\ 
 
 ^ 
 
/ /; 2 
 
 ALUMNI LIBRARY, 
 THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 
 Casey 
 D Book, 
 
 Division. 
 
 Section. 
 No. 
 
 
''CAEM INQUIRY 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 THE PERSON OF CHRIST; 
 
 TO WHICH AKE ANNEXED 
 
 A BRIEF REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY 
 
 BETWEEN BISHOP IIORSLEY AND 
 
 DR. PRIESTLEY, 
 
 AND 
 
 A SUMMARY OF THE VARIOUS OPINIONS 
 
 ENTERTAINED BY CHRISTIANS 
 
 UPON THIS SUBJECT. 
 
 BY THOMAS BELSHAM, 
 
 MINISTER OF THE CHAFEJ. IN ESSEX STREET, 
 
 "Quid erffo Albenis Pt Hierosolymis ? quid AcaJemise et Ecclesise ? Videriut 
 
 qui stoicuin Platoiiirum et dialecticum clirislianismum prolulerunt. Ncbis, curiotitate 
 opus uoii est post Christum Jesum, uec iiiquisilioue post evaiigelium." 
 
 Tertutlian, 
 I 
 
 THE SECOND EDITION, CORRECTED. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PRINTED FOR THE UNITARIAN SGClETyj 
 AND SOLD BY ROWLAND HUNTER, SUCCESSOR TO J. JOHNSON,, 
 
 ST, Paul's churchyafd; and david eaton,187^ holeokn. 
 1817. 
 
I 
 
 Printed hj R. and A. Taylor^ Shoe-Lane, London. 
 
TO THE REVEREND MINISTERS, 
 
 FORMERLY PUPILS OF THE AUIHOR, 
 
 MANY OF WHOM NOW OCCUPY STATIONS OF EMINENCE 
 
 IN Ti'IE NONCONFORMIST CHURCHES, 
 
 FOR THE DIRECTION OF WHOSE STUDIES 
 
 THIS INGLUIKY WAS ORIGINALLY INSTITUTED, 
 
 AND 
 
 TO THE YOUTH OF THE CONGREGATIONS 
 FIRST OF HACKNEY, AND AFTERWARDS OF ESSEX STREET, 
 
 FOR WHOSE INSTRUCTION 
 THE SUBJECT WAS DISCUSSED IN A MORE FAMILIAR FORM, 
 
 THIS TREATISE 
 IS RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED 
 
 BY THEIR FAITHFUL 
 AND AFFECTIONATE SERVANT, 
 
 THE AUTHOR. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 X o those who interest themselves in the subject 
 of this Inquiry, the order pursued in the follow- 
 ing investigation may appear not altogether na- 
 tural ; and the Analytic method might perhaps 
 be thought preferable to the Synthetic. And that 
 method would unquestionably have been adopt- 
 ed, had the original design with which this Inqui- 
 ry was instituted been to disprove the commonly- 
 received doctrine concerning the deity of Jesus 
 Christ. 
 
 But the truth is, that at the time when this 
 Inquiry was begun the author was himself a firm 
 believer in the pre-existence of Christ ; and was 
 fully persuaded that the spirit which animated 
 the body of Christ was the eternal Logos asserted 
 by Dr. Clarke ; nor had he then altogether re- 
 nounced the plausible hypothesis of Dr. T. Bur- 
 net and Dr. Doddridge, that the Son is God by 
 the indwelling deity of the Father. He had been 
 at that time, A. D. 1781, recently appointed to 
 the Theological chair in Mr. Coward's Academy 
 at Daventry, and Unitarianism being then " the 
 great controversy of the age," he was dissatisfied 
 with the slight notice taken of this controversy 
 
 in 
 
VI PREFACE. 
 
 in Dr. Doddridge's Lectures, which was the text- 
 book of the Institution, and regarded it as an im- 
 perative professional duty to enter more fully 
 into this important discussion, which had of late 
 risen into increased celebrity, partly, by the con- 
 troversial writings of Dr. Priestley, but chiefly, 
 by the meritorious sacrifice which the venerable 
 Theophilus Lindsey had made not many years 
 before to the dictates of an enlightened conscience, 
 and by the new and singular phsenomenon of a 
 flourishing congregation of Christians, avowedly 
 Unitarian, having been formed under his au- 
 spices in Essex Street. 
 
 Now the plan, which to the author appeared 
 most eligible for conducting the minds of his pu- 
 pils in this Inquiry, was to form a collection of 
 all the texts in the New Testament which in any 
 way related to the person of Christ, and to ar- 
 range them under different heads, beginning with 
 simple pre-existence, and advancing through the 
 various intermediate steps to the doctrine of the 
 proper deity of Christ. Under each text was 
 introduced the comment of one or more learned 
 and approved Trinitarian, Arian, or Unitarian 
 expositors, in the commentator's own words, and 
 in general without any additional, or at least doc- 
 trinal, comment of the compiler's own, as it was 
 his wish to leave the texts thus expounded to make 
 
 their 
 
PREFACE. Vll 
 
 their proper impression upon the minds of his 
 pupils. Nor did he at that time entertain a doubt, 
 that in the judgement of every serious and im- 
 partial inquirer, the result would be a clear dis- 
 cernment of what he then thought the superficial 
 texture of the Unitarian arguments, and a con- 
 firmed conviction of the pre-existence, and supe- 
 rior nature and dignity, if not of the proper deity, 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 The first consequence of this mode of conduct- 
 ing the lectures was to himself very unexpected, 
 and not a little painful and mortifying. Many 
 of his pupils, and among those some of the best ta- 
 lents, the closest application, and the most serious 
 dispositions, who had also been educated in all the 
 habits and prepossessions of Trinitarian doctrine* 
 to his great surprise became Unitarians. This, 
 however, he was disposed to attribute to the fickle- 
 ness of youth, and to the caprice of fashion. As 
 to himself, though he was at first struck with the 
 small number of passages which he could disco- 
 ver, which explicitly taught the doctrine of our 
 Lord's pre-existence, yet, being satisfied in his 
 judgement that they were decisive upon the ques- 
 tion, it was some time before the arguments of 
 the Unitarians made any considerable impression 
 upon his mind : and his early opinions were too 
 deeply rooted, and too intimately associated with 
 
 the 
 
Vlll PREFACE. 
 
 the whole system of his religious feelings, to be 
 easily abandoned. But being under the necessi- 
 ty of reviewing the subject from year to year, 
 and at every review finding himself obliged to 
 give up some posts as untenable, which were 
 once deemed impregnable, he was at last compel- 
 led, though with great reluctance, to an entire 
 surrender of the faith in which he had been edu- 
 cated concerning the person of Christ, and to the 
 adoption of those opinions to which he certainly 
 had no previous attachment, and the erroneous- 
 ness of which he had once flattered himself he 
 should easily have detected. Then, at length, he 
 regarded it as his duty to speak out : and being 
 no longer able to fulfill the design of his appoint- 
 ment, he resigned his ofiice in January 1789 into 
 the hands of Mr. Coward's Trustees, took leave 
 of an affectionate congregation, and of a flourish- 
 ing seminary of estimable pupils, and retired with 
 no other expectation or prospect at the time, but 
 that of passing the remainder of life in obscurity 
 and silence. 
 
 Divine providence however ordained otherwise: 
 and having, after a previous connexion with the 
 New College, been chosen to succeed Dr. Priest- 
 ley in the congregation at Hackney, in the year 
 1794, he drew up the Lectures in a more popular 
 form, still, however, retaining the original ar- 
 rangement. 
 
PREFACE. IX 
 
 raiigement, and delivered them to tlie young peo- 
 ple of that congregation, and afterwards to those 
 who attended the chapel in Essex Street, to which 
 he was appointed in the spring of 1805. Many 
 in both these respectable societies expressed a de- 
 sire of seeing them in print ; with which request 
 the author was the rather induced to comply, 
 hoping that a review of the principal arguments 
 upon the question might revive and confirm the 
 impression made at the time. When, however, 
 he came to revise the Lectures for the press, ic 
 occurred to him that the mere popular form into 
 which the Lectures had been cast, in order to be 
 delivered to admixed audience, would hardly do 
 justice to the subject ; while that form in which 
 they had been originally compiled for the use of 
 professed theological students, would be too volu- 
 minous, and not adapted for common readers. 
 He has therefore been at the trouble of recompo- 
 sing the work, and of reducing it to such a form 
 as he trusts will be generally intelligible to the 
 unlearned reader, and not wholly unacceptable 
 to the learned. Such as it is, he commends it to 
 the candour of his readers and to the divine bless- 
 ing. In the testimony of his conscience to the 
 sincerity and impartiality with which he has him- 
 self sought after truth, and in the fidelity with 
 which he has endeavoured to communicate infor- 
 mation 
 
X PREFACE. 
 
 mation to others, the author rests perfectly satisfied* 
 In what degree, and to what extent, his humble ef- 
 forts may be honoured, as the means of contri- 
 buting to the improvement of his fellow- crea- 
 tures in knowledge and virtue, he willingly leaves 
 to the Supreme Arbiter of events. 
 
 P. S. At the close of the First Part of this In- 
 quiry it has been thought advisable to add a brief 
 abstract of the controversy between Dr. Horsley 
 and Dr. Priestley, concerning the doctrine of the 
 primitive church, which it is hoped will at any 
 rate modify the triumphant language which some 
 zealots have lately used upon this subject ; at least, 
 if they have any regard to their literary or theo- 
 logical reputation, and do not altogether pre- 
 sume upon the ignorance and prejudices of their 
 readers. 
 
 Hackney, March 2% 1811. 
 
 ADVER- 
 
ADVERTISEMENT 
 
 TO 
 
 THE SECOND EDITION. 
 
 1 HE Unitarian Society has done this Trea- 
 tise the honour of admitting it into their Cata- 
 logue ; and has pubUshed a large impression of a 
 second edition of the Calm Inquiry in a cheaper 
 form, in order to facilitate and extend its cir- 
 culation. The Author has revised the work 
 with care, and has introduced some corrections 
 which were suggested by his own reflections, or 
 by the remarks, friendly or unfriendly, of others. 
 The variations, however, from the first edition of 
 the work are neither numerous nor very mate- 
 rial. The Author's original design was briefly, 
 but fairly and candidly, to state the sentiments 
 and the arguments of different parties in the im- 
 portant discussion concerning the person of Christ : 
 and he is not av> are that he has in any considerable 
 degree failed of his purpose. The calm and tem- 
 perate discussion of questions of high importance, 
 he has found by experience to be the pleasantest 
 and the most successful means of investigating 
 
 truth. 
 
Xll ADVERTISEMENT. 
 
 truth. And he is pleased to find that the method 
 which he has pursued has been sanctioned by the 
 approbation of learned and judicious writers, 
 whose conclusions have not always coincided 
 with his own. If this work should contribute 
 in any degree, however inconsiderable, to promote 
 a spirit of liberal and candid discussion among 
 persons of different persuasions upon controvert- 
 ed points, it will so far fulril the primary intention 
 and the best wishes of its author. 
 
 T. B. 
 
 Essex House, Novemher l6, 1816. 
 
 TABLE 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 Question stated, p. J . Burden of proof lies upon those who main- 
 tain the pre-existence or divinity of Christ, p. 2. Unitarian doctrine 
 needs no positive proof, ibid. Preliminary observations, ibid. Pro- 
 found learning not necessary in a mere question of fact, p. 4. 
 
 PART THE FIRST. 
 General Distribution of the Subject, p. 5. 
 SECTION I. 
 
 Whether the Jews expected a pre-existent Messiah, p. 7. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 Argument from the supposed miraculous Conception of Jesus. 
 The narratives in Matthew and Luke of doubtful authority, p. 8. 
 The fact, if proved, would not infer the pre-existence of Jesus^ p. g. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 Texts which are conceived to express in the most direct and un- 
 equivocal Terms the Pre-existence of Jesus Christ. 
 
 Six out of the eight writers of the New Testament say little or 
 nothing of the pre-existence of Christ, p. 10 — not even the historians 
 of his life and ministry, p. 11 — not even Luke himself, who writes 
 the history of the apostles' preaching and doctrine for upwards of 
 thirty years, iliid. How this silence is accounted for by the ancients, 
 ibid. John, a figurative and mystical writer, p. 12. The pre-ex- 
 istence of Christ seldom alluded to in the larger epistles of Paul, ibid. 
 Texts in favour of this doctrine very few in proportion ; but their 
 frequent citation makes them appear to be numerous and prominent, 
 p. 13. 
 
 L John i. 1 — 14, examined, p. 14. Different hypotheses con- 
 cerning the Logos, ibid. The interpretation of Grotius adopted by 
 many modern Unitarians proposed and examined, p. 15, Thar of the 
 Pohsh Socinians*tated and defended, p. 17- — H. John i. 15, examined, 
 p. 26. Mr. Cappe's explanation approved, ibid. — III. John iii. 13, 
 
 examined. 
 
xiv TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 examined, p. 20, The local ascent of Christ into heaven after 
 his baptism maintained by the Polish Socinians, p. IJ. This hypo- 
 thesis modified by Mr. John Palmer, Hid. Explanation of Bishop 
 Pearce and Archbishop Newcome, p. 29. * To ascend into heaven' 
 is to be acquainted with the purpose and will of God, Wul. Proved 
 by Grotius, Beza, Whitby, Doddridge, and, above all, by Raphelius, 
 ih'id. note. ' To come down from heaven,' as the correlate phrase, 
 properly signifies a commission to reveal the divine will, p. 31. Re- 
 flections upon this explanation of the text, p. 36. — IV. John iii. 31, 
 explained. Hid. — V. John vi. 25— C2 expounded, p. 37. The de- 
 sign of Jesus was to drive from his society those who followed him 
 with selfish and secular views, p. 38. They first demand a sign from 
 heaven like the manna. Hid. Jesus promises true bread from heaven, 
 meaning his doctrine, p. 39. The Jews, understanding him literally, 
 eac^erly desire this heavenly bread, ibid, Jesus declares that he is him- 
 self the bread from heaven, ibid. The Jews, knowing his extraction, are 
 off'ended at his pretensions to a heavenly descent, p. 40. Jesus persists in 
 declaring that he is the bread which they must actually eat to obtain im- 
 mortality, ibid. The Jews being still more confounded and offended. 
 Hid, — Jesus insists in still stronger language upon the absolute neces- 
 sity of eating his flesh and drinking his blood, p. 41. The Jews seem 
 to suspect him of insanity, p. 42 3 — and Jesus having further intimated, 
 as they conceived, that after his body had been thus consumed they 
 should see him again return to heaven, his selfish followers, shocked 
 at the apparent absurdity of his doctrine, abandon his society, ibid. Je- 
 sus, in conclusion, declares that his whole discourse is to be taken figu- 
 ratively and not literally, p. 45. — VI. John viii.42, explained, p. 45. 
 — VII. John viii. 58, explained, p. 46. Explanations of Guyse, Sherlock, 
 and Doddridge^ p.47.0riginof the popular mistake of the words I AM, 
 p. 48. Arian interpretation, p. 49. Remarks of Dr. Clarke, Bishop 
 Pearce, Dr. Harwood, and Dr Price, p. 50. Singular interpretation 
 proposed by the Polish Socinians, and revived in the Theological Repo- 
 sitory, p. 53. Interpretation commonly received by the Unitarians, p, 55 j 
 — which best suits the connexion, p. 56; — and is justified by the lan- 
 guage both of the Old Testament, p. 57, — and of the New, p. 58. 
 Supported by Grotius, Beza, Hammond, Lardner, Cardale, Lindsey, 
 Wakefield, Simpson, Src, p. 62. Reasons for insisting so much at large 
 upon this celebrated text, p. 66.— VIII. John xiii. 3, explained, p. 67. 
 — IX. John xvi. 28, explained, ibid. — X.John xvii. 5, explained, 
 p. 68. Trinitarian interpretation, ibid. Arian interpretation, ibid. 
 Triumphant language of the Arians, p. 69. Unitarian interpretation, 
 p. 70. Error of expositors concerning the nature of that glory for 
 which Jesus prayed, p. 71. This prayer explained, ibid. The pro- 
 
 lepsis 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. xv 
 
 lepsls justified, p. 72. Mr. Lindsey the only expositor who has given 
 the true meaning of our Saviour's petition, p.%7-4. The proleptical 
 interpretation supported by Grotius, by Wolzogenius from Augustin, 
 by Le Cierc, Lardner, and others, ibid. note. — XI, John xvii. 24, 
 explained, p. y5. Strange interpretation of Dr. Guyse and Dr. Dod- 
 dridge, il-id. note. Rational comni nt of Calvin and Campbell, ibid. 
 — XII. 1 Cor. XV. 47, explained, p. "//. Singular interpretation of 
 Crellius and the old Socinians, p. 78, note. Vulgate reading probably 
 true, p 78. — XIII. 2 Cor. viii. 9, explained, i/i(Z. No allusion to our 
 Lord's pre-existence, ibid. Judiciously omitted by Dr. Clarke, 
 p, 7Q. Triumphant language of Arians and Trinitarians, ibid. Riches 
 and poverty of Christ simultaneous events, p. 80. In what sense 
 Christ was both rich and poor, p. 81. — XIV. Eph. iv. 9, explained, 
 p. 82 — XV. Philipp. ii. 5 — p, explained, ibid. Form of God inter- 
 preted by Trinitarians, p. 83 ; — by Arians, ibid. ; — high language of 
 the Arians, p. 84 Interpretation of Grotius and the Unitarians, p, 85 ; 
 — equahvith God explained, p, 86. Robbery understood in an active 
 sense by Calvin, Reza, Doddridge, and others, p. 87 j — in a passive 
 sense bv Vatablus, Clarke, Wakefield, and the ancients. Hid. Being 
 in the likeness of men no proof that he was not a human being, p. 91. 
 Recapitulation, p. 92. — XVI. Col. i. 15, e::plained, p. 94. First- 
 born how understood by Trinitarians, ibid.; by Dr. Clarke, ibid.; — by 
 Arians, p. 95 j — by Grotius and the Unitarians, zVic^. — XVII. Col. 
 i. 17, explained, p. 96.— XVIII. Rev. iii. ]4, explained, ibid. Ge- 
 neral reflections, p. 97. 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 Texts vvhichj if they do not directly assert the Pre-existence of 
 Christ, are thought to be most easily explained by that Hy- 
 pothesis. 
 
 Recapitulation of phrases already explained, p. 98. Explanation of 
 John vi. 46, ibid. John viii. 14, p. 99 ; — ver. 23, ibid. ; — ver. 38, ibid. 
 John xiv. 28, ibid. Trinitarian solutions of the Father's superiority, 
 ibid. This text the strong hold of Arianism, p. 100. Unitarian in- 
 terpretation, ibid. Explanation of John xviii, 37, p. 101. Rom. x. Q, 
 ibid. 1 Cor. X. Q, ibid. 1 Cor, x. 4, p. 102. Gal. i. 1, ibid. Heb. 
 ji. 14, ibid. This text does not prove the assumption of human na- 
 ture to be a voluntary act, p, I59. Heb. vii. 3, p. 103. Imaginary 
 analogy between Christ and Melchisedec, ibid. Heb. xi 26, ibid. 
 The reproach of Christ explained, ibid. Heb. xii. 25, 26, p. 104. 
 Heb, xiii. 8, p. 105. 1 Pet, i, 11, ibid. 1 Pet. iii. I9, 20, ibid. 
 ' Spiiits in prison* are the heathen world, p. IO6. 1 John i. 1, 2, 
 p. 107 j— parallel to John i, i — 14, ibid, l John iv. 2, p. 108.—' to 
 
 come 
 
xvi TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 come in the flesh' is to be a real man, p. 108. Rev. xxii- l6, iMd, The 
 texts in this Section generally given up by Arian and Trinitarian wri- 
 ters, p. 109. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 Attributes supposed to be ascribed to Christ which infer Pre- 
 existence and Divinity. 
 Eternity, p, 110. Immutability, ibid. Power to lay down and re- 
 sume his life, p. 111. Irresistible power, p. 113. Omnipresence, 
 p. 114. Omniscience, p. 115. Remarks, p, 118. Christ alone 
 knows, and is known by,, the Father, p. II9. Free from sin, p. 121. 
 Remarks, p. 122, The perfect character of Christ proves the truth 
 of the evangelical history, idid. 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 Alleged Superiority of Christ to Angels. 
 Preliminary remarks, p. 123. Various senses in which the word 
 angel is used in the Scriptures, ibid. Existence of angels as a superior 
 order of beings not a doctrine of revelation, nor to be traced in any 
 book previously to the Babylonian captivity, p. 125. The senses in 
 which Christ is represented as superior to angels, ibid. ; — as a mes- 
 senger of God, ibid. ; — as a judge, ibid. ; — and as the head of a new 
 and superior dispensation, p. 126. Texts cited, p. 127. Mark xiii. 32, 
 triumphantly appealed to by the Arians, p. 128. How explained 
 by Trinitarians, iZiif/. Texts from the Epistles, p. 1 2g. Heb chap. i. 
 explained, p. 131. Angels in this chapter uniformly signifies former 
 prophets and messengers of God, ibid. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 Titles and Characters attributed, or thought to be attributed, to 
 
 Christ, which are supposed to imply Superiority of Nature. 
 
 I. Jehovah, p. 136. This title not given to Christ in the New 
 Testament, ibid. — 11. God, p.l37. Mr. Lindsey and others deny 
 that this title is ever given to Christ, ibid. ' Partakers of a divine 
 nature,' a title applied to christians, but not to Christ, p. 138, Matt. 
 i. 23, Immanuel, does not prove that Christ is God, ibid. Luke i. 
 16, 17, if genuine, not applied to Christ, p. 139. John i. 1, ibid. 
 John X. 33, Christ denies that he calls himself God, though, as a pro- 
 phet, he might assume the title, p. 140. John xx. 28, various inter- 
 pretations of the exclamation of Thomas, ibid. Acts xx. 28, * Blood 
 of God,' Dr. Doddridge thinks the phrase inspired, p. 141. Athana- 
 gius imputes it to the Arians, ibid.; — certainly spurious, ibid. Rom. 
 ix. 5, ' God over all* not necessarily applicable to Christ, p. 222. " 
 31ichtingius's very plausible conjecture, p. 142. 1 Tim. iW 16, ' God 
 
 manifest 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS, xvli 
 
 mnnifest in the flesh,' p. 144 ; — diflerent readings of the original. Hid. 
 — the text never appealed to in the early stage of the Arian contro- 
 versy, il'id. Tit. ii. 13, p. 146. Contrary to the tenor of Scripture 
 to speak of Christ as ' the great God,' Hid. ITcb. i. 8, ' God is thy 
 tlirone' the true sense of the text, p. 147. 2 Pet. i. 1, ' God' means 
 ' the Father,' p. 148. 1 John ill. lO, the word ' God' an interpolation. 
 Hid. 1 John V. 20, the pronoun this clearly refers to a remote ante- 
 cedent, ibid, otherwise Jesus Christ might be proved to be antichrist, 
 p. 149. Remarks, Hid. — III. Christ O/ze with God p. 150; as 
 his disciples are one with him, ibid. 1 John v. ", proved an interpo- 
 lation, p. 151, — omitted in the best modern editions, p. 153; — and 
 omitted or marked as doubtful in the earlier English versions, p. 154, 
 Arguments in favour of the text stated and answered, ibid. Gibbon's 
 account correct, p. 156, note. First cited, and probably forged, by 
 Vigilius Tapsensis, p, 16O. — IV. Equal with God, p. I6I.— V. 
 Fulness of Godhead, ibid.—Yl. The Son of God, p. lG3. The 
 Son, p. 164. God his o7i'n Father, ibid. The first-born, i. e. the 
 first who rose to immortal life, ibid. The beloved Son, p. l65 ; — 
 i. e. chosen to peculiar privileges, ibid. Only begotten Son, ibid, j 
 — a phrase peculiar to John, p. 166. Used by him where the other 
 evangelists use beloved, ibid. The Son of God equivalent to the 
 Messiah, p. 167.— VII. Christ the Image of God, p. l6g. The ef- 
 fulgent ray of his glory, ibid. No mysterious emanation of the Son 
 intended by this metaphor, ibid. — VIII. Lord of glory, p. 171 — 
 
 IX. Alpha and Omega, ibid. Rev. i. 10, 11, Dr. Doddridge lays 
 great stress upon a clause now known to be spurious, p. 172, note. — 
 
 X. Lord of all, p. ] 73. The Ron and the Lord of David, ibid. — XL 
 Prince or Leader of life, p. 174. — XII. Fills all in all, p. 175, 
 £ph, i. 22, Christ the head supplies his body, the church, with all 
 things needful, ibid. — XIII. A Saviour or Deliverer, p. 176. — XIV, 
 King of kings, and Lord of lords, ibid. 
 
 SECTION VIII. 
 
 Collection of Passages which are supposed to teach that Christ 
 is the Maker and Preserver of all Things. 
 John i. 3, p. 177. Ver. 10, p. 178. 1 Cor. viii. 6, the new dis- 
 pensation intended, ibid. Eph. iii. 9, the woids 'by Jesus Christ* 
 an interpolation, ibid. Col. i. 15 — 18, explained, p. 179. Unitarian 
 interpretation censured by Arians and Trinitarians, ibid. Christ ne- 
 ver represented as creator of natural objects, ibid. The apostle details 
 Awt things, but states of things, ibid, j — creation sometimes signifies 
 only a chang* of state, p. 181; — things ofteu used for person s, p. 182j 
 — heaven and ear/A sometimes express political and moral distinctions, 
 
 b p. 183. 
 
XTiii TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 p, 183. When heaven is used to express a moral dispensation, the 
 supposed orders of the celestial hierarchy express the ministers and 
 officers of that dispensation, ihid. The passage easily explained, upon 
 these principles, p. 185. Heb. i. 2, 3, explained, ibid. The word 
 ajwv never signifies 'worlds/ but 'ages,' p. 186. Dr. Sykes's interpre- 
 tation, ibid. That of Slichtingius and the old Socinians, p. 187r Gro- 
 tius's interpretation proposed and defended, ibid. Heb. i. JO, addressed 
 to the Father, p. 1 89. Heb. iii. 4, irrelevant to the sxibject, ihid^ 
 Ilev.iii. 14, Christ theheadandchief of the new creation, ibid. Remarks, 
 p. 190. Ifithadbeeu the design of thesacred writers toteachthatChrist 
 was the Creator of all things, it would have been easy to have expressed 
 the doctrine clearly and nnambigaously, p. I9I . Had the doctrine been 
 true, it could- not have been omitted by the historians of his life an4 
 
 ministry, ihid. 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 Whether Jesus Christ vyas the Medium of the Divine Dispensa- 
 tions to the Patriarchs, and to the Hebrew Nation, and whe- 
 ther he ever appeared under the Name and Character of Je-? 
 hovah. 
 
 This doctrine probably the invention of Justin Martyr, p. 193, note. 
 The doctrine of two Jehovahs plainly inconsistent with the Jewish 
 Scriptures, ibid. Arguments examined and confuted, p. ig4. He- 
 brew idiom mistaken, ibid. Jehovah, and the Angel of Jehovah, the 
 same person, p. 10(5. Chaldee paraphrasts give no countenance to 
 the doctrine of two Jehovahs, p. 198. No proof that the Jehovahr 
 angel animated the body of Christ, p. I99. 
 
 SECTION X. 
 
 The present Exaltatiori of Christ, the high Offices which he now 
 sustains, or to which he is to be appointed hereafter, are said 
 to be incompatible with tlic Supposition of his proper and sim- 
 ple Humanity. 
 
 I. His universal government, p. 202. Matt, xxviii. IS, considered, 
 {bid. How understood by Trinitarians and Arians, ibid. Strange 
 hypothesis of the Polish Socinians concerning the universal govern- 
 ment of Christ, p. 203. Unitariaa interpretation, p. 204. Dr. Priest- 
 ley understands it of some personal dignity, ibid. Mr Lindsey, 
 more correctly, of the riioral influence of the Gospel, p. 205. 
 
 ir. Christ personally present with his disciples, p. 207. Matt, 
 xxviii. 20, considered, ibid. The promise only extends to the apo- 
 stolic age, p. 209. Facts accounted for by this interpretation, ibid. 
 Intercession of Christ explained, p. 210. In what sense Christ for- 
 gives sin, p. 211 . ' Sinner ' often equivalent to ' Heathen,' and does 
 not always imply guilt, p. 212. 
 
 III. Christ 
 
TABLE OP CONTENTS. XlS^ 
 
 \tt. Christ appointed to raise the dead, p. 213. 1 Cor. xv. 22, 
 proveis the proper humanity of Christ, il'id. Mr. Tyrwhit's judicious 
 observations. Hid. Christ raises the dead by his Fatlier's power, 
 p. 214. 
 
 IV. Christ ;ippointed to the office of universal judge, p. 215. Matt. 
 XXV. 31, &c. understood, by some, of the destruction of Jerusalem, 
 il'id. Many texts assert the judicial office of Christ, p. 216. &c. Hence 
 many reflecting persons have inferred his superior nature, p. 218. But 
 the Scriptures attribute this office to him as a Man, p. 2 19. They 
 represent the apostles and all christians as assessors with Christ in this 
 offics, ibid. Events often different from what the language of pro- 
 phecy leads to expect, p. 220. Prophets said to perform what they 
 only predict, p. 221 . This principle may perhaps apply to the judge- 
 ment of the world by Jesus Christ, ibid. ; — countenanced by our Lord's 
 expressions> John .\ii. 48, p. 222. Advantages of this hypothesis, 
 p. 223. 
 
 SECTION XL 
 
 Concerning the Worship of Jesus Christ. 
 Religious worship and idolatry defined, p. 224. Christian Idolatry 
 <3istini;uished from Heathen, p. 225. Socinian worship of Christ ex- 
 ploded, ibid. Modern Arians abandon the worship of Christ, and 
 hence claim the title of Unitarians, ibid. Christ said to be the ob- 
 ject of religious regard, p. 22(3; — of faith, ibid. ; — of love, p. 22/. 
 Love to Christ not a personal affection, p. 228. Committing the care 
 of the soul to Christ, p. 230. Great mistake of Dr. Doddridge and 
 others upon this subject, ibid. Christians live to Christ, p. 231. Ex- 
 Tenial homage paid to Christ while on earth, ibid, j — this no more 
 than civil respect, ibid. John v. 23, explained, p. 232. Baptism to be 
 administered into the name of Christ, ibid. Form of baptism no proof 
 of Christ's equality or unity with the Father, ibid. Angels required 
 to worship Christ, p. 234. Every knee to bow at his name, ibid. 
 Adjuration by him, ibid. Appealed to as a witness, p. 235. Chris- 
 tians described as those who invoke his name, ibid. This phrase ex- 
 plained, ibid. Dependance on his direction and blessing, p. 236. 
 Doxologies addressed to Christ, p. 236. Thanksgivings to him, ibid- 
 Prayer to Christ, p. 239. Devout wishes of blessings from him, 
 p. 240 J — not to be confounded with prayers, ibid. 
 
 SECTION XIL 
 
 Direct Arguments for the proper Humanity of Jesus Christ. 
 
 Not necessary to the validity of the Unitarian doctrine, p. 243. 
 
 — 1. The total silence of three evangelists, p. 244. How accounted 
 
 for by Athanasius, Chrysostom, and others, ibid, note.— 2. Pre-exist- 
 
 b 2 cnce. 
 
XX TABLE OF CONTENTS. 
 
 cnce and divinity of Christ not expressly taught in the New Testa- 
 ment, p. 245.-3. Great difficulties upon the supposition that this 
 fact was revealed during our Lord's personal ministry, p. 2-1/. Still 
 greater difficulties upon the supposition that it was not then known, 
 p. 248.-4. Christians not charged with polytheism by the Jews in 
 the apostolic age, ibid. — 5. Christ in the most unqualified language 
 styled a Man after his ascension, p. 24g. An angel incarcerated in a 
 human body not properly a man, p. 250. — 0'. Jesus often calls him- 
 self the Son of Man, ibid. Remarks upon this phrase, p, 251.— /. 
 Christ appeared as a man, with all the incidents and infirmities of hu- 
 man nature, and was universally regarded as such by his contempo- 
 raries, p. 252. — 8. The writer to the Hebrews asserts and argues that 
 he was a mere man, and could not be a being of superior nature, 
 p. 253. 
 
 p. The great body of primitive christians for the two first centuries 
 and upwards were believers in the simple humanity of Jesus Christ, 
 p. 255. This fact of high importance, and fully established by Dr. 
 Priestley, p. 256. The proper humanity of Christ must be the first 
 impression upon the primitive converts, ibid. ; — and must have con- 
 tinued till John wrote his Gospel, p. 257. Nor is there any proof 
 that the writings of this evangelist produced any sudden change of 
 opinions on this subject, ibid. The Unitarians always maintained 
 that their doctrine was the prevailing belief till the time of Victor, 
 A. D. 200, p. 258. That the Jeuish christians were in general Uni- 
 tarians, is proved by their not being excommunicated, ibid.; — by the 
 concessions and the moderate language of Justin Martyr, p. 25c; ; — 
 by the direct testimony of Origen, p. 26"0 ; — confirmed by Eusebius, 
 ibid. No distinction upon this subject between Nazarenes and Ebio- 
 nites, p. 261. Dr. Horsley constrained to concede this point to Dr. 
 Priestley, ibid. note. No foundation for the hypothesis of an orthodox 
 Jewish church at ^lia, p. 202, 'Ihat the great body of Gentile chris- 
 tians were Unitarians, attested by Origen, p. 203 ; — and most expli- 
 citly by TertuUian, p. 26^. Dr. Horsley 's extraordinary method of 
 repelling TertuUian's testimony, p. 266. Testimony of Athanasius 
 to the Unitarianism of the Gentile church, p. 26S ; — and of Jerome^ 
 Hid. note. Conclusion, ibid. 
 
 APPENDLX TO SECT. XIL 
 
 Abstract of the Controversy between Dr. Horsley and Dr. Priest- 
 ley concerning the Existence of a Church of orthodox He- 
 brew Christians at /Elia. 
 
 Origen's assertion stated by Dr. P., p. 270j— contradicted by Dr.H., 
 wW charges Origen with wilful falsehood, and asserts the exist- 
 ence 
 
TABLE OF CONTENTS. xxi 
 
 ence of a Hebrew orthodox church at ^lia, a colony established by 
 Adrian after the demolition of Jerusalem, ibid. Dr. P. consults the 
 wrong reference, p. 272. Charges the archdeacon with making ad- 
 ditions to Mosheim, p. 2/3 ; — denies the existence of the Hebrew 
 church at iEliaj — and accuses Dr. H. of being a falsifier of history, 
 and defamer of the dead, p. 274. 
 
 The archdeacon resents the charge, p. 274 j — acknowledges that 
 he borrowed every thing from Mosheim, ibid.; — and retorts upon Dr. 
 P., ibid. Sets himself to prove the fact he had asserted in seven pro- 
 positions, p. 27.'3 ; — the three lirst acknowledged facts, but nothing 
 to the purpose, ibid.; — the three next are gratuitous and improbable 
 assumptions, p. 2/6, 3 — the seventh proposition argued from the tes- 
 timony of Jerome, p. 277. Dr. H.'s extraordinary mode of bring- 
 ing Jerome's testimony to bear upon the question, p. 27S. ; — acknow- 
 ledges that his argument rests chiefly upon his six propositions, which 
 only assuvie the fact to be proved, ibid. Dr. H.'s bold conclusion, 
 p. 274 ; — not warranted by his premises, ibid. 
 
 Dr. H. asserts the migration of the Jewish christians from Pella to 
 iElia in order to enjoy the immunities of Adrian's colony, p. 280 ; — 
 appeals to Epiphanius's testimony to the fiict, ibid.; — who mentions 
 the return of the christians after the war of Titus 60 years before, 
 p. 281. ; — the archdeacon deprecates chronological objections, ibid. ; 
 — these christians must have been fourscore years of age when they 
 returned to ^lia, p. 282. Aquila, surveyor of Adrian's works, con- 
 verted by them, bears testimony to .heir activity and zeal, ibid. An- 
 other chronological difficulty, ibid. Aqnila's conversion was before 
 Adrian's war broke out, ibid. Dr. H., now a bishop, complains of 
 the trouble his opponent gives him by his chronological objections, 
 p. 283 ; — believes that the Hebrew christians who abandoned the 
 Mosaic ritual were not banished by Adrian, ibid.; — but forgets to 
 provide for them in the interval between the destruction of Jerusalem 
 and the building of JKWa, ibid, note ; — or to reconcile this supposition 
 with the facts before alleged, as the foundation of his charge against 
 Origen, ibid. His lordship wishes to trust the church of -^lia to 
 herself against future attacks, p. 284. 
 
 Dr. P. maintains that his lordship's assumptions are contradicted 
 by the clearest facts, ibid. ; — laughs at his lordship's protest against 
 chronological objections, p. 285 ; — declares the church of Trinitarian 
 Jews to have fallen upon the head of its founder, ibid. ; — and gives 
 the bishop a spirited challenge to resume the controversy, iiic/. 5— 
 which his lordship prudently forbears to accept, ibid. ; — and both par- 
 ties retire equally well satisfied with the result, ibid. 
 
 NOTE 
 
xxii TABLE of CONTENTS. 
 
 NOTE TO THE APPENDIX. 
 Dr. Horsley triumphantly appeals to Barnabas's testimony to prove 
 the early orthodoxy of the Hebrew church, p. 2S6. Dr. Priestley's 
 reply, ibid. Jeremiah Jones's estimate of the value of Barnabas's 
 testimony, ibid. Dr. H., sensible of the weakness of his argument 
 from the church of JEWa, endeavours to bolster up his charge against 
 Origen by two citations from his Reply to Celsus, p. 287 j — both 
 charges unfounded and trifling, ibid. Dr. P"s. severe remark, p. 289. 
 Dr. H. misled by Mosheim : and having brought the charge, thought 
 himself bound to support it, ibid. note. Little reason for the Quar- 
 t-erly Reviewers to compliment Dr. H. upon his triumph, ibid. ; — or 
 to represent Theology as his forte, ibid. Strictures upon observations 
 relating to the Unitarians in a late Quarterly Review, ibid. Dr. H.'s 
 illiberal reflections upon Dr. P., p. 290. Dr. P.'s reply, ibid. 
 
 PART THE SECOND. 
 
 A Summary View of the various Opinions which have been en- 
 tertained concerning the Person of Christ ; with the Argu- 
 ments for, and Objections against, each. 
 
 Sect. L Proper Unitarian Scheme, p. 201 ; — the doctrine stated, 
 ibid. Reasons why they assume the title of Unitarians, p. 29tJ. 
 Arguments for the Unitarian doctrine, ibid. Objections urged, p. 299. 
 Reply, p. 302. Arlans, who believe Christ to be the Maker and 
 Governor of the world, not properly Unitarians, p. 308. — Sect. IL 
 The Socinian Scheme stated, p. 309. Objections against it, p. 31!. 
 — Sect. III. Low Arian Scheme, p. 313 ; -opposed, p. 314. — 
 Sect. IV. High Arian Scheme stated, p. 315. Argument in favour of 
 it, p. 318. Objections against it, p. 3 1 9. Objections aga'nst limited 
 Arianism, p. 321. Sect. V. Semi-Arian Scheme stated, p 322. 
 Arguments in its favour, p. 323. Objections, p. 324. — Sect. VI. 
 The Indwelling Scheme stated, p. 325. Arguments and objections, 
 p. 326. Sect. VII. Sabellian Scheme, p. 32/.— Sect. VIII. Swe- 
 denborgian Doctrine, p. 328.— Sect. IX. Tritheism, p. 330.— Sect. X. 
 Trinitarian Doctrine, ibid. Arguments in favour of the Deity 
 of Christ, p. 331. Objections, p. 332. — Hypothesis of the Realists, 
 p. 336i — of the Nominalists, p. 337- — Proper Athanasian Schen:;e, 
 p. 338. — Remarks, p. 339. — Remarks upon those who adopt Scrip- 
 ture language declining all explanation, p. 341. 
 
 TEXTS 
 
T ]^. X T S 
 
 COMMENTED UPON AND EXPLAINED. 
 
 MATTHEW. 
 Ch. Page 
 
 i. 23 13S 
 
 iii. 17 160 
 
 ix. 2 211 
 
 — 4 115 
 
 xi. 2;, ..35, lip, 164 
 xii. 16 . 165 
 
 — 25 115 
 
 Xiii. 40, 41 127 
 
 xvi. 27 127 
 
 xvii. .'5.. 165 
 
 xviii20 11-i 
 
 sxi. 23 32 
 
 xxii. 41—46.. . . 173 
 XXV. 31, &c. 128, 215 
 
 xxviii. 9 231 
 
 ., 17 Hid. 
 
 18.. 113, 202 
 
 10 232 
 
 T 20.. 115, 207 
 
 MARK. 
 
 i. 1 164, 167 
 
 ii. 7 21 1 
 
 r- 10, 11 ib'id. 
 
 viii. 33 12s 
 
 Xiii. 26, 27 Hid. 
 
 -. 32 ibid. 
 
 xvi. 12 f... 83 
 
 LUKE, 
 
 i. 16, 17 139 
 
 Hi. 27 167 
 
 iv. 41 ibid 
 
 V. 22 115 
 
 Tii. 39, 40 ... . ibid. 
 
 — 48 212 
 
 ix. 26 216 
 
 ^46,47 116 
 
 !E. 22 119 
 
 Ch. Page 
 
 xxii. 67 107 
 
 XJiiv. 52 231 
 
 JOHN, 
 i. 1—14 14, 130.1 f^5 
 177, 178 
 
 -15 26 
 
 -18 35, 165 
 
 -33,34 167 
 
 -50 ibid. 
 
 ii. 19—21 Ill 
 
 -24,25 115 
 
 iii. 12 44 
 
 — 13 26 
 
 — 16 . 165 
 
 — 18., ibid. 
 
 — 31 36 
 
 iv. 25 116 
 
 — 29 ibid. 
 
 V. 18 161, 164 
 
 -23 232 
 
 -26, 27 216 
 
 — 28,29 213 
 
 vi. 25—66 37 
 
 — 46 98 
 
 — 56 12 
 
 — 64 116 
 
 vii, 27 7 
 
 viii. 14 09 
 
 — 23 ibid. 
 
 38 ibid. 
 
 42 45 
 
 46 121 
 
 58 45 
 
 ix. 2 21 1 
 
 X. 17, IS Ill 
 
 -30 150 
 
 -33 140 
 
 >ii. 34 252 
 
 — 39 26, 136 
 
 — 47, 48 222 
 
 Ch. Page 
 
 xiii. 3 67 
 
 13 173 
 
 xiv. 7 247 
 
 — 9—11 120 
 
 13, 14 209 
 
 21 227 
 
 28 99 
 
 xvi. 28 Qj 
 
 28—30 116 
 
 xvii. 5 68 
 
 24 75 
 
 xviii. 33 206 
 
 37 101 
 
 XX. 23 211 
 
 — 28 140 
 
 — 31 \Q7 
 
 xxi. \7 117 
 
 ACTS. 
 
 i. 11 216 
 
 iii. 14 121 
 
 — 15. ..„ 174 
 
 V. 31. 174, 176, 231 
 vii. 52 121 
 
 — 59 239 
 
 ix. 14 235 
 
 X. 36 174 
 
 xvii. 31 217 
 
 XX. 28 141 
 
 ROMANS. 
 
 i.3,4 168 
 
 -7 242 
 
 viii 29 164 
 
 — 32 164 
 
 34 210 
 
 ix. 1 235 
 
 — 5 142 
 
 X. 6 101 
 
 — 9 226 
 
 xiv. 9 174 
 
XXlV 
 
 Texts commented upon and explained. 
 
 1 CORINTHIANS. 
 Ch. Page 
 
 i. 2 235 
 
 ii:8 J 71 
 
 viii. 6 17s 
 
 X. 4 102 
 
 -9 101 
 
 Nii. 10 119 
 
 ^v. 21 213, 2-19 
 
 — 24—27 206 
 
 — 28 16-^ 
 
 — A7 77 
 
 xvi. 22 227 
 
 2 CORINTHIANS. 
 
 jii. 16 109 
 
 iv. 4 ibid. 
 
 — 14 214 
 
 V. 14 231 
 
 — 21 121 
 
 viii, 9 78 
 
 xii. 8,9 240 
 
 xiii. 14 242 
 
 GALATIANS. 
 
 i. 1 102 
 
 iv. 14 130 
 
 EPHESIANS. 
 
 i. 20, 21 130 
 
 -22,23 175 
 
 iTi. 9 178 
 
 iv.,9 82 
 
 V. 19, 20 237 
 
 -30 12 
 
 PHILIPPIANS. 
 
 ii. 5— 9 82 
 
 -(3 1<51 
 
 — 10 234 
 
 -.19 236 
 
 ili. 21 113, 214 
 
 iv. 13 210 
 
 COLOSSI AN S. 
 
 i. 1—5—18 179 
 
 -15 94 
 
 -17 96 
 
 — 18 1(54 
 
 Ch. 
 ii. 3.. 
 
 -9-. 
 - 10. 
 
 Pa^e 
 
 161 
 
 131 
 
 iii. 10, 11 175 
 
 1 THES SALON'. 
 
 iv. 16 2i4 
 
 V. 27 234 
 
 2 THESSALON^ 
 
 i-7 131 
 
 ii, 10, 17 242 
 
 1 TIMOTHY. 
 
 i, 2 242 
 
 - 12 
 
 ii. 5 249 
 
 iii. 16 144 
 
 vi. 20 230 
 
 2 TIMOTHY, 
 i. 11, 12 230 
 
 - 14 ibid. 
 
 iv. 17, 18 236 
 
 TITUS, 
 ii. 13 146 
 
 HEBREWS. 
 
 i. 2, 3 185 
 
 -3 169 
 
 -6 165, 234 
 
 -4—9 131 
 
 - 8—10 189 
 
 -s 147 
 
 - 10 175 
 
 - 10—12 110 
 
 - 13, 14 133 
 
 ii. 2, 3 134 
 
 - 5—18 253 
 
 -10 175 
 
 -14 102 
 
 -18 210 
 
 iii. 3, 4 189 
 
 iv. 12, 13 118 
 
 vii. 3 103 
 
 - 26 121 
 
 - 28 164 
 
 xi. 3 17 
 
 Ch. Page 
 
 xi.26 103 
 
 xii. 2 17''> 
 
 — 25,26 104 
 
 xiii. 8 105 
 
 20, 21 230 
 
 JAMES. 
 
 ii. 1 171 
 
 v. 6 121 
 
 1 PETER. 
 
 i. 8 227 
 
 -11 105 
 
 ii. 21,22 121 
 
 iii. 18 122 
 
 — 19, 20 105 
 
 — 22 135 
 
 2 PETER. 
 
 i. 1— 14S 
 
 ,iii. 18 237 
 
 1 JOHN, 
 i. 1—5 17, 107 
 
 ui. 5. . 
 
 — 16. 
 iv. 2.. 
 
 — 9-- 
 V. 1 . . , 
 
 -7,8. 
 
 — 20. . 
 
 122 
 148 
 108 
 165 
 226 
 151 
 148 
 
 2 JOHN, 
 ver. 7 149 
 
 REVELATIONS. 
 
 i. 5 165 
 
 -5,6 237 
 
 -8 114, 171 
 
 -10,11....... 172 
 
 - 17, 18 idid. 
 
 ii. 2 117 
 
 -23 ibid. 
 
 iii. 10 122 
 
 — 14 96, 189 
 
 V. 8—14 238 
 
 xvii. 14 176 
 
 xxii. 13 173 
 
 16..,. 108, 135 
 
AN INQUIRY 
 
 INTO 
 
 THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE 
 
 CONCERNING 
 
 THE PERSON OF CHRIST. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 J. HREE principal hypotheses have been maintained con- 
 cerning the person of Jesus Christ. 1. That Jesus of 
 Nazareth is a proper human being, the greatest of all the 
 prophets of God. 2. That a pre-existent created spirit 
 of a higher or lower degree in a supposed celestial hierar- 
 chy animated the body of Jesus. 3. That the divine na- 
 ture, or a divine person, was so united to the human body 
 and soul of Jesus as to form one person, who is both truly 
 God, and truly man. 
 
 The first of these is the doctrine of the Unitarians ; the 
 second is that of the Arians ; and the third is that of the, 
 Trinitarians. 
 
 All Christians agree that Jesus of Nazareth was to out- 
 ward appearance a man like other men : and that though 
 he was an inspired prophet, who performed miracles, was 
 raised from the deady and ascended into heaven, he is not, 
 on these accounts solely, to be regarded as a being of 
 rank superior to the human race, but that separate and di- 
 rect evidence is necessary for the establishment of this 
 specific fact. 
 
 Hence it follows that, in this inquiry, the whole burthen 
 
 B of 
 
2 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 of proof lies upon those who assert the pre-existoice, the 
 original dignify, and the divinity of Jesns Christ. 
 
 If any one affirm that a being who has every appearance, 
 and every incident and quality of a man, is not a real man, 
 but a being of an order superior to mankind, it is incum- 
 bent upon him to prove his assertion. If he fail in his 
 proof, his hypothesis vanishes, and the person in question 
 must be regarded as a real man. 
 
 It is therefore by no means necessary for the Unitarian 
 to adduce proof of the proper simple humanity of Jesus 
 Christ. It would be equally reasonable to demand of the 
 Jews a demonstration of the proper humanity of Moses. 
 If the Arian or Trinifarian doctrines be not satisfactorily 
 proved by direct and specific evidence, the Unitarian doc- 
 trine must be received as true. For wfio is so unreason- 
 able as to require evidence to prove a man to be a man ? 
 
 In this controversy, therefore, the proper province of 
 the Arian and Trinitarian is to propose the evidence of 
 their respective hypotheses ; that is, to state those passages 
 of Scripture which they conceive to be conclusive in favour 
 of their doctrines. The sole coyicerii of the Unitarian 
 is to shoiu that these arguments are inconclusive : that the 
 passages in question are either of doubtful authenticity, or 
 misunderstood, or misapplied. 
 
 This is the precise state of the question. It is admitted 
 by all parties. It must be continually kept in view. 
 
 This view of the subject points out the true and only 
 proper method of conducting the argument. It is by pro- 
 posing and carefully examining the controverted texts, 
 lie who will not submit to this labour must be content to 
 remain ignorant, or to take his opinions upon trust. 
 
 The following observations may be of use to guide our 
 inquiries. 
 
 1 . If Jesus or nis apostles peremptorily and unequivo- 
 cally declare the doctrine of his pre-existence and original 
 
 dignity. 
 
INTRODUCTION. 3 
 
 dignity, their evidence must without hesitation be admitted. 
 They could not be mistaken. 
 
 2. Nevertheless, when a fact is contrary to the esta- 
 blished order of Nature, and the antecedent improbability 
 is very great, the direct evidence must be proportionably 
 strong. The doctrine of the pre-existence and high ori- 
 ginal powers of Christ ought not to depend upon a few 
 obscure, mystical, and ambiguous texts. 
 
 3. In examining the validity of an argument from Scrip- 
 ture, the first inquiry is, whether the text be genuine ; the 
 second is, to ascertain its true import, and the correctness 
 of its application. 
 
 4. In order to judge of the true sense of a disputed 
 text, it is necessary to consider the connexion in which it 
 stands ; the scope and design of the writer ; the customs 
 and modes of thinking which prevailed in the age and 
 country in which the author wrote ; his own turn of mind 
 and peculiar phraseology, and whether he means to be 
 understood literally or figuratively. Also, similar passages 
 and forms of expression must be compared with each 
 other, so that what is obscure and doubtful may be illus- 
 trated by what is clear and intelligible. 
 
 5. Impartial and sincere inquirers after truth must be 
 particularly upon their guard against what is called the 
 natural signification of words and phrases. The con- 
 nexion between words and ideas is perfectly arbitrary ; so 
 that the natural sense of a word to any person, means no- 
 thing more than the sense in which he has been accustom- 
 ed to understand it. But it is very possible that men who 
 lived two thousand years ago might annex very different 
 ideas to the same words and phrases ; so that the sense 
 which appears most foreign to us, might be most natural 
 to them. 
 
 6. It ought by all means to be remembered, that pro- 
 found learning and acute metaphysical subtilty are by no 
 
 B 2 means 
 
4 INTRODUCTION, 
 
 means necessary to settle the important question concern- 
 ing the person of Christ. The inquiry is into a plain mat- 
 ter of fact, which is to be determined Hke any other fact 
 by its specific evidence, the evidence of plain unequivocal 
 testimony ; for judging of vihich, no other qualifications 
 are requisite than a sound understanding and an honest 
 mind. Who can believe that the decision of the great 
 question whether Jesus of Nazareth is the true God, and 
 the Creator and Governor of the world, depends upon a 
 critical knowledge of the niceties of the Greek Article? 
 With equal reason might it be maintained, that no person 
 can know any thing of the History of Greece, who is not 
 perfect in the metres of the Greek dramatic writers^ 
 
 7. Inquiry to be useful must be impartial. The mind 
 must be kept open to conviction, and ready to follow evi- 
 dence whithersoever it leads ; to sacrifice prejudices the 
 most deeply rooted and the most fondly cherished, and to 
 embrace truths the most unexpected and unwelcome. 
 Truth must ultimately be favourable to virtue and to 
 happiness. 
 
 The subject is divided into Two Parts. The First con- 
 tains A Selection and Examination of those Passages in 
 the New Testament which have been alleged in favour of 
 the Pre-existence and original Dignity, Power, and Divi- 
 nity of Jesus Christ. The Second Part comprehends A 
 summary View of the various flypotheses which have been 
 formed concerning the Person of Christ, and of the Ar- 
 guments for and against each Hypothesis respectively. 
 
 ' W ho ever heard of a juryman being challenged because he was not 
 a good grammarian ? The incarnation of a God, the incarceration of 
 the Creator of the world in the body of a helpless puling infant, is a 
 fact, thecredit of which must rest, like that of all other facts, not up- 
 on grammatical subtilties, but upon evidence direct, presumptive, or 
 circumstantial, upon the validity of which every person of common sense 
 is competent to decide. 
 
 PARI 
 
PART THE FIRST. 
 
 SELECTION AND EXAMINATION OF THOSE PASSAGES IN 
 THE NEW TESTAMENT, WHICH HAVE BEEN ALLE- 
 GED IN FAVOUR OF THE PRE-EXISTENCE, THE ORI- 
 GINAL DIGNITY, POWER, AND DIVINITY OF JESUS 
 CHRIST. 
 
 GENERAL DISTRIBUTION. 
 
 J. HESE passages will be arranged under the following 
 heads. 
 
 I. The arguments which are alleged to prove that the 
 
 Jews in the time of Christ believed in the pre-ex- 
 istence of their expected Messiah. 
 
 II. The narratives of the miraculous conception and birth 
 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 III. The texts which are conceived to express in the most 
 
 direct and unequivocal language the pre-existence 
 of Jesus Christ. 
 
 IV. The texts which, if they are not to be admitted as 
 
 direct arguments, are nevertheless thought to be 
 most correctly interpreted as alluding to this im- 
 portant fact. 
 
 V. Those in which attributes appear to be ascribed to 
 
 Christ, which are thought to establish his pre- 
 existence, and by many even his divinity. 
 
 VI. Those passages which are understood as affirming 
 
 the superiority of Christ to angels. 
 
 VII. Those 
 
6 GENERAL DISTRIBUTION. [Part I. 
 
 VII. Those passages which ascribe Names, Titles, and 
 
 Characters to Christ, which are supposed to infer 
 great original dignity in a pre-existent state, and 
 by many to prove his supreme divinity. 
 
 VIII. Those which are supposed to teach that Christ is the 
 
 Maker, Supporter, and Governor of all things. 
 
 IX. Those passages from which it is inferred that Christ 
 
 was the Medium of the divine dispensations to 
 mankind antecedently to his supposed incarna- 
 tion, and particularly of the dispensations of di- 
 vine providence to the patriarchs, and to the Jewish 
 nation. 
 
 X. Those which express the exaltation to which Christ 
 
 is advanced, and the offices with which he is now 
 or will hereafter be^invested, and which it is argued 
 are incompatible with the supposition of his proper 
 humanity. 
 
 XI. The passages which require or exemplify homage 
 
 and worship to be offered to Christ, to which it is 
 conpeived that no creature, at least no man how- 
 ever exalted, can be entitled. 
 
 This part will close with 
 
 XII. A selection of passages from the New Testament to 
 
 prove, if it were necessary, the inferiority and pro- 
 *- per humanity of Jesus Christ. 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. l.J EXPECTATION OF THE JEWS. 
 
 SECTION T. 
 
 THAT THE JEWS EXPECTED A PRE-EXISTEN' 
 MESSIAH. 
 
 One text only is alleged with any plausibility in favour 
 of this supposition. 
 
 John vii. 27. " We know this man whence he is : 
 but when the Christ cometh, no man knoweth whence 
 he is.'* 
 
 Grotius and Doddridge explain this passage as allu- 
 ding to the miraculous conception of Jesus. 
 
 Dr. Whitby more justly understands it as referring to a 
 tradition among the Jews, that the Messiah was to be con- 
 veyed from Bethlehem soon after his nativity, and to be 
 concealed from the world till Elias came to anoint him. 
 
 It is said that some of the modern Cabalists maintain 
 that the angel Metatron, who led the Israelites in the wil- 
 derness, will be the soul of the Messiah. But it is noto- 
 rious that the ancient Jews, and indeed the Jewish nation 
 in general, in all ages entertained no such expectation, 
 Trypho the Jew, in his Dialogue with Justin Martyr early 
 in the second century, represents the notion of the pre- 
 existence and incarnation of Jesus, as not only wonderful, 
 but silly : and he reproaches the Christians for their be- 
 lief in the miraculous conception of Christ, which he ri- 
 dicules as a fiction equally absurd with that of Jupiter and 
 Danae. He says, that all his nation expect the Messiah 
 to be a man born like other men. 
 
 Justin Martyr Opp. Edit. Thirlby, p. 233 — 6. Dr. 
 Priestley's Hist, of Early Opinions, vol. iii. p. 30 — 40. 
 Ben Mordecai's (H. Taylor's) Lett, vol. i. p. 359 — 61. 
 
 SECTION 
 
S . ARGUMENT FROM [Part I. 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 ARGUMENT FROM THE MIRACULOUS CONCEPTION OF 
 JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 JL HE narrative of this event is contained in the two first 
 chapters of the gospels of Matthew and Luke. And the 
 miraculous birth of Christ is regarded by many as a con- 
 siderable presumptive evidence of his pre-existence. But, 
 
 1 . The narrative itself is of very doubtful authority. 
 
 The Ebionite gospel of Matthew and the Marcionite 
 gospel of Luke did not contain these accounts : and both 
 those sects maintained their own to be the'uncorrupted, 
 unmutilated copies of these evangelical histories. 
 
 From Luke iii. 1, compared with ver. 23, it appears 
 that Jesus was born fifteen years before the death of Au- 
 gustus, that is at least two years after the death of Herod ; 
 a fact which completely falsifies the whole narrative con- 
 tained in the preliminary chapters of Matthew and Luke. 
 
 If the relation given of the miraculous conception were 
 true, it is utterly unaccountable that these extraordinary 
 events should have been wholly omitted by Mark and 
 John, and that there should not be a single allusion to them 
 in the New Testament ; and particularly, that in John's 
 historv, Jesus should be so frequently spoken of as the 
 son of Joseph and Mary, without any comment, or the 
 least hint that this statement was erroneous. 
 
 The Ebionites, who were Hebrew and Unitarian Chris- 
 tians, and the Gnostics, who were philosophizing Gentile 
 believers, who differed from each other in almost every 
 other opinion concerning the person of Christ, agreed in 
 disbelieving the miraculous conception. There was no- 
 thing 
 
Sect. 2.] THE MIRACUI.OTIS CONCEPTION. 9 
 
 thing in the peculiarities of these sects which should ren- 
 der them averse to this opinion. Both would naturally 
 have been pleased with any circumstance which would 
 have exalted the dignity of the founder of their faith : but 
 both these sects had their origin in the apostolic age, and 
 had probably at that tim.e never heard the report. 
 
 Also, if the facts related in the account of our Lord's 
 nativity were true ; viz. the appearances of angels, the star 
 in the East, the visit of the Magi, the massacre of Beth- 
 lehem, &c. they must have excited great public attention 
 and expectation, and could not have failed to have been 
 noticed by contemporary writers, who nevertheless observe 
 a total silence on the subject. 
 
 2. The miraculous conception of Jesus would no more 
 infer his pre-existence, than the miraculous formation of 
 our first parents, or the miraculpus conception of Isaac, 
 of Sampson, of Samuel, and of John the Baptist, would 
 prove that these persons had an existence before they came 
 into this world, and were beings of a superior order to the 
 rest of mankind ' . 
 
 ' See upon this subject Dr. Priestley's History of Early Opinions, 
 vol. iv, book iii. chap. 20. Also the Notes, in the Improved Version 
 of the New Testament, on the Prefaces of Matthew and Luke. / 
 
 
 SECTION 
 
10 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part. I. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 TEXTS EXAMINED WHICH ARE CONCEIVED TO EX- 
 PRESS IN THE MOST DIRECT AND UNEQUIVOCAL 
 TERMS THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 J. HE writers of the New Testament are commonly reck- 
 oned eight. Matthew, Mark, Luke, John, Paul, James, 
 Peter, and Jude. Of these writers six, viz. Matthew, 
 Mark, Luke, James, Peter, and Jude, are generally allow- 
 ed to have advanced nothing upon the subject of the pre- 
 existence, and superior nature and dignity of Jesus Christ. 
 At least it will be admitted that, if there be any allusions 
 in these writers to this extraordinary fact, they are so faint 
 and obscure that, independently of the rest of the Nev/ Tes- 
 tament, they would not of themselves have proved, per- 
 haps not even suggested the idea of, the pre-existence and 
 divinity of Christ. The credit of these facts depends 
 v/holly upon the testimony of John and Paul. 
 
 Of the six writers who make no mention of the pre- 
 pxistcnce and divinity of Jesus Christ, three are professed 
 historians of the life, the miracles, and the doctrine of 
 Christ ; and one continues his history to upwards of thirty 
 years after our Lord's ascension ; and relates many inter- 
 esting particulars of the lives, the sufferings, and the doc- 
 trine of the apostles, the subjects of their preaching, the 
 miracles which they performed, and the success of their 
 mission. But neither the history nor the discourses of 
 Christ, nor those of his apostles for thirty years after his 
 ascension, contain the least hint of his pre-existent state 
 and dignity. 
 
 But how can this total silence be explained and account- 
 ed 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 11 
 
 ed for, if the popular doctrine concerning the pre-existence 
 and divinity of Christ is true ? Is it credible, or even pos- 
 sible, that three persons, in different places and at different 
 times, should undertake to write the history of Christ, 
 each meaning to communicate all that was necessary to be 
 known, with their minds fraught with the overwhelming 
 idea that the person whose history they were about to write 
 was a superior Being, a great angel, the Creator of the 
 world, or the Almighty God himself in human shape, and 
 that the belief of this great mystery was necessary to the 
 salvation of their readers ; and yet through the whole of 
 their narrative should abstain from mentioning or even 
 glancing at this stupendous fact ? How would a modern 
 Arian or Trinitarian have acted in similar circumstances? 
 Would he have left his readers under the impression which 
 necessarily results from the perusal of the three first evan- 
 gelical histories and that of the Acts, viz. that the founder 
 of the christian faith was a man like to his brethren, and 
 only distinguished from them as the greatest of the pro- 
 phets of God, who had been raised from the dead and 
 exalted to the right-hand of the Most High I — That six 
 of the writers of the New Testament should have observ- 
 ed such a profound silence upon a subject of which tiieir 
 hearts must have been so full, and with which their ima- 
 gination must have been so overpowered, may well induce 
 a considerate mind to pause, and to reflect whether this 
 could have happened if Jesus of Nazareth were in truth a 
 being of high, perhaps the highest order in the universe? 
 Athanasius, Chrysostom and others accounted for this 
 extraordinary silence from the great prudence of the evan- 
 gelists, and their unwillingness to give offence to the new 
 converts ; but this is a supposition which will not now 
 satisfy an inquisitive mind ^ 
 
 ' See Dr. Priestley's History of Early Opinions, book iii. chap. 4, 5,6, 
 
 The 
 
12 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Parti. 
 
 The evidence therefore of the pre- existence and supe- 
 rior dignity of Christ must rest upon the testimony of John 
 and Paul. And if it appears that these apostles were au- 
 thorized to supply the defects of their predecessors, and 
 that their testimony to the received doctrine is clear and 
 unequivocal, it must without doubt be admitted. 
 
 But observe, they never declare nor hint that they were 
 authorized to teach any new doctrine concerning the per- 
 son of Christ : nor do they lay down any such doctrine 
 to be received as an article of faith. If they say any thing 
 upon the subject, it is in an incidental way, and not as if 
 they were introducing any strange and astonishing disco- 
 very. 
 
 It is farther to be observed, that the style of these two 
 writers is in many instances highly figurative. In the 
 gospel of John our Lord sometimes uses metaphors of the 
 most obscure and offensive kind, such as * eating his flesh' 
 and ' drinking his blood,' to express the reception of his 
 doctrine. Chap. vi. 56. And Paul in his epistles introduces 
 many harsh and uncommon figures, viz. ' We are mem- 
 bers of his body, of his flesh, and of his bones,' to express 
 the union of true believers under Christ as their head. 
 Eph. v. 30. It is therefore reasonable to expect that such 
 writers will use figurative language concerning Christ ; 
 and it is peculiarly necessary, in reading their writings, to 
 distinguish carefully between what is literal and what is 
 figurative. 
 
 With regard to the apostle Paul, it is worthy of remark 
 that little or no evidence is pretended to be produced from 
 his larger epistles, in favour of the popular doctrine con- 
 cerning the person of Christ. Few proofs are alleged 
 from the epistle to the Romans, the two to the Corinthi- 
 ans,, that to the Galatians, the two to the Thessalonians, 
 or those to Timothy, Titus, or Philemon. The principal 
 appeal is to the epistles to the Philippians and Colossians, 
 
 which 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 18 
 
 which arc figurative throughout beyond all others ; and to 
 the epistle to the Hebrews, the author of which is doubt- 
 ful, and in which the writer indulges himself in an inge- 
 nious, but forced and fanciful analogy between the Mosaic 
 institute and the Christian dispensation. 
 
 Is it possible to believe that this stupendous doctrine, if 
 it were true, would be found clearly expressed in no other 
 part of the sacred writings but in the mystical discourses 
 of the evangelist John ; in two of the obscurest epistles of 
 Paul ; and in the epistle of another unknown writer ? 
 Surely, if it were fact that Jesus of Nazareth was truly 
 God, or the Maker of the world in a human shape, it is a 
 fact that would have blazed in every page of the New 
 Testament ; and would never have been mentioned by 
 the sacred writers but with the most evident marks of 
 astonishment and awe. 
 
 Persons who have not much attended to the subject, 
 and who have been educated in the belief of these extra- 
 ordinary doctrines, are surprised when they come to learn 
 how few passages of Scripture can be produced in favour 
 of the pre-existence and divinity of Jesus Christ. The 
 truth is, that these texts, so few in number, are so often 
 cited and repeated, and insisted upon, that they occupy a 
 very prominent place in the memory and imagination, and 
 are commonly thought to be much more numerous, clear 
 and decisive, than in fact they are. Like the stars in the 
 firmament, they dazzle the eye of the superficial spectator, 
 and excite the ideas of number and magnitude far beyond 
 the reality. The eye of reason, aided by philosophy, dimi- 
 nishes their number, deprives them of their glare, and 
 reduces them to their true proportion ~. 
 
 •See Dr. Priestley's History of Early Opinions, vol. i. Introd. 
 sect. 1, 2. vol iii. book iii. chap. 6, 7- I^r- Carpenter's Letters to 
 Mr. Veysie, letter 2. 
 
 The 
 
14 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part L 
 
 I. 
 
 The first passage which is alleged as decisively proving 
 the pre-existence of Jesus Christ, is John i. 1 — 14. 
 
 '' In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was 
 with God, and the Word was God/* &c. 
 
 The expression JVord, or Logos as it stands in the ori- 
 ginal, has been understood in a great variety of senses, ac- 
 cording to the different hypotheses which have been enter- 
 tained concerning the person of Christ. 
 
 1. The early platonizing christian writers conceived the 
 Logos to be the intelligence of God personified, or con- 
 verted into a real person, and united to a human soul 3. 
 
 2. The proper Trinitarians assert that the Logos is truly 
 God, necessarily derived from the Father, but of the same 
 nature with him, and in all respects equal to him. This 
 is the doctrine held by bishops Bull and Horsley, Dr. Wa- 
 terland, and others. 
 
 3. Others maintain that the Logos, or Word, is the 
 first and greatest of created beings, in whom the fulness 
 of the godhead dwells, and with whom the divine nature 
 is so intimately united, that he is truly and properly one 
 with God. This is the hypothesis of Dr. Thomas Burnet, 
 Dr. Doddridge, and many other learned men. 
 
 4. Dr. Clarke, and those who have been called Semi- 
 Arians, maintain that the Logos is a being uncreated, but 
 from ail eternity begotten, /. e. in some incomprehensible 
 manner derived from the will and power of the Father, 
 possessed of all divine attributes, self- existence alone ex- 
 cepted, and the delegate of the Almighty in the creation, 
 support, and government of the universe ; that he as- 
 sumed human nature, and animated the body of Christ. 
 
 ^ See Priestley's Histoiy of Early Opinions^ vol. ii. book ii. chap. 5. 
 Lindsey's Second Address lo the Students at the two Universities, 
 chap, ii. 
 
