is possible to
conceive of Deity except through some sort of anthropomorphism in this
wider sense of the term, and certainly our author has not disengaged
himself from it.

In spite of our author's repudiation in his reply, I boldly claim the
writer of the concluding chapter of _Supernatural Religion_ as a
believer in a Personal God, in the only sense in which I understand
Personality as applied to the Divine Being. He distinctly attributes
will and mind to the Divine Being, and this is the very idea of
personality, as I conceive the term. He not only commits himself to a
belief in a Personal God, but also in a wise and beneficent Personal God
who cares for man. On the other hand, the writer of the first part of
the work seemed to me to use arguments which were inconsistent with
these beliefs.

[142:1] Iren. v. 33. 4 [Greek: Ioannou men akoustes, Polukarpou de
hetairos gegonos].

[143:1] Euseb. _H.E._ iii. 39 [Greek: Ouk okneso de soi kai hosa pote
para ton presbuteron kalos emathon kai kalos emnemoneusa sunkatataxai]
[v.l. [Greek: suntaxai]] [Greek: tais hermeneiais, diabebaioumenos huper
auton aletheian, k.t.l.] This same reference will hold for all the
notices from Eusebius which are quoted in this article, unless otherwise
stated.

[144:1] See above, p. 96 sq.

[145:1] _Haer._ iv. 27. 1, 3; iv. 30. 1; iv. 31. 1; v. 5. 1; v. 33. 3;
v. 36. 1, 2.

[145:2] _Ref. Haer._ vi. 42, 55, 'The blessed elder Irenaeus.' Clement
of Alexandria uses the same phrase of Pantaenus; Euseb. _H.E._ vi. 14.

[145:3] _H.E._ iii. 3; v. 8; vi. 13.

[145:4] Heb. xi. 2.

[146:1] Weiffenbach _Das Papias-Fragment_ (Giessen, 1874) has advocated
at great length the view that Papias uses the term as a title of office
throughout, p. 34 sq; but he has not succeeded in convincing subsequent
writers. His conclusions are opposed by Hilgenfeld _Papias von
Hierapolis_ p. 245 sq (in his _Zeitschrift_, 1875), and by Leimbach _Das
Papias-Fragment_ p. 63 sq. Weiffenbach supposes that the elders are
distinguished from the Apostles and personal disciples whose sayings
Papias sets himself to collect. This view demands such a violent
wresting of the grammatical connection in the passage of _Papias_ that
it is not likely to find much favour.

[146:2] In illustration of this use, it may be mentioned that in the
Letter of the Gallican Churches (Euseb. _H.E._ v. 1) the term is applied
to the Zacharias of Luke i. 5 sq.

[146:3] 1 Tim. v. 1, 2, 17, 19.