wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and
wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and
626 Proclus'j Monad before the Trinity. Fogk I.is alfo a principle, and the God of gods, a monad from the firfi one, beforeall effence. Where, fo far as we can underftand, "jamblickm\ meaningis, that there is a fimple unity in order of nature, before that Tagaibon,or monad, which is the firft of the three divine hypoftafes. And. ,. this doclrine was afterward taken up by Prochis, he declaring it inLib. z. P-Q%-^^^^ manner ; Kwxai.yji HXcctuv ctto tk 7rA»)y»; £7ri T«j iva^x; a,vXTPi-/jiV ii,'j.4iv'jj.xkXov di >C) v^Q T8 IlAaTovoj xara tiw rlav srpa.'y^oiruv t«^iv Trto t? TAvifiK,- 'h oisl JO,Xj -StXITX, ^HXTX^i; KTTO fAOV:t,So^ (Xp^sixi' $l7 fJ-tVyup EX TfiizSc; n-pOiVJXi-TO'J a,pi^ij.0\l TOVSriVv, u.Xha, moo Tijf r^ia^oi; yi fj.oxii' «-« jMv Sv xj d SfjiMVcyrMX Tp=7; aAAa ti? o ttojTOW T^iuv £ij, vSifJAx yx^ Toju S-jiuv TB^fav £« TrXr&Sj- aWf7izi* ^'k ata ocTTo- Tsii/Jo; a-pyj-3(x,i $ti Tov SvijA.its^yiy.ov a^iS^-oK, aXA.' «7ro y.o'jaJoi;-< Plato every i!:here afcendsfrom vttiUitilde to -unity y from whence alfo the order of the many proceeds--,but before Plato, and according to the natural order of things, one isbefore multitude, and every divine order begins from a monad. Wherefore,though the divine number proceed in a trinity, yet before this trinityniLifi there be a monad. Let there be three demiurgical hypoflafes jneverthelef, before thefe mufi there be one, becaufe none of the divine orders beginsfrom multitude. We conclude, that the demiurgical number does not beginfrom a trinity, but from a monad, /landing alone by itfdf before that trinity;Here Proclus, though endeavouring to gain fome countenance for thisdocflrine out of Plato, yer, as fearing left that fliould fail him, doeshe fly to tire order of nature, and from ihence would infer, that beforethe trinity of 'demiurgick hypoftafes, there muft bo a fingle monador henad, ftanding alone by itfelf, us the head thereof. And Sr.Cyril of Alexandria, who was junior to /amblichus, but Icnior to Proclus,feems to take notice of this innovation in the Platonick theology,€.yul. /.S.as a thing then newly crept up, and after the time of Porphyry : «aa'f.271. o'i yi TT^on^YijAVio^. Xj zs-^0^ T«To uvliXiyudi, (pa,Ty.ovli; i^ri (Jiii T'AFAQO'N iruv-«ji6(u.£~i/ TOi; x-TT auT»' i^ri^YiQxi yx^ xtto ZTxan^ xoii/i.'uiV.f Stx to tlvxi xTrXiii TrxvrtiU) xiixlov Ti'JOf (r'Jf*Sair£wf 'Ato SI t» NO T, (xpy/i yse.p fro?) rn tomSx fj.'txv o-aSwaj-Bui thofe before mentioned contradiil this doSirine (of Porphyrius andthe ancient Platonifts) fl^r««»^, that the Tagathon ought not to be connumeratedor reckoned together with thofe which proceed fro-m it, but toheexempted from all communion, becaufe it is altogether fimple, and uncapableof any commixture or confociation with any other. Whereforethefebegin their trinity with Nous or Intelle£l, making that the firfi.The only difference here is, that Jamblichus feems to make the firflrhypoftaiis of the trinity after a monad to be Tagathon, but St. C>t//,Nous. However, they both meant the fame thing, as alfo did Proclus.after them. Wherefore, it is evident, that when, from the time of the Nicenecouncil and Athanafms, the Chriftian dodrine of the Trinity c;im.e to bepunctually ftated and fettled, and much to be infilled upon by Chriftians,Jamblichus. and other Platoniils, who were great antagonifts of the fame,perceiving what advantage the Chriftians had from the Platonick Trinity,then firft of all innovated this do6lrine, introducing a quaternity of di*vine hypoftafes, inftead of a trinity, the firft of them being not coordi*nate with the other three, nor confociated or reckoned with them-, but all ofthem, though fubordinate, yet univerfaJ,and fuch as comprehend the whole ;tiuL