 5. The 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 13 
 
 5. The Arians aflirm that the Logos is the first and 
 greatest of created beings, delegated by the Father to be 
 the Maker and Governor of this world, or system, or of 
 all worlds and systems, and the medium of all the divine 
 dispensations to mankind. He became incarnate to redeem 
 the world, and animated the body of Christ. This is the 
 hypothesis supported by Dr. Whitby in his Last Thoughts; 
 also by Mr.Whiston, Mr. Emlyn, Dr. Price, and many 
 others. 
 
 G. An opinion has been taken up by some learned 
 moderns, that the Logos is merely a spirit of an order su- 
 perior to mankind, who assumed human nature in the 
 person of Jesus of Nazareth, but who had no concern in 
 the formation of the world, nor in any of the preceding 
 dispensations of God to mankind. 
 
 These hypotheses, with the arguments for and against 
 them, will be stated more at large in the Second Part of 
 this Inquiry. 
 
 7. Many have maintained that the word Logos means 
 the wisdom and power of God, by which all things were 
 originally made, which attributes were eminently display- 
 ed in the mission, doctrine, miracles, and character of the 
 man Jesus. This is the explanation advanced and approved 
 by Grotius, Lardner, Lindsey, Priestley, and most of the 
 modern Unitarians. 
 
 According to this interpretation of the word, Mr. Lind- 
 sey, in his List of False Readings and Mistranslations, 
 p. 40, has given the following new translation of the 
 proem to John's gospel : 
 
 " In the beginning was wisdom, and wisdom was with 
 God ; and God was wisdom. The same was in the be- 
 ginning M'ith God. All things were made by it, and 
 without it was nothing made. In it was life, and the life 
 was the light of men. And the light shineth in darkness, 
 and the darkness comprehended it not. 
 
 « There 
 
16 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part L 
 
 *' There was a^nan sent from God, whose name was 
 John. The same came for a witness, to bear witness of 
 the light, that all men through him might believe. He 
 was not that light, but was sent to bear witness of that 
 light. That was the true light which came into the world, 
 and enlighteneth every man. 
 
 " It, i. e. divine wisdom y was in the world, and the world 
 was made by it, and the world knew it not. It came to 
 its own land, and its own people received it not. But as 
 many as received it, to them it gave power to become the 
 sons of God, even to them who believe on its name. 
 Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, 
 nor of the will of man, but of God. 
 
 " And wisdom became man and dwelt among us, and 
 we beheld its glory, the glory as of the well beloved of the 
 Father, full of grace and truth.'* 
 
 Mr. Lindsey argues at large in favour of this interpre- 
 tation in the third chapter of the Sequel to his Apology, 
 and Mr. Wakefield in his Translation of the New Testa- 
 ment gives the same sense. 
 
 This interpretation is supposed to be favoured by Solo- 
 mon s description of wisdom, Prov. viii.; — by the use of 
 the word Logos in the Old Testament for the wisdom 
 and power of God ; see Psalm xxxiii. 6 ; — by the cus- 
 tom of the Chaldee paraphrasts in using the fVord of God 
 for God himself; see Isa. xlv, 12 ; xlviii. 13. Gen.i. 27 j 
 iii, 8; and Lindsey's Sequel, p. 380. — And lastly, it ap- 
 pears that Philo and other platonizing philosophers in 
 or near the apostolic age used the word Logos to express 
 the personification of the divine attributes. 
 
 Against this interpretation the following objections have 
 been urged : 
 
 1.] That the word ' beginniri!^* {<^pxn)i though often 
 occurring in the writings of John, almost uniformly signi- 
 fies the beginning of our Lord's ministry, or of the new 
 
 dispensation j 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 17 
 
 dispensation ; and very seldom, if ever, the beginning of 
 the world ; macli less does it express duration from eter- 
 nity 1 John vi. 64, " Jesus knew from the beginning who 
 it was that would betray him." Chap. xv. '27, " Ye have 
 been with me from the beginning 5." 
 
 2.3 It does not appear that the word Logos is ever 
 used for wisdom ((ro(pioc) In. the Old Tesiament. When 
 it is said that the heavens were made by the 2vord of God, 
 the ailubion appears to be to the account of the creation 
 in the book of Genesis, where every thing comes into 
 existence at the command of God. *' He spake, and it 
 was done." Psalm xxxiii 9. 
 
 3.] The expression " all things,*' (-TravTa,) in the wri- 
 tings of John, never signifies the created universe. 
 
 4-.] The word yivcu-ai, which is translated to he made, 
 occurs nearly seven hundred times in the New Testament, 
 and more than a hundred times in the writings of this evan- 
 gelist J but it is no where used in the sense of creation ^^ 
 
 8. Another interpretation of the Logos has been pro-« 
 posed, which is less liable to objection. The Logos is 
 the man Jesus Christ by whom God hath spoken to the 
 worlds the teacher of truth and righteousness. 
 
 * The history of John beginning with the same words as the history 
 of Moses, Genesis i. 1 , has induced many to infer that they expresv 
 the same date, though no conclusion can be more precarious, 
 
 * The word af%5j occurs six. times in the gospel of John (besides 
 twice in the prusm), and eleven times in his epistles: in all which 
 places it clearly expresses the beginning of the gospel ; excepting chap, 
 ii. 11, where it is used for the iirst miracle ; and chap. viii. 44, and 
 1 John iii. 8, in which places the devil is said to have been from the be- 
 ginning a liar and murderer. The other texts where the word occurs 
 are, John vi. 64 ; viii. 25 ; xv. 27 3 xvi. 4. 1 John i. 1 j ii. 7. 13, 14, 
 24; iii. 11. 2 John, 5, 6. See Simpson's Essays on Language of Scrip- 
 ture, Ess, vii. 
 
 * Heb. iv. 3 ; xi. 3. James iii. 9 ; have been alleged as exceptions : 
 but they will all admit a fair interpretation without assigning to the 
 word yivo'j.ai so unusual a sense, Simpson, ibid. p. 27. See Improved 
 Version, in ioc. 
 
 c This 
 
IS TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 This was the interpretation of thePolish Socinians : itwas 
 adopted by Hopton Hay nes, the friend of Sir Isaac Newton, 
 and has lately been revived with some modifications, and 
 defended, by Mr. J. Palmer, of Birmingham, in the Theo- 
 logical Repository, vol. vii. ; by Mr. Cappe, in his Dis- 
 sertations ; by Mr. Simpson, in his Essays ; by Dr. Car- 
 penter, in his Reply to Mr. Veysie ; and it is adopted in 
 the Improved Version. 
 
 It is a considerable presumption in favour of this inter- 
 pretation, that it harm.onizes with the introduction to the 
 first epistle of John, which is a kind of comment upon 
 the proem to the gospel, which contains many of the same 
 or similar expressions, and which is universally under- 
 stood of the person of Christ. 
 
 1 John i. 1, 2. " That which was from the begin- 
 ning, which we have heard, which we saw with our eyes, 
 which we have looked upon, or leheld, which our 
 hands have handled, of the word of life. And this 
 LIFE was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear wit- 
 ness, and show unto you that eternal life, which 
 was WITH THE FATHER, and was manifested to us.'* 
 Ver. <5, " God is light, and in him is no darkness at 
 all. If we say that we have fellowship with him, and 
 walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth. But if 
 we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have 
 fellov^ship one with another." 
 
 It is impossible not to remark the similarity of phrase 
 between the epistle and the gospel ; the words ' begin- 
 ning,* ' word,* ' life,* ' light,* ' darkness,* kc. occurring 
 in both. But it is plain that the fFord of life and light, 
 which from the beginning was heard, and seen, and 
 touched, and manifested, and borne 7(nt7iess to, in the 
 epistle, is Jesus Christ : and therefore it is Jesus Christ 
 to whom the same or a similar phraGeoIogy is applied in 
 the gospel. 
 
 The 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST, 19 
 
 The following is the translation and exposition of the 
 passage, upon this hypothesis. 
 
 Ver. I. "In the beginning 7 was the Word 8, and the 
 Word was with God, and the Word was a god 9." 
 
 From the commencement of his public ministry, Jesus 
 was a teacher of truth and life. And as Moses was with 
 God in the mount to receive the law, (Exod. xxxiv. 28 ;) 
 so Jesus withdrew from the world, into the wilderness or 
 elsewhere, to receive his instructions and qualifications 
 from God. And being a prophet of the highest order. 
 
 ' Or from the first. See Cappe's Diss, vol, i. p. IQ; and Simpson's 
 Essays, No, vii. p. 5. Improved Vers, in loc. Seep. \'J , note 4. 
 
 ® i. e. Jesus, the person by whom God spake to mankind. Hence, 
 Rev. xix. 13, he is called the Word of God: and 1 John i. ], the 
 Word of Life; because he taught the doctrine of eternal life. Our 
 Lord appe-irs to be denoted by the same title, Luke i. 2, They who 
 from the beginning wereeye-witnesses,and ministersof the Word. And 
 again, Luke iv. 36, And they were all amazed and spake, saying. 
 Tig 'Aoyos ovros; Qualis est hie doctor? Who is this Word, or teach- 
 er? See Schleusner in verb, Christ is called Life, because he is the 
 teacher of Life ; Truth, because he is the teacher of Truth ; the Way, 
 because he teaches the Way of righteousness ; the Light, because he 
 introduces Light into the world : so he is called the Word, because 
 he teaches the Word or doctrine of God. 
 
 ^ In the Scriptures the word God is applied ; 1st, To prophets who 
 were commissioned to deliver messages from God. John x. 35, " He 
 called them gods, to whom the word of God came." — 2dly, To a 
 prophet who was authorized to work miracles. Exod. vii. 1, "The 
 Lord said unto Moses, See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh, and 
 Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet." Here Aaron is to deliver 
 the message, but Moses to perform the miracle. — 3dly,To magistrates, 
 and persons in high civil authority. Psalm Ixxxii. 1, " God standeth 
 in the congregation of the mighty ; he judgeth among the gods." See 
 also ver. 6. Exod. xxi, 6; xxii. 8, 9. Deut. x. 17. 1 Sam. xxviii. 13. 
 In all these senses the title God might with peculiar propriety be 
 applied to Jesus, for to him was communicated the Spirit without 
 measure : John iii. 34. And when asked by Pilate whether he was a 
 king ; he replied, " I am a king. To this end was I born, and for 
 this cause I came into the world." John xviii. 37. Crellius conjec- 
 tured that the true reading of the original was Qbs, " the word was 
 God's:" but this conjecture, though ingenious and not improbable, 
 yet, being unauthorized by manuscripts, versions, or quotations in eccle- 
 siastical writers, is inadmissible. 
 
 c 2 to 
 
20 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part T. 
 
 to whom the divine will was fully revealed, who v/as en- 
 dued in a very superior degree with miraculous powers, 
 and who was appointed Lord and King, ia that new dis- 
 pensation w^hich he was authorized to introduce to super- 
 sede the Mosaic covenant, he is for these reasons, in the 
 well knovvn phraseology cf the Jewish scriptures, entitled 
 to be called a god, though obviously in a sense infiniteiy 
 below that in which the same expression is applied to the 
 Supreme Original Being. 
 
 Ver. 2. " This V/ord was in the beginning with 
 God 10." 
 
 Before he appeared in public, from the very com- 
 mencement of his niiiiistry, he had intercourse with God, 
 and was called, and qualified by him^ for his high and 
 important office. 
 
 Ver. 3. " All things ^^ were done 12 through him ^^, 
 
 and 
 
 '° The stress in this clause appears to lie upon the words sv o-f/jn, 
 ' in the beginning,' or ' at first.' Jesus did not obtrude himself into tiis 
 high office without a proper call. He did not appear in public till he 
 had been fully instructed, qualified, and disciplined for his great un- 
 dertaking. Compare Heb. v. 5, " Christ glorified not himself to be 
 made a high priest, but he that said unto him^ Thou art my son, this 
 day have I begotten thee." 
 
 " Jll iJui/ifs'] (vccvrx), i. e. all things which concern the new dis- 
 pensation which Jesus was commissioned to introduce. This word is 
 often used in a restricted sense, and in this sense in particular 1 John 
 ii. 20, " Ye have an unction from the holy One, and know all things." 
 See also Johnxiii. 3; xiv. 6; xvi. 13. 2 Pet. i.3,4. Eph. i. 3, 21,22. 
 Act? i. 1 . 
 
 '* IVere done] (fyjvgro). Though yjvc/xa; never signifies ' to create,' 
 yet, as Mr. Cappe observes, (Crit Flem. vol. i. pag. og,) it is a word 
 of very general signihcatioa : it signifies ' to be, ' ' to corae to pass,* 
 ' to be done,' as well as ' to be made.' John xv. 7. " Ye shall^ask 
 what ye will, and it shall be done unto you." xix. 30, "These things 
 ■were done (aysvsro), that the Scripture might be fulfilled." See also 
 IMatt. V. 16 ; vi. 8; xxi. 42 ; xxvi. Q. Improved Version in loo. ; and 
 Dr. Carpenter's Letters to Veysie, p. 7(). Mr. Cappe renders the text^ 
 " All things were by him, and without him was not any that has 
 been." Mr. Simpson, (Diss. vii. p. 45,) " All things were yorm^a 
 by bim ; all the regeneration of mankiiid which the Gospel produced 
 vvaseifecLed by his instrumentality." He observes, p. 28, that "though 
 
 ^^-^x- ,^ 
 
 ^iSf ^'H.. 
 
 ...^.^-t-'^'i 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRK-r.XISri:NCE OF CHRIST. 21 
 
 and without hicn not a sin;^le thing was done, which haih 
 been done ' K" 
 
 Every thing relating to the introduction of the new dis- 
 pensation has been accomplished, either by Jesus himseh", 
 or by his apostles and messengers, who derived their com- 
 mission and powers from him, and who perfornied nothing 
 without his express warrant and authority. 
 
 Ver. 4. " By him was life ^-', and the life was the light 
 of men." 
 
 Jesus is the revealer of a fatiire life by a resurrec- 
 
 the apostle John never uses yivo/xai for proper creation, yet he ofien 
 employs it to denote a change ot" slate, condition, or properties " 
 Dr. Carpenter well remarks, that " the common rendering ot ver. 3, 
 ' all things were made by iiim ;' and of ver. 10, ' the world was made 
 by him,' has perhaps more than any thing contributed to establish in 
 the minds of the unlearned the I'rinitarian or the Arian hypothesis 
 concerning our Saviour," v'n. that he was the Creator and Former ot 
 the material universe. 
 
 '^ Through him,'] Si' avrs, ' through his instrumentality.' He was 
 the mediator of the new covenant : the only medium of the christian 
 dispensation : the only person who derived his instructions and powers 
 inlmediately from God. His apostles derived their authority, qua- 
 lifications and powers from hmi. John xv. 26, " When the advocate 
 is come, whom I will send unto you from the Father." Ver. l6, 
 " Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you and appointed you." 
 Acts ii, 32, 33, " Jesus, having received from the Father the promise 
 of the holy spirit, has poured forth this," &c. 
 
 '•* iVo^ a single thing, life.'] sis sv o ysyovsv. See Campbell. The 
 apostles derived all their powers from Christ, and could do nothing 
 without him. John xv. 5- Compare ver. 4, " As the branch cannot 
 bear fruit of itself unless it abide in the vine ; so neith-er can ye, unless 
 ye abide in me." — He was probably personally present w th, and oc- 
 casionally he visibly manifested himself to, his apostles in the course 
 of their ministry : Matt, xxviii. 20. They worked miracles in his 
 name : Acts iii. 6; ix. 34. He converted Paul, appeared to him re- 
 peatedly, and directed his nfissionary journeys : Acts ix 5 ; xviii. (). 
 2 Cor. xii. 8, Q. See also Rev. i. 1. 
 
 '* By him was life.] .lohn vi. 68, " Thou hast the words of eternal 
 life." 1 John v. 1 1, " This is the record, that God hath given to us 
 eternal life, and this life is in his son." Hence our Lord calls himself 
 *' the Resurrection and the Liie," John xi. 25. " The Way, the Truth, 
 and the Life," John xiv. 6. In like manner, and for like reasons, he 
 is called " the Light," John viii. 12 3 xii, 35^ 36. See Cappe, p. 43, 
 44. Imp. Ver. in loc. 
 
 tion 
 
22 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Par 1. 1 
 
 tioii from the grave ; and this heavenly doctrine is the 
 principal means of instruction, reformation, and comfort 
 to mankind. 
 
 Ver. 5. " And the light shineth in darkness, and the 
 darkness hath not overtaken it ^^." 
 
 This glorious light which Jesus kindled, and which 
 diffuses its beams over a benighted world, still continues 
 to shine. It is not yet extinguished, nor ever shall be. 
 
 Ver. 6, 7, B, 9. " A man, whose name was John, was 
 sent from God ^7 . This man came for a testimony, to 
 bear witness concerning the light, that through him all 
 might believe. He was not the light, but sent to bear 
 witness of the light. The true light was that which, being 
 come into the world ^^, is enlightening every man.*' 
 
 John the Baptist was divinely commissioned to announce 
 the approach of a greater prophet, whose beneficent 
 errand it would be to enhghten and to bless the human 
 race. John, though he was himself a burning and a 
 shining light, equal to any of the prophets who preceded 
 him, was not, nor did he ever profess to be, any thing 
 more than the humble harbinger of a far greater prophet 
 
 '^ Darkness hath not overtaken it!] 8 xareAafev. Compare ver. Q. 
 1 John ii. S. " The word Y.a,ra\a.\fXct'Jix} is often used of ihe day and 
 night and their vicissitudes." S>3e Jolm xii. 35, ' Walk while ye 
 have the light, lest darkness come upon you :' and I Thess. v, 4. See 
 Cappe's Crit. Rem ibid p. AQ. Some render the words '* the dark- 
 ness comprehended it not," — mankind in general did not understand 
 the true nature of it. Simpson's Essays, p. 45. 
 
 '^ " To be sent from God" is to be a [)rophet, to come to men with 
 a divine message. If John was sentyro7« God, it implies that he had 
 been previously with God, lo be instructed by him. This explains the 
 phrase in verses I and 2, where it is said that the Word, Jesus, was 
 with God See Cappe, p. 23 
 
 1^ That which beiug come.'] Caj'peand Campbell read heivho, ijfc, 
 as beii:!g more intelligible, though not exactly corresponding with the 
 original "or the iiajection, see Campbell's valuable note. True, is 
 often used in Scripture to a'lgnify great, illustrious, excellent. Cappe, 
 ibid. p. 48. Everyman, i. e. Jew and Gentile, all nations. John xii. 32. 
 Acts xvii. 30. 1 Tim. ii. 4. Horn. ii. 10. Heb. ii. 9. Cappe, ibid. 
 
 who 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 23 
 
 who was to succeed. That great prophet is Jesus of Na- 
 zareth, who, having risen like the sun upon a benighted 
 world, is to this hour, and will ever continue to be, dif- 
 fusing light, and hope, and happiness to all of every na- 
 tion, Jew or Gentile, who are willing to receive the beneiit 
 of his beautiful and cheering rays. 
 
 Ver. 10. " He was in the world ^0, and the world was 
 enlightened by him "'^, yet the vt^orld knew him not." 
 
 Jesus appeared in public ; to all without distinction he 
 
 proclaimed 
 
 '' The world.'] KO<r[jiOS per metonymiam significat incolas orbis ter- 
 rarum a) generatim, universum genus humanum : (3) speciatim, 
 magnam hominum multitudinem, &c. Schleusner in verb.— This 
 word occurs upwards of a hundred times in the writings of John, bat 
 seldom if ever in the sense of the visible creation, or the material world. 
 Simpson, p. 35. And as it is said that the world knew him not, it is 
 evidently to be understood here of intelligent beings, of mankind in 
 general. lb. p. 37. 
 
 ^ fVas enlightened by him.'] With some hesitation I adopt the 
 method of supplying the ellipsis, proposed by niy learned and ingenious 
 friend Dr. Carpenter in his Letters to Mr. Veysie, p. 79. q. d. tysvita 
 KO(TiJi.os tB(pwricr^i)/Oi : see ver. 6, Ihe preceding context justifies in 
 his opinion his insertion of the word enlightened. As Matt, xxiii. 15, 
 the word proselyte must be supplied from the foregoing clause : ** Ye 
 compass sea and land to make one proselyte, xai oroi.v ysvrftan, i.e. 
 'n'pO(rri?.vro;, when the proselyte is made, ye make him &c." This 
 gives a better sense than the common translation, " the world was 
 made by him," if understood of the new moral creation. For in that 
 case it would not be strictly true that the world knew him not. For 
 the new-creaied world did know him, and acknowledge his authority. 
 But the world might be enlightened by Christ, and at the same time 
 might refuse to derive benefit Irom him, or to submit to his clsims. 
 They shut their eyes against the light, and chose darkness because their 
 deeds were evil. 
 
 Mr, Simpson indeed obviates this objection b • observing, that 
 verbs which signify the simple act or effect, sometimes express only 
 the design and tendency, and at other times the endeavour or using 
 means : q. d. The tendency of his doctrine was to reform the world. 
 Ibid, p. 38. This is ingenious, and may be just ; but the other inter- 
 pretation seems to suit the connexion better. 
 
 Mr, Simpson's own translation is : " He was in the world, and the 
 world was formed by him, yet the world knew him not." Which 
 he paraphrases thus : " He was publicly conversant with men j many 
 were reformed by him ; and he imparted the best means of renovating 
 
 the 
 
24 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 proclaimed his heavenly doctrine : but, though a few well 
 disposed persons received his message and became his fol- 
 lowers, the bulk of mankind disregarded his declarations, 
 and rejected his authority. 
 
 Ver. 11, 12, 13. " He came into his own country si^ 
 and his countrymen received him not. Nevertheless, to 
 as many as received him, and believed in his name, he 
 granted the privilege of becoming children of God. 
 Who were born not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, 
 nor of the will of man, but of God 22." 
 
 The ministry of Jesus was exercised in Galilee and 
 Judea, among his own countrymen the Jews. These in 
 general rejected his credentials with disdain. A small 
 number, however, who were of a better temper, acknow- 
 
 the human race^ yet mankind in general did not believe in him." 
 Ibid. p. 46. 
 
 Mr. Cappe gives quite a new turn to the passage. He translates the 
 text 5 " He was in the world, and the world vi'as madeybr him." q. d. 
 " He was for some time freely and publicly conversant among his 
 countrymen, preaching the word of God ; — yet, though the Jewish 
 dispensation was calculated to excite the expectation of him at this 
 time, to reveal him, and recommend him, &c. ; that world, the sub- 
 jects of the Jewish dispensation, to whom such advantages in this 
 respect had been vouchsafed, knew him not." Cappe, ibid. p. 10. 
 
 Of this interpietation the learned and excellent writer gives a very 
 particular and ingenious vindication, p. 50 — 62. But though he has 
 brought abundant evidence to prove that li% with a genitive sometimes 
 expresses the f.nrd cause, I neveilheless feel some reluctance to un- 
 derstand it in this passage in a sen^e so unusual, when the construction 
 does not require it, and a very good and obvious sense can be given 
 without it. lut the intelligent reader will foim his own judgement 
 which of these interpretations is to be preferred. 
 
 It may not be amiss to remark, en passant, that the evangelist by 
 this form of espressiou, •/.oo-y.os St' avrs iyivcto, cannot reasonably 
 be understood to teach the popular doctrine that the material world 
 was created by Christ : lirst, because the word ma-jjiCii seldom, pro- 
 bably never, signifies the material world in the writings of this 
 evangelist ; and secondly, because the word yn^i^cci never signilies 
 to create. 
 
 " Came to his own country. "] See Cappe and Campbell. 
 
 »' JFho were lorn, iffc.'] tee Improved Ver.ion, and Mr. Cappe 's 
 Crit. Rem. p. 10, and p. 63, Sec. 
 
 ledged 
 
Sect. C] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 25 
 
 kdged his claims and submitted to his authority. And 
 to those who received him as the Messiah he imparted the 
 qreat nrivilege of adoption into the family of God, by 
 which they became entitled to the hope of immortal life. 
 And this privilege was not obtained in the mode prescribed 
 by the Mosaic law, — by birth, or by marriaoe, or by 
 proselytism; but was communicated to all believers with- 
 out distinction by the free gift and abundant goodness 
 of God. 
 
 Ver. 14. " And the Word was fleshes and dwelt among 
 us, and we beheld his glory." 
 
 Jesus, this great teacher of truth and revealer of the will 
 of God, though so highly honoured above all the prophets 
 who preceded him, was nevertheless, as it was foretold he 
 would be, (Isaiah liii. 2, .3,) a man, a frail suffering man, 
 compassed with infirnuties, in all things like to his brethren. 
 He passed among us a short and transitory life, and was 
 in no respect distinguished from other men, but as he was 
 selected by divhie wisdom, and qualified by divine power 
 
 *' And (or nevertheless) the Word w^sfiesJi] 6 P>cyo; <^cc^^ BysyBTi' 
 not was 7;iG(/e flesh or lecame flesli, but was flesh. So ver. 6, Eycvan 
 ay^pujiroc a.TTccrraXiJ.svos, a man was sent, not was niadeseui-. or bccamn 
 sent. Luke xxiv. 19, the ihings concerning Jesus of i>Jazareth, 0; 
 iyivcto o.vYjp ■n'^O'prjTYjS, who uas, not who became, a prophet mighty 
 in word and deed. 
 
 The If'urd wasjlesh,^ i. e. a man, a proper human being. In this 
 sense the v.ov'-^Jiesh is often used in the Scriptures. See Psalm Ixv. 2. 
 Horn. iii. 20. John iii. 6 ; xvii. 2. Acts ii. 17. Luke iii. 6. 1 Cor. i. 
 20,. Ike. &c. : and it occurs in this sense in the preceding verse. " Fre- 
 quently and peculiariy," says INIr. Lindsey, Sequel, p. 136, " itstand« 
 .lor man as mortal, subject to infirmities and sutfering, and as such is 
 particularly appropriated to Clirist- here and in other places," 1 lira. 
 iii. 16. Rom. i. 3 ; ix. 5. 1 Pet, iii. 18 ; iv. 1. See Improved Version, 
 in loc. Cappe, ibid, p 86. Simpson, ibid. p. 40. 
 
 This interpretation of the proem of John's gospel is in the main 
 the same with that of Socinus, Slichtingius, Wolzogenius, and Crel- 
 lins ; only that the Socinian expositors contend lor a local ascent of 
 Jesus into heaven after his baptism, and previously to his appearance 
 u* a public instructor. 
 
 to 
 
26 Tf.XTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Pait ^* 
 
 to be the messenger of grace and peace to mankind. This 
 was his chief glory, and to this high distinction of our 
 pxalled Master we were the personal and admiring wit- 
 nesses. 
 
 IT. 
 
 John i. 15. ''■ John bare witness of him. This is he 
 of whom I said, He who comcth after me has got before 
 ine ^j for he was my principal -''." 
 
 John bore testimony to the superior character and dig- 
 nity of Jesus. This, said he, is the person whose harbin- 
 ger I was. I announced his approach, and have finished 
 my career. He has now overtaken me, and has taken 
 precedence of me, to which he is justly entitled, because 
 he is the very person whose advent I was commissioned 
 to proclaim. 
 
 III. 
 
 Johniii. 13, " Nov/ no man hath ascended up to hea- 
 ven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son 
 of Man, ivho is in heaven.''' 
 
 This is a text the right understanding of which is of 
 
 -* He who Cometh after tne,'] o OTritrui [X8 sp')(pix,iv(,i, the coiner after 
 me, he who set out after me, whose harbinger I was, Sjj.r'poa-Sev ,a8 
 yayoviy, has overtaken and passed me in the career. The idea is taken 
 from " the relation of the harbinger to the prince whom he precedes." 
 See Cappe, p. 108. Ey^irpoTj^v is an adverb both of time and place. 
 See Schleusner. 
 
 ^^ He was viy principal,'] irpcAiros ,u.s. The word is used in this 
 sense, I I'im. i. 15, iG ; " Christ came into the world to save sinners, 
 of whom I am the chief." Sec Mark vi. 2i. Luke xix. 4/. Acts xiii. 
 50; xvii. 4. 
 
 The common interpretation of the text is : " He who cometh after 
 me is preferred before me, for he was (in order of time) before me." 
 And Hammond, Doddridge, Campbell, and others, contend that the 
 latter clause must tefer to antecedency in order of time, otherwise the 
 sentence is tautological, and the evangelist is arguing idem per idem. 
 But Mr. Cappe's interpretation sufficiently obviates this objection. The 
 last clause is a good reason why the person who set out last took pre- 
 cedence of him who was originally first, 
 
 great 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST, 27 
 
 great importance for settling the controversy concerning 
 the pre-existence of Christ. 
 
 The words in their primary signification express a local 
 ascent of the Son of Man into heaven, a local descent 
 from heaven, and a local existence in heaven while he was 
 residing on earth. 
 
 In this primary sense the text is not received by any ; 
 but by some, one clause, by others, two, and by others, 
 all the clauses are interpreted in a figurative sense. 
 
 1. The first clause, which expresses that the Son of Man 
 had ascended into heaven, is understood in a literal sense 
 by the Polish Socinians only, who believed that Christ 
 was taken up into heaven after his baptism to receive his 
 commission from God, and to be instructed in the divine 
 counsels. In support of this interpretation they argue, 
 that the verb is in the prefer tense ; that the subject of the 
 affirmation is the Son of Man, who as such could have no 
 existence before his birth ; that the expression could net 
 with propriety be used of a continued existence in heaven 
 previous to a residence on earth ; and that it is improper 
 and unnecessary to have recourse to a figurative interpre- 
 tation when the literal sense is obvious and probable ^. 
 
 Mr. John Palmer "7, improving upon this hypothesis of 
 
 ^'^ Ava^tbvjx.s.] " Loquitur non de ascensu suo future, sed de ascensu 
 praeterito : ut scilicet in coelo ccelestia edoctus, ea delude e coelo remeans 
 loqueretur et doceret in terns. Qui hie ad metaphoras et impropriaa 
 locutiones confugiunt sine ulla necessitate id faciunt, &c." Slici:itingius 
 ia loo. See also Wolzogenius in loc, : and Christ. Relig. Institut. 
 apud Socini Opp., torn. i. p. 674, 6j5. 
 
 *'^Mr. John Palmer was a man ot abilities and learning, and an ex- 
 cellent Scripture critic. He was educated at the Warrington Academj', 
 and for some years was settled with a congregation at Macclesfield. 
 He afterwards retired to Birmingham, wjiere he assisted Dr. Priestley 
 in conducting the Theological Repository, in which he wrote sonoe 
 valuable articles, and had planned more, but was prevented by a stroke 
 of the palsy, which put an end to his life in December 1787. Dr. 
 Priestley published an interesting account of him in the Theological 
 Repository, vol. vi. p. 2 17. 
 
 the 
 
28 TiXTs SUPPOSED TO AS5LRT [Parti. 
 
 the older Soclnians, supposes that our Lord while he was 
 in the wilderness was favoured with divine communica- 
 tions, during which he was completely secluded from all 
 connexion with the external world ; and, like St. Paul, 
 (2 Cor. xii.) he might imagine himself transported into 
 heaven, and not be able to distinguish whether what he 
 saw and heard was visionary or real. And Mr. Palmer 
 thought that when Jesus spoke of himself as having been 
 in heaven, and as coming down from heaven, it was in 
 allusion to this divine vision. 
 
 This very ingenious and plausible hypothesis, which 
 Dr. Priestley mentions in terms of great respect 28^ appears 
 liable to the following objections. That a fact of such 
 high importance, and so honourable to the character of 
 Jesus, should not have been mentioned or alluded to by 
 any other of the evangelical historians or sacred writers ; 
 that the phrases of ' ascending up to heaven' and ' de- 
 scending from heaven,' as applied to Christ, are peculiar 
 to John, and therefore probably (like some other pecu- 
 liarities of phraseology in this writer) mean nothing more 
 than what the other writers have expressed in different 
 language ; and, fmally, that it does not appear that any of 
 the early christian sects or ecclesiastical writers ever heard 
 of this supposed assumption of Christ into heaven, or ever 
 attempted to explain the evangelist's phrases by that hy- 
 pothesis. 
 
 As this personal ascent of Jesus into heaven previous 
 to his entrance upon his public ministry, whether real or 
 visionary, is not allowed by the bulk of christian divines, 
 the first clause of this text is generally interpreted in a 
 fisiurative sense. 
 
 '^ After having stated Mr, Palmer's hypothesis, Dr. Priestley adds : 
 " I pcknowledge myself to be much pleased with Mr. Palmer's ideas 
 upon this subject." Theol. Repos. ibid. p. 321 . 
 
 Bishop 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCn: OF CHRIST. 29 
 
 Bishop Pearce, and after him Archbishop Newcome, 
 render the words " No man goeth up to heaven," which 
 they explain, No man is to go up thirher. " The preter 
 tense,'* say these learned prelates, " is used for the pre- 
 sent, and this again for the future ~y." 
 
 This, however, is not the interpretation generally advOpt- 
 ed. The most coaimon and best supported expositioa 
 of the phrase ' No man hatk ascended up to heaven^ is 
 this, No one is acquaiuted v/ith the counsels and purposes 
 of God to mankind^o. 
 
 'To 
 
 •" See Pearce and Newcome in loc. So then the words < No man 
 halh ascended up to heaven' mean * No man tft// ascend thither.' Let 
 not the Unitarians be any longer reproached as the only expositors 
 who warp the Scriptures from their plain and obvious sense to serve a 
 hypothesis. The arguments, however, of these learned prelates wiii 
 not support their conclusion. Bp. Pearce produces passages in which 
 the preter tense may be and is translated in the present. John vi. 60 ; 
 xi.27j XX. 29, 17 J iii. 18 : He also quotes Iliad, a. 37. o; X/Jutrr^v aa>pi- 
 . ?ffcv;/.a5. And the archbishop cites John iii. 18, in which the presenJi 
 tense has the force of a future. PjUt no instance is produced in wl,ich 
 the preter tense has the force of the future only ; and it is apprehend- 
 ed that none such can be alleged. For the preter can only be trans- 
 lated in the present tense when it expresses the continuance of av\ 
 action, * I have been and continue to be,' * Thou hast protected and 
 dost continue to protect,' &c. And the present is only used as vj 
 future figuratively, to express the certainty of the event, or that it is 
 very near at hand. See Wolzog^uiius in loc. 
 
 Campbell and Walcefield both translate tl-.e verb in the present tense, 
 'ascendeth;* but without sutlicient attention to the connexion, whic^ 
 implies that the Son of Man had himself ascended, though others had 
 not. Erasmus observes, " Grsecis prast. temporis est, ne quis putei 
 de futura ascensione intelligi." 
 
 '° The agteeraent of the commentators in this interpretation is very 
 remarkable. 
 
 " Ascendere in coslum dicitur qui arcatiaccrJi penetrnt. Cluantura 
 coflum a terra distat, tantuu] consilia divina ab humanis." Grotius,— 
 " Ascei:;dit in co^lum : i. e. Spiritualis inteiligentia; luce prsditus est." 
 Peza — " Ascendit in ccplum : i. e. Nemo novit res coeiestes prsettr 
 me." Vatabius. — " Ascendere in cuduni, hoc loco, uti intuenti Christi 
 scopum satis liquet, nihil aliud est quarn inquirere, aut admitti in con- 
 scientiani consilii divini." Cameron — •' II faut entendre ces paroles 
 fgurcment de la connoissanoe des verites celestes." Le Clerc. — " in 
 C'oeliuiJ S'icendeit' hcc loco signilJLdl arcana at<!uc nu'steria ccelestia 
 
 scrutari, 
 
so TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 * To ascend to heaven' is a Hebrew form of expression 
 to denote the knowledge of things mysterious and remote 
 from common apprehension. Deut. xxx. 11, "This 
 commandment is not in heaven, that thou shouldest say 
 Who will go up for us to heaven and bring it ?" Prov. 
 xxx. 4, " Who hath ascended into heaven or descended?'* 
 Rom. X. 6, " Say not in thy heart Who shall ascend 
 into heaven," &c. Baruch iii. 29, " Who hath gone up 
 into heaven and taken her, i. e. v/isdom, and brought her 
 down from the clouds ?" 
 
 In the preceding verse Jesus says to Nicodemus, " If 
 I have told you earthly things," /. e. things plain and 
 intelligible, " and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if 
 I tell you heavenly things ?" i. e. things difficult and re- 
 mote from your conceptions. 
 
 It is supposed that our Lord alludes to the ascent of 
 Moses to the mount to receive the Law. This is not im- 
 
 scrutari, ac nosse." Wolzogenius. — '^ No man can acquaint you with 
 these heavenly things, for no other person hath ascended into heaven 
 to learn them there." Whitby. — " No one ever hath ascended into 
 heaven to search into the secret counsels, and to obtain an intimate 
 and perfect knowledge of the truths of God." Dr. Doddridge : who 
 remarks that the phrase ' nsoendinrj up into heaven' is plainly used in 
 this sense, Deut. xxx. 12. Rom. x. G. Prov. xxx. 4. — Mr. Lindsey in 
 his Sequel, p. 213 et seq. observes, that " in the strict literal sense it 
 "was by no means true, that no one had ascended up into heaven but 
 the Son of Man ; for Enoch in all probability, and Elijah the prophet 
 had certainly been translated from earth to heaven. Neitlier is it true^ 
 ii; the direct sense of the words, that the Son of Man had ascended up 
 into heaven. We have no account in Scripture that lie ever ascended 
 into heaven but once, when he took his final leave of this earth and 
 of his disciples." Hence he infers that ' ascending up to heaven' signi- 
 fies his being admitted to the knowledge of God's counsels. 
 
 Ludolphus Raphelius, in his preface to his father George Rapheli- 
 us's Annotations upon the Scripiures, h:i3 given a learned and judi- 
 cious dissertation upon this text ; and after a very fair and impartial 
 examination he conclu;les, " Ex his itaque satis constare aibitror, 
 Christum nihil aliud velle, quam quod nemo consilia Dei sciat, nisi 
 hlius hominis, i/jse dei/s, qui ex caelo ad nos descendii." I add these 
 woidsj to fallow that this ia not the gloss of a prejudiced Unitarian. 
 
 probable. 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. SI 
 
 probable, as he immediately mentions Moses, and speaks 
 of his lifting up the serpent in the wilderness. Perhaps 
 he might mean to hint at the superior dignity and impor- 
 tance of the Christian dispensation to that of Moses. Moses 
 ascended the mount, but the Son of Man ascended to 
 heaven. 
 
 The Jews in the Targum say, in honour of Moses, that 
 *' he ascended into the high heavens," by which they 
 could mean no more than his admission to the divine 
 counsels. See Whitby in Ice. 
 
 That which is plain and obvious and well understood 
 is said not to be in heaven. Deut. xxx. 11. Rom. x. 6. 
 See above, and Grotius in loc. 
 
 2. The meaning of the first clause being thus settled, 
 that of the second is now to be investigated. 
 
 " But he that came down from heaven, even the Son 
 of Man." 
 
 This clause was understood in a literal sense by the 
 Socinians, who believed in the local ascent of Christ up 
 to heaven, and in his local descent to earth again. 
 
 It is interpreted literally by the Arians, who believe that 
 the divine Logos who made the world was the spirit which 
 animated the body of Christ. 
 
 It is interpreted figuratively by the believers in the pro- 
 per deity of Christ, who do not maintain that the deity 
 locally descended from heaven to become incarnate,- be- 
 cause God is omnipresent, but that he manifested himself 
 on earth in the person of Christ. So God is said to have 
 descended to see the tower of Babel, and the iniquity of 
 Sodom. Gen. xi. 5 ; xviii. 21. See "Whitby in loc. 
 
 It is interpreted figuratively by the Unitarians, who ex- 
 plain the second clause in a similar m.anner, and as per- 
 fectly correlaiive v/ith the first, 
 
 " No man hath ascended up to heaven :" /. e. No one 
 is instructed in the divine counsels : 
 
 " But 
 
S2 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I, 
 
 *' But he that came down from heaven, even the Son 
 of Man :" /. e. Excepting the Son of Man, who had a 
 commission from God to reveal his u'ill to mankind ^J. 
 
 First, This is a form of expression v.hich is unques- 
 tionably used in Scripture to express what is of divine 
 origin or authority. Matt. :,-xi» 25, " The baptism of 
 John, was it from heaven or of men ? And they reasoned 
 with themselves, saying, If wc shall say, From heaven ; 
 he will say unto us. Why did ye not then believe him ? " 
 This question our Lord put in reply to the quesJion of the 
 chief .priests and elders, " By what authority dost thou 
 these things ? '* So that in the language of our Lord 
 himself, ' coming from heaven* is equivalent to coming 
 ys'iih divine authority^^. 
 
 Secondly, This sense best suits the connexion of the 
 words. The second clause, ' came dov/n from heaven,* 
 is correlate to the first, ' ascended up to heaven.* It is 
 therefore to be understood similarly. If the first clause is 
 figurative, the second is figurative : if the first is literal^ 
 
 *' " Qr.e celu: qui en est descendu. C'est a dire, qui a ete envoye 
 auK hommes pnr L>ieu son Pere : ou qui est un present celeste que 
 Dieu leur a fait." Voyez cli. vi. 58. Jam. i. 1/; iii. 15, 17. Le Clerc. 
 
 '* If ' ascending up to heaven' is not to be taken literally, neither is 
 ' descending from heaven' to be understood of a local descent. For 
 the Son ot ALin^ as it is here asserted, could not come duwn from 
 Leaven, w here he had confessedly never been." Liudsey's Sequel, 
 p. 216. 
 
 ^* Compare James i. IJ , " Every good gift is from above, and 
 comelh down from the Father of light." iii. 15 — 17 , " This wisdom 
 descendeth not from above 3 .... but the wisdom that is from above 
 is first pure/' &:c. 
 
 " E ccelo descendit yvitSf ceaLircv." — Juvenal. 
 " Audire desidero ccelo aliquid lapsum." Arnobius, lib. 7- 
 
 It is observable that Mark and Luke relate this incident of the ap- 
 plication of the elders to demand our Lord's authority, and the reply 
 of Jesus concerning John's baptism, in the same words as Matthew, 
 as if they bad bee.i solicitous to notify to their readers that descending 
 from heaven signifies nothing more than coining with divuie authority. 
 Mark xi. 2'J. Luke xx. 1. 
 
 ' the 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 33 
 
 the second is literal. Good writers do not in grave dis- 
 course capriciously change the meaning of their words : 
 and in this case there is no necessity to suppose a change. 
 On the contrary, the sense is perfectly clear, intelligible 
 and apposite without it. 
 
 It is replied, that it is no uncommon thing, in two an- 
 tithetic clauses, for the same word to be taken in its pri- 
 mary sense in one clause, and figuratively in the other. 
 Many instances of this kind, it is said, occur in the New 
 Testament, of which 1 Thess. v. 4, et seq. is referred to 
 as an example : " Ye are not in darkness, that that day 
 should overtake you as a thief 33," and the hke. 
 
 But it may be answered that such a change, in the 
 meaning of the same word in the same sentence with- 
 out notice, is not common, nor to be admitted without 
 necessity. 
 3. " Who is in heaven.'* 
 
 This clause is omitted in the Vatican and some other 
 
 manuscripts, 
 
 ^^ This objection to the common interpretation of the second clause 
 of the text in John, from the change of the sense of an important 
 word without any notice or necessity, though so obvious and forcible, 
 is not, that I recollect, mentioned by any critic but Raphelius, whose 
 words I transcribe. Praef, § I/. 
 
 " Coronidis loco objectioni cuidam adhuc respondendum est. Sci- 
 licet facile quisquam putet, si ascendere in coelum idem sit (]uod scire 
 mysteria divina, oppositum descendere, idem fore qnod nesrire. Ad 
 quam objectionem respondit Dunnhauerus quod ejus nulla sit sequela, 
 quia nihil sit insolitum inter duns voces oppositas, unam proprie, al- 
 teram figurate, accipi. Non probavit banc suam thesin exemplis, 
 quoniam operas pretinm haud esse duxit : cum plurima ejus rei occur- 
 rant in S. Codice. Unicum solummodo allegabo, 1 Thess. v. 4. seqq. 
 ubi in una oraiione due voces noxa\.que dies modo proprie modo impro- 
 prie accipiuntur, uti facile intelliget qui verba Pauli debita animi con- 
 siderabit attentione." 
 
 It is singular that, if examples are so numerous, only one should be 
 produced. At any rate this change of signification is not to be admit- 
 ted without obvious necessity. It is a fair remark, that if ' ascending 
 to heaven ' signifies knowing the divine counsels, ' descending from 
 
 n heaven' 
 
54 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 manuscripts, and is at least of doubtful authenticity. See 
 Griesbach ; and the Improved Version. 
 
 Of those who receive it as genuine, the believers in 
 the deity of Christ understand it as expressing his om- 
 nipresence^^. 
 
 Arians and Socinians translate the words, " who 7vas 
 m heaven. " So John ix. 25, " Whereas I was blind, 
 now I sce3^.** The Arians understand the clause of the 
 pre-existcnce of Christ ; the Socinians^ of his translation 
 to heaven after his baptism. 
 
 The Unitarians in general consider it as a continuation 
 of the figure or allegory in the first and second clauses : 
 
 heaven' may signify not knowing them. But the figure is preserved 
 if the person spoken of ascends to learn heavenly truths, and descend'^ 
 to communicate them. And this sense is confirmed by the language 
 of Jeus concerning John's baptism : Matt. xxi. 25. 
 
 ■'* 1010 is in heaven,] as " he is now present there by his divine na- 
 ture, which fills both heaven and earth." Doddridge. See Whitby. 
 
 ^^'O ujv ay ruj siccvoj, who was in heaven. Compare chap. ix. 25, 
 Tu(pA05 ujv, apti jSAsttcw and chap. i. 1 8, The only begotten Son, o s»v 
 £<f toy Y.oKitov, who is or was in the bosom of the Father. " This," 
 says Dr. Harwood. (Soc. Scheme, p. 32,) " is so direct, positive, and 
 solemn an assertion of the pre-existence of our Saviour from the mouth 
 of our blessed Lord himself, that I see not what criticism can evade it. 
 The ancient Socinians indeed framed a hypothesis that our Lord after 
 Lis baptism was caught up into heaven. But this journey to paradise, 
 which has so much the air of a Mahometan tale, has no existence in 
 the sacred page." — " Nothing can be more unreasonable and ground- 
 less," says Dr. Clarke, (Script. Doct. p. 84, No. 574,) " than the 
 Socinians' interpretation of this passage, who feig7i that Christ was 
 taken up into heaven, as Moses of old into the mount, to receive his 
 instructions, and then came down again to preach. " Perhaps a So- 
 cinian might justly retort upon these learned divines, that his fiction 
 is at least as probable as the Arian fiction of a created Logos, who, 
 being invested with svtch stupendous powers as to supersede the Deitv 
 himself in the creation, support, and government of the universe, re- 
 duced himself afterwards, by a metamorphosis more wonderful thaa 
 uny recorded by the Roman poet, to the condition of a senseless and 
 helpless infant. But it is time to abstain from harsh language and in- 
 jurious reflections. These are not the v.'eapons by which this important 
 contest is to be decided^ and the battle won. 
 
 « The 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. SS 
 
 " The Son of Man, who is in heaven, who is instructed in 
 the gracious purposes of God to man"G.'» 
 
 The true sense of the whole text may therefore be ex- 
 pressed thus : 
 
 No one has ever been admitted to a participation of the 
 divine counsels, except the Son of Man, Jesus of Naza- 
 reth, who has been commissioned to reveal the will of 
 God to men, and who is perfectly instructed and quali- 
 fied for this office. 
 
 This text seems to be exactly parallel to John i. 1 8, *' No 
 man hath seen God at any time : the only-begotten Son, 
 who is in the bosom of his Father, he hath declared him '* 
 
 q. d. No one knows the purposes of God, but his 
 faithful servant and messenger Jesus Christ, who is in- 
 structed in his counsels, and has revealed his will. 
 
 To the same purpose, Matt. xi. 27, " All things are 
 delivered to me by my Father, and no man knoweth the 
 Son but the Father, neither knoweth any man the Father 
 save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal 
 him." 
 
 q. d. The Father has communicated to the Son his 
 whole will ; and no one knoweth the extent of the Son*s 
 commission but the Father. Nor is any one instructed 
 in the mind and will of God but the Son, and those who 
 are taught by him^T. 
 
 ^® This interpretation of the text is not peculiar to the Unitarians. 
 Le Clerc says, " II faut expliquer ceci comma I'expression monler au 
 del : c'est a dire, de la connoissance que Notre Seigneur avoit re9ue 
 des secrets du ciel. Voyez ch. i. 18. " Dr. Campbell also refers to 
 the same text, which he explains in a similar way: " By the expression 
 u-/ sig rov xoKiTOv, ' who is in the bosom of the Father,' is meant 
 not only who is the special object of the Father's love, but who is ad- 
 mitted to his most secret counsels. By o wv sv ru> spavw, * who 
 is in heaven,' is meant whose abode, whose residence, whose home 
 is there." 
 
 ^' See Improved Version. " Monstrat orationis series agi de my- 
 steriis ad salutem humanam pertinentibus, quorum rerelatio Filio est 
 credita." Grotius. See likewise Le Clerc in loc. 
 
 D 2 From 
 
3(5 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part t. 
 
 From this illustration of the text the following con- 
 clusions are deducible : 
 
 1.] That the phrase ' to descend from heaven' does 
 not necessarily and universally signify a local descent. 
 
 '2.] That this phrase, according to our Lord's own 
 interpretation and use of it, Matt. xxi. 2.5, sometimes ex- 
 presses nothing more than coming with a divine com- 
 mission and authority. 
 
 3.] It is therefore no perversion of plain language to 
 understand and explain these words in this sense ; the 
 sense in which our Lord himself explained them. 
 
 4.] That from the phrase ' he came down from heaven, *^ 
 no argument can be derived in favour of thepre-existcnce 
 of Jesus Christ, unless these words occur in a connexion 
 which makes it absolutely necessary to understand them 
 in a literal and local sense^^. 
 
 IV. 
 
 Johniii. 51. " lie that cometh from above is above 
 all : He that is of the earth is earthy, and speaketh of the 
 earth : He that cometh from heaven is above all." 
 
 ' He that cometh from above,* or * from heaven/ is he 
 who cometh with a divine commission and authority. ' He 
 that is of the earth' is a teacher who has no pretensions 
 to such authority, — the priests and Levites who instructed 
 the people and expounded the law. Their instructions 
 were fallible and imperfect : those of Jesus, the prophet 
 of the Most High, were hifallible and divine. 
 
 " No stress is laid (though possibly it might bear an argument) 
 npon the absurdity of the Jewish notion of a local heaven above the 
 firmament, where God and angels reside, and where Jesus is supposed 
 to have existed previously to his incarnation. Modern discoveries in 
 astronomy amply refute this puerile hypothesis. God is at all times 
 equally and every where present. And heaven is a state, and not a 
 place. To be perfectly virtuous and perfectly happy is to be in hea- 
 ven, whatever be the local situation of the being in question. 
 
 Or, 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. S? 
 
 Or, as Mr. LIndsey supposes, perhaps the Baptist may 
 refer to himself and to former prophets and messengers 
 of God, and may mean to speak modestly and dispara- 
 gingly of his own authority and commission from God, in 
 comparison with that of Jesus, which was indeed far 
 more illustrious and divine. See Mr. Lindsey's Sequel, 
 p. 217 ; and Grotius in loc. 
 
 V. 
 
 John vi. S3. " The bread of God is that which cometh 
 down from heaven and giveth life to the world." 
 
 Ver. 33, " I am that bread of life." 
 
 Ver. S8. " For I came down from heaven not to do 
 my own will, but the will of him that sent me." 
 
 Ver. 42. " They said, Is not this Jesus the son of Jo- 
 seph, whose father and mother we know ; how is it then 
 that he saith, I come down from heaven ?" 
 
 Ver. 62. " What and if you shall see the Son of Man 
 ascend up where he was before ?** 
 
 As the greatest possible stress is laid by the advocates 
 for the pre-existence of Christ upon the expressions which 
 0jir Lord uses in this discourse, it is necessary to consider 
 them in their connexion. 
 
 It has been already proved that ' to come down from 
 h.eaven' is a phrase not unfrequently used to express com- 
 ing with divine authority. The only question therefore 
 is, whether there is any thing in the connexion in which 
 the words occur in this discourse which limits their signi- 
 fication to a local descent. 
 
 After the miracle of the loaves and fishes, Jesus cross- 
 ed the sea of Galilee ; and the next day the multitude 
 followed him, with a determination to compel him to as- 
 sume the title of king. The miracle he had wrought 
 convinced them that he was the Messiah, and that he was 
 able to deliver their country from the tyranny of the Ro- 
 man 
 
S8 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I, 
 
 man government. Jesus, knowing their mean and secular 
 views, resolved to release himself from these selfish and 
 unworthy attendants ; and for this purpose he delivers a 
 discourse which they could not comprehend, and the de- 
 sign of which was to shock their prejudices, to disgust 
 their feelings, and to alienate them from his society. 
 
 Ver. 25. The multitude, having found him, begin the 
 conversation with the question, " Rabbi, when earnest 
 thou hither ?" 
 
 Ver. 26, 27. Jesus declines giving a direct answer, and 
 reproves their selfish and secular motives : 
 
 " Verily, ye seek me not because ye saw miracles, but 
 because ye ate of the loaves. Labour not for the meat 
 which perisheth, but for that which endureth to everlasting 
 life, which the Son of Man shall give you, for to him the 
 Father, that is God, hath given his attestation 39." 
 
 Ver. 28. They then asked him, " What are the works 
 which God requireth us to do ?" 
 
 Ver. 29. " Jesus answered. That ye believe on him 
 whom God hath commissioned." 
 
 Ver. 30, 31 . "They replied. What miracle doest thou, 
 that seeing it we may believe tliee? Our fathers ate manna 
 in the desert, as it is written, ' He gave them bread from 
 heaven to eat.* " 
 
 The Jews expected that when the Messiah came, he 
 would be made known by some public visible sign from 
 heaven. See Matt. xvi. 1 ; xxiv. 3. 1 Cor. i. 22. This 
 is what the multitude now ask for. Notwithstanding the 
 great miracle of the loaves, they are not perfectly satisfied 
 till they obtain this visible sign j which they are the more 
 encouraged to expect, as Moses actually exhibited a sign 
 of this description, viz. the manna which descended from 
 heaven. 
 
 3" See Dr. Campbell's Translation. 
 
 Ver. 
 
Sect. 5.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST." 3^ 
 
 Ver. 32, 33. " Jesus said to them, Moses did not give 
 you that bread from heaven ; but my Father is giving you 
 the true bread from heaven. For the bread of God is that 
 which is descending from heaven, and giveth light to the 
 world." 
 
 Jesus here speaks figuratively. He means the doctrine 
 of eternal life which he was comwiissioned to teach. But 
 he uses ambiguous language, which the multitude under- 
 stood literally, and expected the immediate descent of 
 some species of food better than the manna which Moses 
 had given to their ancestors. 
 
 Ver. 34. " They said to him, Master, give us always 
 this bread." 
 
 Ver. 35 — 4'0. Jesus now confounds and perplexes 
 their understandings by speaking of himself personally as 
 the promised bread from heaven : 
 
 " Jesus answered, T am the bread of life. He who com- 
 cth to me shall never hunger, he who believeth on me 
 shall never thirst. All whom the Father giveth me will 
 come to me. But I descended from heaven not to do my 
 ovi'ii will, but the will of him who sent me. This is the 
 will of him who sent me, that whoever acknowledgeth 
 the Son, and believeth on him, should obtain eternal life, 
 and that I should raise him up at the last day." 
 
 Jesus is the bread from heaven — but this bread is his 
 doctrine, as all allow, — his person therefore is here put 
 for his doctrine, which like manna comes from heaven. 
 But having mentioned himself personally, he speaks of a 
 personal descent from heaven, that is, as has been already 
 proved, of a divine mission. But the Jews, taking the 
 whole literally, are puzzled to account for his singular 
 and, as they thought, extravagant language. 
 
 Ver, 41, 42. " The Jews murmured against him, be- 
 cause he said I am the bread which descended from hea- 
 ven. And they said, Is not this Jesus the son of Joseph, 
 
 whose 
 
40 "TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 whose father and mother we know^O; how then doth he 
 say, I descended from heaven ?" 
 
 Ver. 43 — 51. Jesus continues to assert the divinity of 
 his mission and the vivifying power of his doctrine, in 
 language still more offensive and unintelligible to the 
 multitude : 
 
 " Jesus therefore answered, Murmur not among your- 
 selves. No man can come unto me unless the Father 
 who hath sent me draw him, and him I will raise up at 
 the last day. Every one who hath heard and learned 
 from the Father cometh unto me. Not that any man, 
 except him who is from God, hath seen the Father. He 
 that believeth on me hath eternal life. I am the bread of 
 life. Your fathers ate the manna in the desert, and died. 
 This is the bread which is descending from heaven, that 
 whoso eateth thereof may not die. I am the living bread 
 which descended from heaven. "Whoso eateth of this 
 bread shall live for ever : and the bread which I shall 
 give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world." 
 
 Our Lord first states plainly that he had a mission from 
 the Father, and that all who practically believed his doc- 
 trine should be entitled to eternal life. He then expresses 
 the same sentiments in figurative language. Moses gave 
 manna from heaven, he gives bread from heaven — those 
 who ate manna were mortal, those who eat his bread are 
 immortal — nay, he is himself this life-giving bread — to be- 
 come immortal they must eat him, his very flesh, which 
 he is ready to impart to them for this purpose. 
 
 What can this mean, but that he was ready freely to 
 
 *' Observe how currently Jesus is spoken of as the son of Joseph, 
 and as one whose father and mother were well known : and this with- 
 out any remark by the evangelist to caution his readers against the 
 popnlar error concerning his nativity, which surely he would have 
 done if he had known any thing of our Lord's miraculous conception, 
 especially as he had omitted that fact in bis history. 
 
 impart 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 41 
 
 impart his heavenly doctrine ? But the Jews, understand- 
 ing him literally, are lost in astonishment at the extrava- 
 gance of his discourse. 
 
 Ver. 52. " The Jews then debated among themselves, 
 saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat ?" 
 
 Ver. 53 — 58. Jesus, knowing their mean and secular 
 motives, and desirous of being forsaken by them, does 
 not condescend to correct their mistake, but proceeds to 
 express himself in language still more offensive and dis- 
 gusting : 
 
 " I say unto you. Unless ye eat the flesh of the Son of 
 Man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. He 
 that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood, hath eternal 
 life, and I will raise him again at the last day. For my 
 fxesh is truly meat, and my blood is truly drink. He who 
 eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood abideth in me, 
 and I in him. As the Father liveth who sent me, and I 
 live by the Father, so he that eateth me shall live by me. 
 This is the bread which descended from heaven. It is 
 not like the manna which your fathers ate, for they died. 
 He that eateth this bread shall live for ever." 
 
 It is universally agreed that the meaning of our Lord 
 in this highly figurative passage is, that the man who re- 
 ceives, digests, and practically improves his divine and 
 heavenly doctrine, shall be raised by him to everlasting 
 life. This doctrine he compares to bread from heaven, 
 from God, far excelling the manna v/hich their fathers 
 ate. He further compares it to his own person, his flesh, 
 his blood ; which bread, which person, which flesh and 
 blood descending from heaven, will make those who eat 
 and drink it immortal. 
 
 The Jews observing the seriousness and solemnity of 
 our Lord's manner, and understanding his declarations in 
 a strict literal sense, are more offended and disgusted than 
 
 ever. 
 
43 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 ever, and resolve to forsake his society, probably conceiv- 
 ing him to be disordered in his mind'*i ! 
 
 Ver. 60. " Many of his disciples having heard it, said 
 This is hard doctrine, who can bear it ?'* 
 
 This is such extravagant unintelligible raving, that it 
 is impossible to endure it any longer. 
 
 They did not speak out : but Jesus judged fromi their 
 looks and virhisperings what passed in their minds : and 
 in order to fix them in their purpose of leaving him, he 
 adds one more remark in the same strain, which served 
 to confirm them in their former opinion : 
 
 Ver. 61, 62. "Does this offend you? What then, 
 if you should see the Son of Man ascending thither where 
 he was before 42?" 
 
 q. d. Are you so disgusted with what I have said, as 
 to be upon the point of deserting mc, after all your pro-. 
 
 fessions 
 
 ■" Our Lord's own friends and near relations suspected him at times 
 to be beside himself. Mark iii. 2] . See 2 Cor. v. 13. And his enemies 
 repeatedly, publicly, and without any regard to decency, charged him 
 with insanity. John viii. 48, '* Say we not well that thou art a Sama- 
 ritan, and hast a demon ?" q. d. a blasphemer and a madman. John x. 
 20, " Many said, He hath a demon and is mad, Why hear ye him ?" 
 <j. d. Why do you listen to a man that is raving mad ? Ver. 31 : 
 " Others said" more justly, " These are not the words of him that 
 hath a demon," q. d. of a madman. " Can a demon," q. d, a madman, 
 " open the eyes of the blind ?" See Improved Version, in loc. 
 
 '''This text has always been considered as the strong hold of Ari- 
 anism, the palmary argument for the pre-existence of Jesus Christ ; 
 and the glosses as they are called, of the Socinians and Unitarians, by 
 which they evade what is stated to be the plain obvious meaning of 
 the text, are animadverted upon with no light degree of severity. And 
 Unitarians themselves have appeared almost to despair of giving a 
 satisfactory explanation of it. 
 
 Dr. Price, in the Appendix to his Sermons, p. 392, says : " I must 
 think this text as decisive a declaration of Christ's pre-existence by 
 himself as words can well express. Were I, what some of my best 
 friends wish to see me, a Socinian, I should probably in this ca.se, in- 
 stead of seeming to wrest a plain text, either give it up and own a 
 difficulty, or with a magnanimous openness, like that of Dr. Priestley 
 
 in 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 43 
 
 fessions of regard : What then would you say, if, after 
 having eaten my flesh and drunk my blood, you should 
 see me in my own person ascending up to heaven again, 
 from whence, as I told you, 1 the bread of life came 
 down ? 
 
 This language must have appeared to our Lord's self- 
 ish and ambitious followers, who understood it all in a 
 literal sense, more absurd and extravagant than any thing 
 which they had heard before ; and would no doubt fix 
 them in their resolution to renounce all connexion with 
 him. 
 
 It is, however, highly probable that our Lord still in- 
 tended the same thing by the same figurative expressions. 
 By his person, the Son of Man, he srill means his doc- 
 trine. By ascending up where he was before, i. e. to 
 heaven, he still means the knowledge of sublime and 
 mysterious truths, beyond the reach of common appre- 
 hension. 
 
 in objecting to the authority of Mo?es and Paul, question the propri- 
 ety of building an article of faitii, of such magnitude, upon the 
 correctness of John's recollection and representation of our Lord's 
 language." 
 
 But with the permission of this able and candid writer, our Lord's 
 language by no means necessarily implies his pre-existence, even if it 
 should be taken in its literal acceptation: for in this sense it better ex- 
 presses the Socinian hypothesis of a personal ascent to heaven previ- 
 ously to his public appearance, than the Arian notion of a pre-existent 
 Logos. It seems to have escaped the attention of the learned advo- 
 cates for Arianism, that it is the Son of Man, not the Son of God, it 
 is Jesus in his human form, that is spoken of as haviiig been in heaven 
 before. There is no occasion, therefore, at any rate, to have recourse 
 to the supposition of a lapse of memory in the evangelist, rhe in- 
 terpretation proposed above appears to me to explain the text satisfac- 
 torily without the supposition of a local ascent : but it is offered with 
 diffidence to the candid and inquisitive reader, as the author does not 
 recollect to have met with it before, though Le Clerc seems to hint at 
 something similar. To the deeply prejudiced, and to those who are 
 not accustomed to judge of the sense of a passage by the connexion 
 and context, it will necessarily appear harsh and unnatural. To 
 the judgement of the calm, serious, and impartial inquirer it is now 
 submitted. 
 
 The 
 
44 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part L 
 
 The sense then appears to be this : Are you offended 
 at what I have already taught : What would you say if I 
 were to reveal truths still more foreign to your conceptions, 
 and more offensive to your prejudices ? 
 
 Exactly corresponding with this is our Lord's remark 
 to Nicodemus: John iii. 12, " If I have told you earthly 
 things and ye believe not, how shall ye believe if 1 tell 
 you of heavenly things ? " 
 
 This will be called a forced interpretation. And it is 
 certainly very different from the plain literal meaning of 
 the words. But it is most agreeable to the connexion. 
 It is nothing more than a continuation of the same allegory, 
 in which, throughout, our Lord's doctrine is represented 
 by him as ' bread from heaven,' as ' living or life-giving 
 bread,' as * himself,' as ' his own flesh and blood,' which 
 must be eaten and drunk in order to secure immortal life. 
 
 Seeing the offence which his discourse had already 
 given, what could be more suitable to his design than to 
 add, What if I should speak truths which would be still 
 more obscure and offensive ? or, in the language of the 
 allegory. What if you see me the Son of Man {i. e. my 
 doctrine) ascend to heaven where I was before, i. e. go 
 farther out of your reach, and become still more perplexing 
 and mysterious ? 
 
 Thus the text appears not as an insulated remark un- 
 connected with the context ; but as an observation ap- 
 propriate to the occasion, and couched in language similar 
 to what he hid already used ; not more harsh than the 
 tenor of the preceding discourse, but made purposely 
 obscure and offensive, that " seeing they might see and 
 not perceive, and hearing they might hear and not un- 
 derstand." Luke viii. 10. 
 
 It is obvious to remark that the words taken in this 
 gense have no relation to the pre-existence of Jesus Christ. 
 
 Also, if this be the true interpretation, there is no refe- 
 rence 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 45 
 
 rence in the 62d verse to our Lord's local ascension; nor in 
 the preceding discourse is there any allusion either to his 
 death, or to his supposed atonement, or to the institution of 
 the eucharist. The whole discourse relates to his divine 
 and heavenly doctrine only. 
 
 At the conclusion, our Lord suggests a hint that his 
 language was to be taken in a figurative and not in a li- 
 teral sense. 
 
 Ver. 63. " It is the spirit that giveth life : the flesh 
 profiteth nothing : the words which I speak unto you, they 
 are spirit and they are life." 
 
 (/. d. It is the hidden meaning of my ^Enigmatical dis- 
 course which alone is useful. If you could actually eat 
 my flesh it would do you no good. The doctrine which 
 I teach is that heavenly bread, that flesh and blood, which 
 if received, digested, and reduced to a living principle of 
 action, will lead to everlasting life. 
 
 This declaration of Christ is a key to the whole pre- 
 ceding discourse. But the selfish and ambitious persons 
 who were in his train were too much disgusted with what 
 they had already heard, to listen to any explanation. They 
 found that Jesus was not the man to take the lead in a po- 
 litical revolution. Their ambitious projects were disap- 
 pointed, and they abandoned his party. 
 
 Ver. G6. " From that time many of his disciples went 
 back, and walked no more with him." 
 
 This was what our Lord desired. He was now desert- 
 ed by those v.ho had followed him from mercenary and 
 political motives only. He was no longer teased to assume 
 a secular crov/n : and he was left in privacy with the apo- 
 stles and a few others whom he had selected, and whom 
 he gradually instructed and qualified to propagate his 
 gospel in the world. 
 
 VI. 
 
 John viii. 42. " If God were your Father, ye would 
 
 love 
 
46 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 love me ; for I proceeded and am come from God. I 
 came not of myself; but he sent me." 
 
 Dr. Whitby and Dr. Doddridge think that in these 
 words there is an allusion to the eternal generation of the 
 Son ; the word s^sK^siv, to proceed, not being applied to 
 any other apostle or prophet. 
 
 But as it is said of Jesus^ that ' he was in the beginning 
 with God,* to express his divine instruction and commis- 
 sion, so the expressions ' he proeeeded,' or ' came out 
 from the Father ' and came to mankind, very naturally in- 
 dicate that he was the chosen messenger of God to the 
 human race'^s. 
 
 The last clause explains the preceding. Compare John 
 xiii. 3 ; xvi. 27, 28. 30. 
 
 VII. 
 
 John viii. 58. " Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say 
 unto you, Before Abraham was born'^'*, I am." 
 
 This text is held up as a triumphant argument for the 
 deity, or at least the pre-existence, of Jesus Christ. 
 
 1 . " I that am truth itself," says Dr. Guyse in his 
 paraphrase upon the text, *' assuredly tell you that how 
 young soever I be, yet before Abraham was born, and 
 before all worlds, I had a real existence, as the unchange- 
 able I AM, who ordered Moses to speak of me to your 
 fathers under that name." 
 
 " Something more is implied," says Dr. Sherlock, 
 (Disc. vol. iv. on Philip, ii. 6.) " in the expression I AM, 
 
 ^ E^tjASov xcci rfuvj' q. d. £^£A9«;v YjKujj ' a Deo missus sum.' Grotius. 
 See Lardncr on the Logos, p. 21. 
 
 ** Before Abraham was borji,~\ itpiv A^^ccaix. ysvscr^ai, syo sifii. So 
 Airian Epict. irpiv 'lifnoKptxry] ysvetr^ai, ' before Hippocrates was 
 born.' Eaphel. in loc. who cites other parallel instances from Herodo- 
 tus, ripiv ysvaoSm ■^[J.as, ' before we were born.' Platon. Phsedoii. 
 bee Wolfius, and Archbishop Newconie. 
 
 than 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 47 
 
 than that he had long existed before his coming into the 
 world ; something peculiar, as we may learn from the 
 original use of the words, they being the very same which 
 God made choice of to express his own eternity and power, 
 when Moses inquired after his name. Now Vv'hat could 
 tempt our Saviour to use and apply this expression to 
 himself, when he knew that it had never been applied to 
 any but God .?" 
 
