But he adds, pp. 13, 14, " That this consideration is so pressing, that a certain learned author, in his book entitled 'Conjectura Cabalistica,' affirms that for Moses, by occasion of his writings, to let the Jews entertain a conceit of God as in human shape was not any more a way to bring them into ido- latry than by acknowledging man to be GcTd, as our religion doth in Christ ;" which plea of his Mr B. exagitates in the pages following. That learned gentleman is of age and ability to speak for himself: for mine own part, I am not so clear in what he affirms as to undertake it for him, though other- wise very ready to serve him upon the account which I have of his worth and abilities; though I may freely say I suppose they might be better exer- cised than in such cabalistical conjectures as the book of his pointed unto is full of. But who am I, that judge another? We must every one give an account of himself and his labours to God ; and the fire shall try our works of what sort they are. I shall not desire to make too much work for the fire. For the present, I deny that Moses in his writings doth give any occasion to entertain a conceit of God as one of a human shape; neither did the Jews ever stumble into idolatry on that account. They sometimes, indeed, changed their glory for that which was not God; but whilst they worshipped that God that revealed himself by Moses, Jehovah,
' "Qun? ilifuntiu-dfi Deo atBfaircTOfTui intelligcnJa sunt S'.oTpnS; " VOL. XII. 5
66 THE PREFACE OF MR RIDDLE
Ehejeh, it doth not appear that ever they entertained in their thoughts any- thing hutpunimnumen, a most simple, spiritual, eternal Being, as I shall give a farther account afterward. Though they intended to worship Jehovah both in the calf in the wilderness and in those at Bethel, yet that they ever entertained any thoughts that Grod had such a shape as that which they framed to worship him by is madness to imagine. For though Moses sometimes speaks of God in the condescension before mentioned, express- ing his i^ower by his arm, and bow, and sword, his knowledge and understanding by his eye, yet he doth in so many places caution them Avith whom he had to do of entertaining any thoughts of any bodily similitude of God, that by any thing delivered by him tliere is not the least occasion administered for the entertaining of such a conceit as is intimated. Neither am I clear in the tlieological predication which that learned person hath chosen to parallel with the Mosaical expressions of God's sliape and similitude, concerning man being God. Though we acknowledge him who is man to be God, yet we do not acknowledge man to be God. Clirist under this reduplication, as man, is not a person, and so not God. To say that man is God, is to say that the humanity and Deity are the same. Whatever he is as man, he is upon the account of his being man. Now, that he who is man is also God, though he be not God upon the account of his being man, can give no more occasion to idolatry than to say that God is infinite, omnipotent. For the expression itself, it being in the concrete, it may be salved by the communication of properties ; but as it lies, it may possibly be taken in the abstract, and so is simply false. Neither do I judge it safe to use such expressions, unless it be when the grounds and reasons of them are assigned. But that Mr B. should be offended with this assertion I see no reason. Both he and his associates affirm that Jesus Christ as man (being in essence and nature nothing but man) is made a God ; and is the object of divine Avorship or religious adoration on that account. I may therefore let pass Mr B.'s following harangue against "men's philosophical speculations, deserting the Scripture in their contemplations of the nature of God, as though they could speak more worthily of God than he hath done of himself;" for though it may easily be made appear that never any of the Platonical philosophers spoke so unworthily of God or vented such gross, carnal conceptions of him as Mr B. hath done, and the gentleman of whom he speaks be well able to judge of what he reads, and to free himself from being entangled in any of their notions, discrepailt from the revelation that God hath made of himself in his Avord, yet Ave, being resolved to try out the whole matter, and to put all the differences we have with Mr B. to the trial and issue upon the express testimony of God" himself in his Avord, are not concerned in this discourse.
Neither have I any necessity to diA'ert to the consideration of his com- plaint concerning the bringing in of ncAV expressions into religion, if he intends such as Avhose substance or matter, Avhich they do express, is not evidently and expressly found in the Scripture. What is the " Babylonish language," Avhat are " the horrid and intricate expressions," Avhich he affirms to be " introduced under a colour of detecting and confuting here- sies, but indeed to put a baffle upon the simplicity of the Scripture," he gives us an account of, p. 19, Avhere Ave shall consider it and them. In general, words are but the figures of things. It is not words and terms, nor expressions, but doctrines and things, Ave inquire after.^ Mr B., I sup-