Ch a p.. IV. His other Phantafiicl Trinities, 627that is, infinite and omnipotent ; and therefore none of them creatures.For it is certain, that before this time, or the age that Jamblichus livedin, there was no fuch thing at all dreamed of by any Platonift, as anunity before and above the trinity, and fo a quaternity of divine Jiypoftafes; Plotinus pofitively determining, that there could neither liemore nor fewer than three ; and Proclus himfelf acknowledging theancient tradition, or Cabala,, to have run only of three gods ; and Numoiitts,who was fenior to them both, vi'riting thus of Socrates, T^^iV ^iii^"M-^-^'yih[A(iiv l-^y-x^ccT^s;, that he alfo (before Plalo) ajferted three gods ; that is, r"p''^'2gVthree divine hypoftafes, and no more, as principles ;. therein followingthe Pythagoreans..Moreover, the fame Proclus, befides his Henades and ISIoes before mentioned,added certain other phantaftick trinities of his own alfo ; as this, forexample, of the firft eflence, the firft life, and the firft intelleft, (to omitothers \) whereby that ancient Cabala and S-fsTr^faJolo? ^ioXoyla., theologyof divine tradition ^ of three arcbical hypoftafeSyd.n(\ no more, was difguifed,perverted, and adulterated..Bat befidifS this advantage from the ancient Pdgan Platonics and Pythagorean?,admitting a trinity into their theology, in like manner as Chriftianitydoth, (whereby Chriltianity was the more recommended to the philofophickPagans) there is another advantage of the fame extending evento this prefent time, probably not unintended alfo by divine providence ;that whereas bold and conceited wits precipitantly condemning the doftrineof the trinity for nonfenfe, abfolute repugnancy to human faculties, andimpoffibihty, have thereupon fome of them quite Ihaken off Chriftianity,and all revealed religion, profcffing only theifm*; others have fruftratedthe defign thereof, by paganizing it into creature-worfliip or idolatry ; this ignorantand conceited confidence of both may be returned, and confuted fromhence,, becaufe the moft ingenious and acute of all the Pagan philofophers,the Platonifts and Pythagorean^,, who had no byafs at all upon them, norany f:ripture revelation, ciul might feem to impofe upon their faculties,but followed the free fentiments and di
- Page 610 and 611: wherebycy6 Nene of VhXo Book I.m v.
- Page 612 and 613: ^ ^ 8 PlatoV Trinity Homooufmn. B o
- Page 614 and 615: 580 The Dependence and Subordinatio
- Page 616 and 617: '582 7^^ diJlinSiive CharaSiers Boo
- Page 618 and 619: 8^. Platonifls make Mind and JVjfdo
- Page 620 and 621: 5 86 The Ground of this Platonick B
- Page 622 and 623: •588 PlatoV three Thpofiafcs Book
- Page 624 and 625: oQ How 'Phto s Trinity "B o o k I.a
- Page 626 and 627: merely^gt ^e Agreement and Difagree
- Page 628 and 629: 594- The Platomck'Ba,'^}i.o\ cenfur
- Page 630 and 631: ,q(f In u'hai Je?}fc PlatoV Tri?iit
- Page 632 and 633: 'but5^8 What Inequality Book!.