 ^^ I cannot imagine, " says Dr. Doddridge in his Note 
 upon this text, " that if our Lord had been a mere crea- 
 ture, he would have ventured to express himself in a 
 manner so nearly bordering upon blasphemy, or have 
 permitted his beloved disciple so dangerously to disguise 
 his meaning/* 
 
 After the solem.n appeal of these grave and learned men 
 to this text as a decisive proof of the deity of Christ, who 
 would suspect that, when our Lord made the declaration 
 upon which this important conclusion rests, there is no 
 reason to believe that he had the slightest allusion to the 
 text in Exodus iii. 1 4, v*'ichout which every appearance of 
 argument vanishes away ? 
 
 The truth is, that the translators of the Old Testament 
 having rendered erroneously a passage in Exodus, and the 
 translators of the New Testament having also mistranslated 
 a text in John ; from a combination of the two, the un- 
 learned or inadvertent reader draws a conclusion still more 
 erroneous and pernicious than either or both the others. 
 
 When Moses asks by what name he shall describe the 
 Almighty to the Israelites ; God answers him, Exod. iii. 
 14, "I will be what I will be," — a phrase expressive of 
 the immutability of the divine nature and counsels : which 
 the public version renders, " I am that I am." In the text 
 in John, our Lord says to the Jews, " Before Abraham 
 was born, I was," for so it must be rendered in order to 
 make sense, as expositors generally allow. But the pub- 
 lic 
 
48 *r£XT5 SUPPOSED TO AG3ERT [Part li 
 
 lie version renders the words '• I am ;" which, being con- 
 nected in idea with the same words in the English version 
 in the book of Exodus, have led to the conclusion that 
 our Lord assumed a title peculiar to the Supreme being : 
 he is therefore God, equal to, or one with, the Father. 
 
 It is plain that no such inference would have been 
 thought of had the translation of the two passages been 
 more correct. Nor can it be reasonably alleged that the 
 words of our Lord are a citation from the Septuagint ver- 
 sion and not from the Hebrew original. For the words 
 in the LXX. are Eycv £//x; o Hv, " I am the Being." And 
 such would probably have been the words of the evan- 
 gelist, had he intended to express in Greek an allusion to 
 this text, which our Lord had delivered in his native, that 
 is the Syro-chaldaic tongue 4^. 
 
 2. " Before Abraham was born I existed.'* 
 The present tense of the substantive verb is sometimes 
 used for the past. John xiv. 9, " Have I been {sijxi, am I,) 
 so long time with you, and yet hast thou not known me ?" 
 Psalm xc. 2, " Before the mountains were brought forth 
 thou wert (o-'j f/, thou art,) God.'* John v 13, "He 
 that was healed knew not who it was," (ng fcrr/, who it 
 is.) In other verbs the present is also sometimes used 
 for the preterite. John viii. 25, "• They said to him, Who 
 
 *^ This supposed allusion of our Lord to the declaration in Exodus 
 is not noticed either by Calvin or Beza, though the former understands 
 it as an assertion of his divine nature. The latter indeed appears to 
 incline to refer the expression to the divine decree concerning Christ 
 as mediator : " Quatenus est oculis fidei visus ab Abrahamo — alioqui 
 non videretur Christus apposite disserere." Neither the LXX. trans- 
 lation nor the Latin Vulgate would be likelv to lead any one into the 
 same error into which the English version leads an English reader. 
 The liXX. is cited above The Latin Vulgate reads, " Ego sum qui 
 sum : sic dices filiis Israel, Qui est misit me ad vos." Indeed the sup- 
 posed allusion of our Lord to the words in Exodus, is so palpably ground- 
 less, and so completely abandoned by all learned and judicious critics, 
 that one cannot help wondering that so enlightened and liberal a writer 
 33 Archbishop Newconie should have given any countenance to it, 
 
 art 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 49 
 
 art thou ? Jesus said unto them, Even what I told you at 
 first,'* (KccAu, I tell.) See also John xii. 9; xv. 27; 
 XX. 14 ; xxi. 4. 12. Acts ix. 2646. 
 
 The Jews evidently understood the language of Jesus as 
 an assertion of his existence before the birth of Abraham J 
 for in the paroxysm of their rage they took up stones to 
 stone him as a liar and a blasphemer. 
 
 This text is regarded by the supporters of the Arian 
 hypothesis as a decisive proof of the pre-existence of 
 
 *^ Newcome in loc. " Eycv sifLi, praesens pro imperfecto : eram, syco 
 irsXov. Nonnus. Sic in Graeco. Ps. xc, 2." Grotius.— " I am, that 
 is, I was." Bishop Pearce, who observes in his note that the present 
 tense is sometimes used for the preterite, and refers to John viii. 25 j 
 i. 18. Matt, xxiii. 39. and his notes upon them. " Le present se prend 
 souvent dans I'Ecriture pour I'imparfait, qui est un tems dont les 
 langues Orientales manquent." Le Clerc. — " I assure you in the roost 
 solemn manner, I existed before Abraham drew the breath of life." 
 Harwood. — " The peculiar use of the present tense in the usage of 
 scriptural expression is to imply determination and certainty, as if he 
 had said, My mission was settled and certain before the birth of Abra- 
 ham." Wakefield, — " The words may be rendered, I was. The 
 present for the imperfect, or even for the preterperfect, is no unusual 
 ligure with this writer." Campbell. — " Dixerat prius, diem suam 
 ardenti desiderio expetitum fuisse ab Abraham. Quia hoc Judaeis in- 
 credibile erat, subjecit se tunc quoque fuisse." Calvin. 
 
 The expositors and critics are almost unanimous in giving to the 
 words eyuj sifxi the sense of past time. Nevertheless a learned writer 
 in the Theological Repository, vol. iv. p. 350, objects, " If it be said 
 that syuj siu.i may be translated / was, this appears to me more easily 
 asserted than proved. Indeed the present tense of bi^ja in Greek and 
 of sum in Latin may in some instances be translated have been, but T 
 imagine in those only where the present time is taken in with the past, 
 and a continuance of being is implied." And Dr. Carpenter, in his 
 Letters to Mr. Veysie, p. 246, remarks, that " for the interpretation 
 which requires ayco si^i, 1 am, to have the sense of / was, no justifica- 
 tion appears in the writings of John, at least, if in any part of the New 
 Testament." 
 
 The learned reader will judge how far the evidence alleged supports 
 the general sense of critics and expositors, that the present tense is here 
 used to express what is called the imperfect, I arn, for I was. 
 
 It is observable that in the text above cited, John v. 13, the Cam- 
 bridge manuscript for rig sriv reads r<j vjv. The Viilgate, the old Italic, 
 and Beza, translate '' quis esset" 
 
 , E Christ J 
 
50 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO AsssEPvT [Part I. 
 
 Christ ; and the Unitarian exposition of it is treated by 
 them with great contempt +7. 
 
 " The Socinian interpretation of this passage," says 
 Dr. Clarke, (Scrip. Doc. No. 59 i.) "is very hmguid and 
 unnatural, that Christ was before Abraham in the fore- 
 knowledge and appointment of God. The plain meaning 
 is, tliat he was really with God in the beginning, and be- 
 fore the world was." 
 
 Tliis language is rather too confident, especially as the 
 learned advocate of this high-Arian or semi-Arian hypo- 
 thesis has not condescended to state his objections to the 
 Unitarian interpretation. The venerable bishop Pearce 
 has given his explanation of the text in less offensive terms. 
 " What Jesus here says relates, I think, to his existence 
 antecedent to Abraham's days, and not to his having been 
 the Christ appointed or foretold before that time : for, if 
 Jesus had meant this, the answer would, I apprehend, not 
 have been a pertinent one. He might have been appointed, 
 
 ■*' Dr. Harwood in his Observations on the Socinian Scheme, p. 42, 
 allows himself great freedom and warmth of language npon this sub- 
 ject. "That plain declaration," says he, "of our Saviour to the 
 Jews, that before Abraham was, he had an existence, will, I think, for 
 ever stand in full force against all the acumen of criticism, and saga- 
 city of refinement, which may be employed to invalidate and explain 
 away its natural and obvious signification. The interpretation that our 
 Lord had an existence in the divine decree before Abraham, and that 
 it was before the times of this patriarch fore-nrdained that he should 
 appear in such an age and state of the world, is extremely yorcerf and 
 futile, and does not discriminate our Lord from thyself, O reader, who 
 hadst from eternity an existence in the divine decree. It is plain that 
 our Saviour's audience took these words in their natural acceptation ; 
 for. upon his asserting to them that he was in being before their great 
 ancestor, ihey were instantly transported with fury against him as a 
 blasphemer and impostor, and took up stones with a design to nuirther 
 him. These actual violences of the Jews prove, I apprehend, better 
 than a thousand inane and chimerical theories, how our Redeemer 
 was understood, and intended to be understood." 
 
 After all, notwithstanding this fine declamation, the Jews might, 
 for any thing that appears, misunderstand our Lord's words, as unques- 
 tionably they did. 
 
 foretold. 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 51 
 
 foretold, for the Christ ; but if he had not had an existence 
 before Abraham's days, neither could he have seen Abra- 
 ham, nor could Abraham have seen him''-^." 
 
 In his own liberal and gentle spirit, Dr. Price, in his 
 Discourses upon the Person of Christ, p. 1.35, makes the 
 following observations upon the Unitarian interpretation 
 of this text : 
 
 " The interpretations which the Socinians give of these 
 texts are such as cannot easily occur to any plain man. 
 By saying that he existed before Abraham, they think that , 
 he only meant that his existence was intended before 
 Abraham : and by the glory which he had with the Father 
 before the world was, they understand the glory which he 
 had in the divine foresight and appointment before the 
 world was. 1 must own to you that I am inclined to 
 wonder that wise and good men can satisfy themselves 
 with such explanations. But I correct myself, t know 
 that Christians, amidst their differences of opinion, are too 
 apt to wonder at one another, and to forget the allowances 
 which ought to be made for the darkness in which we are 
 all involved. Sensible of this truth, and hoping to be ex- 
 cused if I should ever express my conviction in too strong 
 language, I proceed to recite to you some other texts^O." 
 
 It cannot, I think, be denied that the words of our Lord 
 ih this declaration to the Jews, will, when considered in 
 their grammatical import and construction, bear the sense 
 
 ^ The learned prelate conjectares that the evangelist wrote A^paccu, 
 swpscKS as, " did Abraham see tiiee?" which he thinks would best suit 
 the connexion : but his conjecture is unsupported by any authority- 
 
 ^ It is curious to observe how Dr, Clarke, Dr. Price, and Dr. Har- 
 wood are led away by the notion that the Socinian interpretation is 
 languid, forced, and unnatural, without assigning any reason why they 
 think so, and Vv-ithout reflecting that a sense which, from established 
 associations, may appear most obvious and natural to one, may to an- 
 other, whose train of associations is different, appear forced and far- 
 fetched. The bishop of Rochester (Dr. Pearce) does not fall into this 
 error. 
 
 which 
 
52 TiiXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 which the Arian expositors annex to them, and in which 
 the Jews appear to have understood them. 
 
 But against this interpretation it may be alleged, that 
 the word s//^/, even when used absolutely, very rarely, if 
 ever, expresses simple existence ^^ ; that it is not probable 
 that our Lord would have been so very open and explicit 
 upon this high and mysterious subject to his enemies, when 
 he was so reserved to his friends, and does not appear to 
 have hinted it even to his disciples ^i ; that if he had in- 
 tended in this instance to announce his own pre- existence 
 so very explicitly as many believe, he would have taught 
 this extraordinary doctrine more frequently, in a greater 
 variety of phrase, and would have laid greater stress upon 
 it ; and finally that this fact, so solemnly declared, would 
 have been more attended to, and would have made a 
 more permanent and vivid impression. It would have 
 been a subject of general conversation and scrutiny, of ad- 
 miration, or offence. Whereas the idea of such a claim 
 on the part of our Lord vanished immediately. The dis- 
 ciples did not notice it. The Jews did not repeat it. And 
 it is not alleged as a charge against our Saviour that he 
 arrogated this extraordinary attribute. It is probable 
 therefore that Jesus did not mean to be understood in 
 
 — r ■ — ■ ■■'<■- — ■ ■■ ■■■ '■ 
 
 "•^ " By interpreting tj/^t as meaning to exist, they take it in a sense 
 different from its most common acceptation, and from the meaning in 
 which it is used in every instance in which it occurs in this very chap- 
 ter*" Simpson's Essay ix. p. 105. 
 
 °' " Did we not daily experience," says an excellent writer, (Mr. 
 Lindsey) in the Comment, and Essays, vol. i. p. 408^ " the power of 
 prejudice to darken our understandings, and hinder us from seeing the 
 most palpable contradictions, one might be surprised that any could 
 ever suppose our Lord to be so very open and familiar with those Pha- 
 risees, his most bitter adversaries, as to tell them such a wonderful se- 
 cret concerning himself, that he was the I AM, Jehovah, the eternal 
 God, as some construe his words, or according to others, that he had 
 existed with God from the beginning, before the world was, at the 
 same time that he kept his disciples quite in the dark about things so 
 prodigious and extraordinary," 
 
 the 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXIfiT£NCE OF CHRTST. 53 
 
 the sense in which the Jews did or pretended to apprehend 
 him, and for which the Arian expositors contend. An- 
 other sense may be given to our Lord's declaration, which 
 is liable to fewer objections, and which is perfectly con- 
 sistent with the proper humanity of Christ. 
 
 3. " Before Abram shall become Abraham, I am Ae," 
 i. e. the Christ. 
 
 It was promised to Abraham that he should be the fa- 
 ther of many nations ; and, as a pledge of the accomplish- 
 ment of this promise, by special divine appointment his 
 name was changed from Abram to Abraham. Gen. xvii. 
 4, 5. In this declaration to the Jews, our Lord solemnly 
 avers, that before the accomplishment of this promise to 
 Abraham he appears as the Messiah. 
 
 This explanation of the text was proposed, though not 
 absolutely adopted, by Slichtingius, Wolzogenius, Steg- 
 man, and others of the old Socinians. It has been revi- 
 ved and defended by a writer in the Theological Reposi- 
 tory, vol. iv. p. 348 J and Dr. Carpenter, in his Letters 
 to Mr. Veysie, p. 246, expresses his approbation of it. In 
 favour of this interpretation it is stated, 1.) That the ori- 
 ginal word {yivsa-Qui) does not necessarily refer to past 
 time, but much more frequently, and in the writings of 
 this evangelist uniformly, to that which is future ^2. 2.) 
 That as the second clause is allowed to be elliptical, so 
 probably is the first ; and the ellipsis cannot be better 
 supplied than by this hypothesis. 3.) That this interpre- 
 tation retains the proper sense of the present tense (lam) 
 in the second clause, a sense which it bears uniformly in 
 
 " The word yevscrSaj occurs 38 times in the New Testament. In five 
 passages only it signifies past time. Luke iii. 22 ; ix. 36. Acts xxii, 
 17' Phil, i, 13. 1 Thess. i. 7. In John xiii. 19, the phrase -ffpo ra ys- 
 vsaSoci is found, which is properly rendered ' before it shall come to 
 pass.' And John xiv. 29, the very same words occur which are used 
 in ch. viii. 53 ; tpiv ysvsG'^ai, where they must refer to future time. 
 " 1 have now told you before it come to pass." Theol. Rep. vol. iv. 
 p, 346, 
 
 all 
 
54 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 all other places where the words are used absolutely. 
 That nothing but absolute necessity will justify a depar- 
 ture from this usage. And though it cannot be denied 
 that in some instances the present indicative, / am, has 
 the sense of the preterperfect, / have been, it does not ap- 
 pear that it is ever used for / ivas^^. 4.) This interpre- 
 tation connects well with the tenor of our Lord's dis- 
 course : Your father Abraham desired to see my day : he 
 did see it, and rejoiced. " And verily I say, that the 
 time for the accomplishment of what he foresaw is not 
 yet arrived : for before Abram shall be Abraham, f. e. 
 become the father of many nations, according to the im- 
 port of his name, I am the Christ your Messiah s*." 5.) 
 This declaration of his superiority to Abraham best ac- 
 counts for the violent rage of the Jews, who would rather 
 have been disposed to treat our Lord with contempt, as a 
 lunatic, if they had understood him as meaning nothing 
 more than that he existed before Abraham was born. 
 
 To these arguments it is replied, 1.) That this solution 
 is not necessary ; for it is universally admitted that the 
 common interpretation of the first clause is fully justifi- 
 able : and it is generally agreed that the authorities for 
 giving a preterite signification to the latter clause are com- 
 petent and satisfactory. 2. ) If the proposed interpretation 
 is just, the text ought to have stood thus : " before Abram 
 shall become" Abraham." The present ellipsis is too harsh, 
 and the mode of supplying it quite arbitrary, 3.) The 
 word Abraham always in the New Testament occurs 
 
 »^ See Note 46, p. 4g. 
 
 ** Tbeol. Repos, vol. iv. p. 351, See also Slichtingius and Wolzoge- 
 nius in loc. The latter seems to give the preference to this interpre- 
 tation, which the former does not. Both these learned critics state at 
 large the two Unitarian interpretations of this text, and neither of 
 them seems to feel any difficulty in assigning to £</-(.< a preterite signi-< 
 fication. 
 
 as 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. ^5 
 
 as a proper name, and is never used in a mystical sense ^'"\ 
 4.) It is a trifling proposition, and unworthy of the so- 
 lemnity with which it is introduced, that Christ existed 
 as the Messiah before an event which it was known was 
 not to happen till many years or ages afterwards ^^. 
 5.) The connexion with the preceding context is not very 
 obvious. It is no reply to the objection of the Jews. Nor 
 does it at all illustrate or vindicate ourLord's own assertion, 
 " that Abraham had seen his day." The declaration, " I am 
 the Messiah before the promises are fulfilled to Abraham,'* 
 seems both insulated and irrelevant. 6.) It is an interpreta- 
 tion altogether novel, and unheard of till it was proposed 
 by the Polish Socinians ^7. 
 
 4. "Before Abraham was born, I w as Ae;" i, e. the Christ. 
 
 *' " h being evident that the discourse is of Abraham's person, it 
 is incongruous here to introduce a mystical sense of the word, which 
 the Jews never thought of, and which had Christ intended, he would 
 in all hlielihood have said Ttoiv Afoaa ysvsTSai A^jsaaa." Whitby. 
 
 *^ " Ipsa Graeca phrasis vel sola, satis refuiat Socinianos, qui mire 
 torquent hsec verba, quasi Salvator id dicere voluerit, se jam esse an- 
 tequam Abram factus sit Abraham, id est j)ater multarum gentium : 
 quod contigit post ascensionem Christi. SoJent isti homines valde 
 ingeniosi et acuti haberi. Sed vere dicam in hujus loci explicatione 
 ita versantur, ut acumen omne perdidisse, et obtusissimi esse videantur. 
 Quid enim jejunius dici cogitarive potest, quam Salvatorem hoc sen- 
 sisse, se jam esse, antequam ea fierent, qute aliquot annis post futura 
 erant ? Nam quis sanus ita loquitur ? Et quid hoc ad istud, propter 
 quod Judasi Jesum, quasi blasphema locutum lapidibus obruere vole- 
 bant." Raphel. Annot. torn. i. p. 651. 
 
 Now, without adopting the hard words of this learned and orthodox 
 crlt'c, it may surely be permiued to remark, that when our Lord 
 thought fit publicly and plainly to announce to the Jews the ofi^ensive 
 truth that he was himself their Messiah, it was hardly consistent with 
 the dignity of his character, with the greatest solemnity of language 
 to announce another fact, which every one present must have known 
 as well as himself, viz. that if he really was the promised Messiah, he 
 was such antecedently to an event which was then future. What 
 would be thought of a certain great personage, if he should say, " I 
 solemnly aver that even before the princess Charlotte becomes queen 
 of England, I am now prince of Wales." Num quis sanus ita lo- 
 quitur ? 
 
 ^^ " This interpretation is contrary to all antiquity, as their (the 
 Socinian) expositions ia these cases use to be," Whitby. 
 
 q.d. 
 
56 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 q, d. Before that eminent patriarch was brought into 
 being, my existence and appearance under the character 
 of the Messiah at this period, and in these circumstances, 
 was so completely arranged, and so irrevocably fixed in 
 the immutable counsels and purposes of God, that in this 
 sense I may be said even then to have existed. 
 
 This is the interpretation proposed by the Unitarians. 
 It is that which Dr. Clarke calls "languid and unnatural ;'* 
 which Dr. Harwood styles " forced and futile, inane and 
 chimerical;" and at which Dr. Price " wonders." It re- 
 mains to be considered whether it be scriptural and true. 
 
 1.) In the first place, this interpretation well accords 
 with the connexion and context. 
 
 Our Lord declares, ver. 56, " Your father Abraham 
 longed to see my day, and he did see it.*' The Jews, 
 foolishly or perversely misrepresenting his language, ask, 
 *' Hast thou seen Abraham ?" Our Lord never pretended 
 that he had seen him : and not deigning to rectify this 
 silly mistake, he goes on to establish the reasonableness 
 of his assertion '. q. d. Abraham did foresee my appear- 
 ance, and the blessings of my kingdom. And this was 
 possible : because though I was not then born, yet my 
 appearance under the character of the Messiah, and all 
 the happy consequences which flow from it, had been 
 determined in the divine counsels long before that patriarch 
 was in existence. 
 
 2.) The words lam (syw £////) must be understood 
 to mean, and should be translated, / was. 
 
 The connexion of the words renders this construction 
 necessary to the sense. ' Before such an event / am,' is 
 without meaning, unless the event be future : and in this 
 instance, if the event referred to be future, it has been 
 shown that the assertion would be trivial, and unworthy 
 of our Lord's character. 
 
 3.) The ellipsis must be supplied by the word he^ i. e. 
 
 'he 
 
Sect. 3.3 THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 5*? 
 
 * he who Cometh/ or, ' the Christ.' For it has been al- 
 ready stated that the verb f/^; is seldom if ever used to 
 express simple existence. And wherever it occurs in this 
 elliptical form, it is commonly, and very properly, sup- 
 plied by the pronoun (uvtos) he. John iv. 26, " I who 
 speak unto thee am Ae." John ix. 9, " The blind man 
 said, I am he." John xviii. 5, " I am he" i. e. whom 
 ye seek. Luke xxi. 8, " Many will come in my name, 
 saying {syic si^i) I am Ae," or Christ. Compare Matt. 
 xxiv. 5. Mark xiii. 6. Matt. xiv. 27. Mark vi. 50. John 
 vi. 20. 
 
 The context in all cases easily determines the sense of 
 the ellipsis. In the former part of this very discourse the 
 phrase occurs twice, in a connexion in which the transla- 
 tors of the public version, being under no bias to the con- 
 trary, have supplied the ellipsis properly. Ver. 24, " If 
 ye believe not that I am he, i, e. the Messiah, ye shall 
 die in your sins." Ver. 28, " When ye have lifted up the 
 Son of Man, then shall ye know that I am he." It is the 
 very same phrase which occurs in ver. 58 ; which ought 
 therefore to have been translated in the same form. " Be- 
 fore Abraham was born, I was Ae," i. e. the prophet who 
 was to come, the Messiah. 
 
 4.) In the language of the sacred writers, a being, or 
 a state of things, is said to exist, when it is the eter- 
 nal IMMUTABLE PURPOSE OF GoD THAT IT SHALL 
 
 EXIST, at the time and in the circumstances which his 
 infinite wisdom hath chosen and ordained. 
 
 The apostle Paul expressly teaches concerning God, 
 that " he calleth those things which are not, as though 
 they were ;" Rom. iv. 17: an observation which he ap- 
 plies to the promise made to Abraham, Gen. xvii. 5, '* / 
 have made thee a father of many nations,'* i. e. I have 
 determined the future actual existence of this event- 
 
 I.] In the Old Testament nothing is more common 
 than to express prophecy in the language of history, and 
 
 to 
 
SS TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I, 
 
 to state future events as present or even past. Thus Cy- 
 rus is addressed before his birth as though he were actu- 
 ally existing; Isaiah x!v. 1, "Thus saith the Lord to his 
 anointed, even to Cyrus, whose right hand I have holden." 
 And Babylon is represented as captured seventy years be- 
 fore the event; Jer. li. 4<1, " How is Sheshach taken, and 
 how is the praise of the whole earth surprised ! How is 
 Babvlon become an astonishment amoncr the nations !" 
 
 These events at that time had no existence but in the 
 divine purpose. Other future events are mentioned as 
 already past. Exod. xv. 12 — 17. 1 Sam. xv, 28; 
 xxviii. 17, IS, And in Isa. xlvi. 10, II, the Supreme 
 Being, in very sublime language, declares the absolute 
 certainty of the accomplishment of bis eternal purposes : 
 " I have spoken it, I will also bring it to pass : I have 
 purposed it, I will also do it. My counsel shall stand." 
 
 This prolepsis, this anticipation of future events, is par- 
 ticularly remarkable in the prophecies v. hich relate to the 
 Messiah, who is frequently represented as actually exist- 
 ing, and executing his divine commission, many ages be- 
 fore his public appearance and ministry. Isa. ix. 6, *' Un- 
 to us a child is born, unto us a son is given." Ch. xlii. 1, 
 " Behold my servant, whom I uphold ; my elect,, in 
 whom my soul delighteth : I have put my spirit upon 
 him." And in that celebrated prophecy in the fitty-third 
 chapter, the humiliation of the Messiah, his rejection and 
 sufferings, are described throughout in the language of 
 history. '•' He is despised and rejected of men. He 
 hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows. He was 
 wounded for our transgressions, and bruised for our ini- 
 quities. He was brought as a lamb to the slaughter. 'He 
 was cut off out of the land of the living^^," chap. xlix. 
 
 ■'^ The argument from the prolepsis is not at all invalidated if, as 
 the Jews and some modern writers (to whose opinion however 1 do 
 not accede) suppose, this prophecy is not applicable to the Messiah, 
 but to Jeremiah, or to the present state of the Jewish nation, 
 
 5—10 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. ,59 
 
 5 — 10. The Messiah himself is introduced as speaking 
 and stating the promise of God to him, that " he should 
 be a light to the Gentiles, and salvation to the ends of 
 the earth^S." And again, chap. Ixi. 1 — 3, " The spirit of 
 the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to 
 preach good tidings to the meek ; he hath sent me to 
 bind up the broken-hearted," a prophecy which our Lord 
 declares to have received its accomplishment in his own 
 person: Luke iv. 21. 
 
 In these instances, and in other similar prophecies, the 
 Messiah is described as actually invested with the insignia 
 of his office, and performing its duties. To the Jews, 
 therefore, who were familiar with the language and ima- 
 gery of their own prophets, our Lord's declaration of his 
 existence as the Messiah before the birth of Abraham 
 would not sound so harsh and offtnsive as it does to mo- 
 dern readers ; who, not being accustomed to the bold 
 dramatic language of prophecy, are apt to understand that 
 of actual existence u'hich the Jews would easily perceive 
 to be figurative. The prophetic representations in the 
 Jewish Scriptures amply justify the language of Christ in 
 reference to them. If the prophets describe the P»/Iessiah 
 as contemporary with them, Christ might with propriety 
 speak of himself under that character, as their contempo- 
 rary. If Isaiah writes as having seen the Messiah, having 
 heard his complaints, and having been witness to his la- 
 bours, his miracles, and his sufferings ; our Lord might 
 with equal propriety represent himself under his official 
 
 ** ''The character and office of the Messiah was exhibited in gene- 
 ral terms at the beginning of chap. xlii. j but here he is introduced in 
 person, declaring the full extent of his commission, which is not only 
 to restore the Israelites, but to be a light to lighten the Gentiles, to 
 call them to the knowledge and obedience of the true God." Bishop 
 Lowth in loc. See Cardale's True Doct. of the New Testament con- 
 cerning Christ; p. 84 — 87. 
 
 character, 
 
60 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 character, as having existed in the days of Isaiah. If 
 Abraham saw his day ; he, as the Messiah, must have co- 
 existed with the patriarch, and, by parity of reason, before 
 Abraham's birth. But all allow that the prophetic repre- 
 sentations of the Messiah's existence are figurative : they 
 only express what existed in the divine purpose, and imply 
 nothing more than certainty of event. Let it then be 
 granted, that, when our Lord speaks of himself as the 
 Messiah before Abraham was born, he means the same 
 thing : that his language only implies that he was the 
 Messiah in the divine purpose. No reasoning, I think, can 
 be more conclusive. 
 
 2.] The same language of anticipation occurs in the 
 New Testament, in which persons, and things, and states 
 of things, are described as actually existing, which only 
 existed in the divine mind and declared purpose ; parti- 
 cularly those which relate to the Messiah, and the dispen- 
 sation of the Gospel^. 
 
 Of this language a very remarkable instance occurs, 
 Luke XX. 38. Our Lord argues against the Sadducees the 
 doctrine of the resurrection, from the declaration of God 
 to Moses, Exod. iii. 6, " I am the God of Abraham, the 
 God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob : for he is not a God 
 of the dead, but of the living." And to obviate the ob- 
 jection that the patriarchs were now in fact dead, he adds, 
 *' for all live to him :" that is. As it is the determined 
 purpose of God to raise them to life, they are in his all- 
 comprehending view actually alive. 
 
 The Gospel and its blessings are represented as peculi- 
 
 '^** " Nothing is more common with the writers of the New Tes- 
 tament than to represent those things as having had existence from 
 the beginning, which were always designed by God to come to pass, 
 and were promised in the prophets. And as this was more especially 
 the case in the Gospel, so we find it represented throughout the Scrip- 
 ture as having existed in the eternal counsels of the Almighty." Dr. 
 Dawson at Moyer's Lectures, p. 6S, 69. 
 
 arly 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. Gl 
 
 arly the objects of the divine purpose and decree. Matt. 
 XXV. 34, " Come, and inherit the kingdom prepared for 
 you from the foundation of the world." 1 Cor. ii. 7, 
 " The mystery which God ordained before the world to 
 our glory." Eph. iii. 9, " The mystery which from the 
 beginning of the world has been hid in God." 
 
 This dispensation and its blessings had been promised 
 and foretold by the prophets. Rom. i. 2, " The gospel of 
 God which he had promised before by his prophets in the 
 holy Scriptures." See also Acts xxvi. 22, 23. 1 Pet. i. 
 10, 11. 
 
 Of this dispensation it was the divine purpose that Jesus 
 should be the publisher, and the medium through which 
 its blessings were to be conveyed to mankind. 1 Pet. i. 
 20, " Who verily was fore-ordained before the foundation 
 of the world." Acts ii. 23 ; iv. 27, 28. John i. 44. 
 
 Hence he was the object of the Father's love — John 
 xvii. 24, " Thou lovedst me before the foundation of the 
 world" — and " bad glory with the Father before the 
 world was." ver. 5. And his violent death constituting 
 an essential part of the divine plan, he is represented. Rev. 
 xiii. 8, as " the lamb slain from the foundation of the 
 world." 
 
 And the happy state of things under the dispensation 
 of the Messiah being thus predestinated in the divine coun- 
 sels, Abraham is represented as having actually seen them 
 two thousand years before the birth of Christ. John viii. 
 5Q, " Your father Abraham desired to see my day ; he 
 saw it, and was glad." The prophet Isaiah also " saw 
 his glory." John xii. 41. 
 
 Believers are " chosen before the foundation of the 
 world, and predestinated to the adoption of children," 
 Eph, i. 4, 5 : " predestinated according to the purpose of 
 him who worketh all things according to the counsel of 
 his own will." ver, 11. 
 
 And 
 
62 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Parti* 
 
 And what is thus predestinated is described as actually 
 accomplished from the beginning of time, 2 Tim. i. 9, 
 *' Who hath saved us — according to his own purpose and 
 grace, which v/as given us in Christ Jesus before the world 
 began." 
 
 Our Lord describes his apostles as already in posses- 
 sion of the honour which he intended for them. John 
 xvii. 22j " The glory which thou gavest me, I have given 
 them.'* And the apostle Paul represents virtuous believers 
 in genera], as already in possession of that felicity which 
 God in his great wisdom and mercy has ordained for them. 
 Rom. viii. 29, SO, " Whom he foreknew he also did 
 predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son ; 
 whom he did predestinate, them he also called : whom 
 he called, them he also justified : whom he justined, them 
 he also glorified:" in purpose glorified is archbishop New- 
 come's translation, with whom agree Grotius, Locke, 
 Doddridge, and others. John v. 24, our Lord declares, 
 " He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that 
 sent me, hath everlasting life.*' See also John vi. 47. 54. 
 
 From this induction it clearly follows that persons, 
 things, and states of things, are not unfrequently described 
 in the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament 
 as actually existing, when they exist only in the divine 
 purpose and decree^^ When therefore our Lord de- 
 clares to the Jews, " Before Abraham was born I was 
 Ae," the plain meaning is, I was marked out in the divine 
 counsels as the Messiah. 
 
 5.) Though this interpretation is by some expositors 
 rejected with contempt, it is not destitute of support from 
 the authority of many able and learned critics and di- 
 vinesG2/' 
 
 "This,'* 
 
 ^^ See Slichtingius and Wolzogenius in loc. Also Cardale's True 
 Doctrine of N. T. p, 84—92. and Simpson's Dissert, Essay ix. 
 
 ''* Eyw £<ju.(, praesens pro impeifecto, eram. Syrus. Sic in Graec. 
 PsaliS xc, 2. 'J Fuerat autcm ante Abrahamum Jesus, in divina con- 
 
 stilutione." 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. f),*? 
 
 "This," says Dr. LarJner, (on the Logos, p. 14,) 
 " may be thought a strong text for the pre-existence of 
 our Saviour's soul. But really he there only represents 
 his dignity as the Messiah, the special favour of God to- 
 
 stitntione." Txcv. \'m. S. 1 Pet. i. 20. Grotius in loc. — " Fgo quamvis 
 lion cxistimem Christum hic siinpliciter agere de se, qnatenns Deus 
 est, sed quatenus est ocv.lis fidei visus ab Abrahamo,Dei videlicet homi- , 
 iium mediator, sive Deus in carne manifestatns, (nam alioqui non 
 videretur Christus apposite disserere,) tamen quia ut mediator consi- 
 derari non potest, nisi vere sit Emmanuel, et hac etiam ratione dicitur 
 agniis a constitutione niundi occisus, imo vcro Chris'us fuisse heri et 
 hodie, putavi servandam esse antithesin." Beza in loc. 
 
 ** Regessit Jesus eos mnltuni falli in eestimanda fefate sua : nam, 
 prlmo, se fuisse ab omni seternitate. Secundo, licet tricessimum 
 rmiltis annis superasse non videretur, attamen de se in mandum mit- 
 tendo, longe ante Abrahami tempera, decretum cl Deo factum esse, 
 quod cum benigne a Deo Abrahamo revelatum fuisset, se ea quoqne 
 ratione, Abrabamo notum fuisse." Hammond in Joe. 
 
 This reference, by Beza and Hammond, of the existence of Christ 
 as mediator, to an existence in the divine decree, is the more remark- 
 able, as the known orthodoxy of these expositors places them above 
 all suspicion of partiality to Unitarian interpretations. 
 
 " Priusquam Abraham esset ego sum. Judaei ipsi dicunt, legem ac 
 Messiam longe ante mundum conditum fuisse. Nam qus a Deo de- 
 stinata et constituta sunt, antequam rebus et factis ipsis exhibeantur, 
 apud Deum esse dicuntur. Sic Joannes de vita sterna dicit : 1 Job. 
 i. 2. Hinc et Petrum Christcm praccognitum dicit ante mundi con- 
 stituiionem." Slichtingius in loc. 
 
 " Poterat Christus dicere se fuisse ante Abrahamum non acta sed 
 divina pra?destinatione ac constitutione. Vid. 1 Pet. i. 20, Atque hic 
 sensus pulchre c nvenit cum eo quod Christus supra dixerat Abra- 
 hamum vidisse diem snam. Neque est quod quis banc responsionem 
 vel cxplicationem texfus frigidam vocet, propterea qUod sic non Chris- 
 tus tantum sed omnia quse in decreto divino fuerunt, fuisse dici pos- 
 sunt ante(]uam Abraham fieret. Ob=ervandnm enim est Christum non 
 simpliciter dicere se fuisse in Dei decreto antequam Abraham fieret, 
 sed se fuisse Messiam. Jtaque indicat Christus se ad banc dignitatem 
 tani sublimem, longe antequam Abraham nasceretur, Dei decreto esse 
 designatum." Wolzogenius in loc. 
 
 " iSotre Seigneur veut dire qu'il n'est pas surprenant qa'Abraham 
 ait prevu le terns auquel Dieu avoit resolu de leur envoyer son Fils, 
 parceque le Fils de Dieu etoit avant Abraham. Surquoi les interpretes 
 sont partages. Les uns entendent le verbe J'rtois de ladivinitc eter- 
 nelle (jui a habite en Jesus Christ dans le terns marque par la Sagcsse 
 divine : et les autres, entre lesquels est Theodore de Beza, de I'huma- 
 nite mesme de Jesus Christ, qui etoit dans le decret de Dieu, qui ap- 
 pelle ce qui n'est pas, comnie s'll etoit," Le Clerc in loc. 
 
 wards 
 
64 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 wards him, and the importance of the dispensation by him. 
 It is a way of speaking resembling that in Rev. xiii. 8, 
 " the lamb slain from the foundation of the world," ex- 
 plained by 1 Pet. i. 20, " who verily was fore-ordained 
 before the foundation of the world." The Jewish people 
 have a saying, that the Law was before the world was 
 created. In like manner, the dispensation of the Messiah 
 was before the dispensation of Abraham in dignity, nature, 
 and design, though not in time." 
 
 *' Before Abraham was born, 1 was." " I cannot see," 
 says Mr. Cardale ( True Doct. of New Test. p. 85, ) 
 " that this rendering must necessarily imply either his 
 eternal generation or his actual existence before Abraham. 
 But it should be rather understood, as I conceive, of God's 
 eternal and wise designation or appointment of him to the 
 office and work of a Saviour ; when, in pursuance of an- 
 cient promise and prediction, he should be born into the 
 world, and appear and act as the Messiah. Nor does this 
 appear to me such a low and languid sense as some have 
 represented it ; but the only true, rational, and consistent 
 one, and perfectly consonant to the sacred writings both 
 of the Old and New Testament ; where the spirit of God, 
 who seeth the end from the beginning, often speaks of fu- 
 ture things as already existing, or even as already past, to 
 denote the certainty of their accomplishment." Isa. xlvi. 
 10 ; vii. 14. Rom. iv. 17. 
 
 " Our Lord," says Mr. Lindsey (Sequel, p. 222,) 
 " without regarding the impertinent question of the Jews, 
 goes on to confirm what he had before been saying con- 
 cerning Abraham : ' Verily, verily, I say unto you, Before 
 Abraham was, I am :' that is. You need not be surprised 
 at what I have asserted of the great account Abraham made 
 of me } for I assure you, that before Abraham himself 
 was born I am he, or the Christ. Not that he actually 
 existed before Abraham, but only in the destination and 
 
 appointment 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 65 
 
 appointment of God, to whom all live who are many fu- 
 ture time to be brought into being/' 
 
 " Jesus did not say," says Dr. Priestley in his Note upon 
 the Text, ' either that he had seen Abraham, or that Abra- 
 ham had seen him, but only his day :' All that he meant 
 was, that as the future glory and happiness of the poste- 
 rity of Abraham was connected with his kingdom, and 
 that this had been intimated to Abraham, this kingdom 
 of his mui^t have been intended in the divine counsels be- 
 fore the time of Abraham. Christians are also said to be 
 chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world ; 
 Eph. i. 4 : though it is certain they had no being at that 
 time. But in the eye of God, whatever is to be may be 
 said already to exist. With him a thousand years are as 
 one day, and one day as a thousand years." 
 
 " It was determined," says Mr. Wakefield, In his In- 
 quiry into the Opinions of Christian Writers, p. 129, " in 
 the counsels of Providence, before the ages, before Abra- 
 ham vi-as ; that the Messiah should appear, that Jesus of 
 Nazareth should be the Messiah. So the names of the 
 true servants of God were written in the book of life from 
 the foundation of the world. Rev. xiii. S ; xvii. 8. Events 
 determined are often spoken of in Scripture as already ac- 
 complished. Matt. xvii. 1 1 ; xxvi. 45. This manner of 
 speaking, with a view to the pre-determinations of the 
 Deity, was customary among the Jews. ' Before the lu or Id 
 tvas c^-eated the Lord Jehovah created the Law, he pre- 
 pared the garden of Eden for the just.' Targum of Jona- 
 than on Gen. iil. 24." 
 
 " In the conversation, of which this clause is a part,'* 
 says Mr. Simpson in his accurate Essay upon this Text, 
 p. 112, " Jesus says^ ' Your father Abraham earnestly de- 
 sired to see my day, and he saw it, and was glad.' This 
 cannot signify that Abraham was alive while Jesus was 
 speaking, or during any part of his ministry. The apostle 
 
 F ' Paul 
 
66 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Parti. 
 
 Paul will assist us in the interpretation of this passage. 
 Gal. iii. 8, he says, ' The Scripture having foreseen that 
 God would justify the Gentiles by faith, proclaimed before 
 glad tidings to Abraham, saying. Through thee all nations 
 shall be blessed.' Abraham's seeing the day of the Mes- 
 siah, therefore, means only his having very general infor- 
 mation of the previous divine purpose and appointment 
 that the Messiah should descend from him. In like man- 
 ner, the clause " Before Abraham was born, I was he,* 
 signifies that previous to Abraham's existence God had 
 appointed that Jesus should be the Messiah. Since every 
 event from the beginning to the end of time, and through- 
 out eternity, is present to the omniscient mind of the Deity, 
 and since every thins; which he appoints will certainly come 
 to pass, his original appointments are represented in the 
 language of Scripture as being actually fulfilled before the 
 events really take place.'* 
 
 In the explanation of this important text It was thought 
 necessary to be thus particular, because it is in a great 
 measure decisive of the wliole controversy : for, if this 
 declaration does not establish the pre-existence of Christ, 
 no other passage can. And the impartial reader will con- 
 sider whether, when our Lord had declared, " Your father 
 Abraham saw my day," meaning thereby in prophetic 
 vision ; and when, immediately afterwards, he assigns as 
 a reason, " Before Abraham was born, I was he," it be not 
 most reasonable, and most consistent with the connexion, 
 to understand these words in the corresponding sense, not 
 of real existence, but of existence in the divine purpose. 
 
 Further, As it appears to have been common with the 
 sacred writers to represent persons and things as actually 
 existing, which existed only in the divine counsels, it fol- 
 lows that wherever Christ or his glory is represented as 
 existing previously to his appearance on earth, it may 
 justly be understood of an existence in the divine purpose 
 
 and 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 67 
 
 and decree only, unless the connexion necessarily deter- 
 mines it to the contrary signification. 
 
 VIII. 
 
 John xiii. 3. " Jesus knowing that he was come from 
 God and went to God." See No. VI. 
 
 ?Ie came from God as the messenger of his will to man- 
 kind. See John i. 6. He was returning to God^ having 
 finished his embassy, to render an account of his mission. 
 
 Dr. Harwood (Soc. Sch. p. 45,) cites this text as de- 
 cisive in favour of the pre-existence of Christ. Dr. Clarke, 
 with more judgement, appeals to it (Scrip. Doct. No. 51,) 
 only as a proof of the inferiority of the Son. 
 
 IX. 
 
 John xvi. 28. "I came forth from the Father, and am 
 come into the world ; again, I leave the world and go to 
 the Father." 
 
 It is here argued, that as the last clause clearly refers to 
 a local ascent into heaven, so the first and corresponding 
 clause ought in all reason to be understood of a prior local 
 descent from the Father. Hence Arians and Trinitarians 
 argue the pre-existence of Jesus Christ, and the Polish 
 Socinians infer his ascent into heaven antecedently to his 
 public appearance as a messenger from God. 
 
 On the other hand it has been urged, that *' it is fre- 
 quent with the best authors, and with the sacred writers in 
 particular, when the same words are put in opposition to 
 each other, to take the one in a literal, the other in a 
 figurative sense. Matt. viii. 22, ' Let the dead bury their 
 dead.' " So Jesus came into the world in a figurative sense 
 as a messenger from God ; but he left the world and went 
 to the Father literally and locally when he ascended into 
 heaven. 
 
 But it is better to take both clauses figuratively. As 
 
 F 2 Jesus 
 
68 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 Jesus came into the world when he appeared in public as 
 a messenger from God ; so, conversely, he left the world 
 and returned to the Father when his mission closed, and 
 he ceased to appear any longer as a public teacher 63. 
 
 X. 
 John xvii. 5. " And now, O Father, glorify thou me 
 with thy own self, with the glory which I had with thee 
 before the world was." 
 
 1. This text is understood by many Trinitarians as a 
 petition to the Father from our Saviour in his divine na- 
 ture, requesting that his human nature might be assumed 
 to a participation of those honours which the divine nature 
 had from all eternity possessed. The truth of this hypo- 
 thesis it would be useless to discuss^^-*. 
 
 2. By the advocates for the pre-existence of Christy this 
 text is understood as a prayer to be restored to that dig- 
 
 ^' Slichtingius argues strenuously, from the opposition of the two 
 clauses, the local ascent and descent of Christ. Wolzogenius, Grotius, 
 and Mr. Lindsey, Comin. and Ess. vol. i. p. 395, contend for the figu- 
 rative interpretation of the first, and the literal sense of the latter clause. 
 Jt may be remarked, that in this text the Arians take both clauses in 
 the same, i. e. the literal sens-e : and the Unitarians understand one 
 literally, and the other figuratively. In John iii. 13, " Who hath 
 ascended up into heaven but he that came down from heaven r" the 
 Arians understand the first clause figuratively, and the second literally ; 
 whereas the Unitarians interpret both clauses figuratively. And surely 
 it is always right to interpret the same words in the same sense, wdie- 
 ther literal or figurative, vi'here they occur in the same sentence, 
 unless the connexion imperiously requires contrary. Upon this princi- 
 ple, the figurative interpretation of both clauses in the present case ap- 
 pears the most eligible. 
 
 ^^ " Nunc autem, O Pater, adsumito banc mortalem naturara ad 
 participationem honoris et dignitatis et glorise, qua antequam mihi 
 Lane conjungerem naturam, ante creationem mundi, imo ab omni 
 aeternitate frucbar." Hammond in loc. — " Declarat se nihil adven- 
 titium cupere, sed tantum ut appareat talis in carne, qualis fuit ante 
 cdnditum mundum." Calvin.— Dr. Whitby gives the same interpre- 
 tation, which he supports by a quotation from Theophylact, " rr^v 
 
 Aoyos." 
 
 nity 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 69 
 
 nity and felicity which he possessed with the Father, before 
 the foundation of the world, and of which he had volun- 
 tarily divested himself when he became incarnate. 
 
 This it is alleged is the natural obvious meaning of the 
 words. If interpreted by the rules of sound criticism, they 
 will bear no other sense. The words vrapa cnocvTy, ' with 
 thy own self/ are opposed to the words ivri Trig yrig, ' upon 
 the earth,' in the preceding verse : and the words Trcc^ct 
 (Toi, ' with thee,' in the Scriptures and in all good writers, 
 are used in a local sense to express ' in thy house,' * in 
 thy presence,' and the like ; and never signify ' in thy 
 purpose or decree^^/ 
 
 This text is held up by the Arian expositors as an un- 
 answerable argument for the pre-existence of Christ, and 
 the interpretation of the Unitarians is treated by them with 
 very little ceremony. 
 
 " To suppose with the Socinlans," says Dr. Doddridge, 
 who agreed with the Arians in the belief of a created Lo- 
 gos, " that this refers only to that glory which God intend- 
 ed for him in his decrees, seems to sink and contract the 
 sense far short of its genuine purpose." 
 
 " The Socinian interpretation of this passage," says Dr. 
 Clarke (No. GOT), " is too much forced." 
 
 The value of such kind of observations has been already- 
 stated. Low and forced interpretations mean nothing 
 more than interpretations to which these learned exposi- 
 tors had not been accustomed ; but which might neverthe- 
 less be true. 
 
 Dr. Harwood, as he is wont, uses language still more 
 
 "' See Numb xxii. 9, '* Who are the men that are (TTafa aoj) with 
 thee in thy house ?' 1 Sam. xxii. 3, " Let my father and mother be 
 (irapa a-ci) with thee in thy house." " We shall receive," says the 
 mother of the seven martyrs, " the prize of virtue, and we shall be 
 {itapa. Qscv) with God :" i. e. in his presence. Joseph. Opp. torn. ii. 
 p. 509 'See Arist6ph, Plut. vi. 394. Demosth. de Coron. § 25. 
 Harwood Soc. Sch. p. 46—48. 
 
 triumphant. 
 
,70 - TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 triumphant. *"' Was there no intimation/* says he (Soc. 
 Sch. p. 46,) " in the whole New Testament of the pre- 
 existence of Christ, this single passage would irrefragably 
 demonstrate and establish it. It is a plain solemn address 
 to the Deity, that, since he had glorified his name upon 
 earth, he would be pleased to re-admit him to that state 
 of glory and happiness which he had possessed in his pre- 
 sence before the creation of the world. Upon this single 
 text I lay my finger. Here I posit my system. And if 
 plain words be designedly employed to convey any deter- 
 minate meaning ; if the modes of human speech have any 
 precision ; I am convinced that this plain declaration of 
 our Lord, in an act of devotion, exhibits a great and im- 
 portant truth which can never be subverted or invalidated 
 by any accurate and satisfactory criticism." 
 
 The learned writer adds in a note, " The solemnity 
 with which I once heard Dr. Benson appeal to this text 
 greatly affected me when I was a young man. Dr. New- 
 come also, the very learned and worthy bishop of Water- 
 ford, (afterwards archbishop of Armagh,) in a visit with 
 which he condescended to honour me, insisted on this 
 text as decisive." 
 
 These authorities are considerable. But authorities, at 
 least equally grave, may be produced on the other side. 
 And the question must be determined by reason, not by 
 authority. 
 
 3. " O Father, glorify thou me with thyself, with the 
 glory which I had with thee," that is, in thy immutable 
 purpose and decree, the glory which was intended for me 
 " before the world was." 
 
 This is the sense in which the words are explained by 
 the Polish Socinian expositors and by the modern Unita- 
 rians : and if this sense be admissible, no argument can 
 be dravv'n from this text in favour of the pre-existence of 
 Christ. 
 
 The 
 
Sect. 3,] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 71 
 
 The great error of most expositors seems to be concern- 
 ing the nature of that glory which was the object of our 
 Lord's earnest petition upon this solemn occasion. It is 
 commonly supposed that he solicits some personal benefit ; 
 some high distinction to be conferred upon himself as the 
 reward of his obedience and sufferings. But this would 
 have been a selfish request, unworthy of the dignity and 
 disinterestedness of our Lord's character. The glory to 
 which he aspired was that of fulfilling the purposes of his 
 divine mission ; of redeeming mankind from the bondage 
 of ignorance, idolatry, vice, and misery ; and restoring 
 them to the knowledge and love of God, and to the hope of 
 immortality. That this is the true meaning of our Lord in 
 this prayer, will appear from the following considerations: 
 
 1.) It is represented in Scripture as the glory of God, 
 to will and to accomplish the virtue and happiness of man- 
 kind. Luke ii. 14, " Glory to God in the highest for 
 peace on earth and goodwill towards men." John xv. 8, 
 " Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit." 
 Phil. i. 11," Being filled with the fruits of righteousness, 
 which are by Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of God.'* 
 See also John xii, 28. 31, 32 ; xvii. 4. Rom. xv. 7. 
 
 2.) Christ himself represents the success of his doctrine 
 as constituting his own true glory, and a?? the proper re- 
 ward of his sufferings : John xii. 23. When the Greeks 
 expressed a desire to be introduced to him, Jesus, in con- 
 templation of the future triumphs of his gospel, saith ; 
 *' The hour is come that the Son of Man should be glo- 
 rified. Verily I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall 
 into the ground and die, it abideth alone ; but if it die, it 
 bringeth forth much fruit." 
 
 3.) This is the glory which Christ communicated to 
 his apostles, and which they participated in common with 
 the Father and himself. Ver. 22, " The glory which 
 thou gavest me I have given them." — ^To them he com- 
 
 municated 
 
72 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 munlcated the doctrine he had received from God. Ver. 8, 
 '* I have given them the words which thou gavest me." 
 — To them he gave a commission similar to that which 
 he had himself received from God. Ver. 1 8, " As thou 
 hast sent me into the world, so have I also sent them into 
 the world." — To them he promised the holy spirit to qua- 
 lify them for their work, and to ensure success to their 
 exertions. John xiv. 16, " I will pray the Father, and 
 he shall give you another comforter (advocate) who may 
 abide with you for ever." Chap. xvi. 13, "When the 
 spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth." 
 — And this glory is conferred upon the apostles, that they 
 may be associated with God and Christ in diffusing the 
 blessings of the gospel. Chap. xvii. 22. 2(?, " That they 
 may be one, even as we are one : that they all may be one; 
 as thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also 
 may be one in us ; that the world may believe that thou 
 hast sent me." 
 
 4.) This glory of Christ as the instructor and redeemer 
 of mankind, was the object of the divine eternal purpose. 
 2 Tim. i. 9, " According to his purpose and grace, which 
 was given (f. e. intended and determined to be given) us 
 in Christ Jesus before the world began." See also Eph. i. 
 5. 10; ii. iO. 
 
 5.) This glory of Christ, in the success of his gospel, 
 and the universal extent of his spiritual dominion, is the 
 subject of many prophecies and promises. See particularly 
 Isa.liii. 10—12. 
 
 6.) This glory of Christ, in the recovery of mankind 
 from sin and death, having been the object of the divine 
 eternal and immutable purpose, and the subject of the di- 
 vine promise, is represented by our Lord as what he pos 
 sessed with the Father before the world was. 
 
 It has been already proved under Text VII. that such 
 a prolepsis is not unusual : and that persons, things, and 
 
 states 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 75 
 
 States of things, are not unfrequently represented, in the 
 language of the sacred writers, as actually existing, when 
 they exist only in the divine counsel and decree. 
 
 And the language which is here used by our Lord may 
 justly be interpreted in this sense. It is not true that the 
 preposition 'jiaQx with a dative case always has a local 
 signification. When applied personally, it sometimes sig- 
 nifies ' in that person's estimation or account ;' viz. 2 Pet. 
 iii, 8, " One day is with the Lord {rru^a Ku^/w, ' in the 
 account or estimation of the Lord,') as a thousand years'^"." 
 
 Further : — In this very prayer the prolepsis is repeatedly 
 used, which justifies a similar interpretation of the fifth 
 verse. Ver, 4, *' I have finished the work which thou 
 gavest me to do." Our Lord had not then completely 
 finished his labours : See chap, xix. SO. Ver. 1 2, " None 
 of them is lost but the son of perdition." Judas had not 
 at that time destroyed himself. Ver. 22, " The glory 
 which thou gavest me, I have given them." The suc- 
 cessful discharge of their apostolic mission was an honour 
 intended for them and promised, but of which they were 
 not at that time actually in possession. Also, ver. 24, 
 " That they may be with me where I «?;z," i. e, am to 
 exist hereafter ; " that they may behold my glory which 
 thou hast given me," i. e. intended for me. 
 
 7.) Hence we conclude, that the true interpretation of 
 this celebrated clause in our Lord's valedictory prayer, — 
 that which best suits the connexion, and which is most con- 
 sistent with the dignity and disinterestedness of his cha- 
 racter, — contains no proof of his pre-existence, but is per- 
 fectly compatible with his proper humanity, viz. 
 
 " And now, O Father, glorify thou me with thy own 
 self j'* q. d. allow me to participate in that which is thy 
 
 "^ See also Rom. ii. 11 j xi. 25 ; xii. l6, and Schleusner in verb. 
 See Dr. Carpenter's valuable observations upon this text in his Letters 
 Co Mr, VeysiC;, p. 247—255. 
 
 own 
 
74 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 own greatest glory, " with the glory which I had with thee 
 before the world was;" the glory of recovering lost man- 
 kind to virtue and happiness, a glory which was intended 
 and reserved for ine in the eternal immutable counsels of 
 infinite wisdom and benevolence. 
 
 Many expositors have explained the text in reference 
 to the divine counsels and decrees ; but fev/, if an]'', before 
 Mr. Lindsey, appear to have given the right interpretation 
 of the object of our Lord's dying request ^\ 
 
 " This," says Dr. Lardner, (Log. p. 15,) " according 
 to Jewish phraseology may be very well understood of the 
 glory always designed for Christ by the immutable pur- 
 pose of God. That our Lord had not before his nativity 
 the glory which he here prays for, is apparent from the 
 •whole tenor of the Gospel, and from clear and manifest 
 expressions in the context ; for the glory which he now 
 prays for is the reward of his obedience.** 
 
 " What so proper," says Mr. Lindsey (Sequel, p. 243,) 
 
 ^ " irapx (Tsccvruiin coelo, opponitur enim ei siri 'Ttj; yrjg. tri Jofr ^ 
 sij^oy, destiiiatione tua : ut I Pet, i. 20. Simile loquendi genus Eph. 
 i. 3. Hie legem faisse ante mundum aiunt Hebraei. Trapa <toi, refer 
 ad ilUid ziyjjv, et intellige ut diximus in decreto tuo." Grotius. — 
 " Saepissinie de rebus quae a Deo eerie constituta atque decreta sunt 
 ut fiant, dicitur quasi 'am actu ipso facta sunt. 2 Tim. i, 9. Coloss. iii. 
 1," Woizogeniuj in loc. ; who concludes a long note upon the text 
 with tl'.e.se words of Augustin : *' Ad hoc valet, quod ait, Et nunc glo- 
 rifica me. Hoc est, sicut tunc, ita et nunc ; sicut tunc in prsedestina- 
 tione, sic et nunc perfections Fac in mundo, qi^od apud te jam fuerat 
 ante mundum; fac in suo tempore, quod ante omnia tempora statuisti." 
 
 " Gloriticari a Patre petit in ccelo. Ad quod votum suum impe- 
 trandum uon adducit merita sua, ut qui ex officio fecisset quicquid fe- 
 cisset, sed decretum Petri." Brennius. 
 
 *' Cur lion dic-amus quod planum, quod certum, quod SS. Literis 
 apertissime (esiatum est, Christum petere gloriam illam sibi dari, quae 
 sibi ante mundum conditum a Patre Deo iilo uno destiiiata erat ?" 
 Slichiingius. 
 
 " Comme il s'.ngit ici de la gloire de I'humanitede Jesus Christ, car 
 la divinite ne peut ni perdre ni acquerir de fi gloiie dans le ciel, oii il 
 n'y a rien de sujet au changement : on ne peut pas douter, que Jesus 
 Christ ne veuille parler du dessein que Dieu avoit de I'elever quelque 
 jour ^ la gloire, avant que le monde fut cree," Le Clerc. 
 
 "for 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 7* 
 
 " for the holy and benevolent Jesus to ask at the close of 
 life, as the success of that Gospel by which the virtue and 
 happiness of mankind was to be promoted, which had 
 been his sole aim and pursuit, for which he had lived, and 
 for which he was about to die ? To suppose him to pray 
 for his own happiness and advancement, and to animate 
 himself with a prospect of that from God, as is the com- 
 mon opinion of the glory he sought, would not be suitable 
 to that perfection of moral character which we cannot but 
 ascribe to him^ nor acting up to that idea of that en- 
 larged universal benevolence which seems to have ac- 
 tuated him." 
 
 " What propriety," says Dr. Priestley (in loc. ) " could 
 there be in Christ praying, as the reward of his sufferings, 
 for the same state of glory which he had enjoyed before 
 them ? This would be to make it no reward at all. 
 Whereas he now, very naturally, asks for that reward 
 which had been promised to him when he should have ful- 
 filled the conditions on which the promise was made." 
 
 XI. 
 
 John xvii. 24-. " Father, I will -that they also whom 
 thou hast given me be with me where I am, that they may 
 behold my glory which thou hast given me, for thou 
 lovedst me before the foundation of the world." 
 
 Some expositors have strangely supposed that our Lord 
 is here authoritatively claiming and insisting upon a right, 
 in consequence of previous stipulations in the counsels of 
 Heaven ; and hence infer not only his pre-existence but 
 even his divinity ''\ 
 
 No 
 
 ^ It is unaccountable that Dr. Doddridge should have fallen into 
 this egregious error. He thus paraphrases the text : " O Father, per- 
 mit me to say that I will, that is, I importunately ask it, and in con- 
 sequence of the mutual transactions between us I am bold to claim it, 
 and insist upon it as a matter of right," &c. 
 
 But 
 
76 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 No conclusion can be more unfounded. The word 
 BiKcoy * I will,' expresses nothing more than simple de- 
 sire, * I request.* Matt. xii. 38, " Master, we desire 
 (BsKofjicv) to see a sign from thee." See also Mark vi. 
 25 ; X. 35. 
 
 ' Father, I request that they whom thou hast given me 
 be v/iih me where I am ;•' or, as Dr. Campbell renders it, 
 ' where I shall be.' The present tense is used for the 
 future, to denote the certainty of the event. 
 
 ' That they may behold my glory which thou hast given 
 me.' That glory is described as actually given, which it 
 was the purpose and determination of God to bestow; 
 See ver. 5. 
 
 This glory, it has been proved already, was that of in- 
 structing and reforming the world. Our Lord prays that 
 his apostles may be witnesses to the great success of his 
 Gospel. 
 
 How low and unworthy of our Saviour's character, to 
 suppose that he prays thus earnestly for nothing more than 
 that his apostles might be admitted to see some personal 
 honour with which he was to be hereafter adorned ! 
 
 " For thou lovedst me before the foundation of the 
 world." g. d. In thine eternal counsels thou didst select 
 
 But this is notliing to the language of Dr. Guyse, whose exposition 
 would lead us to conclude that the Father wished to beofFhis bargain, 
 if the Son had not held him closely to the terms of the bond. " The 
 upshot, O my Father, of my will and pleasure, which I insist on as 
 matter of right, according to my purchase and thy agreement, is, that 
 all whom thou hast given me may be admitted into my immediate 
 presence in heaven, where I already am in my divine nature, and for 
 ever shall be. in my entire person," &c. 
 
 The learned Calvin, whose disciples these pious expositors professed 
 to be, would have taught them better if they had consulted his Com- 
 mentary : " Velle pro op/«re positum est : nequeenim praecipientis, sed 
 rogantis, est oratio " — " This argument," says Dr. Campbell, " is 
 built upon an Anglicism in their translations, for which the sacred 
 author is not accountable." 
 
 me 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 77 
 
 me to the high honour of being the messenger of peace 
 and good- will to mankind"". 
 
 To love, in Scripture phraseology, is to select to pecu- 
 liar privileges. Rom. ix, 1 1 — 13, " Before the children 
 were born, having done neither good nor evil, that the 
 purpose of God, according to election, might stand, it was 
 said. The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, 
 Jacob have I loved, but Esau have 1 hated ;" i. e. I have 
 chosen, without regard to personal merit, to grant privi- 
 leges to Jacob which will be denied to Esau. 
 
 XII. 
 
 1 Cor. XV. 47. " The first man is of the earth, earthy; 
 the second man is the Lord from heaven'"." 
 
 " He came originally from the heavenly world to which 
 he is now returned." Doddridge. 
 
 The Polish Socinians, who believed that Christ after his 
 ascension was advanced to a dignity superior to that of the 
 highest angel, and was constituted vice-regent of the whole 
 created universe, understand this text as asserting that the 
 body of Christ was of celestial substance and origin 7i. 
 
 'The 
 
 ^^ " He prays that his apostles and followers may be partakers of 
 his spiritual gifts, and contribute to the spreading of the Gospel, and 
 promoting the virtue and happiness of mankind, in which he himself 
 had been destined before all ages to be the prime instrument, and they 
 to have the honour of being inferior workmen under him," Lindsay's 
 Sequel, p. 25/. 
 
 " 6 Ss'jrspo; avSpujirog o KvsiOi e? ^pava. The words o Kv^io; are 
 wanting in the Ephrem, Clermont, and four other manuscripts in the 
 Coptic, Ethiopic, Vulgate, and Italic versions ; in Origen, Basil, Gre- 
 gory Nyssen and Nazianzen, Tertullian, Cyril, and others. It is said 
 that they were introduced by Marcion. The words o spavio; are added 
 at the end of the verse in two uncial MSS. and in the Vulgate and 
 Ethiopic version ; and they are cited by Ambrose, Augustin, Jerome, 
 &c. The genuine reading perhaps is 6 Ssurepog avSpooros s^ epoLvs, 6 
 bpavioS' iSee Griesbach. — " Primus homo de terra, terrenus: secun- 
 dus homo de coelo, ccelestis." Vulgate. 
 
 " " Quasi dixisset apostolus, Secundus homo, nirairum, Dcminus 
 ille, ex coelo, scilicet^ est ; habila nempe ratione corporis." Crellius. — 
 
 This 
 
75 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 ' The second man will be the Lord from heaven,' i. e. 
 will descend from heaven to raise the dead. This is the 
 interpretation of Newcome, Whitby, Alexander, and 
 others, who, though themselves believers in the doctrine, 
 do not regard this passage as asserting the pre-existence of 
 Christ. 
 
 The Vulgate reads the text, " The first man tvas of the 
 earth, earthy. The second man ivill be from heaven, 
 heavenly." 
 
 This is not Improbably the true reading ; and the sense 
 is, ' The first man, taken from the earth, was frail and 
 mortal ; the second man will descend from heaven in a 
 heavenly form, and with immortal radiance and vigour.' 
 
 XIII. 
 
 2 Cor. viii. 9. " For ye know the grace of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ, that though he was rich, yet for your sakes 
 he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be 
 rich." 
 
 No person, whose mind was not wholly pre-occupied 
 with a persuasion of the pre-existence of Christ, would 
 
 This ingenious and learned writer proceeds to state the expedience and 
 necessity that the body of Christ should be of heavenly substance. 
 " fcio great a being," says he, " than whom no one is more nearly- 
 united to God, who is raised above all celestial spirits, so as to govern 
 them all, God only excepted, annon decuil, immo annon etiam ne- 
 cesse fuit, celestem etiam naturam etangelicam, si non praestantiorem 
 saltem parem, Dei autem ipsius naturae simillimam et proximam adi- 
 pisci ?" 
 
 SHchtingius and Brennius, both of them men of great learning and 
 ability, adopt the same strange interpretation. It is chiefly in this ex- 
 travagant notion of the advancement of a human being to the govern- 
 ment of the universe, and making him the object of religious worship, 
 a doctrine which, as Dr. Price says, '" would make Christianity itself 
 incredible," that the Unitarians of the present diiy differ from the old 
 Socinians ; to whom, notwithstanding their gross error in this parti- 
 cular, they nevertheless look with great veneration, as the most en- 
 lightened critics and expositors of the age in which they lived. — s^ 
 a^avn, i. e. 8pa,vio;, " coelestis : habens jam corpus coeleste." Grotius. 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 79 
 
 ever dream of finding it in this text. If the fact were an- 
 tecedently established, this passage might indeed be ad- 
 mitted as a graceful allusion to it : but it can never with 
 any propriety be alleged as a proof. For when it is said 
 of any man, that though he is rich he spends nothing, who 
 in his senses infers from it that he existed before he was 
 born ? Upon this principle, every miser would have a 
 claim to pre-existence. Dr. Clarke, with great propriety, 
 takes no notice of this text in his arguments for the pre- 
 existence of Christ. Others, with less judgement, have 
 held it up as a decisive proof of this favourite doctrine, 
 and have indulged to no little asperity of reflection upon 
 those who thought differently. 
 
 " He was rick" — " rich," sa^'s Dr. Doddridge, " in 
 the glories of the heavenly world, and in supreme domi- 
 nion and authority there, yet for your sakes he became 
 poor." 
 
 " Rich,'* says archbishop Newcome, " in the glories of 
 the divine nature, he became poor by taking on him hu- 
 man nature, and appearing even In a humble state of life.'* 
 
 " Rich,*' says Dr. Harwood (Soc. Sch. p. 46,) " in his 
 pre-existent state in glory, honour, and happiness, with a 
 greatness of soul which can never be sufficiently extolled, 
 he abdicated all this, and became poor. The apostle's ar- 
 gument upon this scheme only is cogent, apposite, and 
 very elegant and persuasive. To interpret this of our Lord 
 being rich in miracles, and becoming poor in them at his 
 crucifixion. Is such a jejune and forced criticism, as I ima- > 
 gine was never used to explain any author." 
 
 This lofty language is now become too familiar to ex- 
 cite alarm : and, as inquirers after truth, we are to con- 
 sider not what the apostle's expositors are pleased to say 
 for him, but what he has actually said himself j which is • 
 this : 
 
 " Ye know the kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, that 
 
 though 
 
80 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Pai't I. 
 
 though he was rich, yet for your sakes he lived in po- 
 verty", that ye through his poverty might be rich." 
 
 Observe here, that the apostle does not say that having 
 been rich he became poor ; that he passed from an ante- 
 cedent state of opulence to a subsequent state of poverty; 
 much less does he insinuate that the riches which our Lord 
 possessed consisted in the dignity and felicity of a pre-ex- 
 istent state. The apostle affirms the existence of two con- 
 temporary events,, that Christ was rich, and, at the same 
 time, that he lived in poverty. That this is the proper 
 primary meaning of the apostle's words, no person ac- 
 quainted with the original can doubt. Whether the ge- 
 nius of the Greek language will even admit of the sense 
 
 '* The only shadow of argument which can be adduced from this 
 text in favour of the pre-existence of Christ, is from the words sirrw- 
 y^zMTi irXscrios wv in the public version, ' though be was rich he be- 
 came poor.' But 1.) The verb TTtujyjuco does not properly signify 
 • to become poor,' but ' to be poor.' — Stephan. Thes. irtyjysvuj, ' men- 
 dicus sum,' ' mendicus vivo,' He translates the text ' q. vestri causa 
 mendicans vixit.' — Constantin. Lex. itrujyrtvjj, ' inops dego,' ' men- 
 dico.* In the New Testament it only occurs in this place, in the 
 LXX,, six times. See Trommii Concord, in verb. 
 
