( '6l )

inseriour Clergy , in the Time of Charlemagne. Butwere the Arians of those Days, if any then re-mained, more knowing? How iniquitous then isthe Conduct of the Editor in this Point, to fetchArguments of Ignorance in the Orthodox, from anAge when the whole World was involved in thefame Darkness? The Fault was not that of the Men,but of the 'Times.

John was the Elias. Again it immediately fol-lows, not the Elias. Further on: 'Justification nothy the Law, and after the Interposition of one Line,by the Law. A notable Way of hinting that therewere Contradictions in the New Testament , with-out directly charging them. A fair Writer wouldhave mentioned, that these Things, tho’ spoken ofthe fame Subject, are affirmed in different Respects,and consequently no Contradictions.

St. Paul did not pretend to humane Learning.This is ill supported from i Cor. ii. i. and from2 . Cor. xi. 6. The Apostle might pretend to Learn-ing, tho’ he used it not in his first Preachings atCorinth, and tho’ he did not deny the Charge ofhis Maligners, that his Speech was contemptible-,.But that in general St. Paul pretended to humaneLearning is plain, by his Citations from Aratus , Me-nander-, and Epimenides .

St. Paul’s Vanity excused. Vanity is a hard Im-putation on an Apostle, whom he just before allowsto have had Modejly. But probably he thinks hehas made St. Paid Amends, by graciously allowinghim, in another Place, to have some Wit.

A SpeClre proves ?iothing. Yes sure: it provesthat there is a Principle in Man, which survives his

Y Body,