Page:Anacalypsis vol 1.djvu/155

 Zoroaster, or of a man who lived five or six hundred or a thousand years before Cyrus, than that the Jewish Pentateuch is the writing of Moses. Yet they are probably partly his or his compilation, in the same way that the Pentateuch is partly the production or the compilation of Moses. Though these books may not be the writing of Zoroaster, they are the received sacred books of the Magi, the same as the books of the Pentateuch are of the Jews, and their genuineness is entitled to equal respect. It was, perhaps, on account of these matters, that Dr. Hyde’s translations of the Persian works never went to press.

3. The doctrine of the Trinity is first to be met with to the North-east of the Indus, and it may be traced Westwards to the Greek and Latin nations; but the two latter seem almost to have lost sight of it as a national or vulgar doctrine; indeed, among the multitude in them, nothing half so rational is to be found. It seems to have been confined to the philosophers, such as Plato—but whether as a secret doctrine or mystery may admit of doubt.

Whether the doctrine of the Trinity formed a part of the Christian religion has been disputed almost from its earliest period, by a great variety of sects, with a degree of bitterness and animosity hardly to be equalled in the history of the world. If the question had been of vital importance to the religion, or, which is of equal consequence in the estimation of too many, had involved the continuance of the hierarchy or tithing system, instead of being merely an idle speculation, its truth or falsity could not have been contested with greater virulence. Several considerable sects affirm, that it was introduced by some of the early fathers from the school of Plato: this others as strongly deny. Mr. Maurice, who being a Churchman is, of course, on the Trinitarian side, candidly allows that it existed in the doctrines of the Jews, and of all the other Asiatic nations from the most remote antiquity. But so far from seeing any difficulty in this, he concludes from it, that it must have been revealed by God to Adam, or to Noah, or to Abraham, or to somebody else, and from thence he most triumphantly concludes that it is true. The antiquity of the doctrine he has clearly proved. His conclusion is another affair. If it be satisfactory to his mind, it is all well; a worthy and good man is made happy at very little expense. In Chapter II. Mr. Maurice has brought together a vast variety of facts to prove that the doctrine of the Trinity was generally held by the Gentiles, but they all at last shew its origin to have been the Egyptian Mithraitic or Hindoo school. From this source the Trinity sprang: a doctrine which it is seen may be traced to very remote periods of time, indeed long prior to the time fixed for the existence of the Jews, or probably of Noah: and it passed to them through the medium of the Persians and Egyptians, as it did also to the Greeks: and from them all it passed to the Christians in a later day. As it might have been supposed, it is found not to be altogether, but yet fundamentally, the same, and in fact to possess much more similarity than might have been expected from the eternal law of change to which it was subject, during the time it was travelling through various climates, nations, and languages, for hundreds, indeed thousands, of years. However, in all the great essential parts it is the same. There are the Father, the Creator—the Son, the Preserver or Saviour—and the evil principle or the devil—in his bad character the destroyer, in his good one the regenerator; the same three persons as in the Christian Trinity—except that the ignorant monks of the dark ages, not understanding there fined doctrine of the Eternity of Matter, and, that destruction was only reproduction, divided the third person into two—the Destroyer and Regenerator, and thereby, in fact, formed four Gods—the Father, the Son, the Holy Ghost, and the Devil.

4. The immediate origin of the complete and correct Christian Trinity, of that peculiar doctrine on which all orthodox persons seem to think their happiness in this life, as well as in that which is to come, actually depends, will now be exhibited on the unquestionable authority of a most unwilling witness, of one of the most learned and orthodox of its priests—the Rev. Mr. Maurice. Speaking of the Trinity in the oracles of Zoroaster, he says, “Since, exclusive of the error of