 2.) The construction requires that the two states should be simul- 
 taneous. The aorist expresses a perfect action, in past definite time ; 
 which time is ascertained by the connexion. Christ £7rrw%£D(r£, ' was 
 poor.' When ? — 'rT>^ov<no; wv, ' at the time that he was rich.' For 
 this observation I am indebted to the late reverend and learned James 
 Pickbourii, who distinguished himself by the accuracy of his remarks 
 upon the English verb, and by some other learned publications. It is 
 objected that irXaa-ios wv may refer to past time, as ruijiXos wv, John 
 Jx. 25, signifies ' having been blind.* But the adverb apri, ' now I 
 see,' which immediately follows, shows that the participle which pre- 
 cedes is to be understood in a preterite sense. And had the apostle 
 intended to express that the state of poverty was subsequent to that of 
 aflHuence, he would probably have introduced the word sita, or vare' 
 fov, before the verb sTrrw^/Euae. 
 
 The most accurate critics and commentators translate and expound 
 the words as expressing simultaneous and not successive states. " Cum 
 vi ita polleret omnis generis miracula patrandi, personam tamen gessit, 
 tam humilem, ut ne domum quidem haberet propriam." Grotius in 
 loo. — To the same purpose Slichtingius and Brennius. " Considei 
 the kindness of our Lord Jesus Christ, that, being rich, he was poor on 
 account of vou." W^akefteld's Inquiry, p. 1 76. 
 
 commonly 
 
Sect. S.J THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 81 
 
 commonly annexed to the words, viz. of a transition from 
 a state of affluence to a state of indigence, may justly be 
 questioned. Hence it follows, that whatever the apostle 
 meant by the word rich, it expresses a state which Jesus 
 possessed not before he was born into the world, but while 
 he was leading a life of poverty in it. 
 
 It is inquired in what sense Jesus was rich, if not in his 
 divine nature and pre-existent glory ? 
 
 To this question some have answered, that he was rich 
 in good works, in virtue, piety, benevolence^ and the di- 
 vine favour, q. d. Though eminently virtuous, he vi^as very 
 poor 73. 
 
 But this interpretation destroys the opposition between 
 the two conditions which are ascribed to Jesus ; nor would 
 it so well suit the apostle's purpose in urging the example 
 of Christ as a motive to charity and generosity. 
 
 The interpretation of Grotius and others, adopted by 
 Mr. Lindsey, is more to the apostle's purpose. Jesus 
 Christ was rich in miraculous powers, which it was at his 
 option to employ for his own benefit. He fed the mul- 
 titude ; he brought miraculous draughts of fishes into the 
 net; he paid tribute by miracle; and by miracle he sup- 
 plied a wedding feast with wine. With equal case he could 
 have supplied himself and his friends with ail the com- 
 forts, the conveniences, and the elegancies of life. He 
 was rich — but he lived in poverty. He made no use of 
 his miraculous powers for his own advantage. He sub- 
 sisted upon the liberality of his followers, and had not 
 where to lay his head'\ 
 
 " See the Theol. Repos. vol. iii. p. 438. Note by the late venerable 
 "William Turner, of Wakefield. See also Wakefield's Inquiry, ubi supra, 
 
 '* " Christ's riches were his wisdom and great powers from God, by 
 which he had all nature at his comxnand, and could supply every want. 
 And his meritorious poverty consisted in his never entertaining a single 
 desire to employ his miraculous powers for his private ease or benefit, 
 but choosing to lead a poor dependent life, because such an example 
 was of most lasting benefit to us," Lindsey's Seq. p. 2SS. 
 
 G From 
 
82 " TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 From kindness, and for the sake of his followers, he 
 submitted to these privations, to set them a memorable 
 example of fortitude, of resignation, of self-denial, for the 
 benefit of others. 
 
 ' That they through his poverty might be rich.'' Here 
 the connexion requires that the word should be taken in 
 a figurative sense : rich in faith, in holiness, in benevo- 
 lence, and in the promises and blessings of the Gospel, 
 How admirably calculated such an argument was to ex- 
 cite a spirit of c -mpassion for the poor, of gratitude, of 
 kindness and generosity, and of active persevering bene- 
 volence, it is unnecessary to remark. It speaks for itself. 
 
 ^ XIV. 
 
 Ephes. iv. 9. " Now that he ascended, what is it but 
 that he also descended first into the lower parts of the 
 earth ?" 
 
 " That is,'* says archbishop Newcome, " he descended 
 into the grave." Psalm Ixiii. 9, " They that seek my soul 
 to destroy it shall go into the lower parts of the earth." 
 
 This text, though some are disposed to understand it as 
 a proof of the pre-existence and incarnation of Christ, is 
 generally allowed even by learned Trinitarians and Arians 
 themselves to be of little weight in the controversy. 
 
 XV. 
 
 Philipp. ii. 5 — 9. '• Let this mind be in you, which was 
 also in Christ Jesus : 
 
 " Who, being in the form of God, thought it not rob- 
 bery to be equal with God : 
 
 " But made himself of no reputation, and took upon 
 him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness 
 of men : 
 
 " And being found in fashion as a man, he humbled 
 himself, and became obedient to death, even the death of 
 the cross. 
 
 " Wherefore 
 
Sect. S.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST* 83 
 
 " Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him,"&c. 
 
 This is a passage of considerable difficulty, upon which 
 the greatest possible stress is laid by the advocates for the 
 pre-existence and divinity of Jesus Christ, which therefore 
 merits the closest and the most impartial attention. Each 
 clause must be considered in detail ; after which It will be 
 more easy to sum up the evidence of the whole. 
 1. " Who being in ihe form of God".'* 
 
 The word translated ybrm properly signifies the shapes 
 the human Jlgure, Mark xvi. 1 2, " He appeared in an- 
 other form to two of them as they walked into the coun- 
 try." See Joseph. Ant. 1. '1. ix. 7; 1. 6. xiv. 2. 
 
 All expositors agree that the word, in its present con- 
 nexion, is to be understood figuratively. They differ 
 widely in their interpretation of the figure. 
 
 1.) Calvin, Beza, and most of the trinitarlan exposi- 
 
 '* Being in the form of Godl ev fj.op(p-n ©£8 virapy^ujv. M^ip^fj, i. e. 
 sihs, iSstx.. Hesychius, Suidas. — " Forma generaliler de quavis re." 
 Constantin. Lex. — " Forma, omne quod in oculosoccurrit, imago," — 
 Schleusner. — " Mop(pri speciem sonat, aut fignram." Krasmus; who, 
 jn his long and learned note upon this celebrated text, remaiks, " Non 
 video quid hie locus proprie facial adversns Ariauos, qui non negabant 
 Dei Filium esse Deum. Proinde totus hie locus mihi videiur violen- 
 tius detorqueri ad Christ! naturam, cum Paulus agat de specie exhibita 
 nobis." 
 
 By this liberal and fair concession, this elegant critic has incurred 
 the high displeasure of those stern champions of the orthodox faith, 
 Calvin and Beza ; the former of whom loudly accuses Erasmus as a 
 traitor to the cause, who,{w'hile he every where professes to believe |i 
 the divinity of Christ, abaiiaons in the detail what he maintains in the 
 gross, and explains away every text by which that sublime doctrine is d '' ' 
 provedj " Mihi certe," adds the zealous reformer, " ne omnes qui- "^ 
 
 dem diaboli hunc locum extorqueant, quia in Deo firmissimum est ar- 
 gumentum, a gloria ad esseniiam." 
 
 This argument from the form to the essence of divinity is much in- 
 sisted upon by Trinitarian expositors. See Hammond, Vatablus, Cas- 
 talio, Guyse, &c. Sir Richard Ellys, in his Fortuita Sacra, in a learned 
 note upon this text, lays great stress (after Beza) upon the word uira^- 
 yui, as appropriated to the divine nature of Christ, while •yivoy.ai and 
 Aa/xfavw are used in reference to his human nature. But, to support 
 this criticism, it must be first proved that Christ had a divine nature. 
 The word vitctp^^ will not itself prove it. See Schleusner. 
 
 G 2 tors 
 
84- TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part I, 
 
 tors explain it of the manifestation of the attributes of God 
 in his works, from which may be inferred the divinity of 
 his esssnce. By parity of reason, from the divine form 
 and majesty of Christ they infer his divine nature. 
 
 But as Christ is said, ver. 7, to have assumed thejb7-m 
 of a slave v/hen he was not really a slave, so he might ap- 
 pear in the form of God, without being really and essen- 
 tially God. 
 
 2.) Dr. Clarke (Scrip. Doct. No. 934,) represents the 
 Logos as the person " by whom God created all things, 
 by whom he governs all things, by whom he appeared to 
 Adam, to the patriarchs, and to Moses, the angel that ap- 
 peared in the bush. This," says he, " was being in the 
 form of God." Heb. i. 3. Col. i. 1 5. With this learned 
 writer agree Dr. Whitby, Dr. Doddridge, and most of 
 those who are called the high Arian expositors'^. 
 
 Dr. Clarke thinks it necessary to caution his readers 
 against " the very unnatural interpretation which not only 
 the Socinian v>^riters, but Grotius also and some others, 
 put upon these words ;'* and Dr. Doddridge, with bishop 
 Burnet, (on the Art, p. 46,) thinks " the Socinian inter- 
 pretation very cold and insipid." 
 
 It must be so, if the Arian interpretation of this text is 
 true. But it has not yet been proved that the soul which 
 animated the body of Jesus was the maker and governor 
 of the world, the Jehovah who appeared to Adam, to the 
 patriarchs, to I\Ioses in the bush, and to the Israelites upon 
 mount Sin^ii. Nor can this stupendous and 720/ very na- 
 tural hypothesis be justly inferred from the figurative and 
 indefinite expression, that Jesus was in the form of God", 
 
 '® In the outward appearance of God before his incarnation, as, after 
 it, he was in the outward appearance of a slave : ver. 7. Newcome. 
 
 " Sir Richard Ellys, in the Note before referred to, asserts, that the 
 Arian interpretation of ' the form of God,' as referring to the splen- 
 dour of the appearance of the Logos to the patriarchs, is unsupported 
 by the authority of the ancients. 
 
 S.) Grotius, 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 85 
 
 3.) Grotius, and with him the old Socinians and the 
 modern Unitarians, understand the expression ' being in 
 the form of God,' of the miraculous powers with which 
 our Lord was invested, and by which he controuled the 
 laws of nature, healed the sick, raised the dead, and per- 
 formed other godlike works". 
 
 This interpretation best agrees with the antithesis, ver, 7, 
 " He assumed the form," i. e. the appearance of a slave. 
 Also the miracles of Christ might, with as much propriety, 
 be figurativ^ely described as the form of God, as an ap- 
 pearance to Moses in the bush. But we are sure that our 
 Lord performed miracles, and we are not sure that he ap- 
 peared to Moses and the patriarchs ; but the contrary. 
 
 " The form of God," says Dr. Lardner, (Log. p. 12,) 
 " seems to me to have been enjoyed by our Saviour in this 
 world. It denotes his knowledge of the hearts of men, 
 his power of working miracles at all times, whenever he 
 pleased, and all the other evidences of his divine mission. 
 This sense wonderfully accords with what our Lord saith, 
 John X. 34. 36.'* 
 
 Mr. Lindsey (Seq. p. 272,) says, " The form of God 
 which Christ wore upon earth, evidently consisted in those 
 extraordinary endowments of a divine wisdom and power, 
 which shone forth in him." 
 
 '• " 'Mop<pvj non signlficat internum et occultum aliquid, sed id quod 
 in oculos occurrit, qualis erat eximia in Christo potestas sanandi mor- 
 bos omnes, &c. quae vere divina sunt," Grotius. — " Forma Dei quid 
 est nisi exemplum, quod Deus apparet dum mortuos excitat, surdis 
 reddit auditum, leprosos mundat ?" Ambrosius apud Erasmum. — " In 
 forma Dei erat cum divina opera et miracula solo jnssu et nutu suo 
 ederet," &c. Slichtingius. — To the same purpose Crellius and Bren- 
 nius. — "Jesus Christ, enquaHte d'hommC;, paroissoit, a certains egards, 
 plus semblable a Dieu qu'aux hommes, comme en ce qu'il comman- 
 doit a toute la nature avec un empire absolu, et faisoit des miracles 
 inouis. C'est ce que S. Paul appelle la forme^ c'est ^ dire la ressem- 
 blance de Dieu." Le Clerc. 
 
 2. "Thought 
 
86 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part 1. 
 
 2. " Thought it not robbery, to be equal with 
 God"." 
 
 It is universally agreed that the word la-u often expresses 
 similarity only, not equality, and that ira ©sm may properly 
 be rende^f^i' as God, or like God. 
 
 The word la-oc in the sense of similarity occurs fre- 
 quently in the Old Testament. Job v. 17, " They grope 
 in the noon- day as in the night." LXX. la-u wkti. Chap. 
 X. 10, " Hast thou not curdled me (/era Tffw) like cheese ?'* 
 Chap. xi. 12, " Man is born (lo-a ovoo) Uke a wild ass's 
 colt." See also chap. xiii. 12 ; v. 20 ; xv. 16 ; xxiv. 20; 
 xl. ] 5 *^ No person therefore, who is nor grossly igno- 
 rant, would from this text infer the perfect equality of 
 Christ with God. 
 
 I'he words " he thought it not robbery," are attended 
 with considerable difficulty. 
 
 The Greek word a^7ray/xof, here translated robbery, 
 scarcely occurs in any other Greek writer si. It is a verbal 
 noun. But it is not agreed among the learned, whether 
 it is to be taken in an active or a passive sense ; whether 
 
 " " Ou% dcTraytj.ov r^yrjaaro rosiveci kto. Qsuj, Non rapinam arbitra- 
 tus est, esse se aequalem Deo." Vulgate. — "" ktoc, neutrum plurale 
 more Graecorum, adverbialiter capitur." Slichtingius. 
 
 *° See Whitby in loc., who, while he establishes this sense of i(ra, 
 contends, justly enough, that it gives no advantage to the Socinians. 
 Classical authorities tor this adverbial use of jcra are to be found in 
 Newcome and in Schlensner. When the Jews charge our Lord with 
 arrogating to himself equality with God, the expression is lo-ov kavTOi^ 
 TTOioiv TO) @au}. John v. 18. Indeed Mr. Cappe (Grit. Rem. vol. i. 
 p. 233,) quotes this very text to prove that lao; signifies nothing more 
 than general similarity. By the expression ' God was his Father,' he 
 ■would at the utmost only assert that, in e manner, he was like God. 
 
 *■ The word is found in Plutarch, de Liberor. Educ. but in a con- 
 nexion which throws but little light on the subject. Harwood's Lib. 
 Trans. Archhishop ISiewcon}e's Note, and Wetstein in loc. It seems, 
 however, rather favourable to the supposition that the word is used in 
 an active sense ; in which sense it is understood by Calvin, Beza, 
 Hammond, Doddridge, and Guyse. 
 
 it 
 
Sert. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 87 
 
 it signifies the act of seizui^, or the prey, the booty, the 
 thing seized upon. 
 
 Many critics, amongst whom are the translators of the 
 public version, take the word in the active sense : they 
 render it ' robbery **.' And in this sense oi the word this 
 clause is to be understv)od in apposition with the preceding, 
 and as expressing an additional circumstance of the dig- 
 nity of Christ antecedent to his humiliation, q. d. He was 
 in the form of God ; and being so, he thought it no rob- 
 bery, no unjust assumption, to be and to appear like God. 
 
 The majority of expositors, for very probai)ie reasons 
 stated below 83j interpret the word in a passive sense, uo- 
 
 " " 'A|C7ra/a05 proprie ipsa rapieiiui actio, quae usitatiu-s dpitayr) 
 dicitnr : dpirayua verb id quod raptnm est, sed confundi scias, Isa. iii, 
 14." Drusiiis. — In the controversy concerning the person of Christ, 
 it is of no consequence whether the word be taken in an active or a 
 passive sense. Mr. Cappe seenns to prefer the active signification : 
 " For," he says, " I do not think the words much mistranslated in 
 our version. He has not thought it robbery, either an injury, or an 
 act of usurpation." But the learned writer does not express himself 
 with his usual precision : for he had just before stated it as his opinion 
 that the word dpTra.yiJ.cis '' is of the very same import with dpirccy^j.a., 
 the thing sc-ized upon, the suiject of unjust usurpation." Cappe's 
 Crit. Rem vol. i. p. 232. 
 
 " The reasons for taking the word in a passive sense are the fol- 
 lowing : 
 
 1. 'Apitayu^'ji being derived from the perfect passive, retains a pas- 
 sive signification. Mr. Wakefield shows from Eustathius, that, ac- 
 cording to the genius of the Greek language, dpnrxya.Oi is eijuivalent 
 to dpTixyy.x. " 'ApTtx^siv vero est aiiquid avide ei violenter arripere, 
 ut tibi vendices, et tuum facias." Sylva Crit. vol. lii. p. i;2 — 
 " 'AjCTTayaof proprie, direptio. Nomina in y-oj desinentia (ere actio- 
 nem, non rem significant. Sed interdum tamen passive usurpatur, ut 
 significat vel rem raptam, vel rem avidediripiendam, et vindicandam," 
 Schleusner. — See Wetstein, and Wakefield's Inq. p. 186. 
 
 2. The construction of the sentence requires that this clause should 
 express the humiliation of Christ, and consequently that dpir. should 
 be taken in a passive sense. It would be trifling to say, that, being in 
 the form of God, he thought it no robliery to be in the form or like- 
 ness of God. Le Clerc, in bis notes upon Hammond, remarks. " that 
 to justify the common translation, the Greek ought to have been >icci 
 ov)(^ ijyd/xevoj dpT:xy[/.ov sivcit ktol Gstv, lihw; k. r. a." See also Dr. 
 Clarke^ Scrip. Doct. No. 934. 
 
 3. The 
 
88 TEXTS SUPPOSED TQ ASSERT [Part I. 
 
 'Tvayi/.og for a^Troc/jxa, ' a prey,' ' a booty/ ' a thing ob- 
 tained by force, and retained with eagerness.' 
 
 In this sense the second clause of the sentence is in op- 
 position to the first. It is the first step in his voluntary 
 humiliation. 
 
 ' Who, being in the form of God, did not esteem as a 
 prey' (and therefore did not eagerly grasp, did not claim 
 as his inherent right, did not refuse to relinquish,) ' this 
 likeness to God.* 
 
 The latter clause is plainly exegetical of the former ; 
 this likeness to God is the very same thing as being in the 
 form of God. See Wakefield's Inquiry, p. ] 8.5. 
 
 This interpretation has the sanction of many eminent ex- 
 positors**. 
 
 3. The early writers, who used the Greek language, and to whom 
 the phrase must have been familiar, understood the words in this sense. 
 
 In the Letter from the Churches of Vienne and Lyons to those of 
 Asia and Phrygia, they sny of the martyrs, " They were such zealous 
 followers of tlie evsmple of Christ, who, being in the form of God, did 
 not eagerly retain that likeness to God," (' did not covet to be ho- 
 noured as God,' Dr. Clarke,) " that though they had often been cast 
 to wild beasts, and had endured all manner of torments, yet they 
 would by no means sutler themselves to be honoured with the title of 
 martyrs." jinseb. Eccl, Hist. 1. 5. 
 
 Origen, in his Commentary upon John, says, " The goodness of 
 Christ appeared greater and more divine, and truly after the image of 
 the I'ather, when he humbled himself, &c. (tj si apvY/yrjo-aro) than if 
 he had eaoerly grasped or tenaciously retained his likeness to God." 
 Huet. p. 34. 
 
 Novatian says, " Christ, though he knew that he was in the form 
 of God, did not eagerly grasp (or tenaciously retain) equality with God. 
 For though he knew that he was God, he never compared himself with 
 God his Father;" &c. De Trin. c. 17. See Clarke, ibid. 
 
 ^* " iEqualitatem quam cum Patre habebat ambitiose retlnere no- 
 luit. velut facere .solent prsedones, qui quod semel rapuerunt summa 
 cura et studio retinent." Vatablus — " Pro ra[)ina ducere, dicit pro 
 rapaciier uti, et retinere ut Lafini dicunt, in hostium puniero habere, 
 pro occidere nt hostem. ^ic enim poni solet verbum •);y£'!^6a'jUt non 
 solum c gitatjonis sit, verum etiam rei." Conf v. 25. Castalio. — " If 
 apKOLyiJ^a. be synonx mous to d'^Ttccyixog, as l3ocTm(riJ.x to joaitTiarfj^Of, 
 (pojriij^^a. to ipwricrixc;, &c. the proper meaning seems to be a prey, or 
 booty, and may be either just or unjust. They therefore hardly give 
 the exact signitication who explain it by a thing very desirable^ or to 
 
 be 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OP CHRIST. 89 
 
 Dr. Clarke, No. 934, "He did not covet to be honoured 
 as God : was not greedy or fond of, or unwilling to let go 
 the prize : so the words more strictly signify." 
 
 Mr. Lindsey : (Seq. p. 272, &c.) " Being in the form 
 of God, he did not look upon it as a prize to be hastily 
 catched at to be like God, did not eagerly covet to be ho- 
 noured for his godlike powers, was not ambitious oil dis- 
 playing them." 
 
 The following appears to me to be the true interpreta- 
 tion of the text. 
 
 Christ was " in the form of God." He possessed mira- 
 culous powers, and exerted them at pleasure. " But he 
 did not account as a prey this likeness to God." g. d. He 
 did not conceive of these extraordinary powers as a posses- 
 sion in his own right, acquired by his own energies, for the 
 enjoyment of which he was indebted to none, in the ex- 
 ercise of which he was controulable by none, and for the 
 proper employment of which he was accountable to none : 
 having the same paramount right to these powers which 
 a man has to a prey which he has obtained in the field, 
 or a booty which he has acquired in war. Far from it. 
 Jesus knew that, great as his powers were, they were not 
 his own, but given ; that they were communicated not for 
 his personal benefit, but for an important purpose; that they 
 were to be em.ployed in subservience to the will of him 
 from whom they 'were derived ; that when the proper season 
 came, they were to be jaid aside ; and that, to accomplish 
 the design of his mission, he was to submit to humiliation 
 and suffering like an ordinary person, as though he were 
 quite destitute of miraculous powers. He therefore ex- 
 hausted or divested himself, assumed the form of a ser- 
 
 be coveted. Nothing is properly a prey or booty till in possession. The 
 apostle therefore may be supposed to say, ' who was not eager or te- 
 nacious in retaining this likeness,' " &c. Peirce. — " Omnium bona 
 praedam tuam duceres." Cicero in Verrem, v. 15. 
 
 vanti 
 
90 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSSERT [Part I. 
 
 vanl, and became in fashion and appearance as an ordi- 
 nary man. 
 
 3. " But made himself of no reputation'".'* 
 Literally, ' he emptied himself.' This phrase is opposed 
 
 to the preceding. So far from tenaciously grasping, and 
 refusing to relinquish, he voluntarily, and of his own ac- 
 cord, divested himself of every thing that is intended by 
 the form or likeness of God. If the immutable attributes 
 of Deity are intended, these were concealed — or the pre- 
 existent glories of the Logos, these were quiescent — or his 
 extraordinary miraculous powers, these were voluntarily 
 suspended, while he suffered himself to appear and to be 
 treated as though he possessed them not. See 2 Cor. 
 viii. 9. 
 
 4. " He took upon him the form of a servant :" 
 Or, " Assuming the form of a slave*'^" In the form 
 
 of God he really existed {vTroc^yjcv) — -the form of a ser- 
 vant he voluntarily assumed ( Xu^ocv ) . Invested w^ith a 
 high and honourable com.mission from God, he submitted 
 to a life of labour and dependence. Mark x. 45, " The 
 Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to mi- 
 nister." Luke xxii. 27, " I am in the midst of you as one 
 that serveth." 
 
 5. " And was made in the likeness of men*^" 
 
 *' AAa' eaurov £y.zvw<ra. " Eunanivit semetipsum." Vulg. — " Ces- 
 savit a miraculis et operibus illis divinis." Slichtingius. 
 
 "' ix,op(pYiV SsXs XaX'Jov. Here the sentence closes. Wakefield. 
 
 *' £v ouoiujtj.art av^pujircvv yBvojj.svos' " being made like other men." 
 Wakefield. — " Cum similis asset hominibus, illis nempe priinis, i. e. 
 peccati expers." Grotius. — " Nothing," says Dr. Clarke, ibid. " can 
 be more unnatural than the comment of Grotius upon these words, 
 who understands them to signify that Christ was like Adam in a state 
 of innocence. Whereas ihe plain meaning of the apostle is, that 
 Christ, being in the form of God, humbled himself by condescending 
 to take upon him the form of a man." How natural does every one's 
 own hypothesis appear to himself! Grotius is, I think, mistaken in 
 his comment. But surely it involves no extravagance equal to that of 
 supposing that it was an act of condescension in Christ to be a rnun, 
 
 which 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 91 
 
 Or, " Being in the likeness of men.'* 
 
 Trinitarians i.nd Arians argue from this text, that, ante- 
 cedently to his divesting himself of the form of God, he 
 was not in the likeness of men, but a being of superior or 
 supreme rank, either a Logos or a God, who voluntarily 
 laid aside his glory, and became incarnate. 
 
 Unitarians understand this language solely of a volun- 
 tary suspension of his miraculous powers. Though, pos- 
 sessing them, he made no display of them for his own per- 
 sonal benefit, but appeared in all respects like a man who 
 was favoured with no such extraordinary distinction. 
 
 This interpretation is fully justified by parallel passages 
 in the Old and New Testament. 
 
 Sampson was endued with supernatural strength. He 
 said to Delilah, " If they bind me, then shall I be weak, 
 and shall be {c^g dg loov oa^Q^ccTroov) as one of the men:" 
 in the public version, very properly, " as another man." 
 Judges xvi. 7. 11. 13. 17. See also Psalm Ixxxii. 6, 7, 
 " I said. Ye are Gods, but ye shall die like men,'* (wV 
 ctv^^coTtoi) like other men. Gal. i. 1, " Paul an apostle, not 
 from men, nor through manj*' /. e. not from or by ordi- 
 nary men. 
 
 6. " And being found in fashion as a man** ;" 
 
 Or, " Being in fashion as a man.'* 
 
 The word sv^io-^caj, ' to find,' often expresses nothing 
 more than simple existence. 1 Cor. xv. 15, " We are 
 
 ■which Dr. Clarke calls the plain meaning of the text. Mr. Peirce (in 
 loc.) thinks that Christ is said to be in the likeness of men, because he 
 was not really a man, but a human body inhabited by the Logos. It 
 is more reasonable to explain this phrase of our Lord's declining to 
 exert his supernatural powers, and so appearing like an ordinary man. 
 ** >t(Xi cryjjij,a.ti iVpB^Eis cui avQp'juTtoc.] " ^^r^aa, generalirn, omnem 
 habitum et statum alicujus rei externum significat : speciatim vero di- 
 citur de habitu, cultu, gestu, forma ac conditione externa corporis hu- 
 mani." Schleusner. — Mr. Peirce considers this clause as exactly pa- 
 rallel to the preceding ; supsSeig answering to yevo^.Evo;, and (rxW'^"^^ 
 to oiMowazri, Peirce in loc. 
 
 found 
 
92 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Parti. 
 
 found (/. e. we are) false witnesses of God." See also 
 Est. i. 6, Isa. liii. 9. 1 Cor. iv. 2. Matt, i. 18. 
 
 The word a-xYjixa, translated ' fashion/ signifies the 
 whole external appearance of any thing, and particularly 
 of a human being. The sense therefore seems to be nearly 
 the same as in the preceding clause ; viz. being in external 
 appearance a man, i. e. like other men. 
 
 7. " He humbled himself, and became obedient to 
 death, even the death of the cross. Wherefore God on 
 his part has very highly exalted him ''^,'^ — " exalted him 
 higher than before j" viz, before his humiliation and suf- 
 ferings. 
 
 Upon the whole, the following appears to be the most 
 correct version, and the true sense of this celebrated pas- 
 sage: 
 
 " Let this mind be in you which was in Christ Jesus:'* 
 
 *' Who, being in the form of God," i. e. a prophet in- 
 vested with extraordinary miraculous powers, 
 
 '' Did not esteem as a prey this resemblance to God:'* 
 
 Did not regard these powers as a property acquired by 
 his own exertions, to which he had an independent inde- 
 feasible right, which he would exercise at pleasure, and 
 upon no consideration relinquish, but as a trust, to be ex- 
 ercised only for the benefit of others, and to be suspended 
 or resigned at the divine command, or when the purpose 
 of his mission required, 
 
 " But divested himself of it, assuming the form of a 
 slave." 
 
 When the purposes of his mission required it, he con- 
 ducted himself as though he were totally destitute of all 
 supernatural gifts. And far from usurping the authority 
 
 *^ Has very highly exalted him.'] uirscv^cn'os, " God has advanced him 
 higher than before :" i. e. before his incarnation. Peirce. — Rather, 
 ' before his sufferings, when he appeared as a prophet working mira- 
 cles, or in the form of God.' 
 
 of 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 9S 
 
 of a king, as some of his ill-advised followers crgently re- 
 commended, so humble was hi:; station, so assiduous his 
 labours, and so dependent his condition, that he appeared, 
 and chose to appear, in the rank of a menial servant. 
 
 " Becoming thus hke other men," i, e. as one who pos- 
 sessed no extraordinary powers : 
 
 " And being in outward appearance as an ordinary 
 man, he humbled himself;" i. e. still further, " becoming 
 obedient to death, even the death of the cross. Where- 
 fore God on his part has exalted him higher than he was 
 before." 
 
 For whereas, antecedently to his sufferings, he was, 
 though in a very dignified character, no more than a pro- 
 phet working miracles in the name of God, he is now ad- 
 vanced, since his resurrection, and as the rewra'd of his 
 obedience and self-denial, to a much happier and more ex- 
 alted state. Be you therefore like him obedient, self-de- 
 nying, actively and perseveringly benevolent ; and upon 
 all occasions prompt to sacrifice your own ease and grati- 
 fication to the good of others, to a sense of duty, and to 
 promote the great purposes of rational existence. 
 
 According to this interpretation, the ex.ikationof Christ 
 consists in his possession of a divine commission and vo- 
 luntary miraculous powers. His humiliation consists in 
 declining to use those powers for his own benefit, in sub- 
 mitting to a humble, laborious, and dependent condition, 
 and finally, in resigning himself to suffering and death in 
 obedience to the will of God, and for the good of man- 
 kind. 
 
 Thus this celebrated text, admitting of a fair interpre- 
 tation consistently with the proper humiiiity of Jesus 
 Christ, if not decisive in favour of this doctrine, may at 
 least be regarded as neutral. It is one of those passages 
 of which no use can be made in deciding the controversy. 
 
 XVI. 
 
94 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part L 
 
 XVI. 
 
 Col. i. 15. " Who is the image of the invisible God, 
 the first-born of every creature :'* or, " of the whole 
 creation 90." 
 
 Upon this text very great stress is laid for the purpose 
 of illustrating the mode of the derivation of the Son from 
 the Father. 
 
 1 . The Trinitarians understand the words as ex- 
 pressive of the eternal necessary generation of the Son 
 of God. 
 
 This is the interpretation of Calvin, Beza, and others^ 
 who evade the inference of the Arians, that the Son must 
 be a creature, by insisting that in this case the expression 
 would have been ' first created,' not * first begotten' 9'. 
 
 2. Dr. Clarke insists strongly upon this text to 
 establish his doctrine, " that the Son is the eternal and 
 voluntary, but not created production of the Father's 
 power.'* 
 
 " It is observable," says this learned writer (Scr. Doct. 
 No. 937,) " that St. Paul here does not call our Saviour 
 T^QooTOKTKTToc, ' first-crcated j' but vrpu'TOTOKog, first-born;* 
 signifying in general that he was before the creation of 
 all things brought forth, produced bv, derived from, the 
 Father; but not declaring in what particular manner. Col. 
 i. 17. — "What the figurative word rsx^ng, * generated' or 
 ' begotten,' properly and literally implies, this the Scrip- 
 ture has no where revealed or explained.** He produces 
 many passages from ancient writers to show that in this 
 sentiment they coincided with him. 
 
 *' " Non ideo tantum primogenitus, quod tempore prsecesseritom- 
 nes oreaturas, sed quia in hoc a Patre sit genitus, ut per ipsum conde- 
 rentur." Calvin. — " Facilis est responsio ad Arianorum cavillum — 
 ijam hac ratione dicendus fuisset ir^wro; Kria-hi;. At cum dicitur 
 vpwroTOKO^, manifeste distinguitur quod genitum est ab eo quod est 
 conditurn." Beza. 
 
 3. TliC 
 
Sect. 3.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 95 
 
 3. The Avians understand the text as expressing 
 the creation of the Logos by the Father before all worlds. 
 
 " It obviously denotes/* says Dr. Ilarwood, (Soc. Sch. 
 p. 35,) " that the Son of God is the very first being 
 whom the power and goodness of the Supreme produced 
 into existence." To the same purpose is Mr. Peirce's 
 note upon the text. 
 
 4. Grotius, and with him the Socinian and most 
 of the Unitarian expositors, interpret the text as referring 
 to the new creation. Eph. ii. 10; iv. 24, The word 
 
 Jirst-horn is used to express excellence in its kind. Ps. 
 Ixxxix. 27. Jer. xxxi. 9. Jobxviii. 13.92 And of the 
 new creation Christ is the head and chief, being the 
 chief instrument of God in the renovation of the moral 
 world. 
 
 5. The word Tr^c^rcTOKog, * first born/ occurs 
 again, ver. 1 8, *' who is the beginning, the first-born from 
 the dead :" where it plainly signifies that Christ was the 
 first person who was raised from the dead to an immortal 
 life. There can be little doubt that this is the true mean- 
 ing of the word in the 15th verse. It is so, probably, 
 in the few remaining passages in which this epithet is ap- 
 plied to Christ in the writings of Paul. Rom. viii. 29. 
 Heb. i. 6. And certainly Revel, i. 5 : " The first-born 
 from the dead /' the very phrase which is used Coloss. 
 i. IS. 
 
 °^ " TtpcvrorcKOf, primus in creatione nova, de qua 2 Cor. v. 17. 
 Apoc. xxi. 5." Grotins. — " Per crealuram non inielligitur creatura 
 vetus sed nova. Hujus creaturae Christus est primogenitus, id est, 
 omnium primus a Deo creatas," Crellius. — " TfpmjToroy.ov Hebrceis 
 dicitur quod primum et quod summum est in quoque £;enere. Ps. 
 Ixxxix. 26 — 23." Brennius. — The firstborn, i. e. the chief, the lord 
 of all mankind : ver. 23 : Mark xvi. 15, " of the new creation ; of 
 Jews and Gentiles, now blended into one mass." Lindsey's i^eq. 
 p. 4/8. Dr. Priestley's Ear. Op. vol. iii. p. 496. Haynes on Attrib. 
 P- ^97- 
 
 ■ 
 
 XVII. 
 
96 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ASSERT [Part L 
 
 XVII. 
 
 Col. i. 17. " He is before all things93 ;" 
 i. e. in time, dignity, and excellence, in the natural 
 creation, if that be the subject of the apostle's discourse ; 
 or, of the new creation, if that be the subject treated of, 
 as Unitarians maintain. This question will be discussed 
 hereafter. Mr. Lindsey explains the phrase of " priority 
 in the destination and purpose of Almighty God," Seq. 
 p. 482. Grotius, Brennius, and the old Socinians un- 
 derstand it of the high rank and dignity to which he is 
 now advanced, and the authority which is given him over 
 all creatures, as they apprehend. 
 
 No argument for the pre-existence of Christ can be 
 drawn from this ambiguous text. 
 
 XVIII. 
 
 Rev. iii. 14. " These things saith the Amen, the 
 faithful and true witness, the beginning,'* or head, " of 
 the creation of God." 
 
 The natural creation, according to Arians and Trinita- 
 rians — the new moral creation, as Unitarians believe. 
 And that it will bear this interpretation is acknowledged 
 by learned Trinitarians themselves. Beza and Hammond 
 boLh explain the words in this sense9*. 
 
 Mr.Lindsey justly observes, that "our Lord having cha- 
 racterized himself, first, as the truth, or teacher of truth ; 
 next, as the faithful martyr to the truth ; it is much more 
 consistent with these characters to proceed to represent 
 himself as the head of the new creation, the leader and 
 
 chief 
 
 *' Kcci avros £<xri itpo ita.vrxv.'] irpo is an adverb of time and place, 
 and sometimes, figuratively, of excellence. James v. 13. 1 Pet. iv. 8." 
 Schleusner. 
 
 "* " ^?X^> ^ 1^0 principium ducunt omnes res conditse : yel potius 
 
 novi 
 
Sect. S,] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST, 97 
 
 chief of the whole army of martyrs^ than as the being who 
 created all things." Comm. and Essays, vol. i. p. 449. 
 
 The old Socinians understood the words of the univer- 
 sal dominion to which Christ was, as they thought, ad- 
 vanced after his ascension into heaven 9^. 
 
 These are all the passages which the author, many years 
 ago, after a careful perusal of the New Testament, could 
 discover and select as what then appeared to him clear 
 and unequivocal assertions of the preexistence of Jesus 
 Christ ; as to the generality of Christians they still appear. 
 He has stated those criticisms and interpretations of them 
 which he now thinks to be just, and by v.hich he was gra- 
 dually, and not without much reluctaneeTtnduced to aban- 
 don his former conclusions as erroneous and unscriptural. 
 He does not expect that these interpretations will afford 
 the same satisfaction to all his readers, even to those who 
 are most candid and ingenuous, who are sincere inquirers 
 after truth, and who value it above all price. It was long 
 before he himself attained the satisfaction which he now 
 feels. But truth, aided by time, will gradually make its 
 way. And in the mean while, it is surely not too much 
 to expect, that it will be allowed that these texts, which at 
 the first glance appear so decisively to assert the pre-exist- 
 ertce of Christ, nevertheless admit of an interpretation, 
 founded upon the principles of just criticism, perfectly 
 consistent with his proper and simple humanity. 
 
 Upon these texts, which lie at the very foundation of 
 the Arian and Trinitari^tn doctrines, it has been thought 
 expedient to insist at large. These being thus copiously 
 discussed, the remaining articles may be dispatched with 
 greater brevity. 
 
 novi seculi, i. e. ecclesioe, caput verum, et unicum principium." Beza. 
 — " Qui primus pater et auctor est ecclesiae christianae." Hammond, 
 — " Novae creationis." Grotius. 
 
 Si <( pj-jpceps omnium creaturarum Dei." Brennius. 
 
 H SECTION 
 
98 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part I. 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 A COLLECTION OF TEXTS, WHICH, IF THEY DO NOT 
 DIRECTLY ASSERT THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST, 
 HAVE NEVERTHELESS BEEN THOUGHT TO ALLUDE 
 TO IT, AND TO BE MOST EASILY EXPLAINED UPON 
 THAT HYPOTHESIS. 
 
 In the preceding Section it has been shown that the 
 phrases 'to be with God,' and ' to' ascend into heaven,' 
 mean, to be made acquainted with the divine purposes 
 and will : and that the correlate phrases * to be sent by 
 God,'' ' to come from God,' ' to descend from heaven,* 
 and the like, express a divine commission to reveal the 
 purposes and will of God to mankind. 
 
 Also, that the phrase, ' being in the form and likeness 
 of God,' signifies being invested with miraculous powers ; 
 and the correspondent phrases, ' being in the likeness of 
 a man,' or ' the form of a servant,' when put in opposition 
 to ' the form of God,' signify appearing in a humble 
 condition, like an ordinary man, who possessed no such 
 miraculous powers. 
 
 It has also been proved that, in the language of Scrip- 
 ture, persons, or things, or states of things, are spoken of 
 as actually existing, when they exist only in the divine 
 purpose and decree. 
 
 These principles being premised, there will be little 
 difficulty in the explanation of those texts which, though 
 they cannot be regarded as asserting, are neyertlfeless 
 understood by many as alluding to, the pre- existence of 
 Christ. 
 
 I . John vi. 46. " Not that any one hath seen the 
 Father, save he who is of God, he hath seen the Father." 
 
 i. e. 
 
Sect. 4.] TFIE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 99 
 
 i. e. No one is acquainted v/ith the Father's will, but 
 he who hath received a commission from him. 
 
 2. John viii. 14. "I know whence I came and 
 whither I go; but ye cannot tell whence I come and 
 whither I go." 
 
 i. e. I know from whom I received my authority, and 
 to whom I am accountable ; but you are wilfully ignorant 
 of both, 
 
 3. John viii. 23. " Ye are from beneath ; I am 
 from above : ye are of this v/orld ; I am not of this 
 world." 
 
 i. e. You are of a mean and worldly disposition ; I am, 
 i. e. my doctrine is, from heaven ; and its tendency is to 
 purify and exalt the mind. John xv. 19. Col. iii. 2. 
 
 4. John viii. 38. "I speak that which I have seen 
 with my Father : and ye do that which you have seen 
 with your Father." Ver. 44, " Ye are of your Father the 
 devil." 
 
 i. e. I teach you what I have learned from God : ye 
 do what you have learned from the devil. The expression 
 in both clauses is figurative. 
 
 5. John xiv. 28. " My Father is greater than I." 
 This is a very perplexing text to those who believe in 
 
 the proper deity of Christ. Some say, the Father is great- 
 er than the Son in his divine nature, the Son being an 
 emanation from him^ ; — others^ that he is greater than 
 
 ' Of this mind are the Athanasians ancient and modern ; Alexander 
 of Alexandria, Athanasius, Novatian, Gregory Nazianzen, iJuU, Wa- 
 terland, Whitby. "Quod autem Hihirius dicit, ' Patrem esse majo- 
 rem Filio. Filium tamen non esse minorem,' intelligendnm est Patrem 
 esse principium Filii, qui natura tamen est aequalis Patri. In divinis 
 personis, ordo est : insequalitas non est : quemadmodum distinctio est, 
 diversitas nulla est." Erasmus. — •' The primitive fathers owned that 
 the Father was greater than the Son as to his original, the Son being 
 begotten by himj and yet declared that he was (jod, and equal to God, 
 tis to his essence." Whitby. 
 
 H 2 the 
 
100 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part T. 
 
 the Son in his human nature^ ; — and some, in his official 
 capacity as mediator. This latter is the interpretation of 
 Hammond, Doddridge, and Guyse. 
 
 The Arians claim this text as decisive in their favour, 
 '* The sense," says Dr. Clarke in his usual manner, " in 
 which the Socinian writers understand these words is very 
 low and mean. The plain meaning is, that God the 
 Father is greater than the Son.*' Scr. Doct. No, 830. 
 
 But this learned writer appears not to have recollected 
 that his own Logos was as much inferior to the infinite 
 self- existent Deity, as the meanest worm. Nor would Dr. 
 . Clarke say, whatever our Lord might mean, that his dis- 
 ciples understood him in this sublime sense: it is plain 
 that they must have regarded him as a human being, 
 otherwise their minds would have been overwhelmed 
 with astonishment and terror. But surely our Lord must 
 have used his words in that sense in which he knew that 
 his hearers would understand them, viz. 
 
 That God was infinitely more wise and powerful and 
 good than he ; and therefore able to reward him, and to 
 protect them when he was withdrawn from them^. This 
 is the interpretation of the Unitarians. Nor is this phra- 
 seology, which Dr. Clarke thinks zo " fiat and insipid," 
 without example in Scripture. Job xxxiii. 12, IS, " God 
 is greater than man : why then dost thou strive against 
 
 • Beza is very angry with the Ariars for not being satisfied with one 
 ov other of these solutions, either of which ought to have silenced theui, 
 " si sanabiles fuissent aut etiamnum assent." Neither of them, how- 
 ever, in Beza's judgement, expresses our Lord's true meaning, viz. 
 " that his future state of exaltation would be greatly superior to his 
 present state of humiliation." But the pious reformer seems to have 
 thought that any arguments were good enough for the Arians. And 
 they might have guessed a good while befere they had discovered what 
 he tells them is the truth. 
 
 '" riarvjp |X8 ixEi^oiv, mittens misso. Hoc autera ideo dicitur ut 
 intelligatur, et se ibi tutum fore, et ipsis in Patre plus futurum prae- 
 sidij, quani in si;a corporali praesentia." Grotius. 
 
 hini? ' 
 
Sect. 4.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. lOJ 
 
 him?" John x. 29, " My Father, who gave them me, is 
 greater than all.** 
 
 6. John xviii. 37. " To this end was I born, and 
 for this came I into the world :" 
 
 " From another and much better abode," says Dr. 
 Doddridge. 
 
 But how will this interpretation apply to John xvii. 18, 
 " As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I 
 also sent them into the world.'* ' To be sent into the 
 world' is to be invested with a divine commission: 'to 
 come into the world' is to appear in public under a pro- 
 phetic character. Chap, ill 17. 19 ; ix. 39 ; xi. 27. 
 
 7. Rom. X. 6. "The righteousness (or justifica- 
 tion) which is by faith spaaketh thus: Say not in thy 
 heart, Who shall ascend into heaven ? (that is, to bring 
 Christ down from above.)" 
 
 7. d. The language of faith in the Gospel is not, Who 
 shall teach us divine truths ? as though Christ had not 
 revealed all that was needful, and it would be necessary 
 for him to visit this world again. See John iii. 13.* 
 
 8. 1 Cor. X. 9. " Neither let us tempt Christ^, 
 as some of them" (the Israelites in the wilderness) "also 
 tempted him, and were destroyed by serpents." 
 
 For ' Christ,' the Vatican and Ephrem manuscripts, 
 and the Syriac and Coptic versions, read K'jp.ov, ' Lord/ 
 and the Alex. Ms. ©icv, ' God.* Epiphanius charges 
 Marcion the heretic with substituting X-iio-tov^ 'Chrisj,* 
 for Kv^ioy, 'Lord.' 
 
 If we retain the received text, archbishop Newcome 
 
 *" Solent qui rem perqufim difficilem volui.t significare, uti simili- 
 fndine ascensus in ccelum, &c. Intellige, nihil opus de eo nos labo- 
 remus." Grotius. 
 
 '• Ckristl X^iTrav. Irengeus certainly read Kvoiov, Lord. See Wet- 
 s^ein in loc Griesb^ch retains Xpunov (Christj^ but he marks ¥,up.or 
 (Lord J as the preferable reading. 
 
 says, 
 
102 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part I. 
 
 says, *' the sense is, Nor let us tempt, try, prove, provoke 
 Christ now, as some of them did God at that time." See 
 the Improved Version in loc. 
 
 9. 1 Cor. X. 4. " They drank of the spiritual rock 
 which followed them : and that rock was Christ." 
 
 /. e. A type or similitude of Christ, from whom flow 
 all the refreshing blessings of the Gospel. 
 
 10. Gal. i. 1. "Paul an apostle, not of man nor 
 by men, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father who 
 raised him from the dead.'* 
 
 q. d. "Not of, nor by, ordinary men," see Phil. li. 7 : 
 but by Jesus Christ, the sole head and governor of the 
 church, from whom alone an apostolic mission could be 
 derived. 
 
 11. Heb. ii. 14. " Forasmuch then as the chil- 
 dren are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself like- 
 wise took part of the same 6." 
 
 The expression * took part* seems to indicate a volun- 
 tary assumption of human nature, and so it is translated 
 by Dr. Harwood, and expounded by Dr. Doddridge. It 
 ought to have been rendered ' he participated of the same.* 
 And it no more implies that to become a man was a vo- 
 luntary act in Christ, than the other expression, translated 
 * are partakers,' implies that it is a voluntary act in other 
 human beings. " The word TrapaTfKrjcncog,** says Mr. 
 Peirce, " does not here import a faint likeness or resem- 
 blance, but a proper and exact conformity. For he as 
 properly partook of flesh and blood as any of the chil- 
 dren do," The sense therefore is, that Christ was in 
 every respect really and truly a man, as much so as any 
 of the children of God whom he came to save. And this 
 
 " Took pari of the same.'] " '[ietBcr^s, i. e. syioivwvrjas, ^tta.Xa.'Zsv .^^ 
 Cyni!. Phavorinus. See Schleusner. The word, therefore, which 
 our translators render took part, is equivalent to that which they trans- 
 late ere partakers ; and by no means necessarily iinpjies a volun- 
 tary act. 
 
 certainly 
 
Sect. 4.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 103 
 
 certainly is the scope of the writer's argument, as will be 
 evident to every unprejudiced person who reads the para- 
 graph with attention. 
 
 12. Heb. vii. 3. "For this Melchisedec — without 
 father, without mother, without descent (or pedigree), 
 having neither beginning of days, nor end of life, and 
 made like to theSon of God ; abideth a priest continually." 
 
 The writer of this epistle having found in Psalm ex. 
 the priesthood of the Messiah compared with that of Mel- 
 chisedec, strains the similitude to as many points of resem- 
 blance as possible. 
 
 As Melchisedec was a priest, without any mention 
 having been made in the Old Testament of his pedigree, 
 either by the father's or the mother's side ; so Christ, be- 
 ing of the tribe of Judah, ver. 14, is also a priest, without 
 priestly pedigree. 
 
 And as the history contains no account either of the 
 birth or the death of Melchisedec, but only exhibits him 
 as a living man ; so Christ, since his ascension, is be- 
 come a living priest, and is no more subject to change or 
 death 7. 
 
 13. Heb. xi. 26. " He (Moses) esteemed the 
 reproach of Chiist greater riches than the treasures of 
 Egypt." 
 
 " Such reproach as Christ endured." Newcome.— ' 
 " O'log XfiicTTog eTTocQi.*' Photius. — So Lindsey : and 
 others. See chap xiii. 13. — " Typical of the sufferings 
 
 " " Haec non sunt nimium nunc urgenda cnm obsoleverit prorsus ea 
 ratio sic explicandse Scripturae " Le Clerc in Hammond, with his usual 
 good sense. — If this be the true interpretation, which to me seems 
 unquestionable, it puts an end to all the curious speculations concern- 
 ing the person of Melchisedec : some supposing that lie was the Logos, 
 some, an angel, and soaie, Shem the son of Noah ; and likewise, 
 concerning the person of Christ, as being in his divine nature without 
 mother, and in his human nature without father, and the like, with 
 which divines have puzzled themselves to little purpose. See Peirce, 
 and Improved Version, note. 
 
 of 
 
104- TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part I. 
 
 of Christ." Grotius. — " Which the Israelites suffered as 
 expectants of the Messiah." Beza and Hallet. — " The 
 reproach which he incurred by the worship of the visible 
 Jehovah, v.?hom Paul considers in his future character of 
 the Christ." H. Taylor in Ben Mordecai's Lett. p. 297. 
 
 The best interpreration of this text is that of Dr. Whit- 
 by, Dr. Sykes, Le Clerc, and others. The word Christ 
 signifies ' anointed,' i. e. separated, consecrated. Hence 
 it is applied to the Israelite nation, Ps. cv. \5 -, " Touch 
 not my anointed" (LXS. ' mychrists,' twv xp'trrwy) i. e. 
 my chosen and consecrated people. Habakkuk iii. 1 3, 
 " Thou wentest forth for the salvation of thy people, even 
 for thine anointed," jov y^-ia-iov era, ' thy christ,' ' thy 
 chosen people.' 
 
 * Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ,' that is, of 
 the chosen and holy people of God, ' greater riches than 
 the treasures of Egypt,' q. d. He preferred the state of 
 a despised Israelite to the opulence and grandeur of an 
 Egyptian prince. 
 
 Dr. Clarke, with great judgement, takes no notice of 
 this text. 
 
 14. Heb. xli. 25, 26. " See that ye refuse not 
 him that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused 
 him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape, 
 if we turn away from him who speaketh from heaven," 
 he. See Haggai ii. 6.^ 
 
 The speaker here alluded to is God himself, who, at 
 the giving out of the Law, spake from mount Sinai, but 
 who now by his spirit speaks from heaven. 1 Pet. i. 12. 
 *' The stress of the argument," says Peirce, " lies in the 
 different manner of his speaking, his speaking on earth 
 
 ® Archbishop Newcorue strangely conceives of this passage as " fa- 
 vouring the supposition that our Lord was the angel of the covenant 
 who presided at giving the Law." Dr. Clarke takes no notice of 
 this text. 
 
 and 
 
Sect. 4.] THE PRE-E3?ISTENCE OF CHRIST. 105 
 
 and his speaking from heaven.'* See also Grotius and 
 Whitby. 
 
 15. Heb. xiii. 8. " Jesus Christ is the san^^e yes- 
 terday, and to-day, and for ever.'* 
 
 *' In the tenor of his declarations, as well as in the glo- 
 ries of his divine nature." Dr. Doddridge. 
 
 *' The meaning of this place, as appears from the con- 
 text, is, that the doctrine of Christ once taught by the 
 apostles ought to be preserved unchanged." Dr. Clarke, 
 No. 662 : and with him agree Calvin9, Whitby, Le Clerc, 
 Newcome, and the majority of expositors. This inter- 
 pretation is confirmed by ver. 9 : "Be not carried away 
 with divers and strange doctrine," The word Christ of- 
 ten stands for the doctrine of Christ. Eph. iv. 20, " We 
 have not so learned Christ," ?*. e. his doctrine. See also 
 Phil. iv. 13. Acts V. 42. 2 Cor. iv. 5. 1 Cor. i. 24. 
 
 16. 1 Pet. i. 11." Searching what — the spirit of 
 Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified 
 beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that 
 should follow." 
 
 ' The spirit of Christ' is that prophetic spirit which re- 
 vealed the advent and the sufferings of Christ, as, John 
 xiv. 17, ' the spirit of truth' is that inspiration from God 
 which would reveal and attest the doctrine of the Gospel. 
 See Grotius in loc. J Clarke, No. 1209 j and Lindsey's 
 Seq. p. ^S3. 
 
 17.1 Pet. iii. 1 9, 20. " By which also he (Christ) 
 went and preached unto the spirits in prison. Who some 
 time were disobedient, when (once) the long-suffering of 
 God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark v^^as 
 preparing." 
 
 ^ "■ Apparet non de aeterna Christi essentia apostolum disputare. 
 sed de ejus notiiia, quae omnibus seculis viguit inter pios, ac perpetuum 
 ecclesise fundameatum fuv.t." CalviUo 
 
 More 
 
306 TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part I. 
 
 More correctly ; " By which also, after he was gone, 
 he preached to the spirits, ;. e. persons 'o in prison : who 
 formerly disbelieved." 
 
 q. d. By which spirit, communicated to his apostles af- 
 ter his ascension, (Trc^iSng^ see ver. 22, where the very 
 same word is used in the same sense,) he proclaimed the 
 Gospel to persons who were imprisoned in ignorance, 
 idolatry, and vice, of the same description with those to 
 whom Noah preached while the ark was building. Who 
 indeed then preached with little effect, he. 
 
 Those to w'hom Christ preaches by his spirit since his 
 ascension are not the self-same persons to whom Noah 
 preached, but persons of the same cast and character, the 
 &ame race of idolaters and unbelievers, bound in the same 
 chains of ignorance, vice, and prejudice. 
 
 This is the interpretation of Grotius^, and seems to be 
 the best solution of this obscure and entangled text. 
 
 Of the advocates for the pre-existence and divinity of 
 Christ, some suppose with Dr. Whitby, Dr. Doddridge, 
 5cc., that Christ by his prophetic spirit, in the days of 
 Noah, warned the inhabitants of the antediluvian world. 
 
 '" Spirit is not unfrequently used for perw?i. See 1 Tim, vi. 21, 
 compared with 2 T'nn. iv. '22. Philem. v. 25. 1 John iv. 2, 3. 
 
 ^' " £•/ cu, per quern Dei spiritual nussnm in apostolos. iropv^ag, 
 postquam in caelum ascendit : \ id. ver. 22 Joh. xiv. 2, 3. iv (p-jXaxr}, 
 i. e. in carne. aWsiS^o-ao-j itorz. •/., r. A. loquitur quasi iidem tuissent, 
 ft fuerant iidem non ccpi^'xw, sed genere. Homines a Deo plane ab- 
 alienati. Noae non cvediderunt: Christo crediderunt." Grotius. 
 
 Christ was raised to life by the spirit, that is, the power of God : 
 by which spirit, after he was gone to heaven, he preached by the mi- 
 nistry of his apostles to the spirits in prison, not to the dead, but to 
 the Gentile world who were without any sense or knowledge of God. 
 Chap. iv. 6, " The Gospel was preached to them that were dead." 
 Isa. xlii. 6, 7» " I g'^'c ihee for a light to the Gentiles, to bring out 
 the prisoners from the prison. Who were some time disobedient in 
 the days of Noah." — " He preached not to the same individual per- 
 sons ; but to men like them, in the same circumstances." Lindsey's 
 Seq. p. 283 — 288. Dr. Clarke makes no use of this text. See Imp. 
 Ver. i)ot. in ioc. 
 
 who 
 
Sect. 4.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 107 
 
 who then rejected his admonitions, and are now suffering 
 in prison, i. e. in hell. 
 
 Others, with Gregory Nazianzen, understand this text 
 as teaching that Christ descended into hell to preach the 
 Gospel to the imprisoned souls of those who perished in 
 Noah's flood. 
 
 18. 1 John i. 1,9. " That which was from the 
 beginning, which we have heard, which we have seen 
 with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our 
 hands have handled, of the Word of Life ; for the Life 
 was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness, 
 and shew unto you that eternal Life, which was with the 
 Father, and was manifested unto us." 
 
 This text is parallel to John i. 1 — 14 ; and they are 
 mutually explanatory of each other. Jesus Christ, the 
 author and finisher of the Christian faith, who is there 
 called ' the Word,' is here entitled ' the Word of Life,* 
 — he is there said to have been " in the beginning ;'* 
 here, he is " that which was from the beginning," i. e, 
 from the commencement of the new dispensation. — In 
 the Gospel it is said, " in him was Life ;" in the Epistle 
 he is styled " the Life/' " the Eternal Life ;" for this was 
 the main object of his mission, the great doctrine which 
 he was authorized to reveal. — In the Gospel, " the Word 
 was with God ;" in the Epistle, " this Eternal Life was 
 with the Father," /. e. he was instructed by God, and re- 
 ceived his commission from him. — In the Gospel, " the 
 Life was the Light of men, and John was sent to bear 
 witness to it ;" ih the Epistle, " the Life was manifested, 
 and his disciples saw it and bare witness." — Finally, in 
 the Gospel, " the Word was flesh ;" the teacher of life 
 was a real man : in the Epistle, this Word of life was also 
 a real person, the object of sense ; he was heard, and seen, 
 and felt. He was not, as the Docetae then taught, a spi. 
 
 rituai 
 
10S TEXTS SUPPOSED TO ALLUDE TO [Part I. 
 
 iitual being in the shape of a man, but without the essen- 
 tial properties of humanity, intangible, and impassible 12. 
 19. 1 John iv. 2. " Every spirit that confesseth 
 that lesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God." See 
 ver. 3, and 2 John, ver. 7. 
 
 Calvin and bishop Horsley argue from this phrase the 
 pre-existence and divinity of Christ. Grotius and the old 
 Socinians interpret the words ' coming in the flesh,' of the 
 humble and suffering state in which Christ appeared. 
 Dr. Priestley and Mr. Lindsey explain the phrase as ex- 
 pressive of the real and proper humanity of Christ, in op- 
 position to the doctrine of the Docetse, which was then 
 growing ir;to fashion, that Christ was a man in appearance 
 only. Of this doctrine the apostle expresses the strongest 
 disapprobation, ver. 3, " Every spirit that confesseth not 
 that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God : and 
 this is that spirit of antichrist'* — " which the world hear- 
 eth." Ver. 5. 
 
 Thus it appears that the doctrine against which the 
 apostle expresses a marked indignation, and which he 
 denounces as the very essence and spirit of antichrist, is 
 that which denies Christ to be a real man, and which 
 maintains that he was a being different from what he ap- 
 peared to be. This was the doctrine which the w^orld 
 received with applause; and the reason is plain: because 
 it diminished the odium which was attached to the Chris- 
 tian religion, from the low extraction, the mean condition, 
 and the ignominious execution of its original founder i3. 
 
 20 Rev. xxii. 16. "I am the root and the off- 
 spring of David.'* Comp. chap. v. 5. 
 
 ; <h± 
 
 '* See Sect. Ill, No. I Also Impr. Version in loc. 
 
 " Lindsay's Sequel, p. 288 — 29I. — " Every spirit which confess- 
 eth that Jesus Christ is truly man is of God, in opposition to the 
 DocetaCj who inaiutained that he was man only in appearance." Dr. 
 
 Priestley's 
 
Sect. 4.] THE PRE-EXISTENCE OF CHRIST. 109 
 
 q. d. I am a sucker or plant from the root of David. 
 That root, of wlilch it was foretold that it should grow 
 out of the house of David. Isa. xi. 1, " There shall come 
 forth a roof from the stem of Jesse, and a branch shall 
 grow out of his roots." Ver. 10, '' In that day there 
 shall be a root of Jesse.*' Isa, liii. 2. Hcs. xiv. 6. 
 Rom. XV. 12. See Grotius in loc. 
 
 From the reviev/ which has been taken of the texts 
 contained in this Section, we may conclude, that, though 
 if the doctrine of the pre-existence of Christ had been an 
 undoubted fact, established upon independent evidence, 
 some of these passages might be understood as containing 
 an allusion to it, yet that no one of them can be adniitted 
 as a direct proof of the popular doctrine. All of them 
 may be well explained upon the supposition of the proper 
 humanity of Jesus Christ, and the majority of them are 
 in fact interpreted by the most learned and judicious of 
 the Arian and Trinitarian expositors as having no bearing 
 upon the doctrine of the pre-existence. 
 
 Priestley's History of Corrupt, vol. i. p. 8. — " ' ComiMg in the flesh' 
 is a very awkward and unnatural phrase," says bishop Horsley, " to 
 express no more than his being truly man : it naturally leads to the 
 notion of one who had his choica of difterent ways of coming." Hors* 
 ley's Charge, p. 15 — 18. — But the controversy v/ith the Docetae made 
 that expression proper, which would otherwise have been harsh. 
 And this safSciently accounts for the apostle's using it, without having 
 recourse to the unfounded and unscriptural supposition of our Lord's 
 having a choice of diiicrcat ways o{ coming Into the world. 
 
 SECTION 
 
110 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Part I. 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST, 
 WHICH INFER HIS PRE-EXISTENCE AND DIVINITY, 
 
 I. Eternity, 
 
 1. Johni. 1. "In the beginning was the Word.'* 
 jinsiver. The beginning of the Gospel dispensation 
 
 is here intended. See Sect. III. 1. 
 
 2. Col. i. 15. " The first-born of every creature." 
 Ansiuer, Compare ver. 1 8. The first who was raised 
 
 from the dead to immortal life. Sect. III. 1 8. 
 
 3. Heb. vii. 3. " Having neither beginning of 
 days nor end of life.'* 
 
 Ansiver. This being predicated of Melchisedec, and 
 not proving his eternity, it cannot prove the eternity of 
 Christ. Sect. IV. 12. 
 
 4. Heb. xiii. 8. "Jesus Christ, the same yesterday, 
 to-day, and for ever.*' 
 
 jinsiver. That is, the doctrine of Christ, as the con- 
 text requires, and Calvin himself allows. Sect. IV. 15. 
 
 11. Immutability. 
 
 Heb. i. 10 — 12. "And thou, Lord, in the be- 
 ginning didst lay the foundations of the earth ; and the 
 heavens are the works of thy hands : they will perish, 
 but thou wilt remain,'* &c. 
 
 Ansiver. These words are a quotation from Ps. cii. 25, 
 and are certainly addressed to the eternal God. The 
 writer of this epistle having cited the promise, Ps. xlv. 6, 
 that God would support the throne of the Messiah, in an 
 
 eloquent 
 
Sect. 5.] TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. Ill 
 
 eloquent apostrophe he addresses the Supreme Being ia 
 the language of the Psahnist, acknowledging and adoring 
 that immutability of the divine nature, and of his wise and 
 benevolent purposes, which constitute the surest pledge 
 of the stability of the Messiah's kingdom K 
 
 III. Power to lay doiun ids Life, and to resume it at 
 
 pleasure. 
 
 1. John ii. J 9 — 2\. "Jesus answered^ Destroy 
 this temple, and in three days I will raise it up :'* — " he 
 spake of the temple of his body." Matt. xxvi. 61 . 
 
 Answer. The resurrection of Jesus is uniformly 
 ascribed in the Sacred Writings to the power of God, 
 Acts ii. 32 ; X. 40 ; xvii. 31. Rom. vi. 4 ; viii. 1 1. Our 
 Lord's expression therefore Is to be understood figurative- 
 ly ; not that he would raise himself, but that he would 
 be raised by God. Thus, vt-hen It Is said " the dead shall 
 rise,'* 1 Thess. iv. IG. ail that is intended is, that they 
 shall be raised by a divine power. Mark v. 41. John 
 xi. 44 ; V. 28, 29. 
 
 2. John X. 17, 18. " Therefore doth my Father 
 love me, because I lay down my life, that I may take it 
 again. No man taketh it from me, but I lay it down of 
 myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power 
 to take (AaS--/y, to receive)-' It again. This command- 
 ment have I received (t-AaSoj/) of my Father.'* 
 
 ^ See Einlyn's Works, vol. ii. p. 340. Also Lindsey's Sequel, 
 p. 488 ; and the Impr. Vers, in loc. Dr Clarke, though he prefers the 
 application of the words to the Son, as being the delegate of the Fa- 
 tlier in the creation of the world, admits the possibility that they may 
 ' be intended as a des:ription of the immutability of the Father, for 
 a confirmation and ass irance of what he had declared," Ver. B, g. 
 Script. Doct. p. 81. No. 552. 
 
 ' " AK^a^avcv, manu aliquid capio, Matt. xiv. IQ : alia quacunque 
 ratione accipio, Matt. vii. 3 : rursum accipio, recupero, Matt. xix. 2C). 
 Joh. xiii. 12." Schleusner.^ — The word is by no means necessarily 
 taken in an active sense. 
 
 If 
 
112 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Parti, 
 
 If this text is to be understood of the death and resur- 
 rection of Jesus, it is to be explained upon the same prin- 
 ciples as the preceding : and though active verbs are used, 
 they are to be raken in a passive sense. " I have autho- 
 rity to receive it again.'* q. d. If I voluntarily expose 
 myself to suffering and death, I am assured by my Father 
 that the life so sacrificed shall be speedily restored. I 
 shall receive again the deposit which I resign. 
 
 Grotius^ explains the text differently, q. d, I have 
 power to expose myself to imminent peril, and I have 
 power to rescue myself at pleasure : so that no person can 
 deprive me of life till I voluntarily resign it, and wave the 
 power with which I am intrusted, of rescuing myself from 
 all violence. 
 
 Our Lord, to whom the spirit was given without mea- 
 sure, John iii. 34, possessed a voluntary power of working 
 miracles : but his mind was so disciplined by his tempta- 
 tion, and by other circumstances, as to exercise these 
 powers only upon proper occasions. It is evident in par- 
 ticular, that it was optional with him, whether he would 
 submit to a violent death in order to fulfil the purposes 
 of his mission. When the officers came to arrest him, 
 he struck them to the ground with terror. John xviii. 6. 
 — Had he thought fit to desire it, legions of angels 
 would have been sent for his rescue. Matt. xxvi. 53.-— 
 Before the appointed time was arrived, he repeatedly de- 
 livered himself from danger by miracle. Luke iv. 29. 
 John viii. 59. — And the apostle Paul, Philipp. ii. 8, re- 
 presents our Lord's submission to crucifixion as a volun- 
 tary act, in which he spontaneously suspended the exer- 
 cise of his miraculous powers. 
 
 ' " Ostendit Christus aliquid in se eximium. Alii etsi periculo se 
 offerre poteiant, non famen quoties volant se periculo possunt eximere, 
 quod ipse poterat. Aicfeiv, x. r. K, i. e. vitam periculo jam praesenti 
 eripere." Grotius. 
 
 It 
 
Sect. 5.] TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. 113 
 
 It may perhaps be objected, that if our Lord had refu- 
 sed to submit to a violent death, the design of the Gospel 
 dispensation would have been frustrated. But this is a 
 case which could not have occurred under the divine 
 government ; events which result from the election of 
 voluntary agents being equally certain with those which 
 are effected by mechanical causes. And it is more ho- 
 nourable to our Lord's character to conceive of him as 
 intrusted with voluntary powers, which the habitual rec- 
 titude of his mind would prevent him from abusing to 
 improper purposes, than to suppose that he was never ca- 
 pable of performing a nuracle, but when prompted by an 
 immediate divine suggestion : in which case there would 
 be no room for the exercis-:; either of discretion or bene- 
 volence. And the language of the New Testanient evi- 
 dently favours the supposition that the miracles of Christ 
 were voluntary acts, while the apostles possessed miracu- 
 lous powers in a very inferior and limited degree. 
 
 IV. Irresistible Power, 
 
 1. Matt, xxviii. 18. " All power" (c-^aa-ia, au- 
 thorityi) "is given to me in heaven and on earth." 
 
 This text does not refer to power as an attribute of 
 Christ, but to his authority and universal dominion; which 
 is a different question, and will be considered elsewhere. 
 Sect. X. 
 
 2. Philip, ill. 21. " Who shall change our vile 
 body, that it may be fashioned like unto his glorious body, 
 according to the working (energy) whereby he is able even, 
 to subdue (subject) all things to himself." 
 
 Aimver, That Christ will be invested v/ith authority 
 to raise the dead, is a doctrine generally received by chris- 
 tians ; — and that there is a sense in v/hich all things will 
 be made subject to him, is admitted by Unitarians equally 
 with other christians. That this power, whatever it be, 
 
 I is 
 
1 14 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Part I. 
 
 is derived from God, the apostle expressly teaches, 1 Cor. 
 XV. 27. How far this authority is consistent with the 
 proper humanity of Christ, will be the subject of future 
 inquiry. Sect. X. 
 
