wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and

j624 ^^ Cahala of the Trinity Book Lnot to be ^AyaviCi^, unbcgottai, (he being begotten of the Father, who isthcon\y yigennetos) yet is he here fliid to ha ' Ayivi)\c riyvi-wu)) oAotcoVkj to o-m^ic^ ThatPlato notwithjlanding was not altogether ignorant of the truth, but that hehad the knov/ledge of the only begotten Son of God, as likeifife of the HolyGhcfi, called by him Pfyche ; and that he wuidd have every way exprejfed himfelfrightly^ had he not been afraid of Anitus and Melitus, and that poifon,which Socrates drunk. Now, whether this were a fault or no in the Platonifls,that they did not fuppofe their hypoftafes to be three individuals under thefame ultimate fpecies, we leave to others to judge. We might here add theteftimony of Chalcidius, becaufe he is unqiieftionably concluded to havebeen a Chriflian -, though his language indeed be too much paganical, whenhe calls the three divine hypoftafes, a chief, a fjcond, and a third God :P^j. j-y. Jjlius rei difpcfuio talis tnente ccncipienda eft ; criginem quidem rerum effe fiim-[Cap. VII. mum & ineffabilem Deum ; poft providentiam ejus fecundum T)cum, latoremi '86 p. iggis utriufque vita tarn aterna quam temporariie ; tertium effe porro fubidhy 'bri- ft'^"f^^"'i i"'^ fecunda 7nens intelleHufque dicitur, quafi qu^edani cuftos legistii.]' atern.e. His fubjeSfas effe rationr.biles ananas, legi obfequentes, tniniftrasverb poteffates, &c. Ergo fummus Deus jubet, fecundus ordinat, tertius intiinat.Anima: verb legem agunt. This thing is to be conceived after this manner; that the firjl original of thitjgs is the fupreme and ineffable God ; afterhis providence, a fecond God, the eftablifljer of the Imv of life both eternal andtemporary ; and the third {zohtch is alfo a fubftance, and called a fecondMind or Intelle£i) is a certain keeper of this eternal law. Under thefethree are rational fouls, fubjeSl to that law, together with the miv.ifierialpowers, &c. So that the fovereign or fupreme God commands., the fecond or.ders, and the third executes. But fuls are fubjeSl to the law. Where Chaliidhis,though fceming indeed rather more a Platonift than a Chriftian, yetacknowledgeth no fuch beings zs Henades 2.nd Noes ; hut only tnree divinehypoftafes, and under them rational fouls. But w& fhall conclude with theteftimony? Advcif. Juliar.. Lib. I. p. 34.