The works of Nathaniel Lardner - The Christian Researcher - Home

246 Credibility of the Gospel History.
' ancient chronologers, Isidore Hispalensis, and Ado Vien-
' nensis,who in their chronicles agree toplace Sabelliiis about
' A. D. 220.' And indeed he had need to cnll them ' ancient.'
Nevertheless Mr. Jackson does not deny the fruth of what I
said, p. 108, that they are Latin authors; 'and that they
' Avrote, one of" them ui Spain in the seventh, the other in
' Gaul, in the ninth century :' that is, the earliest of them
several hundred years after the supposed time of Sabellius.
The authority of such chroniclers undoubtedly is very great.
I likewise argued from several considerations, to which the
reader is referred, that they confounded Noetus and Sabel-
lius.
But Mr. Jackson's strongest argument seems to be, that
his author could not Avrite his ' excelfent ' book on the
Trinity, p. 126, his ' incomparable and invaluable' book,
p. 132, after his schism; which yet he must have done if
Sabellianism had not its rise till after 251. Nee, quantum
cogito, verisimile est, ilium condidisse tarn egregium
librum,— postquam in schisma detestandum se demersisset.
Prsef. p. 18. But the force of this argument depends upon
a degree of uncharitableness in a man's mind, for which I
can see no ground : a heretic, or schismatic, we may suppose,
cannot write a good book in favour of his errors, or wrong
conduct: but if he hold any truths in common with other
men, I do not see why he may not be able to write well in
defence of them : and I readily assent to Nicephorus in what
he says of Eusebius, the famous bishop of Caesarea : that
he left many writings useful for the church, though he often
favours Arianism. K«« aWa ctafpopa (TV^/^jpafif^icna KaiaXeXoiTre,
TToWrjv ovrjcrtv rn cKicXi^aia eia(f)epovTa' ttXijv to(8to9 wv ev TroWot?
(fyaivejai -ra apein irpeaficvwv. Nic. H. E. I. vi. C. 37. p. 446. C.
I have here added thus much concerning the time of
Sabellius, to please Mr. Jackson ; though I am of opinion
that what I said formerly was sufficient.
II. I must take some notice of what Mr. Jackson says
concerning the name of Novatus, otherwise called Novatianus.
I offered five arguments; the first of which Mas, that
' this presbyter of Kome is generally called Novatus by the
' Greek writers.' This argument I did not much labour,
because I supposed it to be allowed by learned moderns,
that the Greek authors do generally so write his name.
However, Mr. Jackson affirms, p. 131, that ' my opinion is
' contrary to the testimony of the most ancient Greek, as
* well as Latin writers.' Let us then see how Mr. Jackson
shows this.
He allows, p. 126, that ' Eusebius generally calls him