 3. Rev. i. 8. " I am Alpha and Omega, saith the 
 Lord God, who is, and was, and who is to come, the 
 A'niighty.'* 
 
 This is the most approved reading of the text. See 
 Griesbach and the Improved Version, The words are 
 undoubtedly to be understood as uttered in the person of 
 God, and not of Jesus. The words reapeated ver, 1 1 , 
 where Christ is the speaker, are -jertainly spurious. 
 
 V. Omnipresence. 
 
 1. Matt, xviii. 20. "For where two or three are 
 gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst 
 of them." 
 
 Answer. The apostles certainly did not understand 
 these words as an assertion of the divine attribute of om- 
 nipresence. For Peter, without any marks of astonish- 
 ment at so extraordinary a declaration as that must have 
 appeared to be if he had so understood it, and without 
 any comment, proceeds in his usual way to propose a 
 question upon a difSculty which had occurred to him : 
 " Master, how often shall my brother offend, and I for- 
 give ?" The declaration therefore must be taken figura- 
 tively. The context limits toe promise to the apostles 
 only. See Pearce and Newcome, — Ver. 19, " if two 
 of you shall agree on earth concerning any thing which 
 they shall ask, it shall be done for them by my Father 
 who is in heaven." This promise must necessarily be in- 
 tended of prayers offered by the impulse of the spirit. The 
 reason follows : " For where two or three are gathered 
 together in my name, there am I in the midst of them.'* 
 q. d. Such requests, dictated by my authority, and prompt- 
 ed 
 
Sect. 5.] TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. 115 
 
 ed by the spirit which I will communicate, will be as effi- 
 cacious as if I myselF were personally present. 
 
 2. Matt, xxviii. 20. " Lo, I am with you alway, 
 even to the end of the world*." 
 
 j^nsiver. The promise is addressed to the apostles 
 only. It is limited to the termination of the Jewish dis- 
 pensation by the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple: 
 during which interval Christ was often personally present 
 with his apostles ; and always by the communication of the 
 Holy Spirit. See Mr. Lindsey's Sequel, p. 74. 
 
 VI. Omniscience ; the Knmuledge of the TJiouglits and 
 Purposes of the Heart, 
 ]. Matt. ix. 4. "Jesus knowing their thoughts." 
 Compare Markii. 8, " When Jesus perceived in his spi- 
 rit that they reasoned thus within themselves." See also 
 Luke V. 2-2. 
 
 Perhaps the historians might mean nothing more than 
 that he judged from their countenances > .^ t was passing 
 in their minds. 
 
 2. John ii. 24, 25. " He knew all men ; and 
 needed not that any should testify of man : for he knew 
 what was in man." 
 
 3. Matt. xii. 25. " But Jesus knowing their 
 thoughts. " 
 
 4. Luke vii. S9, 40. " Now the Phari-^ee said 
 within himself, This man, if he were a prophet, ould 
 
 have known Vv-ho and what this woman is And Jesus 
 
 ans • ering, said, Simon, 1 have somewhat to say to thee." 
 
 Observe, that the Pharisee expected as a matter of 
 course that a prophet would know by ins'^iraiion ihecha- 
 
 ' To the end nj the ivorldl I'x; rr^^ cruvreXsiag rov a,t(/Jvo;. " To the end 
 of the age." Pcaice, Wakefield, Ncwco me. i.e. " of the Jewish age 
 or dispensation, which seems to limit the promise to that period of time. 
 Chap. xsiv. 3." Pcarce. 
 
 1 2 racter 
 
116 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Parti. 
 
 racter and thoughts of those who approached him, without 
 inferring or suspecting that a prophet was a being of higher 
 order than mankind. 
 
 5. Luke ix. 46, 47. " There arose a reasoning 
 among them, which should be the greatest. And Jesus 
 
 perceiving the thoughts of their heart " Compare 
 
 Ilatt. xviii. 1. Mark ix. 33. 
 
 6. John iv. 25. " The woman saith, I know that 
 when the Messiah cometh he will tell us all things.'* 
 
 L e. All things relating to the true and acceptable wor- 
 ship of God ; which was the subject of discourse. 
 
 7. John iv. 29. " Come, see a man who told me 
 all things that ever I did : is not this the Christ ?" 
 
 Observe here, first, the very restricted sense in which 
 the phrase "all things*' is used. Jesus had hinted at 
 very few incidents only of this woman's private life, and 
 she reports that he told her all things. — Observe, further; 
 that the Samaritans fully expected that the Messiah would 
 possess great and supernatural knowledge of human con- 
 cerns, characters, and thoughts ; notwithstanding which, 
 they had no expectation of him as a being of celestial origin. 
 
 8. John vi. 64. *' Jesus knew from the beginning 
 who they were that believed not, and who would betray 
 him." Compare chap. xiii. 11. 
 
 9. John xvi. 28 — 30. " I came forth from the 
 Father, and am come into the world. Again, I leave the 
 world, and go to the Father. His disciples said to him, 
 Now thou speakest plainly ; — now we are sure that thou 
 knowest all things, and needest not that any should ask 
 thee : by this we believe that thou earnest forth from 
 God.'* 
 
 From the connexion it is evident that, by the phrase 
 * all things,' the apostles meant the thoughts and specula- 
 tions which were passing in their minds. His accurate 
 
 knowledge 
 
Sect. 5.2 TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. 1 17 
 
 knowledge of these speculations convinced them that he 
 came from God : by which they could only mean that 
 he was an inspired prophet. For his knowledge of their 
 thoughts would warrant this conclusion, but would prove 
 nothing relative to a pre-existent state and a descent from 
 heaven. Lastly ; the use of the phrase in this sense must 
 to the apostles have been familiar and Intelligible : for 
 when our Lord saith, " I came forth from the Father ;'* 
 they immediately reply, "Now thou speakest plainly;" 
 and repeat his words no doubt in the sense in which he 
 used them^ i. e. as expressing a divine commission. 
 
 10. John xxl. IT. " Thou knowest all things; 
 thou knowest that I love thee." 
 
 J 1. Col. II. 2, 3. *' To the acknowledgement of 
 the mystery of God (]even of the Father and of Christ]] 
 In whom are hid all jthe treasures of wisdom and know- 
 ledge." 
 
 Griesbach omits the words In brackets. The manu- 
 scripts vary. The relative sv w, rendered * In whom^^ Is 
 by archbishop Newcome translated 'in tvhich/ as referring 
 to the word mystery. See chap. i. 27. 
 
 12. Rev. ii. 2. " I know thy works." 
 
 Each of the epistles to the seven churches of Asia Is 
 introduced with this preface. 
 
 13. Rev. ii. 23. " And all the churches shall 
 know that I am he who searches the reins and the heart." 
 Compare 1 Kings viii. 39. 
 
 Solomon, in his prayer at the dedication of the temple, 
 saith, " Thou, even thou, only knowest the hearts of all 
 the children of men." 
 
 To say nothing of the doubtful authenticity of the Apo- 
 calypse, or of this portion of it, these passages would prove 
 nothing more than that Christ, In his exalted state. Is ac- 
 quainted with the circumstances of his churches, and with 
 the character of individual members. 
 
 14. Heb. 
 
118 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Parti. 
 
 14. Heb. iv. 12, 13. " The word of God is living, 
 and powerful, is a discerner of the thoughts and in- 
 tents of the heart : — neither is there any creature that is not 
 manifest in his eight," (before it,) " but all things are 
 naked and open to the eyes of Him v;ith whom we have 
 to do." 
 
 Though Dr. Clarke (No. 6-57,) and a few others ex- 
 plain this text of Jesus Christ under tht- character of the 
 Logos, the great majority of commentators understand it 
 of the doctrine of the Gospel. See Grotius, Whitby, 
 and Peirce. 
 
 Remarks. 
 
 1. It appears that it was a received opinion among 
 the Jews, that inspired prophets were acquainted, to a 
 certain extent, with the thoughts and characters of those 
 with whom they conversed. And they probably expect- 
 ed that the Messiah would possess this knowledge in still 
 greater perfection. John i. 49. 
 
 2. It is evident from the history that our Lord did 
 actually possess this knowledge in a very high degree. 
 He knevi^ the character of Nathanael, and his actions v^'hile 
 in solitude. John i. 47; 48. — He was acquainted w'nh the 
 history of the woman of Samaria. John iv. I 7, 18. — The 
 death of Lazarus was revealed to him while he vvas at a 
 distance from Bethany. John xi. 14. — And in many 
 instances he discovers an intimate knowledge of the cha- 
 racters of his hearers, and of the thoughts which were 
 passing in their minds. 
 
 3. When it is said of Christ, that "he knew all 
 things," it is evident that the words are to be taken in a 
 very restricted sense. He was not properly omniscient, 
 for he knew not the season v>?hen his own prophecy would 
 be fulfilled. Mark xiii. 32. Nor does our Lord ever use 
 this language concerning himself. In fact, the phrase 
 
 occurs 
 
Sect. 5.] TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. 3 19 
 
 occurs no where but in the writings of John, and he ap- 
 plies it to christians in general. 1 John ii. 20, " Ye have 
 an unction from the holy One, and ye know all things." 
 All therefore that can reasonably be understood by this 
 expression, as applied to our Lord, is, that every thing ne- 
 cessary for the purposes of his mission was revealed to 
 him. 
 
 4. The apostles possc^ssed what is called " the 
 power of discerning spirits," 1 Cor. xii. 10; that is, pro- 
 bably, the power of discerning men's thoughts and cha- 
 racters upon certain occasions. Acts v. 3. 9. 1 Cor. 
 V. 4. This was the same power which Christ possessed, 
 but in a much higher degree. In the apostles it was li- 
 mited and temporary. In him it was no doubt more ex- 
 tensive and permanent. But the measure of it cannot 
 be accurately ascertained. 
 
 5. To argue the doctrine of the divinity of Christ, 
 or even of his pre-existence and superior nature, from the 
 strong and hyperbolical expressions which the evangelist 
 John, unsupported by any other sacred writers, uses con- 
 cerning the knowledge of Christ, especially when it is 
 considered that he applies the same language to christians 
 in general, is drawing a grand conclusion from very pre- 
 carious premises. 
 
 VII. Christ alone Jmoivs ike Father^ and is known by 
 the Father. 
 
 1. Matt. xi. 27. " No man knoweth the Son, but 
 the Father; neither knoweth any man the Father, save 
 the Son, and he to whom the Son will reveal him.** 
 
 2. Luke X, 22. " All things are delivered to me 
 by my Father : and no man knoweth who the Son is, 
 but the Father ; and who the Father is, but the Son, and 
 he to whom the Son will reveal h.m.'* 
 
 Hence it is concluded that there is something very 
 
 mysterious 
 
120 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES SUPPOSED [Parti. 
 
 mysterious in the person of the the Son, which no one 
 but the Father knows -, and that the Son alone can com- 
 prehend the essence of the Father: and from this mutual 
 comprehension is inferred a unity of essence and equality 
 of persons^. 
 
 No conclusion can be more unfounded. It is plain 
 that he to whom the Son reveals the Father, knows the 
 Father. But what can a man thus learn of God ? No- 
 thing surely but his revealed will. In the same sense, 
 precisely, the Son knows the Father, L e. he knows his 
 will, his thoughts, and purposes of mercy to mankind. 
 And the Father alone knows the Son, knows the nature, 
 the object, and the extent of his mission. See John i. 18 ; 
 X. 14, 15. 
 
 3. John xiv. 7. 9, 10, 11. "If ye had known me, 
 ye had known my Father also.'* — " He that hath seen 
 me, hath seen the Father." — " Believest thou not that I 
 am in the Father, and the Father in me ?'* — " The Father 
 who dwelleth in me, he doeth the works." 
 
 Dr. Thomas Burnet, Dr. Doddridge, and others, who 
 contend for what is called the indwelling scheme, under- 
 stand our Lord as asserting that the essence of the Father 
 is in some mysterious manner united to the essence of the 
 Son, so as to communicate to him true and proper divi- 
 nity. But this mystical language of the evangelist, when 
 translated into popular phraseology, means nothing more 
 than that our Lord spoke and acted under a divine com- 
 mission. In the same sense our Lord prays that his apo- 
 stles may be united with the Father and himself. See 
 chap. xiv. 20; xv. 4; xvii. 11. 21 — 26.^ 
 
 * " These words plainly declare that there is something inexplicably 
 mysterious in the nature and person of Christ." Doddridge. — On the 
 other side, see Clarke aiid Grotius. 
 
 ^ See a valuable note of Dr. Clarke's upon these texts (Scrip. Doct. 
 No. 600) ; also Whitby in loc. 
 
 VIII. 
 
Sect. 5.] TO BE ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. 121 
 
 VIII. Christ was perfectly innocent, and free from Sin. 
 
 1 . John viii. 46. " Which of you convinceth me 
 of sin ? And if I say the truth, why do you not believe 
 n»e ?" 
 
 Rather, as Dr. Campbell translates, and as the con- 
 nexion requires, " Which of you convicteth me of false- 
 hood ?'* 
 
 2. Acts iii. 14. " But ye denied the Holy One 
 and the Just." 
 
 3. Acts vii. 52. " And they have slain them who 
 shewed before of the coming of the Just One, of whom 
 ye have been now the betrayers and murderers." 
 
 4. James v. 6. " Ye have condemned and killed 
 tae Just One ; and he did not resist you"." 
 
 Mr. Dodson supposes that in these texts there Is an aU 
 lusion to Isa. iii. 10, v/hich he thinks to have been vfilful- 
 ly corrupted by the Jews in the original Hebrew, and 
 which, in conformity to ihe LXX. and to Justin Martyr, 
 he translates thus : " Wo to them, because they have 
 devised evil against themselves, saying, Let us destroy the 
 Just One, for he is of no use to us." This the learned 
 translator understands to be a prophecy of the rejection 
 and sufferings of the Messiah, here and in other places 
 described as the Just or Righteous One. 
 
 5. 2 Cor. v. 21. " He hath made him to be sin 
 for us, who knew no sin." 
 
 6. Heb. vii. 26. " For such a high priest became 
 us, who was holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from 
 sinners," 
 
 7. 1 Pet. ii. 21, 22. " Christ suffered, leaving us 
 an example : — who did no sin, neither was guile found in 
 his mouth." 
 
 " " rw Aiy.aioy, ' the Righteous One,' and he did not resist you." 
 Newcome.— See Dodson on Isa. iii. lOr 
 
 8. 1 Pet. 
 
122 DIVINE ATTRIBUTES ASCRIBED TO CHRIST. [Parti. 
 
 8. 1 Pet, iii. 1 8. " Christ has once suffered for 
 €;ins, the Just for the unjust.** 
 
 9. 1 John iii. 5. " And ye know that he was ma- 
 nifested to take away our sin ; and in him was no sin." 
 
 10. Rev. iii. 10. " These things saith he that is 
 holy, he that is true." 
 
 Remarks. 
 
 1. The moral character of Christ, throug;h the whole 
 course of his public ministry, as recorded by the evange- 
 lists^ is pure and unimpeachable in every particular. 
 
 2. Whether this perfection of character in public life, 
 combined with the general declarations of his freedom from 
 sin, establish, or v/ei'e intended to establish, the fact, that 
 Jesus through the whole course of his private Hfe was 
 completely exempt from all the errors and failings of hu- 
 man nature, is a question of no great intrinsic moment, 
 and concerning which we have no sufficient data to lead 
 to a satisfactory conclusion. 
 
 3. The uniform and consummate wisdom, propriety, 
 and rectitude of our Lord's conduct in the various singular 
 and critical situations in which he was placed, as related 
 by the concurrent testimony of four independent histori- 
 ans, is a fact so extraordinary, as to preclude the possibi- 
 lity of fiction. 
 
 The great original, from which these artless historians 
 have drawn so finished a portrait, must have had a real 
 existence, and consequently the evangehcal narrative must 
 be true. 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. 6.] 123 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 CONCERNING THE ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF CHRIST 
 TO ANGELS. 
 
 JcoR 'the better understanding of this question, it is ne- 
 cessary to introduce some preliminary remarks. 
 
 T. The primary sense of the word angal (ocyysXog) 
 is * messenjier :' and in this sense it frequently occurs in 
 the Scriptures both of the Old and New Testament. 
 1 Sam. xix. 14, "Saul sent a;iessengers (Gr. ayyeXovg, 
 angels) to take David." Luke ix. 52, " He sent messen- 
 gers (angels) before his face." Chap. vii. 24, "When 
 the messengers (angels) of John were departed." 
 
 II. The uord angel, frequently in the Old Tes- 
 tament, and sometimes in the New, expresses any sym- 
 bol of the divine presence, or any instrument by which 
 God makes known his w^ill, or executes his purposes. 
 Thus the pillar of cloud and fire is called ' the angel of 
 God,' Exod. xiv. 19. — The plagues of Egypt are called 
 ' evil angels,' Psalm Ixxviii. 49. — And Herod's disease is 
 called ' the angel of the Lord,' Acts xii. 23. 
 
 III. The word is sometimes used to express a pro- 
 phet or messenger of God. Matt. xi. iO, " This is he of 
 whom it is written, Behold, I send my messenger (angel) 
 before thy face." 
 
 IV. The word angel sometimes expresses an order 
 of beings, real or imaginary, superior to mankind : such 
 as the Jews, at the commencement of the Christian sera, 
 believed to be the instruments of Divine Providence in the 
 
 adraini- 
 
124 ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part I. 
 
 administration of the world. Mark xiii. 32, " But of that 
 day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels that are 
 in heaven." 
 
 Concerning these supposed celestial intelligences it may 
 be observed, 
 
 1 . That it is very doubtful whether the word angel ever 
 signifies a permanently-existing spiritual being in any book 
 of the Old Testament, which was written previously to the 
 Babylonian captivity. 
 
 It cannot be proved that the appearances in human 
 shape to Abraham, Gen. xviii. ; to Lot, chap. xix. ; to 
 Joshua, chap. v. 1 3, and others, were any thing more than 
 temporary phantoms, visible symbols of the divine pre- 
 sence, and mediums of divine communications. The sup- 
 position that they were such is the more probable, as one 
 of the three who appeared to Abraham is expressly called 
 Jehovah : Gen. xviii. 1 3. 22, 23. So likewise is the angel 
 who appeared to Joshua : Josh. vi. 2.i 
 
 2. It is certain that no names nor orders of angels, nor 
 any distinction of them into good and evil, is even hinted 
 at in any book which can be proved to have been written 
 before the captivity. 
 
 3. In those books of the Old Testament which are cer- 
 tainly known to have been written during or after the cap- 
 tivity, and likewise in the Apocrypha, angels are men- 
 tioned as a distinct and superior order of bcingS ; they are 
 represented as of different ranks and orders ; as presiding 
 over different countries ; as separated into good and bad ; 
 and, what is most extraordinary, as even distinguished by 
 appropriate names, viz. Gabriel, Michael, and the like. 
 
 ^ " It is doubtful whether in some cases, what are called angels, and 
 had the form of men, who even walked and spake, he, like men, 
 were any thing more than temporary appearances, and no permanent 
 beings ; the mere organs of the Deity, used tor the purpose of making 
 himself known and understood by his creatures." Dr. Priestley's Hist, 
 of Early Opinions, vol. i. p. 5. 
 
 4. The 
 
Sect. 6.] CHRIST TO ANGELS. ] 25 
 
 4. The whole mythology concerning angels is destitute 
 of all foundation in the Jewish and Christian revelations. 
 Antecedently to the captivity it was unknown. By Jesus 
 and his apostles it is alluded to as the popular and esta- 
 blished belief of the age ; but by them it was never taught 
 as an article of faith. Revelation therefore is no more re- 
 sponsible for the existence of angels, good or evil, than it 
 is for the existence of witches, and necromancers, of ap- 
 paritions, or of demons, that is, human ghosts entering into 
 and tormenting living men, — all which are alluded to by 
 the sacred writers, and even assumed as facts. The Jews 
 probably borrowed their theory of angels from the Orien- 
 tal philosophy. Our Lord and his apostles assumed it, and 
 argued upon it as a popular hypothesis, as they did in the 
 other cases : and they left the credit of this system, as they 
 did the rest, to stand or fall by its own evidence, which, 
 in fact, is none at all. 
 
 5. When the superiority of Christ to angels is aiKrmed 
 in the sacred writings, it is to be understood in one or 
 other of the following acceptations : 
 
 1.) That Jesus of Nazareth is superior to all former 
 prophets and messengers of God. 
 
 2.) That when Jesus is represented under the charac- 
 ter of a judge appearing in state, or seated upon a tribunal, 
 officers under the name of angels, or messengers, are Vv'ith 
 great propriety introduced as attending in his train to sup- 
 port his dignity, and to execute his orders. How far this 
 scenery will ever be realized, or whether the representation 
 is to be understood in a literal or a figurative sense, the 
 event only can ascertain. But consistency, and, if one may 
 so express it, the costume of the picture, required that, 
 where there was a judge, a tribunal, a hall of justice, books 
 of law and judgement, arraignment and trial, and an ira- 
 ineniic multitude of spectators and of culprits, there should 
 
 also 
 
126 ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part T. 
 
 also be a just proportion of officers to support the splen- 
 dour and to execute the mandates of the court. 
 
 3.) According to the puerile philosophy of the 
 Jews, the earth was the centre of a number of concentric 
 spheres, the uppermost of which was the highest heaven, 
 the immediate residence of God, and of good angels in 
 all their orders and degrees : while evil angels and de- 
 fined to the atmosphere. In allusion to this theorv, the 
 mons were thrust down into the lowest place, and con- 
 sacred writers, and particularly the apostle Paul, describe 
 the Jews, who were the chosen people of God, as existing 
 in heaven ; and the Gentiles, the rejected nations, as exist- 
 ing on earth 2. But the Christian religion having abolished 
 the Jewish peculiarity, and admitted converted Gentiles 
 into a participation of those privileges which had hitherto 
 been the exclusive possession of the posterity of Abraham, 
 this great event is symbolized by the sacred writers under 
 the figure of a revolution in heaven. And Christ is re- 
 
 * So Mr. Locke, that most circumspect' and judicious of expositors, 
 explains Eph. i. 10, vi here the apostle represents it as the great design 
 of the Gospel dispensation to gather together in one all things in Christ, 
 both things in heaven and things on earth, i. e. boih Jews and Gen- 
 tiles. " Thnt Paul should use ' heaven and earth' U>r Jews and Gen- 
 tiles," says this excellent critic, " will not be thought so very strange, 
 if we consider that Daniel expresses the nation of Jews by the name 
 * heaven.' Dan. viii. lO, ' The horn waxed great even to the host of 
 heaven.' " Nor does he want an example of it in our Saviour him- 
 self, who, Luke xxi. 26, by the ' powers of heaven,' plainly means the 
 great men of the Jewish nation. Nor is this the only place of the 
 Epistle to the Ephesians which will bear this interpretation of ' heaven 
 and earth.* See chap. iii. 15, ' Of whom the whole family in heaven 
 and earth is named.' Whoever carefully weighs the expressions, and 
 observes the drift of the apostle in thein, will not find that he does 
 violence to St. Paul's sense, if he understands by ' the family in lieaven 
 and earth,' the united body of christians, made up of Jews and Gen- 
 tiles." I'his great man adds, with the modesty which always accom- 
 panies true genius, " Hov.ever, this interpretation I am not positive 
 in, but otfer it as a matter of inquiry to those who think an impartial 
 search into the true meaning of the sacred Scripture, the best employ- 
 ment of all the time they have." 
 
 presented 
 
Sect. 6.] CHRIST TO ANGELS* 12*? 
 
 presented as ascending into heaven, and taking precedence 
 of all ranks and orders of its inhabitants : and all who be- 
 lieve in him are described as ascended with him, and as 
 seated by him. By which scenical representation nothing 
 more is meant, than that Jesus Christ is superior to all pro- 
 phets and teachers of every degree under the old dispen- 
 sation, and that all persons of all nations, who receive the 
 Gospel, and who profess faith in Jesus as the Messiah, are 
 now admitted into all the privileges of the chosen people 
 of God 3, 
 
 1 . Matt. xiii. 40, 4 ! . "As the tares are gathered 
 together and burned, so shall it be at the end of this world. 
 The Son of Man shall send forth his angels (messengers), 
 and they shall gather all things that offend, and them that 
 do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of lire.'* 
 
 This is a scenical representation, not to be taken too li- 
 terally ; and the only certain meaning of which is, that the 
 wicked will in the final judgement be distinguished and se- 
 parated from the righteous, and consigned to adequate pu- 
 nishment. 
 
 2. Matt. xvi. 27. " For the Son of Man shall 
 come in the glory of his Father, with his angels." 
 
 ' So the apostle to the Ephesians, having first described Christ, chap, 
 i. 20, 21, as " raised from the dead, and set in heavenly places far 
 above all principality and power," proceeds, chap. ii. 5, 6, to state that 
 the Genti'e converts themselves, having formerly been '' dead in sin 
 me now actually raised together with Christ, and are now, at this very 
 time, silting together with him in heavenly places." This lano-uage 
 can mean nothing more than that Gentile converts were now admitted 
 to all the privileges of the chosen people. The same doctrine he ex- 
 presses under a different figure, ver. 14, "■ He is our peace, who hath 
 made both one, and broken down the middle wall of partition," i. #. 
 the wall which separated the court of the Gentiles from tliat of the 
 holy people in the temple-service. 
 
 The subject of the supposed superiority of Christ to angels is treated 
 at large, and with great judgement, by Mr. Lindsey, in the Sequel ^o 
 his Apology, p. 457, ^c. 
 
 See also u_ jn this subject Simpson's Essays, vol. i. Essay iv. where 
 the learned and judicious writer has treated the scripture doctrine con- 
 cerning angeh very much at large. 
 
 3. Matt. 
 
128 ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part h 
 
 3. Matt. XXV. 31. "When the Son of Man shall 
 come in his glory, and all the holy angels with him." 
 
 4. Markvili. 38. " — of him shall the Son of Man 
 be ashamed, when he cometh in the glory of his Father, 
 with the holy angels." — Luke ix, 26, " — when he shall 
 come in his own glory, and in his Father's, and of the 
 holy angels." 
 
 ,5. Mark xiii. 26, 27. " And then shall they see 
 the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power 
 and glory. And then shall he send his angels (messen- 
 gers), and shall gather together his elect from the four 
 winds." 
 
 6. Mark xiii. 32. " But of that day and that hour 
 knoweth no man, no not the angels which are in heaven, 
 neither the Son, but the Father." — Matt. xxiv. 36 ; where 
 the words are nearly the same, but the clause " neither the 
 Son" is omitted. 
 
 This is a triumphant text to the supporters of the Arian 
 hypothesis ; who argue from the climax the superiority of 
 Christ to angels, and from the same climax, and his ig- 
 norance of the day of judgement, his inferiority to the Fa- 
 ther *. 
 
 The advocates for the deity of Christ feel great diffi- 
 culty in repelling this objection. The common reply is, 
 that our Lord knew the time in his divine nature, but was 
 ignorant of it in his human nature. But this is charging 
 Christ with gross and criminal equivocation 5. — Some say, 
 
 that 
 
 * " I think the intention of our Saviour in this passage is to declare 
 that as the Father alone is auroflsof, ' God of himself,' the alone un- 
 <}erived fountain of goodness and power j so he is likewise the alone 
 fountain of all knowledge, insomuch that no one knows any thing, not 
 even the Son himself, but by communication from him," Clarke 
 iigainst Nelson, p. 171. Scr. Doct. 773. 
 
 * Dr. Whitby, in his Commentary, quotes the explanation, or rather 
 jargon, of Dr. Lightfoot : " It is one thing to understand the Son of 
 God barely and abstractedly for the second person in the Trinity ; 
 
 another 
 
Sect. C] CHRIST TO ANGELS. 129 
 
 that knowings in this connexion, means nothing more than 
 a commission to teach. And others again are disposed to 
 call in question the genuineness of the clause omitted by 
 Matthew^. 
 
 These are all the texts in the history of the evangelists 
 in which any comparison is made, or implied, between 
 Christ and angels, and in which any superiority can be 
 supposed to be ascribed to him. Now, whether the event 
 
 another to understand him for the Messiah, or the second person in- 
 carnate. To say that the second person in the Trinity knew not some- 
 thing, is blasphemous. To say so of the Messiah is not so, who, ne- 
 vertheless, was the same as the second person in the Trinity. For 
 although the second person, considered according to his mere deity, 
 was co-equal with the Father, co-omnipotent, co-omniscient, and co- 
 eternal ; yet Messiah, who was God-man, considered as Messiah, was- 
 a servant and a messenger." — Calvin argues that the two natures were 
 so united in the person of Christ, that each could exert its own pro- 
 perties apart from the other ; and that the divine nature was quiescent, 
 while the human nature performed the otfice of mediator, — " Quare 
 nihil absurdi fuit Christum, qui omnia sciebat, aliquid secundum ho- 
 minis sensum nescire." But where do we find these subtle distinctions 
 in the New Testament ; or who can believe that the simple and un- 
 learned evangelists ever meant to perplex themselves and iheir readers 
 with such abstruse speculations ? With much good sense Mr. Emlyn 
 remarks, " that to suppose Christ knows the day of judgement with 
 his divine nature, while he is ignorant of it in his human nature, is 
 charging him with an equivocation similar to that of a person who, 
 conversing with another with one eye shut and the other open, and 
 being asked whether he saw him, should answer, that he saw himfiot; 
 meaning, with tha eye that was shut j though he still saw him well 
 enough with the eye that was open. A miserable evasion, which would 
 not save him from the reproach of being a liar and a deceiver." Em- 
 lyn's Tracts, p. 18. 
 
 ^ The clause ah o ulog, ' neither the Son,' is found in all manuscripts 
 and versions now extant : but Ambrose condemns it as an interpola- 
 tion. — " Non habent codices Graeci, quod nee ' filius scit.' " This 
 clause, though not in the received text of Matthew, is nevertheless 
 found in the Vatican and Cambridge manuscripts, and in many an- 
 cient versions of that evangelist. It is probably genuine. Erasmus 
 thinks it was intentionally omitted by some Trinitarian transcriber : 
 but of this there is no more evidence than that the clause in Mark was 
 interpolated by the Arians. 
 
 The curious solutions of this difficult problem of the ignorance of 
 Christ by the Fathers, may be seen in Dr. Priestley's Hist, of Early 
 Opinions, vol. ii. p. 234. 
 
 K foretold 
 
ISO- ALLliGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part I. 
 
 foretold be, as some suppose, the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem J or, as most believe, the solemn transactions of the 
 day of judgement; or, as many apprehend, both events 
 were in our Lord's contemplation, and the less as typical 
 of the greater ; — upon any one of these suppositions the 
 representation is scenieal. Our Lord is introduced under 
 the character of a monarch, or a judge, attended by his 
 officers of state, who are ready to execute his commands. 
 But no judicious person will argue from symbolical figures 
 to real facts. If, for example, the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem was the object of the prophecy, we have no proof that 
 Christ himself had any personal concern in it whatever. 
 But, like other prophets and messengers of God, he is said 
 to do that which he only foretells. Jer. i. 10 Rev. xi. 5,6. 
 — In this case the angels who gathered the elect must 
 have been the preachers of Christianity, who warned their 
 hearers to escape from the impending desolation. And 
 those which executed judgement upon the wicked, were 
 the calamities of war, famine, and pestilence, with which 
 they were visited, and by which the country was laid waste. 
 And probably, the proceedings relating to the final judge- 
 ment of mankind may be analogous to these, and may bear 
 no kind of resemblance to the scenery by which, in con- 
 descension to human infirmity, it is painted forth to our 
 imaginations. 
 
 7. Gal. iv. 14. " Ye received me as an angel," 
 /. e. messenger, " of God, even as Christ Jesus." 
 
 8. Eph. i. 20, 21 . " — when he raised him from 
 the dead, and seated him at his own right hand in the 
 heavenly places ; far above all principality, and power, and 
 might, and dominion 7, and every name that is named, not 
 
 only 
 
 ' " Nomina haec sumpta ex imperio Persico sub quo olim Hebrjei 
 vixerant." Grotius in Rom. viii. 38. — ^These distinctions of orders in 
 heaven were,, according to Grotius, borrowed from the distinctions of 
 
 ranks 
 
Sect. 6.] CHRIST TO ANGELS. 331 
 
 only In this world, but also in that which is to come 8; and 
 hath put all things under his feet." 
 
 The Jews, the chosen people of God, being " the fa- 
 mily in heaven," distinctions of ranks among the Jews, such 
 as prophets, priests, teachers, &c., are described under the 
 symbols of supposed distinctions of ranks and orders in 
 heaven, viz. principalities, powers, &c. Correspondently 
 with this representation, Christ, after his resurrection, hav- 
 ing been appointed the head of the new dispensation, which 
 was to supersede the former, and to unite believers, both 
 Jews and Gentiles, into one body, ascends to heaven, and 
 takes precedence of all other prophets and messengers of 
 God, both in this world, age, or dispensation, /. e. the 
 Mosaic, and in that which is to come, i. e. the Christian : 
 all things being made subject to him, who is the head of 
 that dispensation which includes both Jews and Gentiles. 
 
 9. Col. ii. 10. " And ye are complete in him, 
 who is the head of all principality and power." 
 
 10. 2 Thess. i. 7. "When the Lord Jesus shall 
 be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, taking 
 vengeance on them who know not God." 
 
 1 1 . Heb. i. 4. 9. " Being made so much better 
 than the angels :" (or rather, " so much greater than those 
 
 ranks in the Persian empire. It was the received mythology of the 
 age : St. Paul alludes to it as such. It was not to be expected that a 
 revelation would be made of so useless a subject as that of the orders 
 and distinctions of celestial beings j nor does the apostle pretend to any 
 such thing. 
 
 • In this world] ' This age,' i. e. the Mosaic dispensation ; ' the age 
 to come/ i. e. the dispensation of the Messiah. See the same words 
 used in the same sense. Matt. xii. 32 ; and bishop Pearce's excellent 
 note. That aiwy has frequently, and, as the learned prelate says, 
 " most properly," the sense of o^e or dispensation, is well known. See 
 Matt. xiii. 40. Col. i. 26. Eph. iii. 21 . ' The age to come' means 
 * the Christian dispensation.* Heb. vi. 5. Eph. ii. /. See Dr. Sykes's 
 Note on Heb, i. 2. 
 
 K 2 messen- 
 
132 ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part I. 
 
 messengers 9,") the prophets mentioned ver. 1, " as he 
 hath by inheritance obtained a more excellent name than 
 they." 
 
 Christ was declared to be the Son of God by his resur- 
 rection from the dead ; by his ascension into heaven he had 
 actually been put into possession of his inheritance. In 
 this respect he far excelled all the prophets and messen- 
 gers of God who had preceded him. And it is with re- 
 spect to these, and not to angels, that the comparison with 
 Christ is instituted in the beginning of this epistle. 
 
 Ver. 5. " For unto which of the angels (or, *^ of 
 those messengers,"^ said he, at any time. Thou art my 
 Son," &c. 
 
 Ver. 6. " And when he bringeth again the first- 
 born into the world, he saith, Let all the angels (or '• mes- 
 sengers") of God worship him :" rather, " pay homage to 
 him 10." 
 
 By a bold prosopopoeia, the former prophets and mes- 
 sengers of God are summoned to do homage to Christ, in 
 consequence of his resurrection from the dead, and to ac- 
 knowledge him as their superior. 
 
 " Messevgers."] The connexion requires that the word ayysXoi, ' an- 
 gels,' in this chapter, should be taken in its usual seme oi messengers, 
 not angels. See Wakefield's Transl. and Imp. Vers, in loc. 
 
 '" Christ is the first-born, as being the first who was raised from the 
 dead J Col. i. 18. Rev. i. 5. See Peirce and Newcome. — It is well 
 known that nt'^off-Kweu) is often used for civil homage, and does not ne- 
 cessarily signify religious worship. See Schleusner. The quotation 
 is from Deut. xxxii. 43 ; LXX. The words are not to be found in 
 the Hebrew. They are applied to the Hebrew nation upon its resto- 
 ration from a calamitous and desolate state : and it is with a very great 
 latitude of interpretation, which was indeed common in that age, and 
 in which this writer frequently indulges, that they are made applicable 
 to Christ. The meaning, however, is suflSciently obvious. SeeSykesin 
 loc. — The prosopopoeia here is something similar to that in Isa. xiv. g, 
 where the departed heroes are represented as marching forth from the 
 grand receptacle of the dead, to meet and taunt the king of Babylon 
 upon his descent thither. 
 
 Ver. 7. 
 
Sect. 6.] CHRIST TO ANGELS, 133 
 
 Ver. 7. "And of the angels (or, " concerning 
 those messengers,") he saith, Who maketh his angels spi- 
 rits, (rather, " who maketh his messengers winds,") and 
 his ministers a flame of fire." 
 
 Former prophets and messengers of God are compared 
 to wind and lightning. They spoke and acted under a di- 
 vine impulse, and the efl'ects of their mission were fre- 
 quently awful and alarming ; but their office was of short 
 duration, and their powers were transient i*. 
 
 Ver. 8,9. " But unto the Son he saith ,Thy throne, 
 O God, is for ever and ever:" or, " God is thy throne," 
 i. e. the supporter of thy throne. Psalm xlv. 6, 7. 
 
 q. d. The power and authority of former prophets, 
 such as Moses, Elijah, and others, however great and awful 
 for a time, was but transitory and evanescent ; but thy 
 kingdom is immoveable, thy dominion is everlasting. 
 
 *' A sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy king- 
 dom : thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity j 
 therefore God, even thy God, hath anointed thee with the 
 oil of gladness above thy fellows." 
 
 Or, " companions," i. e. all those who, like thee, were 
 messengers from God to men. This is a plain indication 
 that the writer is here speaking not of angels, but of pre- 
 ceding prophets, who might justly be regarded as fellow- 
 servants and fellow-labourers with Christ. 
 
 Ver. 13, 14. " But to which of the angels (or, 
 " of those messengers,") said he at any time, Sit thou at 
 my right hand," &c. — " Are they not all ministering spi- 
 
 ' ' Another remarkable instance of lax interpretation. The quotation 
 is from Psalm civ. 4, the proper translation of which is, " He maketh 
 the winds his messengers, and the lightnings his ministers." It is an 
 assertion in beautiful and poetic language of the sovereign dominion of 
 God over the powers of nature. But this writer avails himself of the 
 ambiguity of the language, and accommodates the words to the autho- 
 rity of the prophets. 
 
 jits? 
 
134 ALLEGED SUPERIORITY OF [Part I. 
 
 rits? (rather, " ministers ^V* or " servants,") sent forth 
 to minister to them who shall be the heirs of salvation," 
 or rather, " to those who were about to be heirs of salva- 
 tion J3." 
 
 q. d. Though I call them fellows, or companions, yet 
 they were not equals : they were servants, he is a son and 
 a sovereign ; they were sent to announce and to prepare 
 the way for that dispensation which he was to introduce, 
 and in which he was to preside. They were only his he- 
 ralds and harbingers to the members of that holy and 
 happy community over which he is appointed to rule as a 
 prince. 
 
 12. Heb. ii. 2, 3. " For if the v.^ord spoken by 
 angels (" messengers," /. e. former prophets, who were 
 only servants,) was steadfast, and every transgression re- 
 ceived a just recompense ; how shall we escape if we neg- 
 lect so great salvation, which at first began to bespoken 
 by the Lordi-i?" 
 
 IS. /I Pet. 
 
 '* Ministering spirits.'] i. e. ' persons,* or * inspired ministers.' See 
 1 John iv. 1 — 3, " Beloved, believe not every spirit j but try the spi- 
 ritSj whether they be of God." Why ? " because many false pro- 
 phets are gone out into the world." A spirit, therefore, is a prophet, 
 one who pretends to inspiration. " Every spirit, (i. e. every prophet,) 
 that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God :" and 
 *' Every spirit, {i, e. every one professing to be a prophet,) who con- 
 fesseth not this truth, is not of God." So that the word spirit does 
 not necessarily signify an incorporeal being, which is the idea con- 
 veyed to the English, or rather to the inadvertent, reader : but minis- 
 tering spirits were inspired persons, prophets of a former age, who sus- 
 tained the office of servants, not the relation of sons. 
 
 *^ WhoshaUle heirs of salvation.'] tsc iMsWoyta^ KXrjpovofj.siy ," (hose 
 ■who should afterward belong to the Christian church." Pierce. — rtjv 
 oiy.8y.svrjV fisXXsffav, ' the world to come,' mentioned chap. ii. 5. Pro- 
 phets were ministers : to whom ? Not to their contemporaries, who 
 did not comprehend their prophecies, but to future believers, to those 
 who would afterwards possess the blessings which they foretold, to us 
 who are confirmed in the faith of Christ, by seeing their prophecies 
 accomplished in him. 
 
 '* In the remainder of this 6hapter the writer, seemingly apprehen- 
 sive lest his meaning should be misunderstood, enters into a direct 
 
 proof 
 
Sect. 6.] CHRIST TO ANGELS. 1S5 
 
 13. 1 Pet. iii. 22. "Jesus Christ, who is gone into 
 heaven, and is at the right hand of God, angels, (or 
 " messengers,") and authorities and powers being made 
 subject unto him." 
 
 i. e. The missionaries and teachers of the Gospel, even 
 those of the highest rank and greatest influence in the 
 church, together with all their spiritual gifts and miracu- 
 lous powers, being placed under his direction, and at his 
 disposal. See Impr. Version in loc. 
 
 14. Rev. xxii. 16. " I, Jesus, have sent my an- 
 gel," or, " this messenger of mine," i, e. John, who saw 
 the vision, " to testify unto you these things." See Wake- 
 field in loc. Or possibly there may be an allusion to the 
 angel-mystagogue, who, in the vision, explained to John 
 the prophetic symbols. See chap. I. 1. 
 
 proof that Jesus, though he was so much superior in rank and charac- 
 ter to all former prophets, was not an angel or superior spirit, but a 
 proper human being, in all respects like his brethren. See Impr. 
 Vers, in loc. 
 
 SECTION 
 
136 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 TITLES AND CHARACTERS ATTRIEU FED TO CHRIST, OR 
 THOUGHT TO BE SO ATTRIBUTED, WHICH ARE SUP- 
 POSED TO IMPLY SUPERIORITY OF NATURE. 
 
 I. Jehovah. 
 
 i. HIS word, the appropriate name of God, is esteemed so 
 sacred by the Jews, that wherever it occurs in the Old 
 Testament they forbear to pronounce it, and substitute the 
 word ' Lord' in its place. The versions, ancient and mo- 
 dern, have mostly followed this example. That Christ is 
 called ' Lord ' in the New Testament is sufficiently ob- 
 vious : but the present question is, whether this title is ever 
 applied to him in the sense of ' Jehovah.' The si^pport- 
 ers of the divinity of Christ maintain the affirmative, viz, 
 
 I. John xii. 39 — 4 1 . " Therefore they could not 
 believe, because Isaiah said. He hath blinded their eyes, 
 &c. These things said Isaiah when he saw his glory, and 
 spake of him." 
 
 The quotation is from Isaiah vi. 10, where the prophet 
 speaks of himself as having had a vision of Jehovah upon 
 a throne. And the glory which Isaiah saw being the glory 
 of Jehovah, it is concluded that Jesus is Jehovah. 
 
 This is the argument of bishop Pearce and bishop 
 Lowth, and of Trinitarians in general. Archbishop New- 
 come explains the text of Christ as the representative of 
 Jehovah, or, as Henry Taylor, of the visible or subordi- 
 nate Jehovah ; with whom many Arians agree. But Dr. 
 Clarke, after Grotius, and vi^ith him all the Unitarians, un- 
 derstand the evangelist as affirming, That the prophet saw, 
 
 that 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 1 S7 
 
 that is, foresaw, the glory of Christj as Abraham saw, i. e, 
 foresaw, his day. John viii. 56 K 
 
 II. Heb. i. 10. " And thou. Lord, in the begin- 
 ning hast laid the foundation of the earth," tec. 
 
 A quotation from Psalm cii. 25 ; where it is an address 
 to Jehovah, as it is likewise in this place. The author here 
 confirms his doctrine of the permanent establishment of 
 the throne of Christ, from the consideration of the immu- 
 tability of God by whom it is supported, and whom he thus 
 solemnly addresses in the language of the Psalmist 2, 
 
 II. God. 
 
 It is generally believed that ' God ' is a title not unfre- 
 quently applied to Christ in the New Testament. This 
 is held by many to be a strong argument in favour of his 
 true and proper deity. But as it is undeniable that the 
 word is used in different senses in the sacred writings, the 
 Arians explain it, when applied to Christ, as expressive of 
 his delegated dominion over the v/orld and church. This 
 also is the sense in which the word was understood by the 
 old Socinian writers. The Unitarians plead that Christ is 
 called God, as being a prophet invested with miraculous 
 powers ; in the same sense in which, Exod. vii. 1, Moses 
 is said to be a god to Pharaoh. But Mr. Lindsey, Seq, 
 p. 1 98, and some modern advocates for the Unitarian doc- 
 trine, deny that Jesus is ever styled God in the New Tes- 
 tament. 
 
 It is very remarkable that some of those lofty titles and 
 characters which are attributed to Christ, and which are 
 
 ' See Clarke's Scrip. Doct. No, 597- Ben Mordecai's Letters, vol. i. 
 p, 291. Lowth andDodson on Isaiah, v. I, Lindsay's Seq. p. 354. 
 
 ' Some argue from Rom. x. 13, " Whosoever shall call upon the 
 name of the Lord shall be saved :" from Joel ii. 32. But the words 
 may be rendered " Whosoever shall call himself by the name of the 
 Lord." Others understand the vv^ords as a phrase expressing the pro- 
 fessors of religion, the worshippers of the true God. 
 
 thought 
 
138 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 thought by many to indicate his superior nature and dig- 
 nity, are also used of christians in general, who are said 
 " to be one with him and with the Father," " assessors 
 with him in heavenly places,'* and " to be filled with all 
 the fulness of God." But there is one expression, viz, 
 " partakers of a divine nature,'* applied by the apostle 
 Peter, 2 Pet. i. 4, to all believers, which is stronger than 
 any which are used of Christ, and which, if it had been 
 applied to him, would have been held forth as an irrefra- 
 gable proof of his proper deity : to such an argument it 
 would have been very difficult to have given a satisfactory 
 reply. That explanation of the words which all are now 
 constrained to admit, would then have been treated as a 
 forced and languid interpretation, and an attempt, hardly 
 consistent with honesty, to wrest plain words from their 
 natural and obvious meaning, in order to bend them to a 
 preconceived hypothesis. This instance shows how little 
 stress is to be laid on such phraseology, and how cautious 
 we ought to be of interpreting these strong expressions in a 
 literal sense. 
 
 I. Matt. i. 23. " — that it migh tbe fulfilled which 
 was spoken by the prophet, Behold, a virgin shall bring 
 forth a son, and they shall call his name Immanuel ; which, 
 being interpreted, is, God with us." 
 
 Answer. Not to insist upon the evidence produced, 
 Sect. II., of the spuriousness of the first two chapters of 
 the gospel of Matthew, the prophecy here cited, from 
 Isaiah vii. 14, has no relation to the birth of the Messiah, 
 The design of the prophet is, to announce that before a 
 young woman, shortly to be married, should have a son 
 grown up to years of discretion, the two kingdoms of Syria 
 and Israel should be overthrown. The name Immanuel, 
 given in prophetic vision to this child, was a symbol that 
 God would be with and deliver his chosen people. And 
 had that name been given to Christ in prophecy, or other- 
 wise. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 139 
 
 wise. It would have meant nothing more^. It was common 
 among the Jews to give significant names, and in those 
 names to introduce the name of God ; viz. Adonijah, My 
 Lord is Jehovah, — EUezer, God is my helper. And, Jer. 
 xxxiii. ] 6, Jerusalem is called The Lord our righteousness. 
 
 IL Luke i. 16, 17- " And many of the children 
 of Israel shall he turn to the Lord their God. And he 
 (John) shall go before him, /. e. the Lord their God, in 
 the spirit and power of Elias." 
 
 This is the language of the angel to Zecharias : but the 
 doubtful authenticity of this story has been already noticed, 
 Sect. II. 
 
 And though strictness of construction warrants the ap- 
 plication of the pronoun him to the antecedent God^ yet as 
 the phrase ' Lord our God * is never applied to Christ in 
 the New Testament, no Jew would ever think of such an 
 application of the words. John was the forerunner of the 
 Lord their God, by being the forerunner of Jesus, the 
 great messenger of God to mankind'*. 
 
 III. John i. 1 . " — and the Word was God," or, 
 " a god." 
 
 /. e. An inferior God derived from the Supreme, and 
 delegated by him, — or, ' God v/as Wisdom j' — or ' the 
 Word, i. e. the Teacher, vv^as a prophet endued with mi- 
 raculous powers;' — or, if the conjecture of Crellius and 
 others be allowed, ©sa for ©sog, ' the Word was God's ;' 
 * the teacher was sent from God.' See Sect. III. 1. 
 
 ' " God was with us in Christ, by his wisdom and power commu- 
 nicated to him for the instruction and benefit of men." Lindsay's 
 Seq. p. 184. — See Lowth and Dodson on Isaia'.i vii. 14. 
 
 ^ " He will lead the way in the sight of God." Wakefield, witii 
 whom archbishop Newcome agrees. — Dr. Clarke (Scr. Doct 534,) 
 admits that the construction of the sentence is favourable to the ortho- 
 dox interpretation, but that this is contrary to the style of Luke, and 
 to the whole analogy of Scripture. Calvin, Castalio, and Waterland 
 (Serm. p. 203) lay great stress upon this text, . 
 
 IV. John 
 
140" TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part 1. 
 
 IV. John X. 33. " For a good work we stone 
 thee not, but for blasphemy, and because that thou, being 
 a man, makest thyself God." 
 
 Our Lord had just declared, ver. 31, " I and my Fa- 
 ther are one.'* 
 
 But he peremptorily denies the conclusion which the 
 Jews drew from his language. He even maintains, ver. 
 34, 35, that if he had given himself the appellation of God, 
 he should have been fully justified by the Jewish Scrip- 
 tures, in which this name is given to prophets and magis- 
 trates. But that as to himself, though possessed of pow- 
 ers superior to those of any former prophet, he had never 
 affected to call himself by a higher title than the Son of 
 God. 
 
 V. John XX. 28. " And Thomas answered and 
 said unto him, My Lord and my God." 
 
 This is a sudden exclamation of astonisment and joy. 
 g. d. My Lord ! and my God ! How great is thy power ! 
 Or, My Lord, and my God, has done this ^ ! — It is how- 
 ever objected that the words are expressly said to be ad- 
 dressed to Christ, and are an acknowledgement of his 
 proper deity, for which the apostle would have been se- 
 verely reproved if he had been wrong ^. 
 
 But who can believe that this sceptical apostle, who im- 
 mediately before had been doubting whether his Master 
 was a living man, would, from the sensible and satisfactory 
 evidence he had now obtained of his resurrection, directly 
 infer that he was the living and eternal God ? What an 
 infinite distance between the premises and the conclusion ! 
 If, then, the words are not to be taken as a mere excla- 
 mation, but as an address to Christ, the apostle's meaning 
 
 * Whitby's Last Thoughts, p. yy. Lindsey's Apol. p. 2Q; Sequel, 
 p. 200. Archbishop Newcome in loc. 
 
 " Erasmus, Grotius, and Beza in loc. Dr. Doddridge calls these 
 words " an irrefriigable argument of the deity of our blessed Lord." 
 
 seems 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 141 
 
 seems to be, q. d. Convinced of the truth of thy resur- 
 rection, I acknowledge thee as my master, and submit to 
 thee as my god, as a prophet coming with divine creden- 
 tials, and supported by divine authority. SeeJohnx.34,35. 
 Erasmus, Grotius, and others remark that this is the 
 first, and indeed the only instance occurring in the Go* 
 spels, in which Christ is addressed by his disciples under 
 the title of God. And this fact may be fairly considered 
 as a presumption that he never was addressed by them 
 under this name, and that the words of the apostle are to 
 be understood as an exclamation only. 
 
 VI. Acts XX. 28. " — and to feed the church of 
 God, which he has purchased with his own blood." 
 
 " The blood of Christ," says Dr. Doddridge, ''is here 
 called the blood of God, as being the blood of that man 
 who is God with us. And I cannot but apprehend that it 
 was by the special direction of the Holy Spirit that so re- 
 markable an expression was used." 
 
 " Our Scriptures," says St. Athanasius, " no where 
 mention the blood of God. Such impudent expressions 
 are only used by Arians7." So widely do these eminent 
 and learned writers differ. 
 
 The true reading is unquestionably Kvi^i8^ ' Lord.* This 
 is the reading of the Alexandrine, Eplirem, Cambridge, 
 and many other valaablc and ancient manuscripts ; of the 
 Syriac, Coptic, and other ancient versions ; and of Atha- 
 nasius, Eusebius, Chrysostom, and other ecclesiastical wri- 
 ters. The word ' God' in the Received Text rests only 
 upon the authority of the Vulgate version, and of a few 
 manuscripts of little note^. 
 
 VII. Rom. 
 
 TO, roixvroc r»X|X'>;jw,ara. Athanas. cont, Apollin. apud Wetstein. in loc. 
 * Sec Imp. Vers, in loc. and Griesbach's invaluable note in his se- 
 cond edition. This happens rather unfortunate for the credit of Dr. 
 
 Doddridge's 
 
142 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 VII. Rom. ix. 5. " Whose are the fathers, and 
 of whom, as concerning the flesh, Christ came, who is 
 over all, God blessed for ever." 
 
 Erasmus, Grotius, Ur. Clarke, and others obser'-e, that 
 though the v/ord God is found in all our present copies, it 
 was wanting in those of Cyprian, Hilary, Chrysostom, and 
 others, and is therefore of doubtful authority. 
 
 Erasmus further remarks, that the words may be trans- 
 lated differently, according to different modes of punctua- 
 tion. He prefers placing the stop after a-a^Ku, ' flesh.* 
 q. d. " Of whom is Christ according to the flesh. God who 
 is over ail be blessed for ever." This interpretation is ap- 
 proved by Le Clcrc, Dr. Clarke, Mr. Locke, Mr. Lind- 
 sey, and the majority of Unitarians. 
 
 Dr. Whitby, in his Commentaries, denies that the words 
 will bear the construction which Erasmus gives ; and 
 
 Doddridge's pious remark. For surely the Holy Spirit which inspired, 
 would also have preserved the text. Mr. Wakefield retains the word 
 ©£s, upon the authority of the Ethiopia version ; and with Dr. Clarke, 
 (Scr. Doct. 538,) he explains the " blood of God" as meaning the 
 "■ Son of God." But this learned critic did not advert to a fact men- 
 tioned by Dr. Marsh in his Notes upon Michaelis, p. Gil, viz. that 
 the editors of the Ethiopic version had a very imperfect manuscript of 
 the Acts of the Apostles, the chasms of which, i. e. the larger part of 
 the book, they supplied by translating from the Vulgate. So that in 
 the Book of the Acts, the Ethiopic version is of no authority whatever. 
 See Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. gS. 
 
 Seven manuscripts only, and those of no antiquity and of little value, 
 read 0£8, ' God.' This reading is supported only by the Vulgate and 
 Philoxenian Syriac versions, which last reads Kvpm, ' Lord,' in the 
 margin. It is cited by no writers before Epiphanius and Ambrose, and 
 they are doubtful. — The ancient Syriac reads Xpia-rs, ' Christ.' But 
 in this it is singular, and unsupported by versions or authorities. — 
 Forty-seven manuscripts read Ku^ia xa< 0£8, * Lord and God :' but 
 these manuscripts are neither of high antiquity nor of great value; and 
 this reading is quite unsupported by the ancient versions and ecclesi- 
 astical writers. — Ten manuscripts, of which four are ancient, read 
 K'jpis, ' Lord :' these manuscripts are of the highest antiquity and au- 
 thority, and of different families. All the readings in which these ma- 
 nuscripts agree, are, by the best critics, admitted as genuine. And 
 (his reading is supported by the most approved ancient versions and 
 ecclesiastical authorities. See Wetstein and Griesbach. 
 
 tains 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. ]43 
 
 maintains that the text is decisive in favour of the deity 
 of Christ. With him agree Hammond, Doddridge, and 
 the Trinitarians. But, admitting the common transla- 
 tion to be the true one, the Arians and Socinians under- 
 stand it not of the proper divinity of Christ, but of his sup- 
 posed dominion over the created universe. See Clarke, 
 539. 
 
 Slichtingius proposed a most happy and plausible con- 
 jecture ; the transposition of a single letter, cov o, for h uy, 
 which gives a new and beautiful turn to the whole sen- 
 tence, viz. " Of whom is the adoption, — of whom are the 
 fathers, — of whom is the Messiah, — of whom is God over 
 all blessed for ever.'* Thus the climax rises gradually, and 
 finishes where it ought. Whereas in the Received Text, 
 while the apostle is professedly reckoning up all the privi- 
 leges of the Hebrew nation, the greatest of all, and that 
 which would ever be uppermost in the mind of a Jew, is 
 totally omitted, — that God owned himself in a peculiar 
 sense their God. See Heb. xi. 16. 
 
 This conjecture, ingenious and even probable as it is, 
 not being supported by a single manuscript, version, or au- 
 thority, cannot be admitted into the text. But one may 
 almost believe that the present reading might be owing to 
 an inadvertence in one of the earliest transcribers, if not in 
 the apostle's own amanuensis9, 
 
 VIII. iTim. 
 
 " It is singular that Slichtingius proposes it as an objection (o his own 
 conjecture, that the phrase, " God over all," is more appropriate lo 
 Christ, who was made regent of ihe universe, than to the Supreme 
 Being himself. " Christo rectius hie titulus convenit, nt intelligeretur 
 Christum non super quaedam tantum, sed super omnia dominum ac 
 deum efFectum esse," — So extravagant were these great critics in some 
 opinions, while they were so eminently judicious in others. But the 
 strongest minds could not at once burst asunder the adamantine bonds 
 of anlichristian prejudices. It is wonderful that they advanced so far. 
 And it is owing to their great energies and extraordinary success, that 
 modern inquirers, who have followed their footsteps, have been enabled 
 to advance still further than their venerable predecessors in the true 
 
 interpretatioa 
 
14't TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 VIII. iTim. iii. 16. " And without controversy 
 great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifest in 
 the flesh, justified in the spirit, seen of angels, preached 
 unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up 
 into glory." 
 
 There are three different readings of this passage. 
 
 1. That of the Received Text : " God was manifest in the 
 ilesh," Qiog (abbreviated into 02) s(pav£^u'Syj sv croc^Ki, 
 
 Whether this be the reading of the Alexandrine ma- 
 nusciipt is disputed : but it is supported by the majority of 
 Greek copies, and by the ijter Greek ecclesiastical writers. 
 
 But the word ' God' is not found in the earliest and 
 most approved manuscripts, nor in any ancient version of 
 credit ; nor is it cited by any early Greek writer, nor by 
 any Latin writer whatever ; and, what is decisive in the 
 case, this text was never appealed to in the Arian contro- 
 versy before the sixth century, when the word ' God' is 
 said to have been introduced into the Greek copies by 
 INTacedonius bishop of Constantinople. This word is 
 therefore most certainly spurious ^o. 
 
 2. " He 
 
 interpretation of the Scriptures. The principles upon which they acted 
 have not only been successful in their hands in detecting the gross er- 
 rors of the antichristian church, but have furnished their successors 
 with a clue for discovering and correctino- their own. No person will 
 now agree with this learned reformer in the objection which he starts 
 to his own happy conjecture. 
 
 This conjectural emendation was adopted by the learned and candid 
 Whitby, in his Last Thoughts, p. /g, though, by mistake, he imputes 
 it to Crt-llius. The very same conjecture occurred to that excellent 
 and judicious expositor Dr. John Taylor, who had not then heard that 
 atiy one had thought of it before him. Mr. Wakefield likewise sug- 
 gests several probable arguments in favour of this conjectural transpo- 
 sition, in his Inquiry into the Opinions of Christian Writers^ p. 166, 
 et seq. 
 
 '" Qso; is not found in any manuscript of the Alexandrine, or the 
 Western editions. Ihose copies in which it occurs are of the Con- 
 stantinople edition, of modern date, and of very inferior value. Of the 
 versions, it is found only in the Polyglot Arabic and the Sclavonic. See 
 Giiesbach. It appears indeed in the printed text of Gregory Nysscn 
 
 and 
 
Sect. 7.3 ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 145 
 
 2. " He who (OS) was manifested in the flesh/' &c. 
 
 This is the reading of the Ephrem, of four other valu- 
 able and ancient manuscripts, and, as Griesbach thinks, 
 of the Alexandrine also ; and certainly, of the copies of 
 those persons in the sixth century who complained that 
 Macedonius had corrupted the text: — it is supported by 
 the Coptic and Sahidic versions, — and by the citations of 
 Cyril of Alexandria 11, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Epipha- 
 nius, and others ; and finally it is much more probable 
 that OS, * he who,' should be altered to 02, ' God,' or to 
 O, ' that which,' than that either of these should have been 
 chanojed to OS. Upon these authorities it is received by 
 Griesbach into his corrected text. 
 
 q. cL " He who ^^ was manifest in the flesh ^^" — 
 who appeared in a mean and humble form, John i. 14. 
 2 Cor. iv. 1 1 . 
 
 " — was justified by the spirit," -was proved by his mi- 
 raculous powers to be invested with a divine commission. 
 
 " — vvas seen by ange's^'^," by the men who were 
 chosen to be his messengers and ambassadors to the world. 
 
 " — preached unto the Gentiles:" — his gospel was pub- 
 lished to all nations, and Gentiles as well as Jews were in- 
 vited to accept the blessing. 
 
 and some others; but, as Dr. Clarke observes, (Scr. Doct. 540^) "we 
 
 are to iud^e. not from the present copies of these writers, but from 
 their manner of commenting upon the place, how the text was read in 
 their days " Griesbach cites Chrysostom, Theodoret, and Theophy- 
 lact, as reading Qsos. 
 
 " Cyril does not cite this text in replj' to Julian, who denies that 
 Christ is ever called God in the writings of Paul. 
 
 '* 'Os, ' he wtio ' See a similar construction, Rom, xiv. 2. 5. Arch- 
 bishop Newcome, who '•efers to Mark iv. 25 ; Luke viii. 18 ; Rom. 
 viii. 32 " I ectio l)aec ditficilior, et insolentiorcseteris." Griesbach. 
 
 '^ In the flesh ] Perhaps tlie meaning may be, ' he who was really 
 and truly a man,' in opposition to the doctrine of the Docetse, that he 
 was a man in appearance only. See chap. i. 4 ; vi. 20. Compare 
 1 John iv. 2, 3 ; 2 John, ver. 7. Imp. Ver. note. 
 
 '* See Benson. One copy reads ayScwTroij. 
 
 L '' — believed 
 
146 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 " — believed on in the world," — many embraced and 
 
 professed his doctrine. 
 
 " — was elevated in glory i^,'* — he had a glorious as- 
 cension into heaven ; — or rather, he was elevated above 
 principalities and powers to a station of the highest dig- 
 nity and authority in the church. 
 
 3. O, (juod, ' that which,* &c. is the reading of the 
 Clermont manuscript, the Syriac, Ethiopic, Italic, and Vul- 
 gate versions, and of all the Latin ecclesiastical writers 
 without exception 1^. q. d. 
 
 Great is that mystery of godliness which was manifested 
 in the flesh, /. e. the Gospel which was preached by men 
 in humble life. Many of the Latin fathers explain the 
 word mystery, of the person of Christ. 
 
 IX. Tit. ii, 1 3. " Looking for that blessed hope, 
 even the glorious appearance of the great God, and our 
 Saviour Jesus Christ." 
 
 Or, as some contend, according to the construction 
 of the original, " of our great God and Saviour Jesus 
 Christ," TJ^ u.£'yaX8 ©sa kdh T>ooT/j^og rjjjiuv IrjO-a X^/orxi^. It 
 is said, that in order to justify the common translation, the 
 article th should be prefixed to Xcjoryi^og- 
 
 In reply to this argument. Dr. Clarke well observes, 
 (Scr. Doct. 54 1 ,) that though " the words will gramma- 
 tically bear this construction, it is much more reasonable, 
 and more agreeable to the whole tenor of Scripture, to un- 
 derstand the former part of the words to relate to the 
 
 ^^ 0(.vE\r}<pSrj, " met with a glorious reception," Benson; who ex- 
 plains it of the great success of the Gospel in the apostolic age. But 
 the text will hardly bear out the learned writer in this interpretation. 
 The word, or its derivatives, occurs fourteen times in the New Testa- 
 ment, and without a single exception expresses local ascent or change. 
 Ev So^v, ' in glory ;' not e<; So^av, ' into glory.' 
 
 "" Oi modern critics Beza, Whitby, Pearson, Le Clerc,Woide, Dod- 
 dridge, &c. adhere to 0eof, ' God.' Calvin, Slichtingius, Przipcovius, 
 Erasmus, Dr. Clarke, Wetstein, Benson, Harwood, Griesbach, Wake- 
 field, Lindsey, &c. read o; or o. 
 
 Father : 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 147 
 
 Father : the word God, with any high title or epithet an- 
 nexed, always signifying the Father only '7." 
 
 X. Heb. i. 8. " Thy throne, O God, is for ever 
 and ever." 
 
 This is a quotation from Psalm xlv. 6. And it is well 
 known that the words of the original will equally well bear 
 to be translated, " God is thy throne;" that is^ the support 
 of thy throne. See Grotlus, Clarke, and Pierce in loc. 
 Mr. Lindsey contends that this must be the proper trans- 
 lation, because it is most analogous to the language of 
 Scripture. 2 Sam. vii. 13. 16. 1 Chron. xvii. 12. I*. 
 Psalm Ixxxix. 4. Archbishop Newcome translates, " Thy 
 throne, O God, is for ever and ever :" but he remarks, 
 that in the Psalm the same words are addressed to Solomon. 
 
 " See likewise Clarke's Reply to Nelson, p. 85, &c. And to the 
 snme purpose Erasmus and Grotius in loc. 
 
 The author is not unapprised of the great zeal with which this argu- 
 ment for the proper deity of Christ, from the construction of the Greek 
 article, has been lately resumed and pursued by that eminent philan- 
 thropist Granville Sharp, Esq. and his learned coadjutors Bishop Bur- 
 gess, Dr. Wordsworth, and Dr. Middleton. That many of the obser- 
 vations of these respectable writers are ingenious, acute, and just, as 
 far as the Greek language is concerned, is, I believe, universally ad- 
 mitted. But the witty and shrewd writer of Six more Letters to 
 Granville Sharp, under the signature of Gregory Blunt, has ably and 
 amply refuted the argument derived from this principle in support of 
 the doctrine of the deity of Christ. Indeed it is an indignity to the 
 human understanding to maintain that a doctrine, which, if true, would 
 shine conspicuously in every page of the New Testament, should de- 
 pend for its evidence upon the critical use of the Greek article by the 
 plain and unlettered writers of the New Testament ; together with 
 what would be equally necessary, the immaculate correctness of tran- 
 scribers. If this is the state to which the controversy is reduced, it 
 would be better to give up the point at once. A doctrine of such mag- 
 nitude as the proper deity of Christ, must have clearer and moresub- 
 .stantial evidence, or none at all. That Dr. Middleton's Theory of the 
 Greek Article will not bear him out to the extent to which he has ap- 
 plied it, has been amply and satisfactorily shown in an able critique 
 upon that learned and laborious treatise, by the hand of a master, in 
 the Monthly Review, N. S. vol. Ixii. See also Mr. Winstanley's able 
 Vindication, &c. in reply to Mr. Sharp. 
 
 L 2 XI. 2 Pet. 
 
148 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Pdft I, 
 
 XI. 2 Pet. i. 1 . " Through the righteousness of 
 God and our Saviour Jesus Christ." 
 
 th @s8 r\^ocv Tioci crooTYi^og. The words may be trans- 
 lated, " our God and Saviour Jesus Christ." 
 
 Answer, It is admitted that the original will bear this 
 translation ; but the common version is also admissible. 
 And it is preferable, because, as Dr. Clarke observes. 
 No. 289, "the word Go(/ generally stands for the Father;" 
 and the same words are repeated in the next verse in a con- 
 struction which determines the sense without any ambi- 
 guity. " Grace and peace be multiplied to you through 
 the knowledge of God, and of Jesus our Lord :" sv ivrc- 
 yvuj<r£i t8 Qsa rnxi Ivicrii th -kv^ih '/j^u;v. To which may be 
 added, that two manuscripts and the Syriac version, in- 
 stead of 0i£j, ' God,' read Kvpia, ' Lord.' 
 
 XII. 1 John iii. 16. " Hereby perceive we the 
 love of Godi because he laid down his life for us." 
 
 The word 0i«, * of God,' has the authority of one ma- 
 nuscript only, and that of little note, of the Vulgate ver- 
 sion, and of the Complutensian edition. It is unques- 
 tionably spurious, and is left out of Griesbach's corrected 
 text, and of Archbishop Newcome's, Mr. Wakefield's, 
 and the Improved versions. 
 
 XIII. 1 John v. 20. " And we know that the 
 Son of God is come, and hath given us an understanding, 
 that we may know him, that is true : and we are in him 
 that is true, even in his Son Christ Jesus. This [ovtcs) 
 is the true God and eternal Life." 
 
 " To paraphrase this of true religion," says Dr. Dod- 
 dridge, in his note upon the text, " is quite enervating the 
 force of Scripture, and taking a liberty with plain words 
 by no means to be allowed. It is an argument of the deity 
 of Christ, which aiinost all who have written in its defence 
 
 have 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED To CHRIST. 14S 
 
 have urged, and which I think none who have opposed it 
 have even appeared to answer ^8,'* 
 
 Let us try the learned expositor's principle by the ap- 
 plication of it to a similar case. 
 
