Important handwritten manuscript by Sir Isaac Newton comprised of over 700 words in his hand, regarding the ultimate and controlling divinity of God the Father, and relatedly, Newton's rejection of the concept of the Holy Trinity. Newton's belief in Christianity was integral to his life and worldview, as he saw the universe as a divine machine, with the laws of gravity and motion controlled by one prevailing power. Newton therefore rejected the idea of the Holy Trinity as three separate divine substances, a blasphemy so radical that Newton was almost forced to resign from Trinity College in Cambridge, and also chose not to publish any of his religious writings during his lifetime. His thoughts on the Trinity, including this manuscript, were kept secret by Newton until after his death.
In this manuscript, Newton investigates the usage and meaning of the Trinity as "three persons", concluding that it was adopted after Emperor Constantine conquered the western Empire and was in response to the spread of Sabellianism, the heresy that God is a single person manifesting in three different forms, rather than existing as three distinct persons. Newton states that the language of three persons "was not in scripture" and ends with this powerful statement: "the father being always the father, as he is also always the king & the savior, being all things potentially." Manuscript reads in part,
"Where these things were in dispute the language of [three persons] was also invented…It was used by the Montanists in the 2d & 3d centuries as I find by Tertullian, but I do not find it used in churches of God before the Council of Sardica or in that council & therefor[e] reccon [that] it began a little a little after suppose when Constantius conquered the western Empire & the latines were prest with the charge of Sabellianism. For the Council of Antioch A. C. 344 or 345 in a long……in opposition to Sabellianism w[hi]ch by the language of una substantia was then spreading in the west. But the word person being of an ambiguous signification……three persons. The proceedings of the Council of the Council [sic] of Sirmium against Photinus being generally approved by all parties, the Latines seem to have thence borrowed the language of three persons, but would not yet use the language of three hypostases because it had been condemned as Arrian by the Council of Serdica. And the Greeks…would not acqui[e]sce in the language of three presons w[i]thout a distinctions of substances & therefore still continued to press the language of three hypostases, the language of persons being used by the Montanists & accounted consistent with Sabellianism unless where it implied a distinction of Substances, Sabellius himself considering one & the same substance…as acting in various forms & with various powers & in various places & by various…dilations…or emissions of its parts or vertues & accordingly…giving that substance the various names of father son & holy ghost: w[hi]ch amounts to an…allowance in the deity of such persons as do not consist in a distinction of substances. Those therefore who used the language of one usia & one Substance did not only receive the language of three persons but many of them began to take ye persons for substances & many of these to use also the language of three hypostases & tax those w[i]th Sabellianism who continued to use the language of one hypostasis notwithstanding that they used the language of three persons. And this I take to be the true state of things in the four or five last years of the reign of the Emperor Constantius. The Greek Church therefore & those of her party among the Latines for quieting these controversies…appealed to scripture & laboured in their Councils to…abrogate all such language as was not in scripture &…was apt to be misunderstood by the people & lead them into errors & create disturbances & for suppressing Sabellianism & Paulinianism receiv[e]d the decree of the Council of Antioch against Paul of Samosat as was said above. And on the other hand Athanasius for keeping up a party adhered to the language of Paul…& called it Arrianism to reject that language, & in the above mentioned Council of Alexandria endeavoured to clear it from heresy by teaching…his party to make the persons substantial, as you may see in the Epistle of Athanasius to those of Antioch & also in the 21th Oration of Gregory Nazianzen."
Newton continues on the verso, "I may add that he himself in the Council declared this his opinion. ffor Eusebius Pamphili in writing an account to the Church of Caesarea of what was then done in the Council tells how the Emperor confuted the saying of Arius Before he was begotten he was not; by representing [that] he was before he was begotten in the flesh, & even according to his divine generation w[hi]ch was before all ages, he was…because before he was actually generated he was potentially in the father…without…generation: the father being always the father, as he is also always the king & the savior, being all things potentially."
Single sheet measures 6" x 7", partially written over a letter sent to Newton asking for his charity. With approximately 730 words in Newton's hand, including some cross-outs and edits. Chip to edge, partially affecting text, and uniform toning. Very good plus condition with bold handwriting. With full transcription.