Debate Between Satan and Sherlock, Postscript
Poſtſcript to the READER.
THe Author of theſe Sheets conceives he cannot excogitate a fitter cloſe than Mr. Sherlock's to his ſecond Section, with no other alteration than the ſubstitution of two words, Gods nature, inſtead of Chriſt's perſon and of God inſtead of Chriſt.
Thus Reader, I have given the… an entire ſcheme of a new Religion, reſulting from an acquaintance with [Gods nature] in all its fundamental Principles and Practices; here is every jot and tittle of reaſon it is founded on, or pretends to, and the moſt obvious and eaſie connexion of one part with another, whereby thou maiſt eaſily judg of the whole fabrick and contrivance; and I think there needs no more to expoſe it to the ſcorn of every conſidering man, who cannot but diſcover how inconſiſtent the Religion of [Gods nature] and of his Goſpel are: this is that knowledg of [God] theſe men [Mr. S. and his Club] glory in, as containing greater myſteries, & more ſoul-ſaving truths, than are revealed in the Goſpel, p. 75. And the Author thinks fit to add, that he preſumes that no conſidering man will doubt whether this new Religion deſerves that character which the learned Dr. Arrowſmith gives of it; and the men that are of that Religion, deſerve that ſharp cenſure which the learned Grotius gives of them, in the paſſages quoted in the Title-page, (which for the ſake of the unlearned Reader it may not be amiſs to tranſlate. In Socinianiſm, which not undeſervedly is called a more refin'd Mahometaniſm, Hell and Irreligion open their mouths wide. So Arrowſmith. The Socinians I think unworthy not only of the name of Chriſtians, but even of Hereticks. They retain the name of Chriſtianity, but they deſtroy the thing that bears that name. Therefore I judg they differ very little from Mahometans, who themſelves do not ſpeak evil of Jeſus. So Grotius. The only thing that may ſeem wanting to brand the Sherlockians with the name of Socinians, and ſo of more refined Mahometans, is an explicite denial of the Godhead of Chriſt; which whether they be not in a good forwardneſs for, let the Reader judg by that paſſage, No man could believe in Chriſt till he came, that is, could not believe any thing upon his Authority, p. 247. It is a Queſtion which for his own credits ſake, Mr. Sherlock were bound (one would think) to anſwer, why no man could believe any thing upon Chriſts Authority, till he came? The only reaſon his Antagoniſts can imagine is, becauſe Chriſt had no Authority before he came. And if that be it, the falſhood of that ground is evident enough (as otherwiſe ſo) by the light of Pſal. 110.1. and Mat. 23.43, 44, 45, compared, where David call'd [and ſo accounted] Chriſt his Lord, before he came; and conſequently ſuppoſes him to have Authority to exact belief. And from that falſe ground, that Chriſt had no Authority before he came, [ſuppoſing it yet to be true] this inference is fair, that he was not preexiſtent, and ſo nor God before he came. And thence another, that he had no ſuch Authority when he come, as Mr. Sherlock denies him before he came, that is no primary and immediate Divine Authority, but only ſecondary and mediate, that is, the Authority of a Prophet, the belief of whom is reſolved into the Authority of him that ſent him as its proper ground. And how finely does this notion ſuit with the account which the Socinians give of the reaſon of the denomination of the Son of God, and God, given by Chriſt to himſelf. His verbis (viz. Joh. 10.35, 36.) apertiſſime indicat Chriſtus, quod nullam aliam ob cauſam majorem, ſeipſum Dei Filium, ac proinde Deum aſſeruerit, niſi quod a Patre ſanctificatus, & in mundum miſſus fuerit, Cat. Racov. cap. de Cog. Dei. That is, In theſe words, viz. Joh. 10.35, 36. Chriſt does plainly declare, that for no other greater reaſon does he affirm that he is the Son of God, & therefore God, then becauſe he was ſanctified of the Father, and ſent into the world. And leaſt Mr. Sherlock (or any on his behalf) ſhould complain of wrong done him, and not know of whom to demand ſatisfaction, the Author hath thought meet to alter his firſt reſolution of concealing his Name, and with the diſcovery of it to give this account of himſelf, that he is one who hath ſubſcribed the 36 Articles of the Doctrine of the Church of England, and does hereby profeſs the continuance of his approbation of them as Orthodox, and conſonant to the Scripture; and withal that he is not ſo void of candor, but that if Mr. S. convince him that he hath wreſted any of his words, or made any illogical deductions from his Principles, he will not fail to give publick ſatisfaction in what form Mr. S. himſelf ſhall preſcribe, which (he conceives) is as much as any reaſonable man can require, or any honeſt man need to promiſe.
THO. DANSON. Sometime Fell. of Magd. Coll. Oxon.
End of the text · Thomas Danson, Debate Between Satan and Sherlock (1676)