 2 John v. 7. " Many deceivers are entered into the 
 world, who confess not that Jesus Christ is come in the 
 flesh. This {ovrog) is a deceiver and antichrist." 
 
 According to Dr. Doddridge's mode of reasoning, to 
 refer the singular pronoun this, to a remote and plural an- 
 tecedent, " is taking a liberty with plain words by no 
 means to be allowed." This, then, is an argument to 
 prove that Jesus Christ was an impostor, and even anti- 
 christ, which none who espouse his doctrine " have even 
 appeared to answer." 
 
 Upon the same principles, therefore, by which Dr. Dod- 
 dridge and others would prove that Jesus Christ is the true 
 God, they might prove that he is a deceiver and anti- 
 christ J which indeed he would have been, had he pre- 
 tended to be, what they erroneously call him, the true God. 
 
 In both instances the pronoun irog, this, which usually 
 belongs to the proximate, is to be connected with the re- 
 mote antecedent. The deceiver and antichrist is he who 
 confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, or, 
 that he is a real man. The true God is that Being v.hom 
 Jesus hath given his disciples understanding to know: it is 
 his Father and our Father, his God and our God. 
 
 From the review of the preceding texts we may remark; 
 
 1. That the number of texts in which it can be 
 presumed that Jesus is called ' God,' is comparatively very 
 small. 
 
 2. That of these, some are evidently spurious, and 
 
 '^ Dr. Doddridge is particularly unfortunate in the selection of most 
 of those texts upon which he professes to lay the greatest stress in sup- 
 port of his system. See particularly his notes upon Acts xx. 38} and 
 Rev. j. 8. 1 1, 
 
 in 
 
150 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Pait I. 
 
 in others the application of the epithet to Christ is by no 
 means clear and decisive, 
 
 3. That if the title God is ever applied to Christ, 
 which perhaps may be admitted in one or two instances, 
 it is in that inferior sense which our Lord himself explains, 
 John X. 3.5, where he shows that in the language of Scrip- 
 ture they are called gods, to whom the word of God came. 
 And it is further observable, that our Lord never assumes 
 this title himself. 
 
 in. One with God. 
 
 L John X. 30. " I and the Father are one." 
 
 'Ev S(r^$v, * one thing,' not * one person/ as Grotius, 
 Clarke, and even Calvin ^9 have observed, q. d. ' to be in 
 my band,' is the same as ' to be in the hand of my Fa- 
 ther;' for I bear his commission, and act under his autho- 
 rity. Chap. xvii. 1 J , Our Lord prays that the apostles may 
 be one, as he and the Father are one. And again, ver. 2 1 , 
 '* that all who believe may be one. as thou, Father, art in 
 me, and I in thee ; that they also may be one in us." 
 
 Dr. Doddridge, who affirms '* that this text so plainly 
 demonstrates the deity of our blessed Redeemer, that it 
 may be left to speak for itself," adds, " How widely dif- 
 ferent that sense is in which christians are said to be one 
 with God, will sufficiently appear by considering how fla- 
 grantly absurd and blasphemous it would be for them to 
 draw the same inference." But, at any rate, a phrase 
 which is applicable to believers in general, cannot, of it- 
 self, when applied to Christ, prove that he is hi nature one 
 
 '^ "Abusi sunt hoc loco veteres ut probarent Christum esse Patri 
 lfLOH7iov : iieque enim Chiislus de unitate substantiae disputat, sed de 
 consensu quern cum Patre habet, quicquid scilicet geritur a Christo, 
 Patris virtute confirmatum iri." Calvin. — Not sk, {unus,) ' one and 
 the same person,' but kv, (unu?n,) ' one and the same thing.' The 
 Father has communicated his power to the Son. Tertullian, Nova- 
 tian, Origen, Chrysostom, and Basil, explain the words in the same 
 manner. Dr. Clarke, ibid. No. 594. 
 
 with 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 151 
 
 with God. And in the connexion in which it stands, it 
 may be explained in a sense perfectly compatible with our 
 Lord's proper humanity. 
 
 II. 1 John V. 7, 8. " For there are three that bear 
 record in heaven : the Father^ the fVord, and the Holy 
 Ghost : and these three are one. uind there are three that 
 bear untness in earth; the Spirit, and the water, and the 
 blood ; and these three agree in one." 
 
 The words included in Italics are manifestly spurious. 
 For, 
 
 1 . They are unnecessary, and do not suit the con- 
 text. There is no similar expression in the Scripture. 
 The sense is complete without it : and the spirit being 
 made a witness both in heaven and earth, destroys the an- 
 tithesis. 
 
 2. These words are not to be found in any Greek 
 manuscript that is older than the fifteenth century. 
 
 3. This text is found in no Latin manuscript older 
 than the ninth century. In many of the later manuscripts 
 it is also wanting. In some copies it is only inserted in the 
 margin, with additions and variations, which give room for 
 suspicion of fraud and forgery 20. 
 
 4. These words are wanting in all the ancient ver-' 
 sions. They are not to be found in the italic version made 
 before the time of Jerome, nor in the Syriac^^, nor in the 
 
 copies 
 
 *° The text is found in a considerable majority of Latin manuscripts, 
 though it is wanting in many. It appears in one or two which are be- 
 lieved to be of the ninth century, though Griesbach doubts it. In many 
 it is written not in the text, but in the margin by a later hand ; which 
 makes it probable that it was wanting in the older copies, from which 
 these were transcribed. 
 
 *' Treraellius translated this text out of Greek into Syriac, and Gut- 
 birius and Schaaf have inserted this translation into the text of their 
 editions of the Syriac version. A most unwarrantable and unpardon- 
 able liberty to be taken with the Sacred Writings. They, however, 
 probably believed the text to be genuine. But what can be said in 
 
 excuse 
 
152 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part T. 
 
 copies of the Nestorian or of the Jacobite christians in 
 Asia, nor in those of the christians of St. Tho ^as in the 
 East Indies. Nor does it appear in either of rhe \rabic 
 versions, nor in the Coptic, the Ethiopic, the Armenian, 
 the Sahidic, or the Sclavonian. 
 
 5. This text is omitted by all the Greek fathers, 
 even by those whose subjects would naturally have led 
 them to cite it, who ransacked the New Testament for ar- 
 guments in favour of the doctrine of the Trinity, and who 
 have quoted the words immediately preceding and follow- 
 ing the disputed text. 
 
 Irenasus cites this chapter to prove the deity of Christ, 
 but takes no notice of this text. Dionysius of Alexan- 
 dria, in his epistle to Paul of Samosata, concerning the doc- 
 trine of the Trinity, cites the eighth verse, but omits the 
 seventh. — Athanasius never mentions this text even in 
 those books in which he enumerates all the scriptures he 
 can find to prove the deity of the Son and the Spirit. — 
 The Fathers of the Council of Sardica produce John x. 20, 
 to prove a trinity in unity, but take no notice of this 
 text, though more to their purpose. — Gregory Nazianzen, 
 in his five Orations de T/ieologid, alleges the next words 
 to prove the deity of the Spirit, but is silent concerning the 
 heavenly witnesses. — Cyril of Alexandria cites the verses 
 before and after this text to prove the deity of the Spirit, 
 but omits the seventh verse. — Leontius, in the name of 
 the Nicene fathers, defends the deity of the Spirit from 
 ver. 6, but takes no notice of the seventh. — Griesbach 
 says that no one of the Greek fathers ever cites the text, 
 nor is any mention made of it in the Acts of any Coun- 
 
 excuse ot those modern expositors and translators, who, in order to 
 serve a party or a personal purpose, continue, in defiance of palpable 
 evidence, and in opposition to better knovviedge, to retain this noto- 
 rious passage in the sacred text ? 
 
 cil. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 153 
 
 cil, general or provincial, that is in repute among the 
 Greeks 22. 
 
 6. This text is not cited by any of the Latin fa- 
 thers 23^ even where it would have been most pertinent, 
 and where the subject seemed to require it. 
 
 It is not found in the Treatise upon the Baptism of He- 
 retics, bound up with Cyprian's Works, though the au- 
 thor cites the verses before and after it; — nor yet in No- 
 vatian, who wrote upon the Trinity ; nor in Hilarius ; nor 
 Phcebadius ; nor in Ambrose, who cites the verses before 
 and after it ; nor in Leo Magnus, who, in his Letter to 
 Flavianus presented to the Council of Chalcedon, com- 
 ments upon the whole context ; nor in Faustinus ; nor in 
 Jerome ; nor in Augustin, who maintains that the Father, 
 the Son, and the Spirit are mystically signified by the 
 Spirit, the water, and the blood. Bede, in the eigtuh cen- 
 tury, wrote a comment upon the epistle, in which he ex- 
 pounds the eighth verse, but takes no notice of the se- 
 venth. All this is acknowledged by Dr. Mill, who is ne- 
 vertheless an advocate for the genuineness of the text, but 
 who allows that, for about seven hundred yeaps, it was 
 wanting in the Bibles of the Latin church. 
 
 7. The best editions of the New Testament, since 
 the Reformation, have omitted, or at least have fixed a 
 mark of caution and suspicion upon, the disputed text. 
 
 It was wanting in the first and second editions of Eras- 
 mus, A. D. 1,316 and 1518, but was inserted in the third, 
 to silence the clamour which had been excited against him. 
 " Ne cui esset causa calumniandi." It was omitted in the 
 
 *^ Griesbach Append, p. Q ; apud Nqv. Test. vol. ii, ad fin. Emlyn's 
 Tracts, p. 313 — 3 16. lienson on Epp. vol. ii. p. 645. 
 
 "^ " A patribus Latinis non citatur, ubi vel maxime ad rem pertinc- 
 ret, atcjue omnino expectari posset." Griesbach. 
 
 edition 
 
JJ4 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Pait I. 
 
 edition of Aldus, 1518 ; in that of Haguenau, 1581 ; of 
 Strasburg, 1524; of Colinasus at Paris, 1534. In the ver- 
 sion of Luther, and the edition of ZwingUus and Bullin- 
 ger, in the editions of Bovvyer and Knapp, it is marked as 
 doubtful ; and is wholly omitted in those of Harwood, of 
 Matthsei, and of Griesbach. Wetstein marks it as cer- 
 tainly spurious, but he professedly publishes the Received 
 Text without alteration 24. 
 
 In the old English Bibles of Henry the Eighth and of 
 Edward the Sixth, the words were printed in small types, 
 or were inclosed in brackets. In Queen Elizabeth's Bible 
 of 1566, the same caution was continued. But between 
 1566 and 1580 the words began to be printed as they 
 now stand, without any distinction, but by whose autho- 
 rity is not known. 
 
 In defence of this disputed text it has been alleged, 
 1 . That the text was contained in some ancient Greek 
 manuscripts which are now lost. 
 
 1 . ) The text appears in the Complutensian Poly- 
 
 ** " Primum ediderunt illud comma Complutenses ; dein Erasmus in 
 tribus postremis editionibus : ex his propagatum fuit in Stephanicas : 
 hinc in Bezanas, inde in Elzevirianas, ceeterasque." Griesbach. — Ben- 
 gel, like Mill, maintains the genuineness of the verse, after having 
 produced evidence sufficient to convince every reasonable person that 
 it must be spurious. But though he candidly allow^s that the words 
 are not to be found in any known Greek or ancient Latin copy, he is 
 unwilling to despair; but piously hopes that some copy may still be 
 discovered which contains this precious relic. " Et tamen etiam atque 
 etiam sperare licet, si non autographum Johanneum, at alios vetus- 
 tissimos codices Grsecos qui banc periocham habent, in occultis provi- 
 dentiae divinae forulis adhuc latentes, suo tempore, productum iri." 
 Bengel. N. Test. p. "jyo, "JJl. — Wetstein remarks upon this, " Non 
 equidem invideo ei, qui hac spe lactatur." This verse is omitted in 
 Archbishop Newcorae's Translation, in Mr. Wakefield's, and in the 
 Improved Version. " I must own," says the bishop of Lincoln, " that 
 after an attentive consideration of the controversy relative to that pas- 
 sage, I am convinced that it is spurious." Elements of Christian Theo- 
 logy, vol. ii. p. 90^ note. See Jortin's Remarks on Eccl. Hist. vol. iii. 
 p. 100. . 
 
 glot. 
 
Sect. 7.J ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 155' 
 
 glot, published by Cardinal Ximenes about 1510, from 
 manuscripts some of which are now lost^s. 
 
 Answer. S tunica, the editor of this celebrated work, 
 when challenged by Erasmus, could not produce a single 
 Greek manuscript in which this text was found. He con- 
 tented himself with appealing to the Latin copies as of the 
 highest authority, and probably translated the text from 
 the Vulgate into Greek. 
 
 2.) Robert Stephens, a man of great ability and 
 learning, published a splendid edition of the Greek Testa- 
 ment at Paris in A. D. 1550, from sixteen manuscripts in 
 the Royal Library. He has inclosed in brackets the words 
 £y a^ocvoo^ ' in heaven,' and marked them as wanting in seven 
 manuscripts ; from which it has been concluded that the 
 remainder of the text was found in those seven copies, and 
 that it was entire in all the rest. 
 
 Answer. It is most certain that Stephens had no more 
 than seven manuscripts which contained the catholic epi- 
 stles. There is every reason to believe that these manu- 
 scripts are still in existence ; and that they leave out the 
 whole seventh verse. And as Stephens himself has put 
 the bracket in the right place, after the v^ords in terra j ' in 
 earth,* in his Latin editions of 1539 and 1540, it is highly 
 probable that the misplacing of it in the Greek edition of 
 1550 was an error of the press, many of which have been 
 detected in that magnificent but inaccurate work 26. 
 It 
 
 ^' Of these, what Stunica calls the llhodian manuscript was the most 
 celebrated It was brought from the island of Rhodes. These ma- 
 nuscripts were preserved for many years in the library of Alcala ; but 
 in the year 1749 they were sold by an ignorant librarian to a rocket- 
 maker, and destroyed, " This very circumstance,' says Dr. Marsh, 
 " may console us for their loss : for as rockets are not made of vellum, 
 it is a certain proof that the MSS. were written on paper, and there- 
 fore of no great antiquity." Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 440. 844. 
 
 ^^ Griesbach contends that the placing of the bracket must certainly 
 have been a typographical error, for no manuscript exists, which, 
 
 omitting 
 
156 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti, 
 
 It is further alleged, that Beza declares that he had ac- 
 tually read the words In so Tie of Robert Stephens's an- 
 cient books ; — but this is certainly incorrect It is not 
 probable that Stephens carried the manuscripts -vith him 
 to Geneva ; nor could Beza have seen in the books v/hat 
 the books did not contain. Beza left out this assertion 
 in tlie third and succeeding editions of his New Testa- 
 ment -7. 
 
 3.) It has been conceived that LaurentiusValla was 
 in possession of seven Greek manuscripts which contained 
 the disputed text. The only evidence in the case is, that 
 Valla does not in this instance note the difference between 
 his manuscripts and the Latin text. — But his notes upon 
 this epistle are few and trivial ; — he might possibly have a 
 
 omitting the words ev Bpavu), retains the rest of the text. And he 
 triumphantly asks, Who can be so silly as to believe that Stephens pos- 
 sessed seven manuscripts containing the disputed text, not one of 
 Avhich now exists : or if one, why is it not produced ? Or let the pa- 
 trons of this opinion show, if possible, i.jw seven such manuscripts 
 could be lost between the years 1550 and 17OO, when it is known that 
 Greek manuscripts were in such high request, and purchased at such 
 an enormous price. Ibid, p. 6. See upon this subject Travis's Let- 
 ters to Gibbon, and Person's Letters to Travis, 
 
 *' Beza's words are : " Hie versiculus, omnino, raihi retinendus vi- 
 detiir : legit Erasmus in l-ritannico codice — legimus et nos in nonnul- 
 lis Iloberti nostri veteiibus libris." In the third and following edi- 
 tions, instead of the words in Italics he wrote extat. It is difficult to 
 save the credit of the learned reformer in this hardy assertion. Ben- 
 gel candidly observes, that he does not say " ego legi," but " nos le- 
 gimus," and seems to mean nothing more than that he read the ma- 
 nuscripts with the eyes of Stephens, as Erasmus did the liritish ma- 
 nuscript with the eyes of his correspondent there. Beza concluded, 
 from the place of the crotchet in Stephens's book, that his manuscripts 
 contained the disputed text. See Wetstein in loc. 
 
 Hence we see the foundation of Gibbon's famous remark upon this 
 celebrated text ; " The three witnesses have been established in our 
 Greek Testaments by the prudence of Erasmus, the honest bigotry of 
 the Gomplutensian editors, by the typographical fraud or error of Ro- 
 bert Stephens in the placing of a crotchet, and by the deliberate false- 
 hood or strange misapprehension of Theodore Beza." Gibbon's Hist. 
 yoL iii. p. 545. 4to. 
 
 Latin 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 157 
 
 Latin copy in which the seventh verse was omitted: — or, 
 finally, as he only notes variations in those passages in 
 which he thinks that the Latin text should be corrected by 
 the Greek, he might think it prudent not to notice the va- 
 riation here. See Griesbach, ibid. 
 
 2. The text is still found in some Greek manuscripts. 
 1.) In the Montfort manuscript in the library of 
 Trinity college, Dublin. 
 
 This manuscript, given by Archbishop Usher to Trinity 
 college, is certainly that to which Erasmus alludes in his 
 controversy with Stunica, and upon the sole authority of 
 which he introduced the text of the heavenly witnesses 
 into his third edition, where it stands an exact transcript 
 of the text of this Codex^s. This manuscript was written 
 in the fifteenth or sixteenth century, is of no authority, and 
 evidently interpolated from the Latin Vulgate^Q. 
 
 2.) The text is found in the Berlin, or Ravian ma- 
 nuscript. 
 
 Answer. This manuscript has been long known to be 
 in a great measure copied from the Complutensian Poly- 
 glot, retaining even the errors of the press. It was ex- 
 amined throughout in the year 1796 by Pappelbaum, who 
 discovered that the portion which was not transcribed from 
 the Complutensian edition was taken from Stephens's third 
 
 -' " Ex codice Eritannico reposuimus, qaod in nostris dicebaturde- 
 esse, ne cui sit causa calumniandi : tametsi suspicor ilium codicem, ad 
 nostros esse correctura." Erasmus. — In his letter to Stunica he cites 
 the words differently from the Codex : but in his text he cites correct- 
 ly, " ne niiica quidem literula differt." Hence Griesbach concludes 
 that there is no foundation for the supposition that Erasmus's British 
 manuscript is different from the Codex Dublinensis. 
 
 ^ Griesbach mentions, as evident proofs of corruption from the 
 I-atin, the omission of the article before the witnesses, and more par- 
 ticularly ver. 6, where it follows the Vulgate in reading o X^jcrro;, in- 
 stead of ro TTvEUjtia, and is the only Greek manuscript in which this 
 reading is found. Griesbach, ibid- p. 4. See Marsh's Michaelis^ vol. ii. 
 p. 284. 
 
 edition, 
 
158 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 edition, with the addition of a few articles from Stephens's 
 margin, and the Complutensian, inserted in the text to 
 conceal the fraud^o. 
 
 3.) The Codex Guelpherbytanus D, is a manu- 
 script of the first epistle of John. It contains the disputed 
 text, but it also contains the versions of Castalio, Vatablus, 
 and Beza. It was written in the seventeenth century, and 
 is of no authority whatever^'. 
 
 4.) Matthaei mentions two other manuscripts which 
 contain the disputed text. One is a manuscript of the 
 thirteenth century, and in this the seventh verse is written 
 in the margin by a later hand. The other is of no autho- 
 rity, having been written since the time of Erasmus and 
 Beza, whose version it contains 33. 
 
 3. It is contended that the text is cited, or clearly al- 
 luded to, by some of the earliest Latin fathers. 
 
 1.) Tertullian, cont. Praxeam, c. 25. " Ita, con- 
 nexus Patris in filio, et filii in paracleto, tres efficit cohae- 
 rentes, alterum ex altero. Qui tres unum sunt, non unus; 
 quomodo dictum est. Ego et Pater unum sumus ^." 
 
 -"^ See Griesbach, ibid. p. 4, and Pappelbaum, Examen Cod. Rav. 
 Berolini, 1 796. 
 
 ■" See Griesbach, ibid. p. 7. Marsh's Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 263. Mi- 
 chaelis says, " It is entitled neither to collation nor description : but 
 John V. 7. is with many so favourite a passage, that no trouble bestowed 
 on it is tliought too great." 
 
 ^- See Pope's Letters to Nisbet, p. 33(). The latter of these ma- 
 rnscripts is probably the Cod. Guelph. D, already noticed. Neither 
 Griesbach, nor Michaelis, nor Marsh, cite these authorities of Mat- 
 rhsei. On the contrary, Michaelis says, (ibid. p. 269,) not one of them 
 has the spurious passage, 1 John v. 7- Griesbach concludes his exa- 
 mination of Greek manuscripts with these words : " Verissimum igi- 
 tcr est, nullum codicem Graecum inveniri adliuc potuisse, qui comma 
 controversum a prima manu exhibeat, praeter unicum Dublinensem 
 seu Britaiinicum." 
 
 ^ " So the connexion of the Father with the Son, and of the Son 
 with the Paraclete, makes three cohering one with another, which 
 three are one thing, not one person^ as it is said ' I and the Father are 
 one,' " 
 
 ufnsiver. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 159 
 
 Answer. In these words there is no reason to suppose 
 the least allusion to the disputed text, which would most 
 certainly have been often quoted by Tertullian in his vo- 
 luminous works, if it had been found in his copy of the 
 New Testament. 
 
 2.) Cyprian, de Unitate Eccles. p. 79, edit. 1700, 
 says : " De Patre, et Filio, et Spiritu sancto, scriptum est, 
 Et hi tres unum sunt'^'^." 
 
 Answer. This was probably Cyprian's gloss upon the 
 words in the eighth verse. Such glosses were common in 
 that age. Augustin puts the very same interpretation upon 
 ver. 8. Cyprian himself was fond of these mystical senses. 
 And Facundus, an African bishop of the fifth century, in- 
 terprets ver. 8 in the same way, and expressly appeals to 
 Cyprian as authorizing the interpretation 3^. 
 
 3.) The text is found in a Preface to the catholic 
 epistles inserted in some of the Latin copies of Jerome, and 
 sometimes ascribed to him. — But this prologue is certainly 
 spurious, and is not found in any manuscripts earlier than 
 the ninth century. Griesb. p. 24. 
 
 4.) Eucherius, bishop of Lyons A. D. 440, is said 
 to have cited this text explicitly in his Treatise de Formu- 
 
 '* " Of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit it is written, These 
 three are one." This is the argument in which the grefit streno-th of 
 the cause lies, and which induced Dr. Mill to retain the text in oppo- 
 sition to all the objections, in common estimation irrrfragable, which 
 he has produced against it. 
 
 '' Augustin, bishop of Hippo in Africa, cont. Maximin. cap. 22, 
 *' Tres sunt testes, et tres unum sunt : ut nomine Spiritus accipiamus 
 Patrem, nomine autem sanguinis, filium ; et nomine aquae, spiritum 
 sanctum." — Cyprian, in his book De Unit allegorizes our Lord's 
 tunic, which was woven without a seam, as an emblem ot" the church. 
 Griesbach, ibid. p. 15, Facundus pro Def. Trium Capitulor. 1. i. c. 3, 
 after having given the interpretation of the Spirit, the blood, and the 
 water, as signifying the Father, the Sou, and the Holy Ghost, adds, 
 " quod Joannis apostoli testimonium b. Cyprianus de Fatre, Filio, et 
 Spiritu sancto intelligit." He then quotes Cyprian's words. 
 
 lis, 
 
160 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti, 
 
 lis, c. 1 1 . — Upon this testimony Archdeacon Travis lays 
 great stress in his defence of the disputed text. But Mr. 
 Porson has shown that the words were not inserted in the 
 earliest editions of Eucherius, and are probably an inter- 
 polation 36. 
 
 5.) This text is clearly and indisputably cited by 
 Vigilius Tapsensis, a writer at the latter end of the fifth 
 century, in a work written against the Arians. The credit 
 of the text rests solely upon the authority of this writer, 
 ■who was a person of no good fame, who was accustomed 
 to publish works under the names of other writers of re- 
 pute, and who is suspected by many to have been the au- 
 thor of the Athanasian creed ^7. 
 
 Griesbach concludes his learned and laborious research 
 into the genuineness of this celebrated text, with the fol- 
 lowing just and pertinent remarks : 
 
 " If witnesses so few, so doubtful, so suspicious and so 
 modern, and arguments so trifling, are sufficient to esta- 
 blish the genuineness of any reading, in opposition to tes- 
 timonies and to arguments so numerous and so grave ; no 
 criterion would remain of truth and falsehood in criticism ; 
 and the whole text of the New Testament would be left 
 doubtful and uncertain 38. 
 
 IV. Equal 
 
 ^^ Travis's Letters to Gibbon, ed. 3, p. 420. Person's Reply, 
 p. ;H6, Griesbach, ibid. p. l6, ]/. 
 
 '^ " Igitur comma controversum septimum, prsecipue, ne dicam 
 TJiiicc, nititur testimonio, fide, atque auctoritate Vigilii Tapsensis, et 
 librorum huic attributorum auctori ante quern nemo clare idexcitavit. 
 Jam de Vigilio observandum est parum laudabilem esse hunc scripto- 
 rem quod libellos suos sub nominibus fictis Athanasii, Augustini, Ida- 
 cii, &c. maluerit in lucem emittere, quam suum nomen prufiteri. 
 Eundem hominem plures viri docti auctorem esse existimarunt sym- 
 boli istius celeberrimi Athanasio suppositi.'^ Griesbach, ibid. p. 21. 
 
 '^ The learned writer adds: " Ego quidem, si tanti esset, sexcentas 
 lectiones ab omnibus rejectas atque futilissimas defendere possem tes- 
 timoniis et rationibus aeque niultis atque validis, imo, pluribus plerum- 
 que atque validioribus, quam sunt ea quibus utuntur hujus dicti pa- 
 tron! : nee baberent genuini textus defensores tot, tantaque arguraenta 
 
 quae 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 161 
 
 IV. Equal ivith God. 
 
 1 . John V. I S. " Therefore the Jews thought the 
 more to kill him, because he had not only broken the sab- 
 bath, but said also that God was his own (I'^wv') father, 
 making himself equal with God,'* icov roo 0£co. 
 
 Answer, Jesus never claimed equality with God. Nor 
 did the Jews mean to charge him with so gross a blasphe- 
 my. They accused him of justifying his own violation of 
 the sabbath by the authority and example of God ; in this 
 respect making himself like God. See Clarke, No. 580 ; 
 and Grotius in loc. Compare John x. 33. Mark ii. 7. 
 
 2. Philip, ii. 6. " — thought it not robbery to be 
 equal with God." 
 
 la-oc 0?w, ' like God ;' did not account as a prey this like- 
 ness to God : did not regard his miraculous powers as the 
 acquisition of his own power and wisdom ; for the exer- 
 cise of which he was not accountable to any. See p. 133, 
 
 V. Fulness of Godhead. 
 Col. ii. 9. " For in him dwelleth all the fulness of 
 the godhead bodily ^9: and ye are complete (^TrsTr^.yi^ooy.svoi, 
 
 quae conatui meo inani opponere possent, qiiot quantnque fautoribus 
 hujiis dicti supra opposita sunt."' Griesbach, ibid, ad tin. 
 
 The latest champions of tliis forlorn hope are Knittel, Hezelins, and 
 Travis, whose zeal " 8 nar' STrtyvcvcriv a viris doctissimis Porsono et 
 JV'larshio, ut par erat, repressus ac castigatus." Griesbach — The re- 
 plies to their arguments by I'orson, Marsh, and Griesbach have proba- 
 bly set the controversy at rest Hezelius, " utpote vir veri araantissi- 
 raus," has already acknowledged his error. And few will have the 
 hardihood U, revive the controversy. 
 
 The principal writers upon the subject previous to the controversy 
 excited by Archdeacon Travis, are Mill, Bengelius, Wetsfein, and 
 Matthaei in loc. Martin and Emlyn's Dissertations upon the texf. Sir 
 Isaac Newton's Letter to Le Clerc. Woltii Cur. Philol, vol. v. p. 293 
 — 324. P. Simon. Hist. Grit, c xviii. Hist, de Vers. c. ix. ; and the 
 controversy between Stunica and Erasmus, Grit. Sac. vol. ix. p. 354/. 
 See Pope's Letters to Nisbet, p. 340. The whole evidence is cor- 
 rectly stated by Griesbach in the Appendix to his Nov. Test. Graec. . 
 vol. ii, ed. 2. A. D. 1790. 
 
 ^'^ iruv ro Tr?^Yipu:iJ,cc tt/js ^sor-^rog cruJiiaT'iKius. 
 
 M 'filled') 
 
162 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 ' filled*) in him who is the head of all principality and 
 power." 
 
 In the epistle to the Ephesians, chap. iii. 19, the apo- 
 stle prays that they may be filled with all the fulness of 
 God, ?'. e, wirh knowledge of the divine will, and confor- 
 mity to the divine image. But the epistle to the Colos- 
 sians was u'ritten at the same time, when the apostle's mind 
 was occupied with the same train of ideas, which he ex- 
 presses in the same or similar metaphorical language. The 
 fulness of Godhead, therefore, which resides in Christ, is 
 the fulness of divine knowledge, gifts, powers, and autho- 
 rity. This resides in him bodily^ i. e. in reference to his 
 mystical body, the church, of which he is the head. That 
 this is the apcstle's meaning is evident from the context. 
 For he immediately adds, " Ye are filled in," or by " him," 
 Filled, with what? with the fulness of the Godhead no 
 doubt, which is the only subject of which he is treating. 
 q. d. Ye, his members, are filled by him who is your head ; 
 filled with knovv'ledge, gifts, and powers^o. There is no 
 image in which the apostle more delights, or upon which 
 he more expatiates, than that of the church being the body 
 of which Christ is the head, and of which individual chris- 
 tians are represented as particular parts and limbs. 1 Cor. 
 xii. 27, " Ye are the body of Christ, and members in par- 
 ticular." Compare Eph. v. SO ; i. 23. In consistency with 
 this metaphor, believers are said to be " circumcised in 
 Christ," Col. ii. 11: " dead and burled with him," ver. 
 
 '^ See John xvii. 21 — 23, " I in them, and thou in me ; that they 
 also may be one in us," &c. — " The fulness of the Godhead/' says 
 Mr. Pierce, " is the same thing which he calls ' all the fulness of God,' 
 Eph. iii. 19 : it is ll)al plenty of excellent gifts which from the God- 
 head was communicated to Christ, by him to be imparted to us in or- 
 der to the filling us : a fulness of grace and truth. John i. 14, 16, IJ ■ 
 *' Ye are complete in him." It would have led the English reader 
 much better into the apostle's thought, had it been rendered, " Ye are 
 filled by him." Feirce in loc. Simpson's Essays, vol. ii. p. 279. 
 
 12. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 165 
 
 12. 20: " raised with him," ver. 13. Chap. iii. 1, " as- 
 cended and seated in heaven with him,*' Eph. ii. 2. 5, 6 ; 
 and in every respect vitally united to him, associated with 
 him, and deriving supplies of life and vigour from him, as 
 the body from the head. 
 
 According to this interpretation, there is no foundation 
 for the argument which many derive from this text to prove 
 the proper deity of Christ, and particularly to establish that 
 hypothesis which represents Christ as God, in consequence 
 of the deity of the Father dv/elling in him-^'. 
 
 ^n. Jems is 'styled the Son of God in a peculiar sense, 
 and ivitJi peculiar epithets. 
 
 1. The Son of God. 
 
 Mark i, 1. " The beginning of the Gospel of Jesus 
 Christ, the Son of God." 
 
 This title occars upv/ards of forty times in the New Tes- 
 tament : it is used by all the evangelists, by the apostle 
 Paul in his epistles, and by our Lord himself. 
 
 ■*' " In whom the fulness of deity substantially dwells." Dr. Dod- 
 dridge in his note. FTe adds, '' I assuredly believe, that as it contains 
 an evident allusion to the Shechinali in which God dwelt,, so it ulti- 
 mately refers to the adorable mystery of the union of the divine and 
 human natures in the person of the glorious Immanuel." But there 
 is no evidence whatever of any allusion to the Shechinah, much less 
 could such an allusion afford any warrant to the strange supposition of 
 a physical union of the self-existent d^'ily with the created spirit which 
 animated the bojy of Christ, so as of the two to constitute one single 
 intelligent agent. Dr. Whitby, in his Commentary, understands 
 ^aoxYii of the divine essence : but in his Last Thoughts, p. 83, he ex- 
 plains it, with Dr. Clarke, (No. Q\5,) of the fulness of divine wisdom 
 and power. Beza finds in this text (illustris hie locu'; si quisquam 
 alius) the whole mystery of two natures in one hypostasis, and of the 
 equality of the Son with the Father. Erasmus, in his usual manner, 
 acknowledges that all which is said concerning the divine nat\ire of 
 Christ is true, bat that this text has no reference to it : " earn rem hie 
 non agit Paulus." He, with Grotius, explains the text of the doctrine 
 of Christ which excels and supersedes the law of Moses. 
 
 M 2 2. The 
 
164 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 2. The Son. 
 1.] Matt. xl. 27. " No man knovveth the Son, but 
 the Father." Comp. Luke x. 22. 
 
 2.] Mark xiii. 32. " — neither the Son.'* 
 3.] John iii. 35. " The Father loveth the Son." 
 This phraseology occurs upwards of twenty times in the 
 writings of John, 
 
 4 ] 1 Cor. XV. 28. " Then shall the Son also him- 
 self be subject unto him that put all things under him.** 
 
 This phrase does not occur again in the acknowledged 
 writings of Paul. 
 
 5.] Heb. i. 8. " But to the Son he saith" — 
 6.3 Heb. vii. 28. " The Son who is consecrated for 
 evermore.'* 
 
 3. God is called his oivn Father. Christ is God's own Son. 
 1.] John V. 18. " He said also that God was his 
 own father" — ttuts^cc t^iov. 
 
 2.] Rom. viii. 32. " He that spared not his own 
 Son" — t8 iha via. 
 
 Christ was the beloved Son, more highly favoured than 
 the rest of his brethren. 
 
 4. Christ is the first-born. 
 
 1.] Col. i. 15. "The first-born of the whole 
 creation" — vr^uTOTOKog. See p. 94. 
 
 2.] Col. i. IS. " Who is the beginning, the first- 
 born from the dead." 
 
 This passage determines the signification of the phrase 
 to be, The first person who was raised to an immortal 
 life: being thus the first-born of the new creation ; the 
 first of the sons of God who obtained possession of the 
 inheritance. 
 
 3.] Rom. viii. 29. " — that he might be the first- 
 born among many brethren." 
 
 q. d. That 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 165 
 
 q. d. That he being the first-born might have many 
 brethren, who hke him should be raised to immortality. 
 
 4.] Heb. i. tJ. " But when he bringeth the first- 
 born again into the world." 
 
 5.] Rev. i. 5. " The first-born from the dead." 
 
 5. The beloved Son. 
 
 1.] Matt. iii. 17. "And, lo ! a voice from hea- 
 ven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well 
 pleased," See Mark i. 11. Luke iii. 22. 
 
 2] Matt. xii. IS. " — which was spoken by 
 Isaiah (xlii. 1), Behold, my servant whom I have chosen, 
 my beloved, {Heb. ' my chosen one,') in whom my soul 
 is well pleased." 
 
 This shows that the word beloved here, as in other 
 places, expresses being selected to possdSs peculiar privi- 
 leges. See Rom. ix. 13. 
 
 3.] Matt. xvii. 5. " — a voice came out of the 
 cloud, which said, Fhis is my beloved Son, in whom I 
 am well pleased : hear ye him." 
 
 This was on the mount of transfiguration. See Mark 
 ix. 7. Luke ix. 35. 2 Pet. i. 17. 
 
 6. Christ is the only begotten Son — ^ovcyiv/ig. 
 
 1.] John i. 14. " — we beheld his glory, as of the 
 only-begotten of the Father." 
 
 2.] Ver. 13. "The only-begotten Son, who is in 
 the bosom of the Father." 
 
 3.] John iii. 16. " God so loved the world, that 
 he gave his only-begotten Son." 
 
 4.] Ver. 1 8. " — he hath not believed in the name 
 of the only-begotten Son of God." 
 
 5.] 1 John iv. 9. " God sent his only-begotten 
 
 Son into the world." 
 
 These 
 
166 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 These are the only passages in the New Testament in 
 which the word occurs in reference to Christ*^, 
 
 Observe here, 1. That John is the only one of the sa- 
 cred writers who appHes the title ' only begotten' to 
 Christ. — 2. That this word in the original properly sig < 
 nifies * an only child.' Luke vii. 12 ; ix. 38. — 3. That 
 it is often metonymically used to express ' dearly beloved.' 
 See Heb. xi. 17. And the same word in the original 
 Hebrew, which by the LXX. is rendered u.Q-jQycv\]q^ ' only- 
 begotten,* is in other passages translated otyunxyiiog^ 'be- 
 loved.' Jer. vi, 26. Amosviii. 10. — 4. Hence it is pro- 
 bable that as the word ayaiv/iTog^ 'belove.i,' does not oc- 
 cur in John as a title of Christ, this writer uses the word 
 Ij^QvoysvYtgy 'only-begotten,' instead of ir, and where the 
 other evaneelists would us-j 'beloved.' — 5. It is evident 
 that Dr. Clarke fcas no just ground to conclude, from the 
 use of a word peculiar to John, and unknown to the other 
 sacred writers, that this word is intended to convey the 
 extraordinary doctrine, that there is something peculiar 
 and mysterious in the derivadon of the Son from the 
 Father '^3, 
 
 Remarks, 
 
 ** The word uixoygvy/; occurs only in four other places in the New 
 Testament: Luke vii. 12, "The only son of his mother :" viii. 42, 
 ** He had one only daughter :" ix. 38, " he is my only child." Heb. 
 xi. ]/, " He who had received the promises, offered up his only son." 
 — The word [j,o-/oyi-/rjg occurs but tour times in the Old Testament, 
 and that as a translation ot ITI^. Psalm xxii. 20, " Deliver my dar- 
 ling from the power of the dog." LXX. jw-c'/oysvvj fxe, ' my only one,* 
 i. e. my life. Psalm xxv. l6, " I am desolate and afflicted :" LXX. 
 [j.O'/oyavri; Bil^i : (j. d. I am solitary. Psalm xxxv. \7 , " Rescue my 
 darling from the power of the lions." Judges xi. 34, Jephtha's daugh- 
 ter was his oniii child. The same Hebrew word "T**!!^ is in six places 
 rendered by aya.irr.r'jg, ' beloved :' Gen. xxii. 2, "Take now thy son, 
 thy only son Isaac :" LXX. rov a-ycLTtr^rov. See also ver. 12, \Q. Jer. 
 vi. 26. Amos viii. 10. Zech. xii. 10. Compare 1 Chron. xxix. i. Prov. 
 iv. 3. Trommii Concord, in verb. 
 
 "^ See Grotius on John i. 14 . Matt, xiv, 33 : and Lindsey's Sequel, 
 p. 412, &c. " Only-begotten signifies being so derived from the Fa- 
 ther in a singular and inconceivable manner^ as thereby to be distin- 
 guished 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 167 
 
 Remarks, 
 
 1 . The expression ' The Son of God,' or ' The Son/ 
 among the Jews appears to have been equivalent to ' The 
 Messiah.' Mark i. !, "The Gospel of Jesus Christ, the 
 Son of God."' — John i. 50, " Thou art the Son of God, 
 thou art the King of Israel." — Luke iv. 41, "Thou 
 art the Christ, the Son of God." — chap. xxii. 67, 
 " Art thou the Christ ? tell us." — ver. 70, *' Art thou 
 then the Son of God ?" — John xx. 31, " These things 
 are written that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, 
 the Son of God." This title was probably taken from 
 Psalm ii. 7, which, by the ancient Jews, was understood 
 of the Messiah. 
 
 2. That he was the Messiah, or the Son of God, was pro- 
 bably made known to Jesus at his baptism : Luke iii. S^i^.-'^.l. 
 This accounts for his own assumption of the title upon 
 various occasions. And being invested with a commission 
 
 of the highest importance, and with powers superior to 
 those of any former prophet, he is distinguished above 
 the rest by the title of ' beloved,* ' well-beloved,' and 
 ,' only-begotten Son.' 
 
 That Jesus v>as the Son of God, or the Messiah, was at 
 the same time made known to John the Baptist, and to 
 all who were witnesses to his baptism. See John i. 32. 34. 
 
 guished from all other beings," Dr. Claike, Scr, Doct. p. 239. This 
 is a favourite notitm of Dr. Clarke, and his great salvo agai;ist the 
 charge of Ai ianisni : but it is quite unworthy of him. He was misled 
 by his hypothesis, and did not sc.lliciently attend to the connexion in 
 which the word is introduced. - I see no reason to suppose, with Gro- 
 tius, Mr. Lindsey, and others, that there is any reference in the term 
 Monogenes to the doctrine of the Gnostics. The word used at the 
 baptism and transfiguration of Christ was probably ITI"^, which the 
 evangelists, writingin Greek, would render by oneor other of the words 
 used by the LXX. Matthew, Ixlark, and Luke adopted ayanrr^rog, 
 ' beloved.' John renders it by ij.oioyeyri$, ' only-begotten.' See Simp- 
 son's Essays, vol. ii. p. 275. 
 
 The 
 
168 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part I. 
 
 — The miracles of Christ also sometimes extorted a con- 
 fession of his Messiahship from the grateful subjects of 
 them, and from the admiring multitude. But the grand 
 and decisive proof of his being the Son of God arose from 
 his resurrection from the dead. Rom. i. 3, 4, Heb. i. 6. 
 
 3. All christians are children of God, being the heirs 
 jind expectants of a resurrection to a happy and immortal 
 life: John i. 12. Rom. viii. 14 — 17. Christ first rose 
 from the dead,, and obtained possession of the promised 
 inheritance. For this reason he is called the first-born, 
 ver. 29 ; and christians are brethren, and co-heirs with 
 him, ver. 1 7. 1 John iii. 2. 
 
 4. There is no sufficient evidence to prove that Jesus 
 is called ' the Son of God ' for any other reason than as 
 being the Messiah. Neither because he is the second 
 person in the Trinity — nor because he is a necessary ema- 
 nation from the Father — nor because he is the voluntary 
 but uncreated production of the Father's power — nor be- 
 cause he is the first and greatest of created beings — nor 
 because he is the mediator between God and man — nor 
 because of his exaltation to universal authority and domi- 
 nion, as the old Socinians believed — nor because of his 
 own plenary inspiration, being also the fountain of'spiri- 
 tual gifts, and appointed to the office of universal judge, 
 which was the opinion of Dr. Lardner**. 
 
 ** It is announced by the angel, Lnke i 35, that Jesus should be 
 called ' the Son of God' on account of his miraculous conception. But 
 as it does not appear that he ever received that appellation from any 
 one on that account, it being generally allowed that the fact, if true, 
 was unknown during his personal ministry, this circumstance is rather 
 an additional presun)plion against the truth of the narrative. 
 
 Upon this subject see Dr. Watts's Works, vol. vi p. 64/. Ridgley's 
 Body of Divinity, vol. i. p. 124. Clarke's Scr. Doct. part ii sect 13. 
 Lardner on the Logos, p. 2g. Lindsey's Sequel, p. Ijg, and p. 412. 
 Slichtingius on 1 John iv. t). Grotius on Matt. xiv. 33. Dr. Price's 
 Sermons, p. no. Dr. Carpenter's Letlti., to Mr. Veysie, p. 181. 
 
 Vll. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 16^ 
 
 VII. Christ the Image of God, the Effulgence of Divine 
 
 Glury. 
 
 1 . 2 Cor. iv. 4. " — lest the light of the glorious 
 Gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine 
 unto them." 
 
 Chap. iii. 16. The teachers of the Gospel reflecting 
 as mirrors the rays which are continually pouring upon 
 them from Christ, gradually become perfect and resplen- 
 dent images of Christ : That is, they clearly exhibit the 
 doctrine which he has commissioned them to teach. In 
 a similar sense Christ is the image of God, reflecting the 
 light derived from him ; clearly manifesting his heavenly 
 doctrine to all who are willing to receive it. 
 
 2. Col. i. 15." — he is the image of the invisible 
 God45." 
 
 3. Heb. i. 3. " Who being the brightness of his 
 glory, and the express image of his person." 
 
 " The brightness of his glory," (aTrxvyaa-jjLa rrig lo^'/jgy) 
 *' the effulgent ray of his glory," Doddridge ^'^'. 
 
 Hence theNicene fathers infer that the Son is oiMoaa-iog, 
 co-essential with the Father, " God of God, Light of 
 Light, of the same nature and substance with the Father : 
 begotten and not made." And Dr. Clarke and Mr. 
 Peirce argue that the derivation of the Son is immediately 
 
 *^ Compare 1 Cor. xi. 7, where the man is said to be the image and 
 glory, or the glorious image, of God. The words are indeed used in a 
 different sense from that in which they are applied to Christ, but the 
 example sufficiently shows that no argument can be drawn from such 
 language in favour of the pre-existence and superior nature of Christ. 
 
 *® " kirxvyao-aoi, splendor solis repercussus." Schleusner : — '' qualis 
 est solis in nube qui dicitur 7rup-/)Xio;." Grotius. — In this sense Christ 
 is the bright reflected image of God : as 2 Cor. iv. 4. ijAJa (psyyo;, 
 Hesychius. — sKXajj.^.;, Suidas & Phavorinus. — aKrtg r^Xts, Lex. MS. 
 Bibl. Coislin. apud Schleus. — ' A ray of the sun's light.' The sense 
 is the same : Christ derives from the Father the light which he diff'uses. 
 Suicer. Thes. vol. i, p. 425. Wetstem in loc. 
 
 from 
 
170 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Part L 
 
 from the Father himself, and in a way different from that 
 of all created beings^?. 
 
 But nothing can be more unreasonable than to draw 
 such important and extraordinary conclusions from a me» 
 taphorical expression ; the plain meaning of which is no 
 more than this, that Christ was sent by God to give light 
 to the world. John viii. 12. Chap. i. 4 — 10. 
 
 "The express image of his person," y^ct^ciKT/',p rr^g vTrc- 
 crraasuig ai>':'d. " An image of himself," or " of his very 
 self ^s.*' So John xiv. 9^ Jesus sai^h, " He that hath seen 
 
 me 
 
 *" See Nicene Creed, and Dr. Whitby in ]oc. *' In both the expres- 
 sions here used our author may perhaps design to distinguish Christ 
 from all other beings, and to show how much he transcends them. To 
 this purpose he represents him as immediately derived from God — no 
 one intervening as the minister or means of that derivation." Peirce, 
 ■ — See also Dr. Clarke's Scr. Doct. No. gSO, and part ii. § 12, p. 237. 
 But there must be an end of the use of all figurative language, if me- 
 taphors are to be strained to a sense so remote from their usual and 
 obvious meaning. 
 
 * " ^afax.rvp, ipsa imago, ac figiira, alicui rei, (v. g. nummo) im- 
 pressa, aut insculpta : a -^apao-a-uj, insculpo aliquid vel ligno, vel ferro, 
 vel plumbo, vel aiii materire." Schleusner. — An image engraven upon 
 coin, or on a seal. See Wetstein. " Insculpta forma." Beza. — 
 hitotrtaa-ii. substance, reality in opposition to mere appearance. 4'c.v- 
 Tac-jav [J^sv syjiv TtAOvrs, vvoraatv Ss ixr,. Artemidorus ap. Wetsten. 
 where there are many similar examples, f/. d. "an engraving of his 
 real self." This word occurs only in four other places in the New- 
 Testament, and in a similar sense. 2 Cor. ix. 4, "lest we," not to 
 say you, "should be ashamed in this same confident boasting:" sv 
 TX vircs-acsi ravTy t'-/}; xai;;^. ' in this self-same boasting.' The same 
 words occur a^^ain chap. xi. J/- In Heb. iii. 14, we read, "We are 
 made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence 
 (rr.y dpy^jV tr^c, JTTcs-ac-jct'f r),act;y, our earnest, our sincere, in opposi- 
 tion to feigned and hypocritical, beginning), steadi^ast unto the end." 
 Heb. xi. 1, " New faith is the substance of things hoped for," sattj- 
 ^ouivcov i/TtoroLCi;, it is " realizing the objects of hope." And this, 
 reader, is all the countenance which the Scripture gives to the furious 
 and endless controversies which have existed concerning essences and 
 hypostases in the doctrine of the Trinity and the person of Christ. 
 Hear Beza. That learned and zealous expositor prefers persona to 
 sulsiantia as a translation of virofccuic, because many are apt to con- 
 found substance v'!tOfa(ng, and essence scnoc. " Deinde hoc eliam corn- 
 modi habet ista interpretatio, quiki hypostases adversus Sabellium aperte 
 
 distinguil. 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 171 
 
 me hr.th seen the Father." Christ was truly the imaga 
 of God in his moral excellences ; but perhaps more pro- 
 perly, in this connexion, Christ is said to be the image 
 of the Father, as having completely revealed the Father's 
 will, and confirmed his doctrine by his miraculous works. 
 John xiv. 11.2 Cor. iv. 4. 
 
 VIII. Lord of Glory. 
 
 1. 1 Cor. ii. S. " — had they knov^'n it, they 
 would not have crucified the Lord of glory :'* q. d. their 
 glorious Lord, or Master. 
 
 2. James ii. 1. " My brethren, hold not the faith 
 of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord, of glory with respect 
 of persons." 
 
 The words in italics are not In the original. The pas- 
 sage may be translated either ' the faith of our glorious 
 Master,' or ' the glorious faith of our Master Jesus Christ.* 
 Dr. Clarke prefers the latter. Scr. Doct. No. GG3. See 
 2 Cor. iv. 4. 
 
 IX. Alpha and Oniegay First and Last. 
 
 1. Rev. i. 8. "I am Alpha and Omega, the be- 
 ginning and the ending, saith the Lord, who is, and who 
 was, and who is to come, the Almighty.** 
 
 Griesbach's text reads, " I am Alpha and Omega, saith 
 the Lord God," &c. This is to be understood of the 
 Father, to whom alone the attribute of omnipotence be- 
 longs. 
 
 distinguit, etro o,a08cnoy confirmat adversus Arianos," How surprised 
 would the sacred writer have been, could he have foreseen the sublle 
 metaphysical distinctions and the wild disputes to which his rhetorical 
 expressions have given birth ! 
 
 N. B, There is no foundation for the use of the epithet express, as 
 ]f 'X^xpXKT'Tjp was a more perfect likeness than suoov, -the former pro- 
 perly expressing an engraving, the latter an image. But they are some- 
 times usad promiscuously. See Schleusner. Also Mr. Simpson's 
 Essays^ vol. ii. p. 235. Dr. Carpenter's Rep. to Mr, Veysie, p. igo. 
 
 2. Rev. 
 
172 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 2. Rev. i. JO, 11. " And I heard behind me a 
 great voice, saying [/ am j4lpha and Omega, the First 
 and the Last, and] what thou seest write in a book." 
 
 This is certainly spoken in the person of Christ : and, 
 from the repetition of the words in ver. 8, Dr. Doddridge 
 and others have strongly insisted upon this text as a de- 
 cisive argument in support of the proper deity of Christ. 
 
 But the words in brackets, upon which the argument 
 restSj are wanting in the Alexandrine, Ephrem, and many- 
 other manuscripts ; in the Syriac, Coptic, Ethiopic, Ar- 
 menian, and Vulgate versions ; they are excluded from 
 the Complutensian edition, also from those of Geneva, 
 Plantin, Bengel, and Griesbach ; and from the English 
 translations of Newcome and the Improved Version. 
 
 It must, however, be admitted, that, though the words 
 in this text are probably interpolated, in other passages in 
 this book, and even in this vision, see ver. 17, 18, our Lord 
 applies the very same, or nearly the same, epithets to himself. 
 All therefore which can justly be advanced in reply to the 
 argument above mentioned, is, that Dr. Doddridge ^^9 and 
 other expositors have laid greater stress upon the words 
 than they will properly bear ; — that they are not intended 
 to express self- existence, but solely that the christian dis- 
 pensation was begun, and will be completed, by Christ, 
 who is the author and the finisher of our faith. 
 
 3. Rev. i. 17, 18. " Fear not : I am the first and 
 the last ; I am he that liveth and was dead," &c. 
 
 4. Rev. ii. 8. " These things saith the first and 
 the last, who was dead, and is alive." 
 
 ■^^ Dr. Doddridge, in his note upon this text, remarks : " I cannot 
 forbear recording it, that this text has done more than any other in 
 the Bible towards preventing me from giving into that scheme which 
 would make our Lord Jesus Christ nothing more than a deified crea- 
 ture." The learned expositor was not aware of the spuriousness of 
 this text. Indeed the posthumous volumes of the Family Expositor 
 were evidently left in a very uafinished state. 
 
 5, Rev. 
 
Sect. 7.3 ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 173 
 
 5. Rev, xxil. 13. "lam Alpha and Omega, the 
 beginning and the end, the first and the last^o." 
 
 In reasoning from the Book of Revelation, it should 
 not be forgotten that this is one of the books the genuine- 
 ness of which was much contested in the primitive church, 
 and which therefore, as Dr. Lardner observes. Hist, of 
 Apost. vol. i. p. SO, " ought not to be alleged as afford- 
 ing, alone, sufficient proof of any doctrine-''." 
 
 X. Clirist is Lord, Lord of all. 
 
 1 . John xiii. 1 3. " Ye call me Master, (0 'di^oca-KU" 
 Xog, ' the Teacher,') and Lord, (0 xv^iog, 'the Master,') 
 and ye say well, for so I am." 
 
 The word Kv(>tog, commonly translated ' Lord,' pro- 
 perly signifies ' Master,' in opposition to ^'dXo:, ' slave.' 
 So ver. 16 : " The servant, '^i<?.og, is not greater than his 
 Lord, Kv^iog.'* In this sense this title is challenged by 
 Cnrist, and in this sense it was used of him, and to him, 
 by his disciples. See Luke xii. 42—48. John xv. 15. 
 Rom. xiv. 7, 8.^2 
 
 2. Matt. xxii. 41 — 46. " How then doth David, 
 in spirit, call him Lord, saying, The Lord said unto my 
 Lord," &c. " If David then call him Lord, hov.- is he his 
 
 '" " TTpwrog, summus dignitate, Job. i. 15, so-^cctrj^^ contemptissi- 
 mus hoininum." Grotius. — " They who apply these texts to prove 
 Christ to be the supreme God, and parallel them with Isa. xliv. 6 ; 
 xlviii. 12, should ask themselves how it can be said of God that he 
 was dead, or, if dead, who could bring him to life again." Lindsey's 
 Sequel, p. 293, See also Wetstein in loc. 
 
 *' Mr. Evanson, who admits the divine authority of the Apocalypse, 
 nevertheless rejects the epistles to the churches, for reasons which he 
 assigns in h s Disson p. 338. 
 
 ** " KuMOf is a title of authority given to kings. Gen, xl. 1 ; to 
 princes, nobles, and governors. Acts xxv. 26. It is also an appellation 
 of respect and reverence to a prophet, 1 Kings xviii, 7 ; fo a husband. 
 Gen xviii. 12 ; to a master, John xv. 15. It is used as a civil mode 
 of address, John xii. 21." Simpson's Essays, vol, ii. p. 2G3. 
 
 Son?" 
 
174 TITLES AND CHARACTERS [Parti. 
 
 Son?" See Psalm ex. 1. Compare Mark xli. 38. Luke 
 XX. 41. 
 
 If this Psalm is a prophecy of Christ, and if our Lord 
 is not merely, arguing with the Jews upon their own prin- 
 ciples, as in the case of demoniacs, Matt. xii. 27, the pro- 
 per answer to this question seems to be, that the Psalmist 
 was transported in vision to the age of the Messiah, and 
 speaks as though he were contem-porary with Christ. This 
 mode of writing was not unusual with the prophets. See 
 Isaiah liii. David, like Abraham, was permitted to see the 
 day of Christ. John viii. 56. 
 
 3. Acts X. 36. " The word which God sent to 
 the children of Israel by Jesus Christ, he is Lord of all." 
 Ovrcg ifXTL T^avncv xvoicg. 
 
 i. e. of Jews and Gentiles, as appears from the con- 
 text 53. 
 
 4. Rom. xiv. 9. " For to this end Christ both 
 died and rose again, that he might be Lord both of the 
 dead, and of the living." 
 
 Christ is Lord of the dead, as he will be invested with 
 authority to raise them to life, and to judge them accord- 
 ing to their works. He is Lord of the living, as the 
 whole human race will ultimately profess subjection to 
 his gospel. 
 
 XL Prince or Leader of Life and Salvation. 
 
 \. Acts iii. 15. " Ye killed the prince {ocfix'^yov, 
 leader,) of life." /. e. the person who, by his resurrection 
 from the dead, led the w^ay to immortality. 
 
 2. Acts V. 31. " Him hath God exalted to be a 
 prince, (ap^57yov, a loader,) and a Saviour, to give repent- 
 ance to Israel, and remission of sins." 
 
 *^ See Clarke on Xrin. No. 620, and Doddridge in loc. 
 
 q. d. a 
 
Sect. 7.] ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. 1^5 
 
 fj. d.2i leader to that salvation which consists in de- 
 liverance from the power and the punishment of sin. 
 
 3. Heb. ii. 10. " It became him — to make the 
 captain {ct(^yjr/ov, the leader,) of their salvation perfect 
 through safterings." 
 
 4. Heb. xii. 2. " Looking unto Jesus, the author 
 {ot^X'/iyov, the leader,) and the finisher (tjjAs/o^t'/jv, the 
 perfecter,) of our faith ^'*." 
 
 q. d. The example and the judge who will eventually 
 bestow the reward. 
 
 XII. Christ is, or Jills, ail and in all. 
 
 1. Eph. i. 22, 23. "And gave him to be head 
 over all things to the church, v/hich is his body, the ful- 
 ness {to ttXvi^m^u, the complement,) of him who nlleti^ 
 all in all." 
 
 Christ is the head ; the church is the body, which com- 
 pletes the whole mystical person, and which in all its parts 
 and limbs derives vigour and nourishment from the head^^, 
 
 2. Col.jii. 10, 1 1. " Ye have put off the old man, 
 and put on the new—where there is neither Greek nor 
 Jew, Barbarian, Scythian, bond nor free : but Christ is 
 all and in all." 
 
 Jews and Gentiles are by Christ formed into one new 
 man, (see Eph. ii. 15,) which is neither Jew nor Gentile, 
 slave nor master, but simply the mystical body of Christ, 
 in which all the component parts are harmoniously, and 
 without distinction, blended, a. d. All invidious distinc- 
 tions are absorbed in the profession of Christianity ■^G. 
 
 ____^ xm. 
 
 " See Simpson's Essays, vol, ii. p. I97. " Qui nobis exemplo suo 
 hunc cursum praeiit, idemque ejus erit jSpafeur^j . Conf, ch. xi. 40." 
 Grotius, 
 
 " See Hallet's Obs. on Script, vol. i. p. 5g. 
 
 *' Gal. iii. 28, is exactly parallel to this passage in the epistile to the 
 Colossians : '/There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond 
 
 nor 
 
176 TITLES ATTRIBUTED TO CHRIST. [Parti. 
 
 XIII. Saviour or Deliverer. 
 
 Acts V. 31. " Him hath God exalted to be a 
 prince and a saviour" — a-ooiri^. , 
 
 This title is applied to Christ upwards of fifteen times 
 in the New Testament. Christ was the deliverer of the 
 Jews from the bondage and curse of the Law, Gal. iii. 13 ; 
 — of the Gentiles from thebondage of idolatry, Gal. iv. 8j 
 — and of all mankind from sin and misery 57. 
 
 XIV. King of kings, and Lord of lords. 
 
 Rev. xvii. 14. ** And the Lamb shall overcome 
 them ; for he is Lord of lords, and King of kings." See 
 also ch. xix. 16. 
 
 q. d. A great king, a mighty lord. It is a common 
 form of the superlative degree. See Ezek. xxvi. 7. Ezra 
 vii. 12.5S 
 
 nor free, there is neither male nor female : for ye are all one (£;V, 
 ' one person,') in Christ Jesus." — "^ Ye are all one body, making up 
 one person in Christ Jesus." Locke in loc. — Ver. 27, " As many of 
 you as are baptized into Christ have put on Christ." — " So that to 
 God looking upon them there appears nothing but Christ." Locke, 
 ibid. 
 
 *" The word ccai'rjp, saviour, expresses ' deliverer j' and ircvfYjpia, 
 salvation, 'deliverance in general.' See Acts vii. 2,5. Jud. iii. Q. 15. 
 2 Kings xiii, 5. See Simpson's Essays, vol. ii. p. 259. 
 
 *• Simpson, Ess. VI. sect. 71- 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. 8.] 177 
 
 SFXTION VIII. 
 
 COLLECTION OF PASSAGES WHICH ARE SUPPOSED TO 
 TEACH THAT CHRIST IS THE MAKER AND PRESER- 
 VER OF ALL THINGS. 
 
 I, John i. 3. " All things were made by him, 
 and without him was not any thing made which was 
 made." 
 
 The whole proem of the Gospel of John has been al- 
 ready considered at large, and this text in particular. See 
 p. 20, where it is translated, " All things were done 
 through him, and without him not a single thing was done 
 which was done." Christ, the Logos or Teacher of truth, 
 was the medium through whom every thing relating to 
 the new dispensation was accomplished ^. 
 
 ' Dr. Price, Serin, p. 143, maintains that "the terrmvorld'm Scrip- 
 ture means only ' ihis world :' and that afl ihingx mean only ' all 
 things belonging to this world :' and that the apostles probably never 
 thought of a plurality of worlds." Also, " that the formation of the 
 world by Christ does not imply creation from nothing, that probably 
 being peculiar to Almighty power, but only an arrangement of iheni 
 in their present order." Dr, Priestley, with great force of argument, 
 contends, that there is no foundation for the distinction between crea- 
 tion and other appropriate acts of the Deity. He asks, *' Since God 
 is said to have created matter, and the Logos to have formed it- into 
 worlds, whether we are also to believe that the Deity created imma- 
 terial substance, and the Logos formed it into spirit ?" He also argues 
 that it is quite arbitrary to limit the operation of the Logos to this 
 world, or to the solar system : for that, as far as our observation ex- 
 tends, the universe does not consist of detached and insulated parts, 
 but forms one connected harmonious system, in which each part bears 
 a relation to the whole : so that it seems reasonable to believe that it 
 is the production of one almighty and intelligent Being. Dr. Priestley's 
 Inciters to Dr. Price, part i, lott. 3. 
 
 N II. John 
 
178 CREATION OF ALL THINGS [Part I. 
 
 IT. John i. 10. "He was in the world, and the 
 world was made by him, and the world knew him not." 
 
 The world was enlightened by him : Or the moral cre- 
 ation was formed, or renewed by him : Or, according to 
 Mr. Cappe, The world was made for him ; the Jewish 
 dispensation was calculated to excite an expectation of 
 him, and to prepare the way for him 2. See page 23. 
 
 III. 1 Cor. viii. 6. " But to us there is but one 
 God, the Father, of whom are all things, and we in him," 
 eig avTov, ' to him,' g. d. his creatures and servants ; " and 
 one Lord Jesus Christ, by," or ' through,' ^/ar, " whom 
 are all things, and we by," or through, " him." 
 
 This is an extract from a letter of the Corinthian 
 christians to the apostle, pleading for the lawfulness of 
 eating things offered to idols, q. d. Whereas the Gentiles 
 have many celestial gods, and many terrestrial or hero- 
 gods, we have learned to acknowledge one God only, the 
 Father, the creator and proprietor of all things, whose 
 creatures, whose worshippers, and whose servants we are ; 
 and one Lord and Master Jesus Christ, through whose 
 ministration this new dispensation was introduced, and by 
 whose ministers and messengers we have been converted 
 to the christian faith, and invited to participate in the 
 blessings of the Gospel ^. 
 
 IV. Eph. iii. 9. " — the fellowship of the mystery, 
 which from the beginning of the world had been hid in 
 God, who created all things by Jesus Christ.^' 
 
 The words by Jesus Christ are wanting in the Alexan- 
 drine, Vatican, Ephrem, Clermont, and other manuscripts 
 of high antiquity and reputation : also, in the Syriac, 
 Arabic, Coptic, Ethiopic, Armenian, Vulgate, and Italic 
 Versions. They are omitted by Basil, Cyril, Theodoretj 
 
 - " y.O(Tj/.cs pro homlnibus passim sumitur." Grotius. 
 ^ See Joseph Mede's Disc, on 2 Pet. ii. 1. 
 
 Tenullian^ 
 
Sect. 8,] BV JFSUS CHRIST. 179 
 
 Tertullian, Jerome, Ambrose, Augustin, and others : and 
 there can be little doubt that they are spurious, being 
 probably a marginal gloss, introduced carelessly or inten- 
 tionally into the text. They are rejected in Griesbach's , y, '^UUii 
 second edition, and in Mr. Wakefield's and the Improved i^a-.y-C- 
 Version. 
 
 But if they were genuine, the connexion requires that 
 they should be understood in reference to the moral cre- 
 ation. *' The sense most suitable to the place," says 
 Archbishop Newcome, " is this : Who hath created all 
 things, that is, Jews and Gentiles, anew to holiness of 
 life." See chap. ii. 10. 15 j iv. 24.4 
 
 V. Col. i. 15 — 18. " Vv^ho is the Image of the 
 invisible God, the first-born of every creature : For by 
 him were all things created that are in heaven and that 
 are on earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones 
 or dominions, or principalities or powers ; all things were 
 created by him and for him : and he is before all things, 
 and by him all things consist. And he is the head of the 
 body, the church : who is the beginning, the first-born 
 from the dead.'* 
 
 This text is regarded by the supporters of the popular 
 opinions concerning the person of Christ as a most deci- 
 sive and unanswerable argument in their favour. And. 
 the Unitarians, who interpret the passage of the moral 
 creation, and their arguments, are treated with very little 
 respect even by the most moderate of their opponents. 
 
 Dr. Harvvood says, (Soc. Scheme, p. 35,) " Words, I 
 think, have no meaning, and are not the true signs of 
 jnen's ideas, if these plain and clear passages do not con- 
 tain and manifest this position : that Jesus Christ was the 
 •^ ^ I .1 
 
 ■• The archbishop admits the words into the text, but marks their 
 doiibtfulness by placing them in crotchets : he used the tirst edition 
 of Griesbach. See Mil}, Bengellus, Wetsiein, and Griesbach in loc. 
 
 N 2 person 
 
180 CREATION OF ALL THINGS [Parti. 
 
 person who, by the direction of the Deity, originally form- 
 ed all things." 
 
 Dr. Clarke (Scr. Doct. No. 5S0) says ; " Nothing 
 can be more forced and unnatural than the Socinians* 
 interpretation of this passage ; who understand it figura- 
 tively of the new creation by the Gospel.'* 
 
 Mr. Peirce (in loc.) remarks, that " the interpretation 
 which refers what is here said of our Saviour to the new 
 creation, or the renovation of all things, is so forced and 
 violent, that it can hardly be though c that men would 
 ever have espoused it, but for the sake of a hypothesis." 
 
 Dr. Doddridge (Not. in loc.) says, that " to interpret 
 this, as the Socinians do, of a new creation in a spiritual 
 sense, is so unnatural, that one could hardly believe, if 
 the evidence were not so undeniably strong, that any set 
 of learned commentators could fall into it." 
 
 Notwithstanding, however, all the severe reflections of 
 these and other learned critics, the Unitarians persist in 
 their interpretation of this celebrated text, as importing 
 nothing more than the great change introduced by the 
 Gospel in the state of the moral world, and the authority 
 and agency of Christ in this new dispensation. In vindi- 
 cation of which interpretation, the following observations 
 are submitted to the consideration of the judicious and im- 
 partial reader : 
 
 1 . Jesus Christ is no where in the New Testament 
 expressly said to be the creator or maker of the heavens, 
 the earth, the sea, or of any visible natural objects. 
 
 2. When the apostle descends to the detail of 
 things which were created by Christ, instead of naming 
 the sun, the moon, the stars, the earth, and its inhabitants, 
 &c. which is what we should reasonably expect if a na- 
 tural creation was intended, he only specifies thrones and 
 ^oaiinions, and principalities and powers j which are not 
 
 physica.1 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. ISl \ 
 
 physical beings, but mere states of things, and artificial 
 distinctions of poHtical society^''. 
 
 3. The word xr/^:-^*, to create, in the language 
 of Scripture expresses not only to bring out of nothing 
 into existence, but likewise to introduce what actually , 
 
 exists into a new state of being, and particularly to transfer y 
 
 from a state of naiure into a state of privilege, and cove- ' 
 
 nant with God. 
 
 I.) The advancement of the Hebrew nation to a state 
 of privilege and favour is described as creation. Isa. xliii. 1, 
 " Thus saith the Lord that created thee, O Jacob, and 
 he that formed thee, O Israel." — Ver, 7, " I have created 
 him for my glory. I have formed him, yea, I have made 
 him." — Ver. ]5, *' I am the Lord your holy One, the 
 creator of Israel, your king." — Hence this favoured peo- 
 ple are said to be, or to exist. Isa. Ixiii. 19, " We are of 
 old." For this reason the Jews are called by the apostle 
 " things that «re," in contradistinction to the Gentiles, 
 who are described as "things that are not.''' 1 Cor. i. 
 '28, " God hath chosen the things that are not^ to bring 
 to nothing the things that r/rc.'' 
 
