 6. The Law and the Gospel the fame Covenant. 7. Christ taking Our Sin upon Him, was Typified in the Priest's Eating the Sin-Offering. 8. He made Himfelf Liable to our Debt, by becoming our Surety. He is our Hostage. Heb. 7. 22. Explain'd. 9. The Socinian Interpertation of Ifai. 53. 11. 10. A Notable Argument of the Socinians, to Excufe themfelves for Denying the Divinity of Chrift. Arguments of the Socinians Prove. to 1. That the Doctrin of the Trinity is not Fundamental to Christianity. 2. That the Socinians ought not to be put under any Penalties by the Lam. 3. That we ought to own them 'The Socinian Faith. Yet Yet we must be Un-Clothed of them all, and Clothed in the Righteoufnefs of Chrift. An Appeal to the Socinians. Work true Faith in Us. to A Perfuafive Inference from the whole The Years of Chrift in which those Ante-nicene Fathers flourished, whom I have Quoted in the following Dialogues, and the Editions, that you mistake not where mistake not where I have Quoted the Page. And if any other Edition happens to be Quoted, the Edition is told. are all Have been perfwaded to let this first Dialogue be Publifh'd while the reft are a Printing. For tho' they one Intire Difcourfe, yet this is fomething Particular from the others, being not in Answer to thofe Books which are Confider'd in them, but a Subject by it felf; yet what I thought Needfull as a Preparation to Remove that Prejudice, which, 1 may say, only has made so many Ser cinians, (and on which they perpetually Infift, tho' very Unreasonably,) not to Believe what is Reveal'd of God, any further than our weak Reafon can Comprehend. I pretend not to Prove the Myfteries of the Holy Trinity, and Incarnation by Reafon. I am fully Satisfied our Shallow Measure of it cou'd never have found them out. Which is one Reason I have given why they cou'd not be of Human Invention. But if they are not direct Contradictions, no other Difficulties can be any Obstruction our Belief of what we all acknowledge to be Myfteries. And if I have folv'd thofe Popular Arguments of Contradiction which are Objected against thefe Myfteries, I have Clear'd the Foundation of that Rubbish which was Neceffa ry in order to Erect the Building more Firm and Regular. And I have Endeavour'd to do this in a Plain F miliar manner fuited to Common Capacities, avoiding as much as poffible the Intricate School-Terms, but Speaking their Senfe in a way Intelligible to English Readers, and giving fuch Inftances to Explain them as are Obvious to every one, and wherein any body may object, without the help of Art, if he finds they come not up to the Purpose intended. I send out therefore this firft Dialogue by it felf. That the Socinians may have time to Confider it, before I come to the Proof with them, which is only from the Holy Scriptures. And if Isball gain any Ground upon them in this, to |