- Page 634 and 635: 6oo Plato'j Trinity reSiified. B o
- Page 636 and 637: 602 I'he EJjfence of the Godhead^ B
- Page 638 and 639: weaut604 A Trithei/iick Trinity, Bo
- Page 640 and 641: and6o6 II3& true Notion of the B o
- Page 642 and 643: 6o8 7^^ Nicene Fathers Book 5.irxTB
- Page 644 and 645: 6io The Homooufian Trinity Book L'T
- Page 646 and 647: 6 1 Whether Co-effe?ntaUty alone B
- Page 648 and 649: 614* Co'EJfentiality necejfary Book
- Page 650 and 651: and6i6 How the Homooufian Trinity^
- Page 652 and 653: 618" "TJ^e Perichorejts in the 'Tri
- Page 654 and 655: 6 20 77je Reafons for this Platonic
- Page 656 and 657: 62 2 Tb^ Father s Senfey ofthe Book
- Page 658 and 659: j624 ^^ Cahala of the Trinity Book
- Page 662 and 663: 628 Arians charged hy the Fathers B
- Page 664 and 665: 630 Orthodox Chrifiians worpipped B
- Page 666: (3^2 Human Nature depravahle. Book
Ch a p.. IV. H<strong>is</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r Phantafiicl Trinities, 627that <strong>is</strong>, infinite <strong>and</strong> omnipotent ; <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong>refore none <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m creatures.For it <strong>is</strong> certain, that before th<strong>is</strong> time, or <strong>the</strong> age that Jamblichus livedin, <strong>the</strong>re was no fuch thing at <strong>all</strong> dreamed <strong>of</strong> by any Platonift, as anunity before <strong>and</strong> above <strong>the</strong> trinity, <strong>and</strong> fo a quaternity <strong>of</strong> divine Jiyp<strong>of</strong>tafes; Plotinus p<strong>of</strong>itively determining, that <strong>the</strong>re could nei<strong>the</strong>r liemore nor fewer than three ; <strong>and</strong> Proclus himfelf acknowledging <strong>the</strong>ancient tradition, or Cabala,, to have run only <strong>of</strong> three gods ; <strong>and</strong> Numoiitts,who was fenior to <strong>the</strong>m both, vi'riting thus <strong>of</strong> Socrates, T^^iV ^iii^"M-^-^'yih[A(iiv l-^y-x^ccT^s;, that he alfo (before Plalo) ajferted three gods ; that <strong>is</strong>, r"p''^'2gVthree divine hyp<strong>of</strong>tafes, <strong>and</strong> no more, as principles ;. <strong>the</strong>rein following<strong>the</strong> Pythagoreans..Moreover, <strong>the</strong> fame Proclus, befides h<strong>is</strong> Henades <strong>and</strong> ISIoes before mentioned,added certain o<strong>the</strong>r phantaftick trinities <strong>of</strong> h<strong>is</strong> own alfo ; as th<strong>is</strong>, forexample, <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> firft eflence, <strong>the</strong> firft life, <strong>and</strong> <strong>the</strong> firft intelleft, (to omito<strong>the</strong>rs \) whereby that ancient Cabala <strong>and</strong> S-fsTr^faJolo? ^ioXoyla., <strong>the</strong>ology<strong>of</strong> divine tradition ^ <strong>of</strong> three arcbical hyp<strong>of</strong>tafeSyd.n(\ no more, was difguifed,perverted, <strong>and</strong> adulterated..Bat befidifS th<strong>is</strong> advantage from <strong>the</strong> ancient Pdgan Platonics <strong>and</strong> Pythagorean?,admitting a trinity into <strong>the</strong>ir <strong>the</strong>ology, in like manner as Chriftianitydoth, (whereby Chriltianity was <strong>the</strong> more recommended to <strong>the</strong> phil<strong>of</strong>ophickPagans) <strong>the</strong>re <strong>is</strong> ano<strong>the</strong>r advantage <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> fame extending evento th<strong>is</strong> prefent time, probably not unintended alfo by divine providence ;that whereas bold <strong>and</strong> conceited wits precipitantly condemning <strong>the</strong> d<strong>of</strong>trine<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> trinity for nonfenfe, abfolute repugnancy to human faculties, <strong>and</strong>imp<strong>of</strong>fibihty, have <strong>the</strong>reupon fome <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>m quite Ihaken <strong>of</strong>f Chriftianity,<strong>and</strong> <strong>all</strong> revealed religion, pr<strong>of</strong>cffing only <strong>the</strong>ifm*; o<strong>the</strong>rs have fruftrated<strong>the</strong> defign <strong>the</strong>re<strong>of</strong>, by paganizing it into creature-worfliip or idolatry ; th<strong>is</strong> ignorant<strong>and</strong> conceited confidence <strong>of</strong> both may be returned, <strong>and</strong> <strong>confuted</strong> fromhence,, becaufe <strong>the</strong> m<strong>of</strong>t ingenious <strong>and</strong> acute <strong>of</strong> <strong>all</strong> <strong>the</strong> Pagan phil<strong>of</strong>ophers,<strong>the</strong> Platonifts <strong>and</strong> Pythagorean^,, who had no byafs at <strong>all</strong> upon <strong>the</strong>m, norany f:ripture revelation, ciul might feem to imp<strong>of</strong>e upon <strong>the</strong>ir faculties,but followed <strong>the</strong> free fentiments <strong>and</strong> di
Change language