 ' This is a consideration of great weight, which one would think 
 must make a deep impression upon every reflecting mind. It is curi- 
 ous to observe how very ditferent the detail of the apostle's commen- 
 tators is from his own. " His nature," says Dr. Doddridge, in his 
 paraphrase upon the text, " has a transcendent excellency, superior 
 io any thing that is made. From him were derived the visible splen- 
 dours of the celestial luminaries, llic sitn, the nwori, and ike stars, evea 
 all the hosts of these lower heavens, and from him the yet brighter 
 glories of invisible and angelic beings." All this is perfectly natural; 
 and had the apostle's theory been the same with that of his learned 
 expositor, his induction of particulars would, no doubt, have been the 
 same. It is evident, therefore, that Dr. Doddridge aieant one thing, 
 and the apostle Paul another. 
 
 * £v a-jru! sy.ri7^T, ra irxvra. — "yiTi^iv, creo, ex nihilo produce, item 
 ex materia praeexistente formo. Metaphorice, Mirabili virtute aliquid 
 etficio, corrigo acemendo." Schleusner. — y.ri<ng,cre(Uio, is sometimes 
 used in a very lax sense for ordi/iatin, insliiutum : 1 Pet. ii. 13, "^Obey 
 every ordinance (v.r((ri() of man," he. 
 
 "2.) The 
 
182 CREATIOJ^ OF ALL THINGS [Part t. 
 
 2.) The advancement of believers, both Jews and Gen- 
 tiles, to the privileges and hopes of Christianity, is also 
 called creation : and in contradistinction to the state of 
 the Jews under the Mosaic oecononiv, it is called a new 
 creation. Eph. ii. 10, " We are his workmanship, cre- 
 ated anew in Christ Jesus to good works." Col. iii. 10, 
 " And have put on the new man, which is renewed in 
 knowledge after the image of him who created him." — 
 Hence converted Gentiles, who before were not, are said 
 to he^ or to exist. 1 Cor. i. 28, " Of him are ye in Christ 
 Jesus :*' and conversion to Christianity is a new creation. 
 2 Cor. v. 17, "If any man be in Christ Jesus, (5. d. be- 
 come a christian,) there is a new creation?.'* 
 
 4. In the Scriptures, and particularly in the wri- 
 tings of Paul, men are often mentioned in terms which 
 more properly express inanimate beings ; they are called 
 not persons, but things: viz. 1 Cor. i. 28, " God hath 
 chosen the foolish things {ju //.w^a ) of the world to con- 
 found the wise, (jug a-op^g, the wise men,) and the weak 
 things (toc ucrhvYi) to confound the mighty things {rot 
 irx'j^oc)i'* i. e. persons, &c. Compare Matt. xi. 27. John 
 iii. 35; vi. 37 — 39.8 
 
 Hence it clearly and distinctly follows, that according 
 to the customary language of the sacred writers, and par- 
 
 ' See Dr, Taylor's Key to the Apostolic Writings, chap, ii, § 17' 
 19; chap. vi. § 99. 102. 
 
 • See Mr. Tyrwhitt's excellent Essay on the Creation of all Things 
 by Jesus Christ. Comm. and Essays, vol. ii. Ess. xiv. p. 9. "The 
 general language of Scripture," says this learned and accurate writer, 
 " concerning this new creation is briefly this : Believing Jews and 
 Gentiles, considered jointly, are called the whole creation : Mark xvi. 
 15. Col. i. \5. 23. The Jews are represented as the first-fruits of 
 it; James i. 18; and Jesus Christ as the first-born, or heir: Col. i. 15. 
 Heb. i. 2. — Each individual believer is styled a new creature : Gal. vi, 
 15. 2 Cor. V. 17. And by it all believers, both Jews and Gentiles, 
 are so perfectly made one, that all former distinctions between them 
 are entirely lost in their common relation to Christ." Col. iii. 11. 
 
 tieularly 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. 183 
 
 licularly of the apostle Paul, ' to create all things,' may 
 signify nothing more than to bring men into a new and a 
 
 better state ; to transfer them out of a state oL nature into 
 a state of great moral privilege and advantage. 
 
 5. The words heaven and earthy in the language 
 of Scripture, figuratively express the civil or moral di- 
 stinctions of mankind in a social state.- -1.) Civil distinc- 
 tions. Matt. xxiv. 29, "The stars shall fall from heaven, 
 and the powers of the heavens shall be shaken :" i, e. the 
 Jevi'ish polity shall be dissolved. Joel ii. 10, "The earth 
 shall quake, the heavens shall tremble :" i. e. men of all 
 ranks, whether of low or of high degree, shall be in con- 
 sternation. Compare Hag. ii. 6, 7. Acts ii. 19. Rev. 
 vi, 12. 15. — 2.) Moral distinctions. Matt. xi. 23, "Thou, 
 Capernaum, that art exalted to heaven ;" he. Eph. iii. 15, 
 " Of whom the whole family in heaven and earth is 
 named ;" i. e. the great body of christians living promis- 
 cuously among Jews and Gentiles : or, perhaps, consisting 
 of both. Compare Eph. i. 10 : and Mr. Locke's Note. 
 
 Hence it appears that * creating all things in heaven and 
 earth,' may signify the introducing some great change into 
 the moral or political state of mankind, and particularly 
 under the relation of Jews and Gentiles. 
 
 6. ' Things visible and invisible' are phrases of 
 ihe same import as things in heaven and things in earth. 
 
 7. As heaven expresses the privileged state of 
 those who participate in the benefits of the Jewish or 
 Christian dispensations, so the distinction of orders, which, 
 according to the crude mythology of the East, was sup- 
 posed to exist among the inhabitanrs of heaven, appears 
 to be used by the apostle, in the way of analogy, to ex-- 
 press the different ranks and offices which subsist in the 
 Jewish or the Christian church, all of which are regulated 
 and new-modelled by Christ; who. in this sense, creates 
 
 all 
 
]84 CREATION OF ALL TIIINCS [Part T. 
 
 all things In heaven and earth, whether they be thrones 
 or dominions, or principalities or powers, q. d. Jesus 
 Christ having introduced a new and better state of things 
 into the moral world, and having formed a church consist- 
 ing of Jews and Gentiles, without any distinction, has also 
 completely organized this ht>ly community, and has ap- 
 pointed and qualified its various officers, apostles, evan- 
 gelists, prophets, teachers, and the like, in their several 
 orders and degrees, for the promulgation of the christian 
 doctrine, and for the instruction and edification of the 
 church 0. 
 
 8. " All things were created by him li ocvrii) : he 
 was the founder of the new dispensation ; he appointed 
 apostles, teachers, ^x. he supplied them with spiritual gifts 
 and powers to qualify them for their important work 'O j 
 — "and for him" {sig otv^ov)'^ to accomplish the pur- 
 poses of his mission : — " and he is before all things" (r.^o 
 "ttocvtcjov) ; he has precedence in time, character, and dig- 
 nity : — " and in him all things consist" (cri;-:-crr/-)ic) ; he 
 is the bond of union, as the head to the body. So the 
 sentence proceeds, "he is the head of the body, the church/' 
 the source of vital influence and energy i^. 
 
 ' See part i. sect. vi. p. 125. 
 
 '" " TtoLvra, intellige omnia quae ad novam creationem pertinent. 
 Certum est per Verbuni creata omnia. Seel quae praecediuit, osten- 
 dunt hie de Christo agi, quod hominis est nornen : quoniodo etiaui 
 Chrysostomus hunc accepit locum." Grotius. 
 
 " " He is before all things, and by him all things consist," It fol- 
 lows : " he is the head of the body, the church : who is the begin- 
 ning, the first-born from the dead, that in all things he might have 
 the pre-eminence." All this is natural and just, if the preceding verses 
 contain a figurative description of Christ, as having founded and or- 
 ganized the christian dispensation, Bui to be the first who rises 
 from the dead, though a high distinction for a human being, is but a 
 poor addii:ion to the pre-eminence of one who is the Creator and Pre- 
 server of all things, the Maker and Lord of angels and archangels. 
 This, surely, is not the conclusion to which we should expect to ha\ e 
 been led by so lofty a description, if the words are to be taken in their 
 primary and vulgar acceptation. 
 
 9. Ex- 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. 1S5 
 
 9. Explaining this passage of the moral creation 
 is most agreeable to the context. The apostle is not speak- 
 ing of natural objects, either in the preceding or the sub- 
 sequent passages ; but solely of the office and dignity of 
 Christ, as the founder and publisher of the Gospel dis- 
 pensation. No homage is required to be paid to him as 
 the Maker of heaven and earth, the preserver and supporter 
 of all things. This stupendous fact, if here intended, 
 is left in a completely insulated state, without a comment, 
 and without any conclusion being drawn from it but what 
 would follow with equal force, and with greater propriety, 
 from the supposition that Christ was a human being whom 
 God had raised from the dead, and placed at the head of 
 the new dispensation. 
 
 10. This interpretation is strongly confirmed by 
 the consideration that where the natural creation is plain- 
 ly spoken of, it is uniformly ascribed to the Father. See 
 Acts iv. 24. Where the moral creation is plainly intend- 
 ed, it is as uniformly ascribed to Christ. Eph. ii. 10. 
 But doubtful passages are to be explained by what is clear 
 and unquestionable : wherever, therefore, the expression 
 is indefinite, whenever creation is ascribed to Christ,, it is 
 to be understood of a moral creation only, and not of a 
 proper natural creation i". 
 
 VI. Heb. i. 2, 3. " — by whom also he made the 
 worlds'^ — upholding all things by the word of his powder." 
 
 ^- This argument is Dr. Priestley's, who observes very justly, " If 
 this be not a natural and just rule of interpretation, lam not acquaint- 
 ed with any which ought to be called such : and tliis clearly gives the 
 creation of the world to the P'ather, and not to Christ." Dr. Priest- 
 leys Letters to Dr. Price, part i. p. II7 — 122— Dr. Lardner refers 
 to Grotius's interpretation of this passage as what he approves and 
 adopts. Logos, p. 69. Mr. Lindsey, Seq p. A^T , observes from Wet- 
 stein, " that if we expound this passage by the parallel epistle to the 
 Ephesians, we must understand it to speak of the new creation. Eoh. 
 i. 10; ii. 10. 15." 
 
tSG ciEAtldN OF ALL THINGS [Part t. 
 
 The common interpretation of this text is, ' That Christ 
 33 God, or as commissioned and delegated by God, \va& 
 the maker of all worlds, and of all things that are con- 
 tained in them.' This interpretation is supported by 
 Whitby, Hammond, Le Clerc, Peirce^'^, Newcome, and 
 many others. 
 
 One great and irideed insurmountable objection against 
 this sense of the passage is, that the word ( ocicov ) In the 
 original is seldom if ever used, either in a singular or 
 plural form, to express the material world. It properly 
 signifies ' ages' or ' dispensations i^.' See Matt. xii. 32 ; 
 xiii. 39. Mark x. 30. Luke xviii. 30. 1 Cor. ii. 6 ; 
 X. 11. Col. i. 26. Heb. vi. 5 ; ix. 26. 
 
 Dr. Sykes and many with him understand the text as 
 affirming that Christ, as the Logos, was the medium of 
 •all the former dispensations of God to mankind ; the an- 
 tediluvian, the patriarchal, and the Mosaic dispensations. 
 Dr. Doddridge renders the words, " by whom he also 
 constituted the ages." It cannot be denied that the words 
 
 ''' Mr. Peirce remarks, that " if these texts are read without a bias 
 from prejudice, and a fondness for hypothesis, they naturally offer 
 this sense ; that as the Son gave being to all the creatures, so he main- 
 tains them all in being." This learned and good man does not seem 
 to have suspected that Arians also might have their " prejudices" and 
 their " fondness for hypothesis," as well as Socinians and Unitarians. 
 
 '*"Thetenn ajwv, in the New Testament, whether singular or 
 plural, never signifies the material world." Simpson's Essays, vol. it. 
 p. 93. — " The word aiuvag, which we render worlds^ (says Dr. Sykes 
 in loc.) does not signify the 'heavens and earthy and all things in 
 them,' but it means properly * ages, or certain periods of time :' — such 
 were the Patriarchal : that of the Law : that of the Messiah : that of 
 the Antediluvians. Nor is there one instance in the New Testament 
 in which more than this seems to be meant by this word." Chap, 
 xi. 3, which in the public version is translated " through faith we un- 
 derstand that the worlds [^atwvcc;) were framed by the word of God," 
 and which is commonly understood as asserting the creation of all 
 things by the divine power, is translated by Dr. Sykes, " By faith we 
 understand that the Ages were adapted or fitted by the word of God, 
 i. e. by his command or direction suited to their proper ends." See 
 Bchleusner in verb, 
 
 will 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. IS*^ 
 
 will bear this interpretation, could the fact here supposed 
 be proved by other and independent evidence. But this 
 text will not of itself prove it ; because it admits of another 
 very fair and probable interpretation, perfectly consistent 
 With the proper humanity of Christ. 
 
 Slichtingius, Crellius, and the old Socinians, by ' the 
 ages,* T8g aicovacj understand the Gospel dispensation, 
 only which was introduced by Christ, and of which he is 
 the head. They regard this text as having the same sig- 
 nification with John i. 3, and consider it as alluding to 
 Isaiah ix. 5, where in the LXX. the Messiah is predicted 
 as " the father of the future age'^." This interpretation 
 has been lately revived and very ably defended by Mr. 
 Simpson, in his Essays on Scripture, Ess. VIII. who main- 
 tains, by a variety of arguments, that the plural number 
 is here used to express excellence : q. d. by whom also 
 he constituted the Age, i. e. " of the Messiah, eminently 
 distinguished for moral and religious advantages." 
 
 The principal objection against this interpretation, and 
 which it is doubtful whether the learned writer has suf- 
 ficiently obviated, is that of Dr. Whitby, in his Note upon 
 the text, " that ocioovsg absolutely put doth never signify 
 the church, or evangelical state ; nor does the Scripture 
 ever speak of the world to come in the plural, but in the 
 singular number only." 
 
 A less exceptionable interpretation, therefore, is that 
 which was proposed by Grotius ; and adopted by Dr. 
 Lardner, Mr. Lindsey, and many others. ' For u'hom, 
 or with a view to whom, he constituted the ages.' q. d. 
 
 '" " Secula Deus per Christum fecisse dicitur, non quod omnia qua 
 unquam extiterunt secula per eum condiderit, sed quod condiderit ali- 
 qua, nempe nova et a prioribus diversa, iisque longe feliciora — articu- 
 lus voci aia»as prasfixus, generalera vocis significationem, ad specia- 
 lem aliquam, minusque communem solet restringere." Slichtingius 
 and Crellius in loc. 
 
 All 
 
183 CREATION OF ALL THINGS [Parti, 
 
 All former dispensations were arranged with a view to 
 that of the Messiah ^7. 
 
 To this, which Dr. Lardner justly calls ^^ a most apt 
 and beautiful sense," the principal objection is, that It is 
 contrary to the usual construction of the Greek languagej 
 in which the preposition ha, when It governs a genitive, 
 as in this instance, usually expresses the instrumental cause, 
 and ought to be rendered by, or through ; whereas when 
 it signifies the final cause,ybr, or with a view to^ it com- 
 monly governs the accusative case. 
 
 But this rule, though general, has many exceptions, 
 which are not only to be met with In classical writersj 
 but in Josephus, a contemporary writer, and a Jew. The 
 construction, therefore, of the language will fairly admit 
 the sense which Grotius gives to the texti3. 
 
 " Upholding," (psr^ocv, directing or governing, " all 
 things by the word of his" the Father's " power :" /. e. by 
 
 " '■' Videtur h" a, hie recte accipi posse pro ^i' ov. Vid. Beza in 
 Rom. vi. 4, Videiur respiceie ad dictum vetus Hebrasorum, propter 
 Messiam conditum esse mundum." Grotius. — See Lardaer on the 
 Log. p. 70. Lindsey's Seq. p. 483. Second Address, p. 297. Im- 
 proved Vers, in loc. 
 
 ''^ Of the use of this construction, the learned Newcome Cappe has 
 produced ample proof and various examples from writers sacred and 
 profane, in his Critical Remarks on SS. vol. i. p. 51, where he applies 
 it with great plausibility to John i, 10, which upon that interpretation 
 nearly coincides with the text in Hebrews. It may be further added, 
 that the sclioliast upon the Plutus of Aristophanes, p. 6, edit. Basil, 
 notices this use of (5'ia with a genitive, as sometimes, though rarelv, 
 expressing the final cause. In Thucyd. Hist. 1. vi. sect. 7> the con- 
 spirators determine to assassinate Hipparchus ci ^tsp, cujus causa, 
 ' on whose account' they had exposed themselves to peril. Josephus 
 repeatedly uses the phrase <J;a Xoyxv, to express that persons canie 
 ■with a view to or for the purpose of conversation. Antiq. 1. xviii. c. vli. 
 § 7j 8 5 c. X. § 3. edit. Hudson. The same phraseology is used 
 by Plutarch. See Glass. Philol. p. 1046. Vigerus de Idiotism. c. ix. 
 sect. 2. — Schleusncr in verb. ex. If), cites 2 Pet. i. 3, as an exam- 
 ple of oia with a genitive being used to express the final cause. Rom. 
 vi. 4, cited by Beza and Grotius, is doubtful. 1 Cor. xiv. I9, Sicc vcu;, 
 i. e. with a view to be understood^ is more to the purpobc. See Locke 
 in loc. 
 
 authority 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. 189 
 
 authority received from God, and supported by mira- 
 culous works '9. 
 
 VII. Heb. i. 8. 10. " To the Son he saith. Thy 
 throne, O God," or, " God is thy throne for ever and 
 ever." — Ver. 10. " And thou. Lord, in the beginning 
 hast laid the foundation of the earth," Sec. 
 
 This is an address, not to the Son, but to the Father, 
 whose immutability and omnipotence are the pledge and 
 guarantee of the Son's everlasting kingdom. See Sect. V. 
 p. liO. 
 
 VIII. Heb. iii. 3, 4. " This person was counted 
 worthy of more glory than Moses, inasmuch as he who 
 builded the house hath more honour than the house ; for 
 every house is builded by some one, but he who built al! 
 things is God." 
 
 This text has no reference to the creation of the world. 
 The Christian dispensation is represented by the writer as 
 an household, {oiKog) ver. 2. Of this household God is 
 xxTaa-Ksvacrccg, the master and regulator : ver. 4. Both 
 Moses and Jesus are appointed to stations under him ; 
 ver. 2. Moses, indeed, only as a servant, to announce future 
 blessings : ver. 5. But Jesus, as a Son, was intrusted 
 with the management of the family, ver. 6. and therefore 
 he takes precedence of all the domestics, and even of 
 Moses himself: ver. 5. 20 
 
 IX. Rev. iii. 14. " The beginning (apx'?) °^ ^^^ 
 creation of God," 
 
 Rather, the head of the creation of God, i. e. of the 
 new creation. See Sect. III. p. 96. 
 
 '" " Sensus est, Christns verbo potentiae paternae, i. e. jussu, regit 
 cwncta. ^£f£<v saepe est regere." Grotius. 
 
 ^' See Impr. Vers, in loc. " O y.y.ra(x>isva(Tag, ' he that orders, go- 
 verns, and presides.' Wisd. ix. 10." Whitby.—" Moses pars fami- 
 lias, Chrislus supra familiam," Grotius. 
 
 Remarks, 
 
190 CREATION OF ALL THINGS [Parti. 
 
 Remarhs. 
 
 1. In the whole New Testament there are but 
 yiine texts which are produced, or which can with any 
 shadow of reason be produced, to prove that Jesus is the 
 Creator, or Former, and Supporter of the world, 
 
 2. Of these the two first are, John i. 3, and 10 ; 
 and in order to draw an argument from these, the word 
 yivoixcct must be strained to a sense different from that in 
 which it is to be understood in any other passage of the 
 New Testament, though it occurs there upwards of seven 
 hundred times, — The 1 Cor. viii. 6, is allowed to be little to 
 the purpose. — Eph. iii. 9, is a manifest interpolation : and, 
 if genuine, is by orthodox expositors explained of the 
 new creation. — Col. i. ]6, 17, is the passage upon which 
 the greatest stress is laid ; — but in this, when the apostle 
 enters into detail of things created, they are not natural 
 objects, such as sun, moon, stars, earth, sea, &:c. ; but 
 artificial distinctions, thrones, dominions, &c. ; and the 
 conclusion drawn, that he is head over all things to 
 the church, &c. is such as might naturally be expected, 
 from his being the founder of the new dispensation ; but 
 very different from what would properly follow from his 
 being announced as the Creator of all things, the Maker 
 and Lord of angels. — To make the argument from Heb. 
 i. 2, available, the word cacjvag, translated ' worlds,' must 
 be taken in a sense different from that which it ever bears 
 in the New Testament. — Ver.lO^ is interpreted by many 
 Arian and Trinitarian expositors as addressed to God, and 
 not to Christ ; and by all must be considered as doubtful. 
 — ^Heb. iii. 4, is most certainly nothing to the purpose : 
 1 — and Rev. iii. 14, is a text both of doubtful authority 
 and doubtful meaning. Such is the evidence upon which 
 the grand conclusion rests, that Christ is the Creator, the 
 Supporter, and the Gove^rnor, original or delegated, of 
 
 this 
 
Sect. 8.] BY JESUS CHRIST. 191 
 
 this and of all worlds, of all their inhabitants, and of all 
 things which the universe contains. 
 
 3. Had it been the intention of the sacred writers 
 to have communicated the extraordinary and momentous 
 fact, that Jesus Christ was the Maker and Supporter of 
 the universe, it would have been very easy for them to 
 express this doctrine in plain language, which could not 
 have been misunderstood, as all now do who hold this 
 opinion ; and as they have themselves done, in ascribing 
 the formation of all things to God. See Acts iv. 24. 27 ; 
 xix. 24, and innumerable other places in holy writ. 
 
 4. If the fact were true, that the person who ap- 
 peared under the form of a man, who had been an infant 
 in a cradle, who had gradually grovv'n up to maturity, 
 subject to hunger and thirst, and all the infirmities of hu- 
 man nature, who had afterwards suffered upon a cross^ 
 and been confined to a tomb j if it were true that this 
 feeble, suffering, dying man was no less a person than 
 the Creator and Lord of nature himself in the disguise of 
 a human being, the communication of this amazing fact, 
 to those who had no antecedent suspicion or expectation 
 of it, must have filled their minds with astonishment ; it 
 must have been always present to their thoughts, and 
 could not but have made the most prominent figure in 
 their discourses and writings. They must have recurred 
 to it again and again, and have expressed themselves upon 
 the subject in every form and variety of language which 
 would indicate the unusual warmth and agitation of their 
 feelings. 
 
 5. Notwithstanding all these grave considerations, 
 three out of four of the evangelists take not the least no- 
 tice of this extraordinary event : — the fourth, if he men- 
 tions it at all, mentions it in language which upon no 
 other occasion carries the same sense j and having barely 
 
 hinted 
 
192 CREATION OF ALLTHINGS BY JESUS CHRIST. [Part I. 
 
 hinted it at the beginning of his history, he drops the 
 subject, and never recurs to it again. — The historian of 
 the doctrine and mission of the apostles for upwards of 
 thirty years after the resurrection of Jesus, is totally si'ent 
 upon this subject. — The apostle Peter, who speaks in rap- 
 tures of the glory of his Master upon the mount of trans- 
 figuration, (2 Pet. i. 17,) makes no mention of his being 
 the Creator of all things. — James and Jude are both silent, 
 — In twelve out of thirteen undoubted epistles of the apo- 
 stle Paul, some of them of great length, in which he takes 
 pleasure in expatiating upon the blessings of the Gospel, 
 and the glories of its great Founder, to whom he was 
 himself under peculiar personal obligation, that apostle 
 suggests not the least hint that his admired and beloved 
 Master was the Creator and Lord of the external world. 
 In one short epistle only, and in one passage of that epi- 
 stle, is he supposed to assert this amazing fact : and this 
 he does in language so unusua), so mystical, and symbo- 
 lical, that, comparing what is difficult with what is plain, 
 it may well be admitted that the writer's true meaning 
 may be w^idcly different from vi^hat is commonly believed. 
 — The unknown writer of the epistle to the Hebrews, if 
 he meant to declare this wonderful fact, uses language 
 which, in all other cases, conveys a very different sense : 
 — and the single expression in the Book of Revelation, 
 if authentic, is at least equivocal. 
 
 6. The obvious and necessary consequence is, 
 either that the sacred writers knew nothing 
 
 OF THIS EXTRAORDINARY FACT, or, what WOuld be 
 
 still more extraordinary, that, knowing it, they did 
 
 NOT think it of SUFFICIENT IMPORTANCE TO INSIST 
 yPON IT, 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. 9.] 193 
 
 SFXTION IX. 
 
 THE QUESTION CONSIDERED, WHETHER JESUS CHRIST 
 
 WAS THE MEDIUM OF THE DIVINE DISPENSATIONS 
 
 - TO THE PATRIARCHS AND TO THE HEBREW NATION ! 
 
 AN"D WHETHER HE EVER APPEARED UNDER THE 
 
 NAME AND CHARACTER OF JEHOVAH^. 
 
 It IS maintained by many that two beings are mentioned 
 in the Old Testament under the name and character of 
 Jehovah ; the one Supreme, the other subordinate, the 
 angel or minister of the Supreme, the medium of divine 
 operations and dispensations ; and that the subordinate 
 Jehovah was the spirit who animated the body of Christ. 
 ^ First : This doctrine of two Jehovahs appears to be 
 plainly contradictory to the Jewish Scriptures, which ex- 
 pressly and solemnly teach, that " Jehovah our God is one 
 Jehovah," or rather, " Jehovah is our God, Jehovah is 
 one." Ueut. vi. 4. A declaration cited with the highest 
 
 ' This extraordinary doctrine, that a subordinate being should as* 
 sume the name and the character of" the Supreme ; a dijctrine which 
 to all Unitarians appears diaiTif?tricaily contrary to the letter and to the 
 spirit of" the Scriptures, and directly suhveisive of the fundamental 
 doctrine both of the Jewish and Christian revelations, has been sup- 
 ported by many able and learned advocates, ancient and modern, since 
 the time of .lusfin Martyr, who probably first invented it, and who 
 imagined that this great secret was communicated to him by express 
 revelation. See Just. Mart. Dialog, edit. Thirlby, p. 258, and Mr. 
 Lindsey's Second Address, chap, ii, sect. 3. The last and ablest advo- 
 cate of this strange hypothesis was the late Mr. Henry Taylor, in a 
 book entitled The Apology of Benjamin Ben Mordecai to Elisha T evi, 
 Lett. ii. and iii. The arguments of this learned writer have been so 
 thoroughly discussed, and so completely refuted, by Mr. Lindsey, in 
 the Sequei to his Apology, chap. vi. that, if such an issue could be 
 hoped f"or in a theological discussion, it might be presumed that the 
 question was now set finally, and for ever, at rest. This Section con- 
 tains a brief abstract of the argument on both sides. 
 
 o appro- 
 
194 WHETHER CHRIST APPEARED [Part I. 
 
 approbation by our Saviour, Mark ix. 29. 32. See like- 
 wise Neh. ix. 6. Nor is it pretended that this doctrine 
 was ever received by the Hebrew nation. In support of 
 this extraordinary position it is alleged, 
 
 I. That one Jehovah is represented as the object 
 of the senses, — He walked in the garden, and his voice 
 was heard by Adam, Gen. iii. 8 ; — he descended to see 
 the tower of Babel, chap. xi. 5 ; — the God of Israel was 
 seen by the seventy elders, Exod. xxiv. 9 ; — He talked 
 with Moses from the mercy-seat, chap. xxvi. 21, 22, — 
 and exhibited his glory to Moses in the mount, chap. 
 xxxiii. 18; xxxiv. 5. But the supreme Jehovah could 
 never be the object of sense : he can neither be seen or 
 heard. 
 
 ylnswer. If the supposed subordinate Jehovah is a pure 
 spirit, he could no more be the object of the senses than 
 the Supreme : — but if the subordinate Jehovah could mi- 
 nifest his presence by sensible symbols, so likewise might 
 the Supreme. 
 
 11. The existence of two Jehovahs is expressly 
 mentioned in some passages of Scripture, and in others 
 it is evidently implied. 
 
 1. It is expressly mentioned, Gen. xix. 24, "Je- 
 hovah rained tire and brimstone from Jehovah out of 
 heaven.'* — Hos. i. 7, " Jehovah saith, I will save them 
 by Jehovah their God." 
 
 j^iisiver. This is nothing more than an idiom of the 
 Hebrew language, in which the noun is repeated for the 
 pronoun. The same argument would prove the existence 
 of two Solomons. 1 Kings viii. 1, " Then Solomon as- 
 sembled the elders to king Solom.on ;'* — and of two Re- 
 hoboams : 1 Kings xii. 21, " Rehoboam assembled the 
 people to bring back the kingdom to Rehoboam." See 
 also Dan. ix. 17. 1 lini. i. 18. 
 
 Zech. 
 
Sect 9.] UNDER THE NAME OF JEHOVAH. 1 9.J 
 
 Zech. ii. 9. " Thus saith Jehovah, Behold, I will 
 shake my hand over thee, Szc. and ye shall know that Je- 
 hovah of hosts hath sent me.'* See ver. 11. 
 
 Answer. The prophet here makes an abrupt trans- 
 ition from the person of Jehovah to his own : g. d. You 
 shall know that I am a true prophet^. See Acts i. 4. 
 
 2. As a pioof that where two Jehovahs are not 
 expressed, they are sometimes plainly alluded to, appeal is 
 made, 
 
 1.) To the word FJohJm, which is commonly transla- 
 ted ' God,' which in the original is in a plural form, and 
 is thought by some to imply a plurality of persons in the 
 divine essence^. 
 
 u4nswer. This is a trifling argument. In all languages 
 it is a common anomaly for words of a plural form to have 
 a singular signification. The word Ehhim is almost uni- 
 formly used in apposition with singular verbs. It is not 
 limited, like Jehovah, to express the Supreme Being alone: 
 and though in a plural form, it commonly expresses one 
 object only. It stands for one angel. Judges xiii. 22 ; — 
 for one golden calf, Exod. xxxii. 31 ; — for one idol. 
 Judges xvi. 1? ; — for Moses, Exod. iv. 10 ; vii. 1 ; — and 
 for Samuel, 1 Sam. xxviii. 13. 
 
 2.) The plural number is sometimes used when God is 
 introduced as speaking. Gen. i. 2'j, " God said, Let us 
 
 * " The fulfilling of these words, saith the prophet, shall be an un- 
 deniable evidence of the truth of my mission." Mr. I.owth in loo. — 
 This is a text upon which great stress is laid to prove the existence of 
 two Jehovahs, one the sender, the other the sent. 
 
 ^ The word Elohiin is commonly derived from a word which signi- 
 fies power. Rut the Hutchinsonians, a sect which rose in tiie last 
 century, and which was of considerable use in reviving attention to 
 the Hebrew language, derive this word from Tb'Ajuruvit .• they read 
 it Aieim, and translate it ' the covenanters,' q. juratores : and they 
 suppose an allusion to the three persons entering into covenant for the 
 redemption of man. Such reasoning needs no refutation. 
 
 o 2 make 
 
196 WHETHER CHRIST APPEARED [Parti. 
 
 make man in our image." Gen. xi. 7, " Let us go down 
 and confound their language." 
 
 Answer. This is nothing more than the author's dra- 
 matic way of writing. We are not to suppose that God 
 actually said to the waters, " Bring forth abundantly," or 
 to the birds and fishes, " Be fruitful and multiply." Per- 
 haps the expression " Let there be" may denote energy ; 
 — and " Let us make" may denote forethought; and upon 
 this occasion such language might be employed by the 
 writer to intimate that man is the noblest work of God, 
 the most distinguished production of divine power and 
 wisdom in this world. Dr. Geddes says that the Jews un- 
 derstood these words to have been addressed to the sur- 
 rounding angels : but there is no need to have recourse to 
 this supposition. 
 
 In Eccles. xii, 1, The Received Text reads " Remem- 
 ber thy Creators:'* and from this plural form a plurality 
 of persons has been inferred. But Dr. Kennicott has 
 shown that ihe best manuscripts have the singular number. 
 
 HI. It is alleged that the word ' angel' is often 
 used in connexion with the subordinate, but not with the 
 Supreme Jehovah. 
 
 It is urged that Exod. xxiii. 20 — 2.S, Jehovah having 
 promised to send an angel to keep the Israelite nation in 
 the way, and to bring them to the promised land, adds, 
 '^ Beware of him, and obey his voice, for my name is iN 
 HIM." Here it is said that the name of Jehovah is ex- 
 pressly given to the conducting angel. 
 
 But this remark is very erroneous. An angel is pro- 
 perly nothing more than a messenger, and the angel here 
 alluded to was probably Joshua, who acted in the name, 
 that is, by the authority, of God. 
 
 Exod. xxxiii. 3. Jehovah says to Moses, " I will send 
 an angel before thee, and I will drive out the Canaanite, 
 
 &c. 
 
Sect. 9.] UNDER THE NAME OF JEHOVAH, 197 
 
 SiC. for I will not go up in the midst of thee, lest I con- 
 sume thee by the way." — But, whatever be the meaning 
 of this threatening, which cannot be undersiood in a literal 
 sense, as though God were afraid of trusting himself with 
 so rebellious a people, lest his indignation should unawares 
 gain the ascendancy over his wisdom, at the intercession 
 of Moses it was revoked. Ver. 14, " My presence shall go 
 with thee," &c. 
 
 To assert that the angel of Jehovah is a phrase only used 
 of the subordinate Jehovah, is assuming the very point in 
 dispute. Any sensible symbol of the divine presence is 
 called an angel, and this symbol is called indifferently the 
 " angel of Jeiiovah," or, " Jehovah himself." See Sect. 
 VI. p. 123. — Gen. xvi. 7, " The angel of Jehovah found 
 her:" but ver. 13, it appears that this angel was Jehovah 
 himself. This facr is still more evident from Exod. iii. 
 2 — 15, *' The angel of Jehovah appeared to him in a flame 
 of fire in the midst of a bush : — and when Jehovah saw 
 — God called to him out of the midst of the bush : — I am 
 the God of thy Fathers, the God of Abraham, &c. — Moses 
 said, They will say to me. What is his name ? — And God 
 said to Moses, I x\m that 1 Am. Thus shall ye say ; Je- 
 hovah, the God of your Fathers, hath sent me : this is my 
 name for ever." 
 
 What room is there here for the supposition of a Jeho- 
 vah subordinate to ihe Supreme? The person who speaks 
 is God himself: and it is plain that the words 'Jehovah,* 
 ' I Am,' ' God,' ' God of your Fathers,' ' God of Abra- 
 ham, Isaac, and Jacob,' are all names for one and the same 
 divine person : also, that the phrase ' angel of Jehovah ' 
 means either the visible symbol of the divine presence, or 
 Jehovah himself. Gen. xvii. 1 ; xxxi. 11, ]2; xxxii. 24j 
 and Exod. xii. 21, which have been appealed to in sup- 
 port of the strange doctrine of two Jehovahs, admit of a 
 similar explanation. 
 
 IV. The 
 
198 WHETHER CHRIST APPEARED [Parti. 
 
 IV. The Chaldee paraphrasts of the Old Testa- 
 ment, Onkelos and Jonathan, are said to acknowledge a 
 distinction between the two Jehovahs, by giving the title 
 ' Mimra/ i. e. IFord, to the Jehovah-:ingel ■*. 
 
 Gen. xxviii. 20, ''■ Jacob vowed. If God will be with 
 me, then shall Jehovah be my God." Onkelos renders 
 it. If the fVnrd of the Lord be with me, then shall the 
 IFordofihe Lord be my God. — Deut. iv. 24, " Jehovah, 
 thy God, is a consuming fire.'* Onkelos : Jehovah, thy 
 God, his JVord IS, kc. 
 
 Gen. i. 27, " Jehovah created man," he, Jonathan ren- 
 ders it, The JVord o/' Jehovah created man. — Chap. iii. 9, 
 " God called to Adam." In the Targum : The JVord of 
 God called, &c. — Chap, xviii. ], "Jehovah, God, ap- 
 peared to Abram," In the Targum ; The Word o/Jeho- 
 vah appeared, &:c. See Gen. iii. 22 ; xix. 24. 
 
 Answer. This argument is evidently founded upon a 
 palpable mistake. In the Chaldee iJiom the term Mimra, 
 * Word,' is substituted for the reciprocal pronoun sef; so 
 that the ' Word of Jehovah' means nothing more than ' Je- 
 hovah himself.' Thus Numb. xv. 32, " A certain man 
 said in his word," i. e. within himself, '• I will go forth and 
 gather sticks." 2 Sam. iii. 15, 16, " Phaldel put asword 
 between his word,'' i. e. himself, " and Michal, the daugh- 
 ter of Saul." Eccl. i. 1 2, "Solomon said in his word,'' i. e. 
 in himself, " Vanity of vanities is this whole world ^." 
 
 Secondly : 
 
 ■* Tlie Chaldee versions of the Old Testament are called Targums, a 
 word which in that language signifies a trcwslatinn. Ot these Tar- 
 gums, the two principal are those of Onkelos, which is a close and 
 faithful translation of the Pentateuch, written, as Dr. Prideaux thinks, 
 near the time of Christ, and that of Jonathan, which is a paraphrastic 
 Version of tr.e Prophets of considerably later date. Another Targum 
 on the Law, is ascribed by the .Tews to the saine Jonathan, who was 
 contemporary with Gamaliel ; but by iniernal evidence it appears to 
 have been written some centuries afterwards, and is a work of little re- 
 pute. Prideaux, Conn. vol. ii. p. 531. 
 
 f Mr. Lowman^ in his Three Tracts, at the end of a chapter upon 
 
 fhis 
 
Sect. 9,] UNDER THE NAME OF JEHOVAH. 199 
 
 Secondly : It is maintained that the Jehovah angel 
 animated the body of Christ. 
 
 It would be sufficient to reply, that no such being exists 
 as the Jehovah-angel : but as the Arian hypothesis main- 
 tains that the great Angel, who was the medium of divine 
 dispensations to the Je^vs, is the spirit which became incar- 
 nate in Christ, it will be proper to state a few of the prin- 
 cipal arguments. 
 
 The following texts, among others, have been alleged 
 from the Old Testament : Isa. Ixiil. 8, 9, " He was their 
 Saviour t the angel of his presence saved them : in his love 
 and pity he redeemed them." But this alludes to the tem- 
 poral deliverances of the Jews. — Hos. i. 7, " I will have 
 mercy upon the house of Judah, and will save them by Je- 
 hovah their God," i. e. i myself will deliver them. — Ezek. 
 xxxiv. 23, " I will set up one shepherd over them, even 
 David.'* Compare Zech. xiii. 7, " Awake, O sword, 
 against my shepherd, against the man who is my fellow, 
 saith Jehovah," or, as Archbishop Newcome renders it, 
 " against my friend, and against-the man who is near to 
 me." — Hos. iii. 5, " The children of Israel shall return, 
 and seek Jehovah their God, and David their kinof." Com- 
 pare Micah iv. 1 , " Jehovah shall reign over them for 
 ever." Hence it is concluded that David, i. e. Christ, the 
 descendant of David, is Jehovah. 
 
 Such arguments admit of no reply. One can only won- 
 der that learned men can impose upon themselves by such 
 slender and miserable sophisms. 
 
 this argument, observes justly, that " if the person appearing in the " / rCl ' 
 
 Shechinah was indeed only an angel personating the Most High, it 7*^''^ ^'^^v J 
 should seem that the whole worship of the Jewish church for two'^thou- 7 ^' "^ 
 
 sand years together, was offered to an object beside and against the in- ''""' ' "' V/ ^ 
 tention of every worshipper, beside and against the chief fundamental t'"'* ^Z^ ^ ' 
 doctrine and rule of worship in their revelation, and against the chief j}" 7 " " ' '" 
 principles of all religion, according to the light of nature." '' 5 ' 
 
 il^ t-^^ tL. firjl 
 
200 WHETHER CHRIST APPEARED [Part I. 
 
 The arguments from the New Testament are more plau- 
 sible. Most of them have been stated and examined else- 
 where. 1 shall subjoin a few which do not so properly fall 
 under any other head. 
 
 It is alleged that the glory of Christ in the New Testa- 
 ment is represented in terms similar to those which ex- 
 press the glory of the Shechinah, or symbol of the divine 
 presence, which rested upon the mercy-seat. 1 Thess. i. 7, 
 " The Lord will be revealed in flaming fire." — Rev. xxi. 
 23, " The glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb was 
 the light thereof." Compare Deut. iv. 24 ; ix. 3. — But 
 no conclusion can be drawn from the obscure and figura- 
 tive language of prophecy. 
 
 Malachi iii. 1. " Jehovah, whom ye seek, shall come 
 suddenly to his temple.'* The prophecy, it is said, was 
 fulfilled when Jesus visited the temple. — But this argu- 
 ment assumes the fact to be proved. Jesus visited the 
 temple as the messenger ot Jehovah, not as the imaginary 
 Jehovah-angel. 
 
 Our Lord, weeping over Jerusalem, exclaims, Luke xiii, 
 34, " O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, how often would I have ga- 
 thered thy children together, and ye would not!" This 
 is explained of the superintendance of the Jehovah-angel. 
 But it may be better understood of our Lords frequent and 
 earnest exhortations to repentance. Or perhaps, like other 
 prophets, Jesus may here mean to speak in the name of 
 54 God. So Matt. xxiii.^^S " Behold, I send unto you pro- 
 
 phets and wise men." — Deut. xxxi. 23, Moses says to 
 Joshua, " Be of good courage, thou shait bring the chil- 
 dren of Israel into the land that I sware unto them, and I 
 will be with thee." 
 
 The feebleness and inconcluslveness of such arguments 
 as these need not to be insisted upon. Other texts, which 
 are produced to prove that the Jehovah-angel animated the 
 
 body 
 
Sect. 9.] UNDER THE NAME OF JEHOVAH. 201 
 
 body of Christ, have been examined already under their 
 proper heads ^. 
 
 The currency which the opinion, that Christ was the 
 Jehovah- angel, and the medium oi the divine ditipensations 
 to the Israelite nation, has obtained among learned and in- 
 quisitive persons, is truly surprising, considering the pre- 
 carious foundation upon which it rests. " It is the una- 
 nimous opinion of all antiquity," says Dr. Clarke on Trin. 
 p. 121, " that this angel who said, Exod. iii. 6, * I am the 
 God of thy Fathers,' was Christ." But Acts iii. 13, the 
 apostle Peter says, " The God of Abraham, and the God 
 of Is^aac, and the God of Jacob, the God of our Fathers, 
 has glorified his son Jesus ;" and Jesus could not be the 
 God whose son he was. Mr. Lindsey therefore justly re- 
 marks, Seq. p. 332, " One may not scruple to say, vi^ith 
 the authority of St. Peter and St. Luke, that all antiquity 
 was certainly mistaken in the opinion ascribed to them by 
 Dr. Clarke, so far as they entertained it." 
 
 ''These texts are Matt. iii. 1—3. John i. 1 — 14; xii. 41.1 Cor. x. 
 4, g. Heb. i. 2. Rom. x. 13. Heb. xi. 26. 1 Pet, iii. 18—20. 
 Heb. i. 8, g. 
 
 SECTION 
 
202 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part I. 
 
 SECTION X. 
 
 TKE PRESENT EXALTATION OF CHPvIST, AND THE HIGH 
 OFFICES WHICH HE NOW SUSTAINS, OR, TO WHICH HE 
 IS TO BE APPOINTED HEREAFTER, ARE SAID TO BE IN- 
 COMPATIBLE WITH THE SUPPOSITION OF HIS PROPER 
 AND SIMPLE HUMANITY. 
 
 First; V^HRis r is said to be advanced to universal do- 
 minion, and is represented as at all times present to assist 
 and protect those who submit to his authority. 
 
 I. His Government is universal. 
 
 1. Matt, xxviii. 18, "All power," c^i^cr/c.-, domi- 
 nion, or authority^ " is given to me in heaven and upon 
 earth." This doctrine is variously explained. 
 
 1.) The Trinitarians say, that universal dominion 
 is eiven to the Son -in his mediatorial capacity, as the re- 
 ward of his obedience and sufferings ^ 
 
 2.) The Arians maintain that Christ, the Logos, 
 is reinstated in the government of the universe, or, of this 
 system, or world, or of angels and men, and is appointed 
 to be head and governor of the church. But if the Logos 
 was from the beginning the Maker and Lord of all things, 
 it is difficult to conceive how a mere restoration to ho- 
 nours which he originally possessed, and voluntarily re- 
 
 ' " Meminerimus vero, quod Christus jure suo semper apud Patrem 
 habuit hoc, illi in carne nostra datum esse, vel, ut clarius loquar, in 
 persona mediatoris." Calvin in loc. — So that it appears after aJl, that 
 nothing was given to Christ which he did not already possess. See 
 also Beza, Whitby, and Guyse in loc. 
 
 linquishcd 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 203 
 
 linquishl'd for a time, can with propriety be represented as 
 the reward of his mediatorial undertaking 2. 
 
 3.) Some say that Christ, who, previously to his 
 incarnation, had been only the tutelar angel of Jxidea, is 
 now advanced to a dominion over other guardian angel;^,, 
 who were before of equal rank with himself, and is ap- 
 pointed governor of the world and of the church 3. 
 
 4.) The Polish Socinians held that Jesus, though 
 a mere human being, as a reward for his transcendant 
 merit, and his obedience to death, is exalted to the throne 
 of universal government, is made the ruler of angels and 
 archangels, and is become the proper object of religious 
 homage*. 
 
 * Clarke on Trin. p. 26S. " Our Lord's dominion is indeed vastly 
 extensive, even coextended with the rational creation : But as it is de- 
 rived, it is neither universal nor supreme, as the Father's is." Dr. D. 
 Scott on the Trin. p. 107. 
 
 ' This siui^ular and extravagant hypothesis is supported by Mr. 
 Peirce on Heb. i. 9 ; also by l\Ir, Henry Taylor in Ben. Mord. Lett. 
 ii. p. 303. 
 
 * " Per mortem et resurrect ionem suam, omnem potestatem in coelo 
 ct in terra, i. e. illimitatum regnum atque imperium super omnes crea- 
 turas in cceIo et in terra existenles....quapropter etiam ipsi, sunimo 
 jure debetur cultus non modo adorationis, sed etiam invocationis in 
 rebus omnibus, quae ad nostrum sive tem.porale sive sempiternum bo- 
 num spectant. Wolzogenius. — Christus ad dextram Dei in ccnlis col- 
 locatus, etiam ab angelis adorandus est....v)mnem in coelo et in terra 
 potestatem accepit; et oninia, Deo solo excepto. ejus pedibus suntyub- 
 jecta." Catach Eccles. Polon. sect. iv. — Well may Dr. Price say, 
 (Serm. p. 14(),) that "there is nothing in Athanasianism itself more 
 extravagant than this doctrine ofSocinus and his followers," and that 
 **' it not only renders the Scriptures unintelligible, but Christianity it- 
 self incredible. Consider whether such an elevation of a mere man is 
 credible, or even possible ? Can it be believed that a mere man could 
 be advanced at once so high as to be above angels, and to he qualified 
 to rule and judge this world ? Does not this contradict all we see or 
 can conceive of the order of God's works ? Do not all beings rise gra- 
 dually, one acquisition laying the foundation of another, and preparing 
 for higher acquisitions? What would you think were you told, that 
 a child just born, instead of growing like all other human creatures, 
 had started at once to complete manhood, and the government of an 
 empire ? This is nothing to the fact I am considering." 
 
 5.) This 
 
i'04 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part I. 
 
 5.) This text is understood by many to^express 
 some unknown personal dij^nity and authority to which 
 our Lord is now advanced, as the reward of his obedience 
 and sufferings, and by which he was enabled in the primi- 
 tive age to communicate the holy spirit to the first teachers 
 of Christianity, and to protect, assist, and direct them in 
 their labours : and by which he is at all times operating ef- 
 fectually for the benefit of the church, though in an un- 
 known and imperceptible manner^. 
 
 6.) Mr. Locke, in his note upon Epb. i. 10, shows 
 that in the writings of Paul the words " heaven and earth" 
 stand for " Jew and Gentile," And if this sense be ad- 
 mitted in the present case, the meaning of our Lord's de- 
 claration will be, q. d. All authority is given me over Jews 
 and Gentiles: that is, All men, without distinction, will be 
 invited to become the subjects^, and to participate in the 
 privileges, of my kingdom. And this interpretation de- 
 riv^es probability from the exhortation which immediately 
 succeeds : " Go ye, therefore, and teach all nations." 
 
 It is a question among learned Unitarians of the present 
 day, whether the reign of Christ upon earth is real and 
 personal, or symbohcal and figurative. Dr. Priestley, 
 though he first defended the figurative hypothesis, became 
 in his later publications a decided advocate for the personal 
 dominion of Christ. He thought that the kingdom of 
 Christ would not commence till the period of the Miilen- 
 niuni, and that he would then appear in the clouds, to 
 raise martyrs and confessors from the dead, to restore the 
 Jews to their own country, and to govern the world lor a 
 thousand prophetic years of peace and prosperity, virtue 
 and happiness '5. 
 
 On 
 
 * See Grot, in loc. This appears to have been the opinion of Dr. 
 Priestley and other modern Unitarians. 
 '^ See Dr. Priestley's hypothesis stated and defended in his Notes 
 
 upon 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH Ills SIMPLE HUMANITY. 20.5 
 
 On the other hand, Mr. Lindsey and many others with 
 him conceive, that those expressions which appear to at- 
 tribute to Christ personal dignity and authority are wholly 
 figurative. They plead that the kingdom of Christ is uni- 
 formly opposed to that of Satan, But it is conceived that 
 in this connexion Satan is a symbolical and not a real per- 
 son, and that his government expresses not the rule of a 
 powerful evil spirit, but the prevalence of idolatry, super- 
 stition, and vice. It is therefore reasonable to conclude 
 that the dominion of Christ is to be understood in the same 
 figurative sense : that it expresses not the personal autho- 
 rity of our divine Master, but the prevalence of his religion 
 in rhe world, the empire of truth, and virtue, and happi- 
 ness, which is continually extending its beneficial influence 
 in proportion to the progress of christian principles, and 
 which we have every reason to believe will in due time be- 
 come universal and perpetual. And though it is pleaded 
 by the advocates for the personal dominion of Christ, that 
 Jesus, being a man, like other men, was capable of being 
 influenced by personal considerations, and that it is refining 
 too much to suppose that he was altogether free from 
 every bias of this nature; it seems, nevertheless, to be more 
 consistent with the acknowledged piety, humility, and dis- 
 interested benevolence of our Lord's character, to conceive 
 of him as acting under the influence of these generous 
 principles and comprehensive views, rather than from the 
 
 upon Rev. xx. He npprehended this period of Christ's second coming to 
 be very near. In the spring of 179'^, a few days before he set sail for 
 America, he said to a friend, that in his judgement this great event 
 could not be more remote tlian twenry years. And it was his firm 
 conviction, that tliis period of Christ's persona! dominion will be of 
 very long duration. He even conjectures that every prophetic day of 
 the Millennium represents a natural year. He conceived that Christ 
 is at all times actively employed for the benefit of mankind, but that 
 he does not enter upon his kingdom till the Millennium arrives. Mr. 
 Evanson also advances a similar hypothesis in his Reflections on Reli- 
 gion In Christendom, p. 39, and p. 14/, 148. 
 
 comparatively 
 
206 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part T. 
 
 comparatively low and interested expectation of personal 
 recompense 7. 
 
 2. John xviii. 3:3, " Pilate said, Art thou the king 
 of the Jews?" — Ver. 36^ " Jesus answered, My kingdom 
 is not of this world." — Ver. 37, " Pilate said, Art thou a 
 king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I am — a 
 king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I 
 into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth." 
 
 3. 1 Cor. XV. 24 — 27, " Then cometh the end, 
 when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, 
 even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and 
 all authority and power. For he must reign till he hath 
 put all enemies under his feet. The last enemy shall be 
 destroyed, rveji death.'* 
 
 In this passage Death, a symbolical person, is placed in 
 the list o[ those enemies of Christ who are hereafter to be 
 destroyed : it is probable therefore that the other enemies 
 here alluded to are symbolical persons likewise : and thus 
 the whole paragraph is a figurative description of the ul- 
 timate trian^ph of the Gospel over all opposition, and of 
 the final extermination of idolatry and superstition, of ig- 
 norance, and vice, and misery. 
 
 4. Eph. i. 20—23. See p. ISO. 
 
 5. Philipp. ii, 9— -1 1, " — Wherefore God also 
 hath highly eXalted him, and given him a name which is 
 above every name : that at the name of Jesus every knee 
 should bow, of things in heaven, and things on earth, and 
 things under the earth ; and that every tongue should con- 
 fess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Fa- 
 ther." 
 
 ' " Agreeably to the prejudices and imaginations of Jews and Gen- 
 tiles, the subjection of all mankind to the rules of piety and virtue, de- 
 livered by Chri!^t, is shadowed out under the imagery of a mighty king, 
 to •whom all power was given in heaven and earth," &:c. Lindsey's 
 Sequel, p. 4/3. 
 
 Compare 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 20? 
 
 Compare Col. i*. 17, 18 ; ii. 10. la the epistles to the 
 seven churches, in the Apocalypse, chap. ii. iii., Jjsus as- 
 sumes a sovereign authority. And chap. xix. contains a 
 symbolical representation of the final triumph of the Co- 
 spel, and of the judgements of God upon its enemies and 
 persecutors. 
 
 II. Christ is repri'sented as persojially present for ths 
 jJiJ and Protection of those tuho submit to his Aatho" 
 riiij. 
 
 1. Matt, xxviii. 20, " And, lo, I am with you al- 
 way, even to the end of the world," I'joq T'.ig a^uvrsKciocg th 
 aucvog^ ' to the conclusion of this age.' 
 
 G!Otius,Whifhy, Doddridge, and the Polish SociniaTis, 
 also Dr. Priestley and many others, understand this text as 
 a promise that Jesus will be personally present with his 
 disciples, acting for their benefit to the end ot time. And 
 Dr. Whitby contends that this is the only sense in which 
 the evangelist uses the phrase wherever it occurs in his 
 
 writings^. 
 
 Dr. 
 
 * The places in which these words occur in the Gospel of Matthew 
 are, chap xiii. 39, 40, " The harvest is the end of ike world, or age, 
 and the reapers are the angels. As therefore the tares are gathered 
 and burnt in the fire, so shall it be in the end of tills luorld, or age." — 
 Ver, 49, '' They gathered the good ( fish) into vessels, but cast the had 
 awav. So shall it beat the e?id of the world, or nge.'' — Chap. xxiv. 3, 
 " What will be the sign of thy coming, and of tiie end of this tvorld, 
 or age?" Here the phrase unquestionably means the Jewish dispen- 
 sation, or rather pohty. For, in reply to the question proposed by his 
 disciples, our Lord immediatelv proceeds to foretel the calarnities 
 which should precede the destruction of Jerusalem. And ver. 34, he 
 declares, " This generation shall not pass till all these things are ful- 
 filled." This phrase, which, as Mr. Wakeiield observes in his note 
 upon Matt. xiii. 3y, " is an idiom of tlie Hebrew language," occurs 
 bat once more in the New Testament, Heb. ix. 26, " but now, once, 
 in the end of the world, zin cruvtzXsia tm-j cn'Myxv , * at the completion 
 or conclusion of the ages,' hath he appeared to put away sin by the 
 sacritice of himself" — " But let me ask," says Mr, Wakefield, ibid. 
 " when did Christ appe.ir, but towards the end of the Jewish polity, 
 civil and ecclesiastical ? They theretbre, who interpret this phrase by 
 
 *the 
 
203 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part I. 
 
 Dr. Whitby was certainly mistaken in this assertion, as 
 appears from the note below. It may nevertheless be con- 
 ceded that our Lord is, or may be, personally present in 
 this world, and actively engaged at all times in some un- 
 known manner for the benefit of his church. But it does 
 not follow that this is the meaning of the promise in Mat- 
 thew ; much less can it be concluded that Christ in his 
 present state, however exalted and glorious, is invested 
 with those divine attributes of omnipresence, omniscience, 
 and omnipotence, which are usually ascribed to him. The 
 truth is, that the Scriptures have left us totally in the dark 
 with regard to the present condition, employment, and at- 
 tributes of Christ, and therefore it is in vain to speculate 
 upon the subject. 
 
 The interpretation which is given to this text in Mat- 
 thew, by Bishop Pearce, Mr. Wakefield, Mr. Lindsey, and 
 others, viz. " I am with you alway, to the conclusion of 
 this age," is that which by Unitarians is generally and justly 
 preferred. 
 
 Our Lord says " I am with yoic/' that is, as Mr. Lind- 
 sey observes, Seq. p. 75, " with t/ou who are now present 
 v/ith me, — tjou may be assured of extraordinary assistance 
 and support. But he does not promise the same to suc- 
 ceeding christians: the miraculous aid and gifts of which he 
 obviously speaks, were confined to the age of the apostles." 
 
 Mr. Lindsey thinks that " this limitation, which our 
 Lord himself prescribes, throws great light upon many 
 passages of Scripture." — \. " It may account for our 
 
 ' the end of the world,' or ' the consummation of all things/ do so 
 without any authority, and in direct opposition to the idiom of the He- 
 brew langu:ige, and the sense of a plain text of Scripture." — That ex- 
 cellent and judioi(,us commentator Bishop Pearce, and after him Mr. 
 Wakefield, interpret the parables of the tares and of the fish, chap, 
 xiii., of the events which took place at the destruction of Jerusalem, 
 when the Christians, warned by divine admonition, retired from Judca 
 before the desolation of the country by the Romans. See Pearcc's 
 Comment, in loc. 
 
 Lord's 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 209 
 
 Lord's appearing to his apostles and to Stephen after his 
 ascension. Acts vii. 55 ; ix. 4." — 2. " It affords a satis- 
 factory reason why Christ has never visibly manifested him- 
 self since the apostolic age. Whatever agency of Christ 
 there may be now in the affairs of his church, it is wholly 
 unknown to us." — 3. " This limitation of the extraordi- 
 nary powers exercised by Christ, and imparted to his apo- 
 stles, and confinement of them to the first ages of the 
 church, will be a clue to lead us to the meaning of many 
 passages in the New Testament, and will help us to avoid 
 those many errors which men have fallen into, by applying 
 to the case of christians in general such things as related 
 only to the apostles, and to the miraculous gifts conferred 
 on them." 
 
 These remarks appear to be highly judicious and im- 
 portant, and are capable of very extensive application. 
 
 2. John xiv. 13, 14. " And whatsoever ye shall 
 ask in my name 9, that w'lW I do, that the Father may be 
 glorified in the Son. If ye shall ask any thing in my name, 
 I will do it." See chap. xv. 23. 
 
 This discourse is addressed to the apostles only, and the 
 promise is limited to them. The meaning is, that what- 
 ever ill the course of their ministry they requested in the 
 name, that is, with a view to promote the doctrine and 
 
 ^ This is not to be understood as a direction to all christians to con- 
 clude all their prayers with the name of Christ, as though there was 
 any particular charm in those words to make their prayers available. 
 The fact seems to be, that our Lord himself possessed a voluntary 
 power of working miracles, but the apostles only an occasional power, 
 when prompted by some inward suggestion. And the language used 
 upon such otcasions generally corresponds with tliis supposition. Christ 
 " rebukes the disorder:" — he says to the leper, " I will, be thou 
 clean 3" and to the dead, " 1 say unto thee, Arise." The language of 
 the apostles is in a humbler strain : "In the name of Jesus Christ," 
 saith Peter to the lame man, " ri«e up and walk : — Eneas, Jesus Christ 
 makelh thee whole." Thus acknowledging themselves the servants 
 of Christ, and that they performed miracles by power derived from 
 him, and exercised in subservience to his cause. 
 
 p kingdom, 
 
210 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part I. 
 
 kingdom, of Christ, if the request was proper ^o^ it should 
 be granted. And upon the whole it is promised, that they 
 should be amply qualified by him for the discharge of the 
 apostolic office. 
 
 3. Rom. viii. 34. " — who also raaketh interces- 
 sion," £j/Tuy%a!/e/, interferes, " for us^^'* 
 
 This expression is applied to Christ only in this passage 
 and in Heb. vii. 25, and probably means that Christ in his 
 exalted stale is employing his powers in some unknown 
 manner for the benefit of the church. 
 
 4. Philipp. iv. 13. " 1 can do all things through 
 Christy who strengtheneth me." 
 
 The word ' Christ' is omitted in the Alexandrine and 
 Ephrem manuscripts, and in some ancient versions. Ad- 
 mitting it to be genuine, it may allude to the promise of 
 Christ to be present with his apostles, and may express the 
 apostle's confidence, that he who had invested him with 
 the apostolic office would qualify him for it, and support 
 hiui in the faithful discharge of it. 
 
 5. Heb. ii. 1 8. " For in that he himself suffered, 
 being tempted, he knows how to succour those who are 
 tempted." 
 
 q. d Having himself been a great sufferer, he knows 
 how to sympathize with those who are afflicted j and in the 
 great discoveries^ and the rich and precious promises of the 
 
 >" That tliis limitation was always to be understood is evident both 
 from the reason of the thing, and from the fact that Paul, who " was 
 not behind the very chief of the apostles," besought the Lord thrice to 
 have his complaint, the thorn in the flesh, removed^ but without suc- 
 cess. 2 Cor. xii. 
 
 " " syrvyy^zysiv vtsp rivo^, pro commodo alicujus facere aliquid." 
 Schleusner. — It is a word of very general import, and is used to ex- 
 press any kind of interfertiice on account of another. Ivlr. Lindsay 
 thinks that " the perpetual intercession of Christ may be the continual 
 operation and eflect of his mission and doctrine in the world." Seq. 
 p. 88, note. Sec Impr. Vers, in loc. 
 
 Gospel, 
 
Sect. lO.j WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 21 1 
 
 Gospel, be has made ample provision for their support and 
 consolation. 
 
 Under this head it may be remarked that Christ some- 
 times authoritatively pronounces the forgiveness of sins : 
 from which his enemies, who were his contemporaries, and 
 many christians in modern times, have erroneously infer- 
 red that our Lord arrogates to himself divine attributes. 
 Matt. ix. 2, " He said to the sick of the palsy. Son, be of 
 good cheer: thy sins are forgiven thee." Hearing this, the 
 scribes said within themselves, '' Why doth he thus speak 
 blasphemies ? Who can forgive sins but God alone ?" 
 See Mark ii. 7.'^ In this passage there is probably an al- 
 lusion to an opinion know^n to have prevailed among the 
 Jews, that every sin was visited with a specific punishment, 
 and that bodily diseases, accidents, and the like, were pu- 
 nishments inflicted for particular crimes. Job's friends, 
 from his misery infer his guilt : and the Pharisees assume 
 that a man was born blind, cither as a punishment for sins 
 which he had committed in an antecedent state, or for the 
 sins of his parents. John ix. 2. See also Luke xiii. 1 — 5. 
 Our Lord upon every occasion peremptorily denies their 
 principle : but in the case of the paralytic, he silences the 
 cavils of the Jews, and supports his divine authority by 
 healing the disease. Mark ii. 10, 1 1. — In the same sense 
 he confers upon his apostles authority to forgive sins, /. e. 
 to heal diseases, and to remove, and in some cases to in- 
 flict, calamities. John xx. 23, " Whose soever sins ye 
 remit, they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins 
 ye retain, they are retained." Compare Matt, xviii. J 8. ^3 
 
 In 
 
 '• " Their principle indeed was right, but their application was evi- 
 dently wrong. — Almighty v'-'avioar, may we each of us receive from 
 thee forgiveness of our sins!" DodJvidge in loc. I'ut our Lord's 
 reasoning was very different from that of the pious expositor. 
 
 ^'^ Upon this principle, that sin and disease are, accordmg to the 
 theory of the Jews, almost reciprocal terms, the text 1 John v. l6, may 
 
 p 2 pel haps 
 
212 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Parti. 
 
 In Luke vii. 48, our Lord pronounces, concerning the 
 woman who washed and perfumed his feet, *' Thy sins are 
 forgiven," " thy faith hath saved thee." This woman was 
 probably a Gentile : and, as it is said " her sins were 
 many," it is probable that she had been remarkably ad- 
 dicted to idolatrous superstitions : but that by our Lord's 
 preaching and miracles she had been convinced of his di- 
 vine mission, and converted to the worship of the true God. 
 By this symbolical action she declared her conversion, 
 which our Lord graciously accepted ; and by his kind ad- 
 dress to her he publicly testified that she was now trans- 
 lated from the community of sinners, i. e. heathen idola- 
 ters, into the community of saints or holy ones, i. e. the 
 true worshipers of God : her faith in him had obtained 
 this privilege for her. There is no reason to believe, that, 
 antecedently to her conversion, she had been immoral in 
 her conduct : nor is it to be supposed that a woman of in- 
 famous character would have been admitted into our Lord's 
 presence, or even into the Pharisee's house. It is well 
 known to all who have attended to Scripture phraseology, 
 that the word sinner often signifies nothing more than hea- 
 then J and saint expresses only a professed worshiper of 
 the true God : and that a conversion from heathenism, and 
 admission into the community of true worshipers, is some- 
 times expressed by the terms ' repentance, and forgiveness 
 of sins i'^,' and that without any immediate regard to per- 
 sonal character. The Gospel dispenvSation is represented 
 in the New Testament, and particularly by the apostle 
 
 perhaps admit the easiest explanation : ' The sin not unto death' may 
 mean a curable disorder, for recovery from which it may not be un- 
 reasonable to pray. ' The sin unto death' may be an incurable ma- 
 lady; in which case prayer for recovery would be useless and improper. 
 Compare James v. J4, J. 5. 
 
 '* See this fact established by Mr. Locke, in his Commentary on 
 Rom. V. 8, note fq); and in Dr. Taylor's Key to the Apostolic Wri- 
 tings, chap. vi. vii. 
 
 Paul 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 213 
 
 Paul in the Epistle to the Romans, as a scheme for ob- 
 taining remission of sins both for Jews and Gentiles ; that 
 is, for recovering them from error and superstition, to the 
 knowledge and worship of the true God. Thus the apo- 
 stle Peter speaks of Christ as exalted to be a prince and a 
 saviour, to give repentance to Israel, and remission of sins. 
 Acts V. 31. — It cannot be doubted that the Gospel teaches 
 the free forgiveness of moral offences to the sincere peni- 
 tent : but this could not with propiieiy be represented as 
 the distinguishing peculiarity of the Christian dispensation, 
 because the promises of forgiveness in the Old Testament 
 are as numerous, as clear, as full, and as decisive, as any 
 that are to be found in the New. See Exod. xxxiv. 6, 7. 
 Psalm li. 17. Isaiah Iv. 7. Micah vii. 18. 
 
 III. Jesus Christ is appointed to rai^e the Dead. 
 
 1. John V. 28,29. "The hour is coming, in which 
 all that are in their graves shall hear his voice, and shall 
 come forth : they that have done good, to the resurrection 
 of life ; and they that have done evil, to the resurrection of 
 condemnation." 
 
 2. John vi. 40. " I will raise him up at the last 
 
 day." 
 
 3. John xi. 25. " I am the resurrection and the 
 
 life." 
 
 4. 1 Cor. XV. 2 1 , 22. " For since by man came 
 death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 
 For as in Adam all die, eo in Christ shall all be made 
 alive." 
 
 " The apostle in these words/'says Mr.Tyrwhitt, " sug- 
 gests a remarkable analogy between the two dispensations 
 of death and life, with respect to the nature of the persons 
 by whom they were introduced.. — The foundation of which 
 analogy seems to be no other than this ; that Christ, as to 
 his nature, was in no respect materially different from 
 
 xVdani j 
 
214 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Parti. 
 
 Adam ; that he was a man in the same sense of the word 
 in which it was applied by St. Paul to Adam, and in which 
 it is commonly applied to all the sons of Adam. We may 
 reasonably presume that the apostle, in speaking of Adam 
 and Christ, with respect to their natures, if he had known 
 of any material distinction between them, would have been 
 no less attentive to the circumstances of opposition than to 
 those of resemblance. That instead of saying, ' As by man 
 came death, by man came also the resurrection of the 
 dead,' he would have said, '■Although by man came death, 
 the resurrection of the dead came by a person of a nature 
 far superior to that of man'''.' " 
 
 5. Philipp. lii. 20, 2 1 . " — the Lord Jesus Christ, 
 who shall change our vile body, that it may be fashioned 
 like to his own glorious body, according to the working 
 whereby he is able even to subdue all things unto himself." 
 
 6. 1 Thess. iv. 1 G. " For the Lord himself shall 
 descend with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and 
 with the trump of God : and the dead in Christ shall rise 
 first." 
 
 7. 2 Cor. iv. 14. " Knowing that he who raised 
 up the Lord Jesus shall raise up us also by Jesus, and shall 
 present us with you." See also John v. 21. 1 Cor. xv. 
 14 — 26. Rev. i. 17, 18. Rom. xiv. 9. 
 
 Dr. Price observes, Serm. p. 147, that the power which 
 the Scriptures teach us that Christ possesses, of raising to 
 life all who have died, and all who will die, is equivalent 
 to the power of creating a world. How inconsistent is it 
 to allow to him one of those powers, and at the same time 
 to question whether he could have possessed the other ! 
 
 Dr. Priestley replies, Letters, p. 142, that Dr. Price ac- 
 knowledges that the power by which Christ raised the 
 
 '' See Mr. Tyrwhilt's admirable Dissertation on this text^ in Com- 
 mentaries and Essays, vol. ii. p. 15, 
 
 dead 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 215 
 
 dead when he was on earth " was not properly his own, 
 but that of his Father, who was in him, or acted by him." 
 It may also be added, that the Scriptures teach that Christ 
 is to raise the dead, but not that he made the world. 
 
