1804. ] 
CLXXXIs——ARMINIANISM, 
Arminius was profeifor of divinity at 
the Univerfity of Leyden ; an eminent op- 
pugner of Calyin’s fentiments. Theré is 
no occafion to ftate Arminius’s fenti- 
ments at large, as Calvin’s have already 
be-n given, Suffice it to fay, that the 
difpuce turns on the different acceptations 
of the terms, original fin, grace, predefti- 
nation, effectual calking, juftification, 
perfeverance ; Calvin fuppofing, that, of 
the good conrained in thele doétrines, the 
elect only are paitakers, the non-eleét be- 
ing bound under what his opponents call 
the borrendum decretum ; Arminius, on 
the other hand,. fuppofing, that the pro- 
mifes and grace ot the Golpel belong 
to all, that man is only puanifhadle for 
his own tranfgreffions, and his voluntary 
rejeiion of the means of grace. We 
fhall not inquire what right the veforme:s 
had to give a Specific fyltcm of do&trine to 
bind the con{eiences of all their poite- 
rity; nor fhall we inquire how far thole 
clerzymen are toibe followed, who, fince 
the time of Laud, have given an Arminian 
‘fenfe to thele articles ; at leatt; who have 
found out a via media. The bulinels of 
this work is only to ttate fas in regard to 
thele matters 5 and, of courfe, fo [peak of 
Calviniftts and Arminians, not to enter 
into their {choo) of controverfirs. And'we 
afluredly never mean, in theie papers, to 
{peak derogatorily of liberty, to the full 
extentof the word; but let this fufice for 
the prefent. Of Arminians a few words 
hereatter. 
CLXXXII.—UNBELIEVERS. 
Unhelievers are of various characters, 
of different degrees, and of different prin- 
ciples. Some profe{s to believe, but fe- 
cietly are unbelievers ; fome, doubting, 
rather than rej Cling, are more properly 
{ceptics ; others reje&t from conviction, 
but only the Motaic and Chriltian writ- 
ings ; and others, all] religions, whether 
natural or revealed. rh 
Of the Jatter number was Mirabaud. 
His opin'on was, that man’s belief ina 
divinity arofe from the evil that he per- 
ceived in the world: that the notion, 
however, was a miftaken one: and that 
the proper remedy for thofe evils was, 
in truth, in ideas founded upon nature, 
and in adhering to the laws of reafon and 
benevolence. Thofe who embrace natu- 
ral religion, that is, the belief in a firft 
caufe, from confidering the material and 
intelleétual worlds, have fometimes rejeéted 
the Molaic hittory, as exhibiting a partial 
view of the Deity, whom they fay it re- 
preients-cruel, revengeful, and unjuft.— 
Cantabrigiana. — - , 45 
Chriftianity they difeard as depending on 
tbe credibility of the Mofaie writings. 
All nations, fay fome, have had their pro- 
phets, their poets, men of rong imagina- 
tion: but prophecy, as a part of a divine 
revelation, they fetafide. Thus Spinozs 
wrote concerning prophecy. All nations, 
too, fay others, are reported to have had 
their miracles. Butthefe depend for evi. 
dence on teftimony : the evidence of our 
fenfes, fay they, is tronger than ali telti- 
mony, than all human tradition. And 
thus Hume wrote concerning miracles. 
Many diftinguifhed philofophers, meta 
phyficians, and critics, have been either 
{ceptics or unbelicvers. 
With refpect tothe writings called the 
New Teftament, opinions are very nume- 
rous, both as to the books themfelves, and 
to the doétrines contained in them. We 
have already fpoken concerning fome doc. 
trines, in treaiing of different fects.— 
With refpeét to the canon, after ali the 
HARMONIES which have been written, 
many contend that the writings are con- 
tradictory to each other, involved in Jaby- 
rinths of endlefs errors, and quite irrecon- 
cileable to all principles cf jult reafoning. 
The Gofpels, as we now have them, called 
canonical, (though Chriltians themfelves 
ftill are not unanimous. in receiving ~all,y 
are four; bur there are numerous other 
Golpels that have been rejeéted, fuch as 
the Evangelium Nativitatis Marie; 
Mparevayyshioy ayie IanwSe 3 the Evangeli- 
um Infantie ; the Evangelium Nicodemi ; 
and vavious others. They have been pub- 
lithed by Fabricius. One particular 
council fetiled which of all the gofpels 
fhould be received as authentic. And of 
‘the reit, the Church has fince faid, with 
Sandlus Flieronymus, Diabolum in Apocry- 
phis infidiari, But it has been afked, are 
there greater improbabilities recorded in 
the latter than in the former ? : 
Vhis, and fimilar quettions, it belongs 
not to the Cantabrigiana to reply to ; for 
our bufinefs is with unbelievers, of whom 
more hereafter. 
CLXXXIJI.—JUDAISM, 
‘¢ What concern have Jews with the 
univerfity ??’ This queftion implies a de- 
feét. Why fhould not the Jews be con- 
cerned with it? Do you worhhip Jeho- 
yah Eloheim ; or, adore only divinam na- 
turam? fhould have no more to do with 
the literary advantages of a univerfity, 
than What do you think of the mountains 
in the moon, or theinhabitants of Jupiter 2 
«© If a Roman Catholic (fays Locke 
wifely) believe that to be really the bedy 
of Chrift, which another man calls bread, 
he 