 IV. Jesus Christ is appointed lo the Ojjice of universal 
 Judge, and to dispense the Rewards ajid Piuiishmerits 
 of a future Life: an Office to lohick, as jnamj think , 
 it is incredible that a mere human Beins. should be ad' 
 va7iccd. 
 
 The passages which are usually understood to assert this 
 doctrine are very numerous, and many of them are per- 
 haps principally applicable to the destruction of Jerusalem. 
 I shall produce some which appear to be most decisive, and 
 refer to the rest. The fact itself Is not disputed, that the 
 Scriptures, taken in a literal sense^ teach that Christ is to 
 judge the world. The difficulty to be considered is, whe- 
 ther his elevation to this office can be reconciled to the 
 doctrine of his simple and proper humanity. 
 
 1 . Matt. XXV. 3 ] , to the end. " When the Son of 
 Man shall come in his glory, and all his holy angels with 
 him, then shall he sit upon the throne of his glory. And 
 before him shall be gathered all nations ; and he shall se- 
 parate them one from anothei", as a shepherd divideth his 
 sheep from the goats,'' &c. 
 
 This passage, in connexion with the preceding dis- 
 course, is interpreted by some as a scenical representation 
 of the calamities which were shortly to overtake the Jewish 
 nation, and of the escape of the Christians from the ge- 
 neral desolanon^^. But it is commonly understood as a 
 figurative description of the final appearance of Christ to 
 judge the world. Other texts to the same purpose in this 
 
 "^ See Bishop Pearce's Coram, in loc, and Nisbett on the Coming of 
 the Messiah, p. 140. 
 
 evangelist 
 
216 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Parti. 
 
 evangelist are, Chap. vii. 22 ; xiii. 40, 41 ; xvi. 27 ; xxvi. 
 64. See also Mark xiii. 26 ; xiv. 62. Luke xxii. 70. 
 
 2. Lukeix.26. "For whosoever shall be ashamed 
 of me and of my words, of him shall the Son of Man be 
 ashamed when he shall come in his own glory, and in his 
 Father's, and of the holy angels." Matt. x. t}o. Luke 
 sii. 8; xxi. 36. Also Luke iii. 16, 17. 
 
 3. John V. 16, 27. " For as the Father hath life 
 in himself, so hath he given to the Son to have life in him- 
 self ; and hath given him authority to execute judgement 
 also, because he is the Son of Man. Marvel not at this:"&c. 
 
 " Because," says Archbishop Newcome, " he hath as- 
 sumed human nature." But the text gives no counte- 
 nance to this gloss. The words are ' because he is,' not 
 ' because he chose to be, the Son of Man.' 
 
 A few manuscripts of no great account, the Syriac and 
 Armenian versions, and some of the Fathers, join the last 
 clause of the 27th verse to the beginning of the 28th. g. d. 
 " Marvel not at this, that he is the Son of Man.'* And 
 Theophylact accuses Paul of Samosata of introducing this 
 punctuadon in order to countenance his Unitarian opini- 
 ons. But the charge is unproved, and the motive impro- 
 bable. The best authorities favour the received punctua- 
 tion : and the text imphes that there is a peculiar propriety 
 in delegating this office to a human being. Compare John 
 V. 22. 
 
 Grotlus supposes an allusion to Daniel vii. 13, 14, and 
 interprets the text of the advent of Christ for the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem. 
 
 4. Acts i. 1 1 . " — This same Jesus, who is taken 
 up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as 
 ye have seen him go into heaven." 
 
 This declaration is thought to assert in the most explicit 
 
 language 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 21? 
 
 language the visible personal return of Christ. See Dr. 
 Priestley's Not. in loc. 
 
 5. Acts xvii. 31 . " Because he hath appointed a 
 day, in which he will judge the world in righteousness, by 
 that Man whom he hath ordained, whereof he hath given 
 assurance to all men, in that he hath raised him from the 
 dead." 
 
 6. Acts X. 40, 42. " Peter said to Cornelius, Him 
 God raised up, and showed him openly ; — and he com- 
 manded us to preach to the people, and to testify that it is 
 he who was ordained by God to be the judge of the living 
 and the dead.'* 
 
 7. Rom. ii. IG. " — in the day when God shall 
 judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ, according to my 
 gospel." Compare chap. xiv. 10. 
 
 8. 1 Cor. i. 8. " — that ye may be blameless in 
 the day of the Lord Jesus." See chap. v. 5. 2Cor. i. 14. 
 
 9. 2 Cor. V. 10. " For we must all appear before 
 the judgement-seat of Christ, that every one may receive 
 the things done in the body, according to that he hath 
 doncj whether it be good or bad." 
 
 10. 1 Thess. ii. 19. " For what is our hope, our 
 joy, our crown of rejoicing ? Are not even ye in the pre- 
 sence of our Lord Jesus Christ at his coming ?" Comp. 
 chap. iv. 16. 
 
 11. 2 Thess. i. 6 — 10. " — when the Lord Jesus 
 Christ shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty an- 
 gels in flaming fire, taking vengeance on them who know 
 not God, — who shall be punished with everlasting destruc- 
 tion, — when he shall come to be glorified in his saints, and 
 to be admired in all them that believe." 
 
 12. 2 Tim. iv. 1, " I charge thee before God and 
 
 the 
 
218 EXALTA,TION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Parti, 
 
 the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the 
 dead at his appearance, and his kingdom." 
 
 13. 1 Pet.i.7. " — that the trial ofyour faith may 
 be found unto praise, and honour, and glory, at the ap- 
 pearing of Jesus Christ." See chap. v. 4. 
 
 14. Rev. i, 7. " Behold, he comeih with clouds, 
 and every eye shall see him," kc. 
 
 15. Rev. ii. 7 " To hiuj that overcomcth will 1 
 give to eat of the tree of life." — See ver. 10. 17 j chap, iii, 
 o. 12. 21 ; chap. xxii. 12, 13. 
 
 From these declarations it is concluded that Jesus is ap- 
 pointed to appear in person to raise the dead, to judge the 
 world, and to award to every individual of the human race 
 his final sentence of reward or punishment. This is an 
 office of such transcendant dignity and importance, and re- 
 quires powers so far superior to any thing which we can 
 conceive to belong to a mere human being, however me- 
 ritorious and exalted, that to many it appears utterly incre- 
 dible that such an office should be assigned to one who 
 was himself at one time a peccable and fallible man, and, 
 as such, liable to appear at the tribunal of eternal justice. 
 The righteous judge of the whole earth, the unerring ar- 
 biter of the destinies of all the innumerable generations of 
 mankind, must surely be himself a personage of rank far 
 superior to any who shall then be summoned to his tri- 
 bunal. This argument has appeared so forcible to some 
 persons of much learning and reflection, that this consi- 
 deration alone has prevented them from acceding to the 
 Unitarian hypothesis, though they have acknowledged that 
 particular texts might admit of a satisfactory explication 
 upon Unitarian principles. That this is a great difficulty 
 cannot be denied : but possibly it may be alleviated by at- 
 tention to the following considerations ; 
 
 1. The 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH PUS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 219 
 
 1. The Scriptures teach that Jesus Christ is ap- 
 pointed to judge the world. The same Scriptures, in con- 
 nexion with this very appointment, expressly represent 
 Jesus as a Man delegated to this high office : Acts xvii. 3 ! . 
 Whatever, therefore, our prejudices may suggest to the 
 contrary, it is in fact not inconsistent uith divine wis- 
 dom, nor with the reason and order of things, that a hu- 
 man being should be appointed to the office of universal 
 judge. It is even implied, John v. 27, that the proper hu- 
 manity of Christ is an essential qualification for the office. 
 And it is certain that wherever Jesus is mentioned under 
 the character of a judge, he is never in that connexion re- 
 presented as a being of an order different from, and supe- 
 rior to, mankind. Nor is this qualification ever hinted at 
 as necessary for executing this solemn office. 
 
 2. Jesus and his apostles do not appear tohavefelt 
 any difficulty in the appointment of a human being to the 
 office of universal judge. They simply state the fact in the 
 clearest and most unequivocal manner, that God will judge 
 the world by the Man whom he hath ordained. They 
 give no explanation, they make no comment, they obviate 
 no objections. This is a strong presumption that, ac- 
 cording to their ideas, the office required no qualifications 
 which a man appointed and assisted by God might not 
 possess. 
 
 3. If to judge the world be an office which Jesus 
 is to execute in person, and if it requires powers and qua- 
 lifications superior to those which he possessed on earth, 
 these may be attained either by the regular and progres- 
 sive improvement of his powers, in the long interval be- 
 tween his ascension and the day of judgement ^7, or they 
 
 may 
 
 '^ '' Christ is also said to judge the world. But whatever may be 
 requisite to his doing this may be as easily imparted by God, as the 
 power of raising the dead. Though when you say that his qualifica- 
 tions 
 
220 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Part I. 
 
 may be imparted to him for the occasion by God himself, 
 whose organ and delegate he will be on that grand occa- 
 sion ; and who could as easily qualify a man, as an angel, 
 or a logos, for this important purpose. 
 
 4. Whatever may be intended by the expression 
 'judging the world,' the apostles ot Christ, and believers 
 in general, are to share in that honour and office with their 
 Master.— Matt. xix. 28, " V/hen the Son of M;in shall sit 
 on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit on twelve 
 thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." — 1 Cor. vi. 2, 
 *' Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world?'* 
 — Ver. 3, " Know ye not that v/e shall judge angels?" It 
 is indeed alleged that christians are said to judge the world 
 only in a figurative and improper sense ; but that this of- 
 fice is attributed to Christ really, properly, and without a 
 figure. But this distinction is quite gratuitous and unau- 
 thorized. For any thing that appears to the contrary, the 
 apostles and other christians will be constituted judges of 
 the world in the very same sense with Christ, though pro- 
 bably in an inferior degree. For he, in this, as in all other 
 things, must have the pre-eminence i^. 
 
 5. The sense in which a prophecy is fulfilled is 
 often very different from that which the literal interpreta- 
 tion would lead us to expect. It is therefore highly pro- 
 bable that the mode in which Christ will eventually exe- 
 cute the office of judging the world, will bear little or no 
 
 tions for discharging this office were acquired suddenly, you overlook 
 the long interval between his ascension and his second coming, in 
 which you cannot suppose that he is doing and learning nothing." 
 Dr. Priestley's Letters to Dr. Price, p. 140. 
 
 '* " Judging the world is no proof of a nature superior to man. Our 
 Saviour says, John v. 2/, ' and has given him authority to execute 
 judgement, because he is the Son of Man.* Not so, the Arian will 
 say; but because he was the Son of God, and was before ail worlds. 
 But this is being wise above what is written," Dr. Priestley's Letters 
 to Dr. Price, p. 140. 
 
 resemblance 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 221 
 
 resemblance to that which the expressions naturally sug- 
 gest : and in their true sense they may mean nothing more 
 than what a human being, exalted and endowed as Jesus 
 is, may be qualified to perform. God declares to the pro- 
 phet Jeremiah, chap. i. 10, " See, I have set thee this day 
 over all nations, to root out, and to pull down, and to de- 
 stroy, and to build, and to plant;" when nothing more was 
 intended than to authorize the prophet to declare the di- 
 vine purpose. And the promise to Peter, Matt. xvi. 1 9, 
 that whatsoever he bound or loosed on earth, should be 
 bound or loosed in heaven, is usually understood in a si- 
 milar sense. The prophecy concerning the destruction 
 of Jerusalem is expressed in language as strong, and in 
 figures as awful, as those which relate to the last judge- 
 ment ; and the personal appearance of Christ himself, with 
 his angels, is as expressly asserted ; see Matt. xxiv. 29. 
 Luke xxi. 25, &c.: yet, for any thing that appears, these 
 calamitous events were brought to pass by natural means, 
 and probably without any personal, certainly without 
 .any visible, interference of Christ. He was only so far 
 concerned in it, as, in the symbolical language of pro- 
 phecy, to declare authoritatively that the event would 
 happen. 
 
 6. May we not then be permitted to conjecture, 
 that when Christ is represented as appointed by God to 
 judge the world, nothing more may be intended by this 
 language, but that the final states of all and every indivi- 
 dual of mankind shall be avi^arded agreeably to the decla- 
 rations of the Gospel? This supposition is perfectly ana- 
 logous to those cases which are cited under the preceding 
 head, especially to the strong expressions which are used 
 concerning our Lord's advent for the destruction of Jeru- 
 salem ; the accomplishment of which in a figurative, and 
 not a literal sense, seems intended to direct our minds to 
 the interpretation of those symbols which typify, and of 
 
 that 
 
222 EXALTATION OF CHRIST COMPATIBLE [Parti. 
 
 that language which announces, the personal agency of 
 Christ and his disciples in the awful solemnities of the final 
 judgement. This explanation affords a very easy solution 
 of the language of Paul concerning the saints judging the 
 world. The apostles and christians in general may fitly 
 be represented as assessors with Christ on the tribunal of 
 judgement, as by the very profession of Christianity they 
 bear their solemn testimony, to the unbelieving world, of 
 the divine declaration by Jesus Christ, that there is a life 
 to come, in which men shall be rewarded according to 
 their works. 
 
 In perfect analogy to this interpretation, Christ is figu- 
 ratively represented as a lawgiver, because the precepts of 
 his Gospel are laws to govern the conduct of his disciples: 
 —he is figuratively a priest, because he voluntarily deli- 
 vered himself up as a victim ; and sacrificed his Hfe in the 
 cause of truth, and in obedience to the will of God. — He 
 is figuratively a conqueror and a king, and universal do- 
 minion is ascribed to him, because his Gospel and religion 
 will gradually prevail through the world, and all nations 
 will eventually submit to us authority. — In like manner, 
 Christ is figuratively a judge, because the final states of 
 all mankind will be awarded in a future life agreeably to 
 the solemn, repeated, and explicit declarations of his 
 Gospel. 
 
 Our Lord himself appears to give some countenance to 
 this interpretation, by the language which he uses, John 
 xii. 47, 48, " If any man hear my words and believe not, 
 I judge him not, for I came not to judge the world, but to 
 save the v^orld. He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not 
 my words, hath one that judgeth him. The word that 
 
 I HAVE SPOKEN, THE SAME SHALL JUDGE HIM AT THE 
 LAST DAY.** 
 
 It is a consideration of some weight, that this interpre- 
 tation relieves the doctrine of the proper humanity of Jesus 
 
 Christ 
 
Sect. 10.] WITH HIS SIMPLE HUMANITY. 223 
 
 Christ from that great difficulty which has been stated 
 above, J-iz. that a mere man should be appointed to ju Jge 
 the characters, and to assign the final states of all the hu- 
 man race ; and obviates an objection which, to some in- 
 quisitive and reflecting minds, has appeared insurmount- 
 able la. 
 
 It is obvious that the same arguments will apply to the 
 personal agency of Christ in the resurrection of the dead, 
 though the difficulty in this case may not pf rhapsbe quite 
 so great as in tiie other. And if any should object that 
 such a latitude of interpretation would make the plainest 
 language unintelligible, let the objector consider, that no 
 language is less intelligible than that of unfulfilled pro- 
 phecy, which may nevertheless be made perfectly intelli- 
 gible by the event. The personal agency of Jesus in the 
 general resurrection of mankind is not more distinctly as- 
 serted, than his visible and immediate agency in the disso- 
 lution of the Jewish polity. Bat as the event proves in the 
 latter case, that nothing more was intended than a solemn 
 and authoritative prediction of the catastrophe, it is not im- 
 possible that it may be equally so in the former. And it 
 is a fact certainly known, and universally admitted, that in 
 the language of prophecy the prophet is often said to do 
 that which he is inspired to foretel. See Hos. vi. 5. Rev. 
 xi. 6.20 
 
 ''' III this light it has been snid that this objection appeared to the 
 late reverend and learned Hugh Farmer of Walthamstow, who thought 
 that ditficuUies from particular tex.ts m'ght be overcome. To the wri- 
 ter of this note this eminent divine, whose name would do credit to 
 any cause, distinctly acknowledged that TertuHian's celebrated testi- 
 mony to the unitarianism of the primitive christians, upon which great 
 stress is justly laid by Dr. Priestley in his controversy vvitli liishop 
 Horsley, had never been answered. 
 
 *** See Dr. Priestley's Letters to Dr. Price, No. IX. 
 
 SECTION 
 
224 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [ScCt. 11. 
 
 SECTION XL 
 
 CONCERNING THE WORSHIP OF CHRIST. 
 
 XtELiGious Worship is homage, mental or verbal, ad- 
 dressed to an invisible being, who is supposed to be capa- 
 ble of attending to such addresses, and to possess a volun- 
 tary power of doing good or evil to the worshiper. 
 
 Idolatry, strictly speaking, is the worship of an image, 
 or of a being of whom an image is the symbol. In a more 
 general sense, it is addressing religious worship to a being 
 who is not authorized to receive it. Hence it follows, that 
 religious worship which in the estimation of one person is 
 an indispensable duty, is by another regarded as idolatrous. 
 The worship of the Virgin Mary and other saints, as they 
 are called, in the Roman church, is by Protestants deemed 
 idolatry. And upon the same principle, the worship of 
 Christ by Trinitarians, Arians, and Socinians, is idolatrous 
 in the judgement of Unitarians, who conceive of God 
 alone as the proper object of religious worship. A con- 
 clusion which Trinitarians readily allow, if the Unitarian 
 doctrine is true ; and from which indeed solne deduce an 
 argument for the proper deity of Christ, as they think it 
 incredible that the great body of christians should have 
 been suffered for so many centuries to apostatize into ido- 
 latry. But not to insist upon the language of prophecy, 
 which foretells this great apostasy, they who use this argu- 
 ment forget that the same reasoning would also establish 
 transubstantiation itself. Unitarians, though they regard 
 the worship of Christ as idolatrous and unscriptural, and 
 productive of many hurtful consequences; and though, on 
 this account, they think it their duty to enter their public 
 
 protest 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 225 
 
 protest against it, are very far from presuming to criminate 
 their fellow-christians who fall into this great and common 
 error. It is not for them to judge of the means and op. 
 portunities of information which their mistaken brethren 
 may possess, or of the motives by which they may be in- 
 fluenced. Nor do they pretend that the worship of Christ 
 was ever alluded to in the cautions and warnings of the 
 first teachers of Christianity, nor do they believe that this 
 species of idolatry was ever in the contemplation of the sa- 
 cred writers. The idolatry which they continually and 
 justly held up to infamy and abhorrence, was heathen ido- 
 latry, which was not only in the highest degree absurd in 
 the theory, but which countenanced and even required the 
 practice of the most odious and degrading vices. 
 
 The old Socinian doctrine, that Christ, after his ascen- 
 sion, Vy'as advanced to the government of the universe, and 
 became the proper object of a secondary religious worship, 
 is now universally exploded. Even the modern Arians, 
 who, like Dr. Price, acknowledge Jesus Christ to be the 
 Maker and Governor of the world, and to be the Lord 
 their Maker, have, however inconsistently with their prin- 
 ciples, and with the examples of their predecessors, gene- 
 rally abandoned the worship of Christ. And upon this 
 ground they lay claim to the honourable distinction of Uni- 
 tarians. But as they continue to ascribe divine attributes 
 and works to Christ, though they deny him divine ho- 
 nours, this claim is hardly allowed by the stricter Unita- 
 rians. At any rate, these Arians cannot avail themselves 
 of the argument which many derive from the supposed au- 
 thorized v/orship of Christ to prove his pre-existence and 
 superior dignity; but are equally concerned with the proper 
 Unitarians, to explain the passages alleged for this purpose 
 in consistence with pure Unitarian principles. 
 
 it is proposed to state the principal texts in Vv'hich the 
 worship of Christ is said to be either taught or exemplified 
 
 <^ in 
 
226 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Parti. 
 
 in the New Testament, from which it will be easy to col- 
 lect how far they admit of being reconciled to the doctrine 
 of his proper humanity. 
 
 Religious worship is either mental or external. 
 
 I. Mental. — Clirist is said to be represented as the Object 
 of religious Regard. 
 
 1. Of Faith. 
 
 1. Rom. X. D. " If thou shalt confess with thy 
 mouth the L^rd Jesus Christ, and believe with thy heart 
 that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be 
 saved." 
 
 q. d. If thou shalt sincerely believe in the resurrection of 
 Jesus, and shalt profess thy faith in him as the true Mes- 
 siah, thou shalt be entitled to the blessings of the Gospel. 
 See Locke in loc. 
 
 2. 1 John V. 1 . " Whosoever believeth that Jesus 
 is the Christ, is born of God." 
 
 q. d. Every one who believes Jesus to be the true Mes- 
 siah, becomes by his profession a member of the christian 
 church, and is adopted into the family of God. — See also 
 John iii. ,06. Acts xvi. 30, 31 ; xxvi. 18. Gal. iii. 26. 
 1 Pet. ii. 6. 
 
 It u'ould be endless and u:»eless to cite all the passages 
 which require faith in Christ. It is obvious from the texts 
 above cited, that Faith has no mystical meaning annexed 
 to itj as some have imagined. Faith in Christ is either spe- 
 culative or practical. Speculative faith is, as the apostle 
 defines it above, assent to the proposition that Jesus is the 
 Christ, and that he rose from the dead. This constitutes 
 a person a christian, and entitles him to the external pri- 
 vileges of the Gospel. In the language of the New Tes- 
 tament, he is ' regenerated,' ' called,' ' forgiven,* ' justi- 
 fied/ ' adopted,' ' sanctified,' and ' saved :' he is ' a son 
 
 and 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 227 
 
 and heir,' he Ls ' chosen and holy :* that is, he is separated 
 from the unbeUeving and idolatrous world, he is translated 
 out of the ' kingdom of darkness' and of ' Satan* into the 
 * kingdom of light' and of ' God's dear Son.' He ig ad- 
 mitted into the new covenant, and stands in the same re- 
 lation to God as the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and 
 Jacob formerly did. 
 
 Practical Faith- is acting up to the conviction of the un- 
 derstanding ; and this is indispensably necessary to the fu 
 ture reward. He that heareth the sayings of Christ, and 
 doeth them, is the wise man who buildeth his house upon 
 a rock. 
 
 2. Christ Is the Object of Love. 
 
 1. John xiv. 21. " He that hath my command- 
 ments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me ; and he 
 that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love 
 him, and will manifest myself unto him." 
 
 2. 1 Cor. xvi. 22. " If any man love not the 
 Lord Jesus Christ, let him be Anathema, Maran-atha." 
 
 q. d. Let him be excluded from the christian commu- 
 nity. " The Lord is coming," who will animadvert upon 
 him as he deserves. The apostle alludes to the solemn 
 form of excommunication among the Jevv's, after they had 
 been deprived by the Romans of the power of inflicting ca- 
 pital punishments. They thus expressed their firm ex- 
 pectation, that God would interpose in some way or other 
 to carry into effect the sentence which they were not per- 
 mitted to execute. 
 
 3. 1 Pet. i. 8. " Whom, having not seen, ye 
 love." See also Matt. x. 37. John xvi. 27; xxi. 15, 16, 
 17. Eph. vi. 24. 
 
 Our Lord has so explicitly and repeatedly declared, that 
 all the love which he requires of his disciples is, to obey 
 the precepts of his Gospel, that it seem? surprising that per- 
 
 Q 2 sonal 
 
1^28 WHETHER CHRISf IS THE OBJECT [Part F. 
 
 sonal affection to Christ should be so often represented and 
 insisted upon as a christian duty of the highest importance. 
 The apostles and other immediate followers of Christ, who 
 knew him personally, and had derived personal benefits 
 from him, in addition to the greatest veneration for his 
 character, could not but feel the most affectionate attach- 
 ment to his person. But it is impossible that christians of 
 later times, who have had no personal intercourse with 
 Christ, and who have received no personal benefits from 
 him, can love him in the same sense in which the apostles 
 and his other companions did. They may indeed figure 
 to their imaginations an ideal person ; they may ascribe to 
 this person the most amiable attributes ; they may fancy 
 that they are under greater obligations to him than to the 
 Father himself; in the warmth of their imaginations, they 
 may conceive of themselves as holding converse with him, 
 and their affections may be drawn out to this ideal bene- 
 factor to a very great extent; their faith and hope, and love 
 and joy, mav swell even to ecstasy : — but this is not love 
 to Christ ; it is nothing but a fond and groundless affection 
 to a mere phantom of the imagination. Our Lord's de- 
 claration remains unaltered: '* He that hath my com- 
 mandments, AND KEEPETH THEM, HE IT IS THAT 
 
 LovLTH ME." This doctHue must necessarily appear very 
 cold and spiritless to those who delight in high flights of 
 fancy and of feeling in the concerns of religion. They 
 may perhaps represent it as the very J'rigid zone of chris. 
 tiatiity. But it is the Christianity which their Master 
 taught, and from which they who are content to learn 
 of him only, will not feel themselves authorized to de- 
 part. 
 
 It is indeed impossible for any person of reflection and 
 sensibility to read the interesting account of Christ in the 
 artless narrative of the evangelists, without being deeply 
 impressed with the wisdom and majesty of his doctrine, and 
 
 with 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RF.LIGTOUS WORSHIP. 229 
 
 with the simplicity and purity, the humility, the meekness 
 and fortitude, the habitual unaffected piety, the enlarged 
 active benevolence, and the mild but conscious dignity of 
 his exalted character. But this is no more than an unbe- 
 liever might experience, and what many have expressed : 
 and cannot with any propriety be called Love to Christ, in 
 the sense in which that phrase is commonly understood. 
 Also, no one can truly appreciate the blessings of the Go- 
 spel, without great thankfulness to God for the gift of his 
 Son to be the Saviour of the world. Any thing beyond 
 this appears to be incomprehensible, irrational, and un- 
 scriptural. That our Lord himself did not challenge per- 
 sonal affection as a christian duty, is further evident from 
 his declaration, IVIark iii. 35, " Whosoever shall do the 
 will of God, the same is my brother, or sister, or mother." 
 q. d. The man who performs his duty to God, is he who 
 bears the truest affection to me. And though, while on 
 earth, our Lord cultivated personal friendships, and the 
 apostles must all have felt the most ardent personal affec- 
 tion to their revered Master; and Paul in particular, having 
 been under peculiar obligations to Christ, often labours for 
 words to express the warmth of his attachment ; yet even 
 this apostle explicitly renounces the personal frieadship of 
 Christ himself; if it should prove, which he states as pos- 
 sible, an impediment to him in the exercise of his ministry : 
 2 Cor. V. 1 6, " Henceforth know we no man after the 
 flesh: yea, even though we have known Christ after the 
 flesh, yet now, henceforth, know we him no more.'* 
 q.d. If I had been the intimate friend of Christ, and in 
 the habit of daily personal intercourse with him, I must 
 forgo all the delight and advantage of his society, in or- 
 der to fulfill the purposes of the mission to which I am 
 appointed. 
 
 3. The 
 
230 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Parti. 
 
 3. The Care of the Soul to be committed to Christ. 
 
 In support of this stranc^e position, which, some repre- 
 sent as the most important of christian duties, only one text 
 is produced, and that most evidently misapplied. 
 
 2 Tim. i. 1 1, 12. " — The Gospel, vvhereunto I 
 am appointed a preacher, and an apostle, and a teacher of 
 the Gentiles. For which cause I also suffer these things : 
 nevertheless I am not ashamed ; for I know in whom I have 
 believed, and I am persuaded that he is able to keep that 
 which I have committed to him," t/jv 7ra^oi9yjK"/}v ^a, my 
 deposit, '' against that day." 
 
 " That is," says Dr. Doddridge, " I know to whom I 
 have trusted all my most important concerns ; and I am 
 fully persuaded that he is well able to keep that precious 
 and immortal soul which I have deposited with him, unto 
 that great and important day, when the promised salvation 
 shall be completed." 
 
 But certainly this is not the true meaning of the apostle. 
 The word Tiapa^jj^cjj occurs only in two other places in the 
 New Testament. See Griesbach in loc. In this chapter 
 it is repeated, ver. 14, where it is rendered, " that which 
 was committed to thee ;" and again, 1 Tim. vi. 20, " that 
 ■(vhich is committed to thy trust." In both passages it 
 means the Gospel, the doctrine of Christ. x\nd this is un- 
 doubtedly the sense in which the word is used here: " I am 
 persuaded that he is able to keep that which he has in- 
 trusted to me unto that day." The holy and generous 
 apostle triumphs in the thought, that, whatever becomes of 
 him.self, the great cause in which he is embarked shall 
 never fail. The doctrine of Christ, the interest of truth 
 and righteousness, shall survive and prosper, and shall en- 
 dure and advance to the end of time'. 
 
 4. Christians 
 
 ' See Griesbach^^rotiuSj and Benson in loc. The case of Stephen, 
 
 Acts 
 
Sect. II.] OF RELIGIOUS M'ORSHIP. 231 
 
 4. Christians are to devote themselves to the Service of 
 
 Christ. 
 
 2 Cor. V. 14. " For the love of Christ constraineth 
 us while we thus judge, that if one died for all, then were 
 all dead ; and he died for all, that they who live should not 
 henceforth live unto thcnnselves, but to him who died for 
 them, and rose agL\in." See also Rom. xiv. S, 9. Phi- 
 lipp. i. 20, 21. 
 
 They live to Christ, whose lives are devoted to promote 
 that cause for which he lived and died, and rose again; and 
 to this end he died and rose, that all being now raised by 
 him to the hope of life may consecrate their existence to 
 his service. 
 
 II. External Homage requirecl or exemplified to Christ. 
 1. Christ was worshiped during his Residence on Earth. 
 
 1 . Matt, xxviii. 9. " Jesus met them, saying, All 
 hail ! and they came and held him by his feet, and wor- 
 shiped him." — Ver. 17, " When they saw him, they wor- 
 shiped him.'* 
 
 2. Luke xxiv. 51, 52. " While he blessed them 
 he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven : and 
 they worshiped him." See also Matt. ix. 18; xv. 25. 
 John ix. 38. 
 
 The worship in these instances offered to Christ was 
 civil respect, not religious homage. The word 7rpoa-K.vv?co 
 is often used in this sense, as well as the English word 
 worship. Dan. ii. 48, " Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his 
 face, and worshiped Daniel." — Acts x. 25, " Cornelius 
 fell at Peter's feet, and worshiped him." These were in- 
 
 Acts vli. 5g, is brought as an instance of committing the soul, i. e. the 
 departing spirit, to the care of Christ. See Doddridge ia loc. This 
 passage is considered p. 239. 
 
 dicaiions 
 
232 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Part I. 
 
 dications of high respect to persons visibly present, who 
 were supposed to be messengers from God, but who were 
 not believed to be themselves gods. But the question is 
 concerning the lawfulness of addressing worship to Christ, 
 now that he is no longer sensibly present. 
 
 2. Christ is said to challenge the same Honours which 
 are due to the Father. 
 
 John V. 23. " That all men may honour the Son, 
 even as (^xa^oug) they honour the Father, He that ho- 
 noureth not the Son honoureth not the Father who sent 
 him.'* 
 
 The obvious meaning is, that Christ, being the messen- 
 ger of God, the very same regard is due to his message 
 which would be due to an oracle delivered by God him- 
 self; and that to disregard Christ under this character is 
 the same affront to the Supreme B'c^ing, as it would be to 
 disregard the voice of God himself^. 
 
 S. Baptism is to be administered into the Name of Christ, 
 together with those of the Father and the Spirit. 
 
 Matt, xxviii. 19. " — teach all nations, baptizing 
 them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of 
 the Floly Spirit." 
 
 Hence many have inferred the proper deity of Christ, 
 
 ' " So far is thi? mucli-cited text from proving that divine worship) 
 is to be paid to Christ equally with the Father, that it does not relat'? 
 to worship at all." Lindsey's Seq. p. 110, &c. — See also Clarke on 
 the Trinity, No. 689. It is surprising that learned Trinitarians, and 
 still more so that the Polish Socinians, should argue from this text, that 
 the same honours which are due to God, are also to be paid to Christ. 
 Sec Whitby, Doddridge, and Wolzogenius in loc. " Socinians," says 
 Dr. Price, " choose to be called Unitarians ; bat they have no exclu- 
 sive right to this title, and former Socinians had no right at all ; for they 
 concurred with Trinitarians in worshiping a deified roan." Price's 
 Serm. p. 143 j note, 
 
 and 
 
Sect, 11. J OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 230 
 
 and that he is the object of religious worship^. If there be 
 any force in this conclusion, it must arise either from the 
 name of Christ being introduced into the rite of baptism, 
 or from its being connected in the same formulary with 
 those of the Father and of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 That baptism into the name of any person signifies no- 
 thing more than the acknowledgement of his authority, 
 and expresses no belief in his proper deity, is evident from 
 what the apostle says of the Israelites, 1 Cor. x. 2, that 
 they were " baptized into Moses." And when the same 
 apostle expresses his apprehensions, 1 Cor. i. 15, " lest 
 any should say that he had baptized into his own name," 
 he could not suspect that they would represent him as 
 claiming divine honours, but merely, as assuming to be the 
 head and leader of the christian sect. 
 
 Nor does the uniting the name of the Son with that of 
 the Father and the Holy Spirit in the administration of 
 baptism, prove the deity of Christ, or that he is any thing 
 more than an exalted human being : much less does it 
 prove that he is the proper object of religious worship. 
 For, waving the consideration whether the text be ge- 
 nuine, whether it was intended as a formulary of the rite, 
 whether the names of the Father and Spirit were ever used 
 in primitive baptism, whether the precedents in the New 
 Testament are not all into the name of Christ only ; and 
 fmally, whether a positive institution, which contains no 
 direct address to an invisible being, can with any propriety 
 be regarded as an act of religious worship j it is certain that 
 
 ^ '^ The christian church in succeeding ages has acted a wise and 
 safe part in retaining these words : and they contain so strong an inti- 
 mation that each of these persons is properly God, and that worship is 
 to be paid, and glory to be ascribed, to each, tliat I cannot but hope 
 they will be the means of maintaining the belief of the one, and the 
 practice of the other, among the generality of christians to the end of 
 time." Doddridge in loc. — See Grotius in loc. ; and Lindsey's Apo- 
 logy, p. 11 7, 3cc. 
 
 no 
 
234 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Parti. 
 
 r)o inference of equality in rank or homage can be drawn 
 from the association of different names in the same sen- 
 tence. See 1 Chron. xxix. 20, " All the congregation 
 bowed down their heads, and worshiped the Lord and the 
 king." — 1 Sam. xii. 18, " The people feared the Lord and 
 the king." — I Tim. v. 2], "1 charge thee before God, 
 and Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe 
 these things.'* 
 
 4. Angels are required to worship Christ. 
 
 Heb. i. 6. *' Let all the angels of God worship 
 him :" i. e. Let all former prophets and messengers ac- 
 knowledge him as their superior. See p. 1 32. 
 
 5. Every Knee is to bow at the Name of Jesus. 
 
 Philipp. ii. 9, 1 0. " Wherefore God also hath highly 
 exalted him, and given him a name which is above every 
 name; that at the name," sy cvojjuxti, in the name, " of Je- 
 sus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things 
 in earth, and things under the earth," &c. 
 
 The learned Peirce, whose system countenanced the 
 worship of Christ, explains this text in his paraphrase as 
 not bearing upon tiiat question. " Upon this account God 
 has advanced him higher than before, and freely bestowed 
 on him an authority that is superior to whatever he granted 
 to any other : tliat bi/ virtue of the aulliority of Jesus all 
 should be constrained to submit to God." 
 
 6. Adjuration by Christ. '' 
 
 1 Thess. V. 27. " I charge," o,.K;^a;, I adjure, "you 
 by the Lord, that this epistle be read to all the holy bre- 
 thren " 
 
 Dr. Clarke observes, that the expression is ambiguous. 
 God may be the person intended. It seems indeed to be 
 nothing more than a solemn request and charge. 
 
 7. Christ 
 
 I 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 235 
 
 7. Christ is appealed to as a Witness. 
 
 Rom. ix. I . " I speak the truth in Christ, I lie 
 not." 
 
 i. e. " Christ being my witness,'* says Dr. Clarke, 
 No. 697. But the words admit of adiflerent interpretation. 
 Mr. Locke's explanation is, " As a christian I speak the 
 truth:" and with him agree Crellius, Dr. Taylor, and many 
 others. See 2 Cor. xii. 19. 1 Tim. ii. 7. 
 
 8. Christians are described as invoking the Name of 
 
 Christ. 
 
 1. Acts ix. 14. " Ananias answered, Lord — he 
 hath authority here from the chief priests to bind all that 
 call on thj name'^.^* That Jesus was the person to whom 
 this answer was addressed, is evident from ver. 17. But 
 these words may be rendered, ' who are called,* or ' who 
 call themselves, after thy name^ i. e. who profess them- 
 selves thy disciples. See Acts ix. 21; xxii. 16. Rom. 
 X. 13, 14. 
 
 2. 1 Cor. i. 2. " — with all that in every place 
 call upon the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.'* 
 
 Or, rather, as Mr. Wakefield renders it, to all in every ■ 
 place " that take upon themselves the name of our Lord 
 Jesus Christ^." 
 
 9, Dependence 
 
 * '*■ ctt iKaXeiJ.sves to ovo[j.x <rn, all that call themselves by thy name." 
 Wakefield. — EvriJiaXfOjaa; is used both in the active and the middle or 
 reciprocal sense, a [j~.ovov, itpo; ^oriSsiav nvo, Kcioay-aXM, aAXa y.a.\, 
 STTivo/xa^o^aai. Phavorinus apud Schleusner. — Acts vii. 59, " They 
 stoned Stephen, sTTotaASiO-svov, involiing and saying," &c. See 1 Pet. 
 i. 17. Calling upon, or calling one's self by, the name of the Lord is 
 no uncommon periphrasis for being truly religious. Deut. xxviii. 10. 
 Joel ii. 32. I'salm Ixxix. Q. James ii. 7. See Wakefield on Acts ii, 21. 
 " Hinc factum est, ut formula STTixaAEicrSaj cvo^aa t'jvoj significaret 
 in universum, prqfiteri rc/igionern aliciijus." Schleusner. 
 
 " Dr. Doddridge, in his note, remarks, ** This strongly implies that 
 it might well be taken for granted that every true christian would often 
 
 pray 
 
236 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Part I. 
 
 9. Dependence upon Christ for Direction and Success. 
 
 Philipp. ii. 19, "I trust in the Lord Jesus to send 
 Timothy to you shortly." — Ver. 24, " I trust in the Lord 
 that I also myself shall come shortly." 
 
 The apostle in his journeys, and in the general execu- 
 tion of his mission, appears to have been under the special 
 direction of Christ, ^ee Acts xiii. 1, '2; xvi. 6, 7. 9, 10. 
 
 10. Doxologies alleged to be addressed to Christ. 
 
 1 . 2 Tim. iv. 17,18. " — the Lord shall deliver 
 mc from every evil work, and will preserve me unto his 
 heavenly kingdom, to whom be glory for ever and ever." 
 
 Dr. Clarke, No. 710, remarks, that " it is somewhat 
 ambiguous whether this be spoken of Christ, or of God the 
 Father, but that it seems rather to be meant of Christ." 
 And where Christ is mentioned under the character of a 
 king, glory or honour may fitly be ascribed to him ; mean- 
 ing thereby to express a wish that the glory of his king- 
 dom may be everlasting, or that the great founder and 
 ruler of this spiritual empire may be held in everlasting ho- 
 nour by his admiring and grateful subjects. 
 
 2. Heb. xiii. 20, 21. " Now the God of peace 
 make you perfect, — working in you that which is welU 
 pleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be 
 glory for ever and ever." 
 
 Dr. Clarke observes, ibid. No. 744, that " it is ambi- 
 
 pray to Christ, as well as address the Father in his name." More to 
 the purpose is the observation of Mr. Locke, " ' Called by the name of 
 .Tesus Christ.' These words are a periphrasis for christians, as is plain 
 from the design of this verse." — " ETTixaAfeJcrOaf signiticat cognoviinari. 
 Matt. X. 3. Luc. xxii. 3. Act. i. 23 ; iv. 36. j aliisque in locis, in 
 quibus est passivae, non activze significationis. Igitur £7r;xaA£;crOa; 
 otGfz-a est vocMri 7iowine Jesu Chrisii quasi agnomine, quod notat sin- 
 galarem conjunctionem quae nobis cum Christo intercedit, qualis est 
 sponsae cum viro, vel qualis servi cum hero, qui de nomine heri etiatu 
 appellatur. Itaque siriKocX. k. r. A. est hic tantum periphrasis Cbris- 
 tiauorum." Hammond in loCp 
 
 guous 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 237 
 
 guous in the construction, whether this refers to Christ or 
 to the Father." He applies the same remark, No. 746, to 
 1 Pet. iv. 11, where the relative may also refer to the re- 
 moter antecedent. And it is more consonant to the usijal 
 practice of the sacred writers to address doxologies to God. 
 
 S. 2 Pet. iii. 1 3. " But grow in grace, and in the 
 knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; to him 
 be glory both now and for ever. Amen." 
 
 Three manuscripts and the Syriac version add the words 
 " and of God the Father." It is also to be remembered 
 that the epistle itself is of doubtful authority. 
 
 4. Rev. i. .5, G. " Unto him who loved us, and 
 washed us from our sins in his own blood, and hath made 
 us kings and priests unto God and his Father, to him be 
 glory and dominion for ever and ever.'* 
 
 One manuscript cited by Mill and Griesbach reads thus: 
 *' Grace and peace from Jesus Christ, — even from him 
 who loved us (m uyan yjo-ocvrcg'), and made us kings and 
 priests to God — to him" (;'. e. God) " be glory." The 
 very different readings of this disturbed passage, says Mr, 
 Lindsey, Apol. p. 144, " show that it has suffered by the 
 negligence of transcribers, and therefore no certain con- 
 clusion can be drawn from it." 
 
 1 1 . Thanksgiving addressed to Christ. 
 
 1. Eph. V. 19, 20. " Singing and making me- 
 lody in your heart unto the Lord : giving thanks to God 
 even the Father in the name of our I^ord Jesus Christ." 
 
 " The connexion seems to determine the word ' Lord' 
 to be meant of God." Dr. Clarke, ibid. No. 7 1 3. — And 
 in the parallel passage, Col. iii. 16, " singing with grace 
 in your hearts unto the Lord :" the best manuscripts and 
 Griesbach's text read " God." 
 
 2. 1 Tim. i. 12. "I thank Christ Jesus my Lord, 
 
 who 
 
238 WHETHER CHRIS r IS THIi OBJECT [Parti. 
 
 who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, 
 putting me into the ministry." 
 
 The Clermont copy and /Ethiopia version read, "I thank 
 him who enabled me, sv XPKrrcd, by Christ Jesus." But the 
 Received Text is the best supported, and is a very proper 
 expression of the apostle's gratitude for the great personal 
 obligations he was under to Christ. 
 
 3. Rev. V. 8 — 14. "And when he had taken the 
 book, the four beasts and the four-and-twenty elders fell 
 down before the Lamb, — and they sang a new song, say- 
 ing, Thou art worthy to take the book, — for thou wast 
 slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood. — And 
 1 heard the voice of many angels round about the throne, 
 — -saying with a loud voice. Worthy is the Lamb that was 
 slain to receive power, and glory, and blessing. And every 
 creature which is in heaven, and on the earth, and under 
 the earth, and such as are in the sea, and all that are in 
 them, heard I saying, Blessing and honour, and glory and 
 power, be unto him that sitteth upon the throne, and unto 
 the Lamb for ever and ever." 
 
 Upon this splendid description of the whole creation, as 
 united in ascribing honour and thanksgiving to God and 
 the Lamb, we may remark, 
 
 1. That the authenticity of the book is doubtful. 
 No doctrine therefore is to be admitted upon this evidence, 
 which is^clearly to be proved from other undisputed Scrip- 
 tures.— 2. The whole scene is visionary, and, in a literal 
 sense, impossible: and It is unreasonable to argue from vi- 
 sions to realities. — 3. The foundation of the homage paid 
 to the Lamb is, that he was slain : therefore he is not God, 
 nor entitled to divine honours. — 4. The homage paid is 
 addressed to a person sensibly and visibly present ; it can- 
 not therefore authorize religious addresses to the same 
 being, when he is not sensibly present. — 5. It has been 
 
 already 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. 239 
 
 already proved (page 233), that the association of the name 
 of God with that of some other person, even in an act of 
 worship, by no means proves equality of nature, rank, or 
 homage. — 6. Admitting the genuineness and inspiration 
 oi the Apocalypse, the lofty and symbolical language of 
 prophecy may possibly mean nothing more than to ex- 
 press the joy and gratitude of the whole human race at the 
 triumphs of the Gospel^. 
 
 12. Christ invoked in Prayer. 
 1 . Acts vii. 59. " They stoned Stephen, Invoking 
 and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." 
 
 The example of Stephen is regarded by many as deci- 
 sive in favour of the practice of addressing prayer to Christ. 
 He was full of the holy spirit, chap. vi. 5 ; and in the very 
 article of death, he prays to Christ in language exactly si- 
 milar to that which, in the same circumstances, Jesus used 
 to his heavenly Father : Luke xxiii. 46. 
 
 But to wave the remark, that the solitary unauthorized 
 example of this good man would of itself be no sufficient 
 warrant for a practice contrary to the precepts of Christ, 
 and the doctrine of his apostles, which are the only proper 
 directory of christian worship, it may be observed, that this 
 holy proto-martyr had just been favoured with an actual 
 vision of our Lord, ver. 55, and that the vivid impression 
 of it, if not the vision itself, must have continued on his 
 mindj so that he had a certain knowledge, if not a visible 
 perception, of the real presence of Christ. The example 
 of this primitive martyr, therefore, does not fall within the 
 
 ' " The blessing and honour is tendered to the object present and 
 visible ; — the reason assigned shows that he cannot be God, viz. his 
 beiiig the Lamb that was slain, i. e. spotless innocence, perfect virtue 
 and goodness tried and confirmed by suiferings. Ascribing glory and 
 honour vo Christ does in no degree authorize the worship of him, or 
 prayer to him. It is no more than a declaration of reverence and high 
 esteem of his most perfect moral characler and goodness." Linds, 
 Apol, p. 145. J Seq. p. C)t>. 
 
 limit 
 
240 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT [Parti. 
 
 limit of religious worship, nor in the least degree autho- 
 rize addresses to Christ when he is not sensibly present 7. 
 
 2. 2 Cor. xii. 8, 9. " — there was given me a 
 thorn in the flesh. For this thing I besought the Lord 
 thrice, that it might depart from me. — And he said unto 
 me, My strength," hvocixig, " is made perfect in weaknesEj 
 — gladly therefore will I glory in my infirmities, that the 
 power," ^vvcciMig, the strengtli, •' of Christ may rest upon 
 me." 
 
 Mr. Lindsey, Apol. p. 147, with Hammond, Beausobre, 
 and others, conceives that the apostle's prayer was ad- 
 dressed to the Father. But the context plainly indicates 
 the contrary. The person to whom he prayed was Christ, 
 who had promised to remain with tlie apostles to the end 
 of the age, who had repeatedly appeared to Paul in person 
 and in vision, and to whom the apostle applied upon some 
 occasion, when it is evident that his Master was sensibly 
 present with hiui, for he cites the very words of our Lord's 
 reply. But this is no warrant to others who are not in- 
 tlulged with the same privilege. 
 
 1 3. Devout Wishes of Blessings from Christ supposed 
 to be equivalent to Prayers. 
 
 Wishes and prayers are very far from being terms of the 
 same import. A wish is merely the expression of desire. 
 Prayer is that expression addressed to one who is supposed 
 to be present, and able to accomplish it. And if this per- 
 son, though not sensibly, is believed to be really present, 
 prayer is an act of religious worship. To wish, may be in- 
 nocent and proper in some cases in which prayer would be 
 unreasonable and idolatrous. I may innocently wish that 
 a person in power may grant an office to a friend, to ask 
 
 ' See Mr. Lindsoy's Sequel, p. 6 — /I. Haynes on the Attributesj 
 p. 152. Lindsay's Exam, of Robinson's Plea, Sect. VI. 
 
 for 
 
Sect. 11.] OF RELIGIOUS WORSHIP. S41 
 
 for which, if the person were present, might or might not 
 be proper according to circumstances ; but to pray to him 
 for it when he is absent, with an expectation that he will 
 hear and grant the request, would be downright idolatry. 
 
 Paul and the other sacred writers commonly begin and 
 end their epistles with devout wishes for evangelical bless- 
 ings from God and Christ, upon those to whom their 
 epistles are addressed. These have been regarded by many 
 as equivalent to prayers and acts of religious worship of 
 Christ equally with God, from which they have inferred 
 that Christ is truly God, and the proper object of divine 
 worship 8. But this conclusion is certainly erroneous. 
 Otherwise it would follow from the benediction, Rev. i. 4, 
 " Grace be to you, and peace from him Who is, and who 
 was, and who is to come, and from the seven spirits who 
 are before his throne," that these seven spirits also are 
 proper objects of divine v/orship. 
 
 The Gospel is often called ' grace or favour,' because 
 it is a free, unmerited, unsolicited, unpurchased gift. 
 Sometimes it is called the ' grace or favour,* or ' free gift 
 of God,' because it comes originally from God, — some- 
 times, as Philipp. iv. 23, it is called ' the favour of Christ,' 
 because Christ was the authorized publisher of these glad 
 tidings. And the purport of the benevolent wish so often 
 repeated in the apostolic writings, is, that those who are the 
 object of it may enjoy all the blessings of the Gospel dis- 
 pensation, which is the free gift of God through Jesus 
 
 •* Melanctlion, in a letter to Camerarius, in 1532, after predicting 
 the disputes and distuibances which would some time or other arise 
 about the Trinity, adds, " 1 take refuge in those plain declarations of 
 Scripture, which enjoin prayer to Christ, which is to ascribe tiie proper 
 honour of divinity to him, and is full of consolation." — See Mr. Lind- 
 sey's Apol, p. 1 50. So Crellius argues in his Note upon 1 Thess. iii. 1 1 , 
 " Insigne ut curae et providentise circa nos Domini Jesu argumentum, 
 ita invocati ipsius exemplum. Votum enim ejusmodi, quod eum a quo 
 aliquid voveo audire sum persuasus, precalionis vim habet, atque adeo 
 ipsa, licet indirecta;, precatio est.'* 
 
 R Christ, 
 
242 WHETHER CHRIST IS THE OBJECT, ETC. [Parti. 
 
 Christ J by whom these glad tidings were communicated to 
 the world. 
 
 1. Rom. i. 7. " Grace be to you, and peace from 
 God our Father, and from the Lord Jesiis Christ." q. d. 
 May that peace be yours which is the fruit of the Gospe-, 
 the free gift of God by Jesus Christ. See chap. xvi. 20. 
 1 Cor. i. S ; xvi. 23. 2 Cor. i. 2. 
 
 2. 2 Cor. xiii. 14. " The grace of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, the love of God, and the communion*' or partici- 
 pation " of the Holy Spirit, be with you all." q. d. May 
 you all enjoy the inestimable blessings of the gospel of 
 Christ, the favour of God, and the gift of the Holy Spirii. 
 
 3. 2 Thess. li. 16, 17. "Now our Lord Jesus 
 Christ himself, and God even our Father, who hath loved 
 us, and given us everlasting consolation and good hope 
 throuiT'h grace, comfort your hearts." q. d. May your 
 hearts be comforted by the love of God revealed in the 
 goepel of Christ. 
 
 4. 1 Tim. i. 2. " Grace, mercy, and peace from 
 God our Father, and from Jesus Christ our Lord." q. d. 
 May you obtain forgiveness of sin and reconciliation with 
 God, which are the privileges of the Gospel dispensation. 
 Here, grace, mercy, and peace are put for the mercy and 
 peace of the Gospel, as the way, the truth, and the life are 
 put, John xlv. 16, for the true way to Hfe. 
 
 In the same manner other similar expressions of devout 
 and benevolent wishes may be explained. And upon the 
 whole, we have abundant reason to conclude, that there is 
 neither precept nor example in the New Testament to war- 
 rant the addressing of prayers or any other kind of reli- 
 gious worship to Christ. To one who forms his judge- 
 ment from the New Testament, the Father only is God, 
 and the proper and sole object of religious worship. 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. 12.] 243 
 
 SECTION XII. 
 
 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE PROPER HUMANITY OF 
 JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 It is not necessary to the establishment of the proper hu- 
 manity of Jesus Christ to produce specific arguments for 
 this purpose. For who would require proof that one who 
 appears in all respects as a man, is in fact a proper human 
 being ? If Christ had, as is universally allowed, all the 
 external appearance of a man, he must in all reason be 
 considered as a man, in no other way distinguished from 
 his brethren than as being invested with an extraordinary 
 divine commission. Whoever maintains that Christ is a 
 being of superior order, an angel, a super-angelic Logos, 
 or a God, it is incumbent upon him to substantiate his as- 
 sertion by clear and satisfactory evidence. If these argu- 
 ments, after being carefully examined^ are found to be in- 
 sufficient, it is not at all necessary to produce proof that 
 Christ is a mere man. The conclusion follows irresistibly, 
 an-d of course. In the preceding sections, all the evidence 
 in favour of the pre- existence and superior nature of 
 Christ has been produced and investigated ; and if we are 
 satisfied that these texts, neiiher singly nor collectively, 
 contain any valid proof of this important point, the as- 
 sumption falls to the ground, and the proper humanity of 
 Christ remains as a plain indisputable fact. As, however, 
 the contrary opinion has for many ages been the prevailing 
 behef of the christian world, it may be of use to annex a 
 concise view of the arguments which tend more immedi- 
 ately to establish and confirm the doctrine that Jesus 
 Christ vvas a man in all respects like other men, except in 
 
 R 2 having 
 
244 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 having been selected by divine wisdom to be the messen- 
 ger of truth and mercy to mankind. 
 
 I. The total silence of the evangelists Matthew, Mark, 
 and Luke concerning our Lord's pre-existence and divi- 
 nity is utterly unaccountable, if these stupendous facts are 
 true, and were known to those writers. This plain and 
 unanswerable argument has been stated before^. 
 
 IL The 
 
 ' See above, Sect. HI. p. 10. Also, Letters upon Arianism, in Re- 
 ply to Mr. B. Carpenter, Lett. 8. Modern theologians pay little at- 
 tention to this ditficulty, which appears to have created, as it well 
 might, very considerable en)bana5iment to the ancient ecclesiastical 
 writers, w!io ascribe t.He silence of the evangelists to their great pru- 
 dence in avoiding to shock the prejudices of their hearers, by tlivulging 
 the obnoxious doctrine of Christ's divinity. Athanasius says, " the 
 Jews of that age thought that Christ was a mere man, resembling other 
 descendants of David, and did not believe either that he was God, or 
 that the Word was made flesh. On this account the blessed apostles, 
 with great prudence, in the first place taught what related to the hu- 
 manity of our Saviour to the Jews, that they might afterwards bring 
 them to the belief of his divinity." Athanas. 0pp. vol. i. p. 553. Dr. 
 Priestley's Early Opinions, vol. iii. p. 89. 
 
 Chrysostom says, " ' In the beginning was the Word.' This doc- 
 trine was not published at first, for the world would not receive it. 
 Wherefore Matthew, Mark, and Luke began at a distance : — they did 
 not immediately say what was becoming his dignity, but what would 
 suit the hearers. John, the son of thunder, advanced to the doctrine 
 of the divinity. As the lightning precedes the thunder, they flashed 
 the (Economy (i. e. the humanity; of Christ : but he thundered out the 
 divinity." Chrysost. de Sig. Opp. vol. vi. p. 171. — Priestley, ibid. 
 p. 130. This writer also represents the apostle John as holding a solilo- 
 quy with himself when he was about to write his history. '' Why do 
 I delay ? Why do I not publish what angels are ignorant of? Why do 
 I not write what Matthew, and Mark, and Luke, through a wise and 
 praiseworthy timidity, passed over in silence, according to the orders 
 which were given them i* I will v/rite a book which will stop the 
 mouths of all who speak unjustly of God. Leaving all things that come 
 to pass from time, and in time, I will speak of that which is without all 
 time, and is uncreated, the Logos of God." Chrys. ibid. vol. vi. p. 606. 
 Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 134. 
 
 Epiphanius says, " the blessed John, coming and finding men em- 
 ployed about the humanity of Christ, and the Ebionitcs in an error 
 ■ about the genealogy, and the Cerinthians and Merinthians maintaining 
 that he was a mere man, descended of human parents, as coming last 
 he began to call back the wanderers, and those who were employed 
 about the humanity of Christ." Epiphan. Opp. vol. i p. 7'^?' Dr. 
 Priestley, ibid. p. 140. 
 
 Jerome 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPILR HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 245 
 
 II. The pre-existence and divinity of Christ are no 
 where taught as doctrines of revelation, but are left to be 
 
 inferred from indirect arguments, obscure phraseology, 
 and ambiguous hints. 
 
 The doctrine of a future life, which is truly a doctrine 
 of revelation, is taught in the most explicit language, so 
 that ho bi^liever in the mission of Christ can possibly en- 
 tertain a doubt of it. And if Christ were God, or the 
 Maimer and Supporter of the world under God, this doc- 
 trine being of such high importance would, no doubt, have 
 been taught with equal clearness and precision. That it 
 is not so taught, is abundantly evident from the numerous 
 controversies which have subsisted, and which continue to 
 subsist upon that subject, and that not only among the ig- 
 norant and prejudiced, but among persons equally honest, 
 and learned, and inquisitive, and equally desirous of know- 
 ing the truth. 
 
 III. The apostles either did or did not know of the pre- 
 existent state and dignity of Christ during his personal mi- 
 nistry, and while they were personally conversant with him. 
 
 Jerome says, " John the aposile, whom Jesus loved, wrote his go- 
 spel last of all, at the intreaty of the bishops of Asia^ against Cerinthus 
 and other heretics., and especially against the doctrine of the Ebionites, 
 then gaining ground, who said ti:at Christ had no existence before he 
 \v.3s born of Mary." Hieronym. 0pp. vol. i. p. 273. Dr. Priestley, 
 ibid. p. 142. 
 
 The prudent timidity and reserve which, by these early writers, is 
 ascribed to the evan^^eiists, is utterly unworthy of their character, and 
 has no foundation ia fact. Nor would it be admitted by modern ad- 
 vocates of the pre-existence and divinity of Christ. The truth is, that 
 the sacred writers never mention these extraordinary facts, because 
 they had never heard of them. Otherwise silence would have been 
 impossible. To write the life of Caesar, and forget the battle of Phar- 
 salia, or to publish tlie history of Nelson, and to omit the victories of 
 the Nile and of Tral'algar, would be nothing in comparison with three 
 historians undertaking to write the life of Christ, and one of them car- 
 rying on the history of the promnlgation of Christianity to thirty years 
 after our Lord's ascension, without giving one single hint that the sub- 
 ject of their narrative was the Maker of the world himself in an incar- 
 nate form, if they had known this extraordinary fact. 
 
 If 
 
246 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Fait I. 
 
 If it is maintained that they were informed of this 
 amazing fact, it may justly be asked. When did they first 
 come to the knowledge of it ? What marks are there of 
 that astonishment and terror with which their minds must 
 have been overwhelmed when this extraordinary secret was 
 first divulged to them ? How could they ever recover 
 themselves from this consternation so far as to he able af. 
 terwards to associate and converse freely and familiarly 
 with their Maker and their God, to put questions to him, 
 and occasionally even to contradict and rebuke him ; and 
 finally, to desert him when he was arrested, judged, and 
 crucified ? — It is indeed alleged, that this impression of as- 
 tonishment and dismay would gradually wear off. But the 
 fact is, that it does not appear to have been ever excired. 
 Through the whole course of his ministry, our Lord was 
 uniformly treated by his associates and disciples as a man, 
 highly distinguished, indeed, by divine communications 
 and powers ; but in no other respect different from, his bre- 
 thren. Their vvhole conduct to Christ is utterly unac- 
 countable upon any other supposition. To affirm that the 
 impression of his infinite superiority, if revealed, would 
 have worn off, is gratuitous and improbable, nay, impos- 
 sible, in the few short months or years in which he lived 
 amongst them. Did Abraham or Moses ever approach to 
 that familiarity in their intercourse with God, which the 
 apostles continually used, even to the very last, in con- 
 versing with Jesus ? Let us for a moment make the case 
 our own. If the discovery should unexpectedly be made, 
 that a person with whom we have for some time associated 
 as a companion, whom we have loved as a friend, have re- 
 vered as an instructor, and have venerated as a saint, — is 
 not what we have always presumed him to be, a man like 
 ourselves, but an angel in human form ; is it possible that 
 we could ever recover from the astonishment which this 
 discQveiy would occasion, so as to converse with him 
 
 again 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 247 
 
 again upon the same term's of familiarity and ease ? What, 
 then, would be the effect produced^ if it were ascertained 
 that this person was our Maker and our God ? — Nothing 
 could be so disturbing to the mind, or so offensive to the 
 prejudices of a Jew, as the novel and strange doctrines of 
 subordinate Jehovahs, of delegated Creators, and of trini- 
 ties of equal persons in a unity of the divine essence : and 
 yet, as some think, all this was revealed to the apostles 
 during the personal ministry of our Saviour, without giv- 
 ing birth to one single expression of surprise, or calling 
 iorth a single comment. 
 
 The difficulties upon the supposition that this informa- 
 tion was communicated to the apostles during the perso- 
 nal ministry of our Saviour are indeed so great, that it has 
 been a prevailing opinion with many, that the doctrines 
 of our Lord's pre-existence and divinity were not com- 
 pletely divulged nil after his ascension". But this con^ 
 
 cession 
 
 - This question is not yet completely settled by the believers in these 
 doctrines ; nor lias it indeed been attended to as its importance deserves. 
 For I will venture to say, it can never be solved upon the hypothesis 
 of Arianisni or Trinitarianism, so as to satisfy a judicious and imparv 
 fial inquirer. The late ingenious and pious Mr. Gilpin, vicar of Bol>- 
 dre, in his Exposition of the New Testament, explains John xiv. 7, as 
 a declaration of the divinity of Christ, y. d. " They who know me 
 know the Father also." To which the apostle Philip very coolly re- 
 plies, " If that be the case, give us some extniordinary sign, that we 
 
 MAY KNO V YOUR EaUALITY WITH THE FATHER," And OUr Lord 
 
 having given his disciple satisfaction in this point, the conversation 
 goes on quietly as usual. The learned commentator, to confirm his 
 exposition, adds in a note, " Pliilip did not want proof of the Father, 
 JD whom he already believed ; but he wanted proof of that equality 
 which Jesus asserted he had with the Father." Can any thing be 
 rr.ore extraordinary and incredible, than that such an astonishing dis- 
 covery should have passed without any particular notice, as a mere 
 ordinary topic of conversation ? In any similar case, if such a case 
 could be imagined, Mr. Gilpin would have been one of the tirst to see 
 and remark the absurdity, for he was a man of sense, and taste, and 
 feeling. But such is the power of prejudice to fascinate even the wise. 
 How very differently, and how much more natuially, did the people 
 oi Lystra act, when, from the miraculous cure oi the lame man, they 
 
 conclude4 
 
248 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part !• 
 
 cession creates an equal difficult}^ on the other side. For, 
 if the pre-existence and divinity of Christ were not known 
 to his disciples during his personal ministry, it is plain that 
 many passages, which are nov/ alleged as clear and un- 
 equivocal assertions of those doctrines, must have been un- 
 derstood by the persons to whom they were immediately- 
 addressed in a sense compatible with our Lord's proper 
 humanity. And the Unitarians are no longer to be ar- 
 raigned as perverting the plain language of Scripture, 
 when they interpret such phrases as " ascending into and 
 descending from heaven," " existing before Abraham/' 
 '• having glory with the Father before the world was," 
 and the like, as referring, not to local situation and actual 
 pre-existence, but to a divine commission, and tocxistance 
 in the divine purpose. 
 
 IV. The Jews in the apostolic age never charged the 
 Christians with polytheism or idolairy. 
 
 The apostles and their follou^ers were loudly impeached 
 by the Jews as ' pestilent fellows,' as ' movers of sedition,' 
 as ' men that turned the world upside down,' as ' blas- 
 phemers of the law,' as ' profaners of the temple,' but ne- 
 ver as idolaters, as the worshipers of false gods, as men 
 that introduced new objects of religious worship, or who 
 violated the great and fundamental doctrine of the unity 
 of God. But this charge has been uniformly and vehe- 
 mently urged by the Jews against the christian religion 
 ever since the doctrines of the pre-existence and divinity 
 of Christ have been received as articles of faith. 
 
 concluded that Paul and Barnabas were gods, who had descended 
 from heaven in human shape ! The whole city was in commotion, 
 and it was with great difficulty that they were restrained from offering 
 sacdfices to the apostles : Acts xiv. 11. Analogous to these would 
 have been the feelings and the conduct of the disciples of Jesus, if 
 they had believed him to be the Lord their Maker. See Priestley, 
 Early Opin. vol. i. p. 23. 
 
 Chrysostoni 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 249 
 
 Chrysostom says, " As to the Jews, \X'ho had daily 
 heard and been taught out of the law, ' Hear, O Israel, 
 the Lord thy God is one Lord, and beside him there is 
 no other ;' having seen Jesus nailed to a cross; yea, hav- 
 ing killed and buried him themselves, and not having 
 seen him risen again ; if they had heard that this very 
 person was God, and equal to the Father, would they 
 not have rejected it, and spurned at it with the utmost in- 
 dignation ? On this account the apostles brought them 
 forward gently, and by slow degrees, and used great art 
 in condescending to their weakness^." 
 
 I 
 
 V. Christ is repeatedly and emphatically called a 
 
 ]SL\N even after his resurrection and ascension; and that 
 without any qualification or reserve, even where the case 
 seemed to require it, and where the writer would not have 
 failed to introduce some qualifying expression had he 
 conceived of Christ as a being different from, and supe- 
 rior to, the rest of mankind. 
 
 Acts ii. '22, *• Jesus of Nazareth, a Man approved of 
 God among you by miracles," &c. — xvii. 3!, " He hath 
 appointed a day in which he v/ill judge the world in right- 
 eousness by that Man whom he hath ordained." — 1 Cor. 
 XV. 21, " For since by Man came death, by Man also 
 came the resurrection of the dead." — 1 Tim. ii. 5* 
 " There is one God, and one Mediator between God and 
 man, the Man Christ Jesus*." 
 
 Dr. Price, Serm. p. 140, says, " that according to all 
 
 ' Chrysostom. Opp. vol, viii. p. 447. Priestley, Hist. Early Opin. 
 vol, iii. p. 104. 
 
 ^ " There is one and the same, and only one mediator between 
 God and men of all nations, even the great and glorious, yea, divine 
 man Jesus Christ, who assumed human nature into personal union 
 with himself as the Son of God, and so was truly man as well as God." 
 Dr. Guyse in loc. — Such is the addition which orthodoxy makes to 
 evangelical simplicity. Paul's language would have been as guarded 
 as that of his commentator, had his ideas been the same. 
 
 opinions 
 
250 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Parti. 
 
 opinions Christ was truly a man, and is properly so called. 
 Had the Scriptures called him a man, and added that he 
 was no more than man, this question would have been 
 decided.'' And Mr. H. Taylor, Ben. Mordecai, Lett. 
 No. 2j observes, " that Christ is a man in the common 
 sense of the word ; that is, a spiritual being inhabiting a 
 human body ; in which sense the word may include the 
 highest spiritual being in heaven capable of incarnation, 
 as well as the lowest upon earth. The angel with whom 
 Jacob wrestled is called * a man,' Gen. xxxii. 24, and 
 ' God,' ver. 30." 
 
 Mr. Lindsey, Seq. p. 392, replies, " that tliough it 
 cannot be denied that spiritual beings personating men 
 are sometimes so called, it is only by the sacred historians, 
 who describe their outv/ard appearance, or by the persons 
 to whom they appeared while they were under a decep- 
 tion concerning them. To call an angelic being shut up 
 in a human body, as in a box or case, and animating it, 
 to call this compound being a man, is uncountenanced 
 by Scripture, or any true philosophy. If indeed you sup- 
 pose a suspension or quiescence of the powers of this pre- 
 sumed great pre-exlstent spirit of Christ, during its con- 
 finement in a human body, he might then properly enough 
 have been called a man, while in such a state. But then 
 if he lost all consciousness of what he was before, and all 
 use of form^er powers and knov.'ledge, it was to all intents 
 the sanie as if he had never been possessed of them. He 
 might as well have been a mere man. In the Scripture 
 there is no intimation of Christ's forgetfulness of what he 
 had formerly been ; no account of any abridgement of 
 the talents and abilities enjoyed by him in a former state; 
 or of any abasement or degrading of himself in leaving it, 
 and entering upon this." 
 
 VI. Jesus calls himself the Son of Man. 
 
 Matt. xvi. 13, " Who do men say that 1 the Son of 
 
 Mail 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 251 
 
 Man am ?" Concerning this title it is observable, 1. That 
 it is applied by Jesus to himself upwards of forty times in 
 the New Testament : it occurs in all the evangelists. — 
 2. This title is never used by any person in addressing our 
 Lord himself, nor by any one in writing or speaking of 
 him, except by Stephen, Acts vii. 56^ " I see the Son of 
 Man standing at the right hand of God ;" and by John in 
 Rev. i. 13, and perhaps xiv. 14. — 3. The expression 
 ' son of man' is a common periphrasis for a man himself; 
 and in this sense it occurs frequently in the Old Testa- 
 ment, and sometimes in the New. See ?s. viii. 4. Prov. 
 viii. 31. Eccles. ii. 8. Mark iii. 28. Eph. iii. 5. — 
 4. This title occurs continually in the prophecy of Ezekiel, 
 where it seems commonly to express a person invested 
 with a prophetical character. Ezek. xxxiii. 7, " O son 
 of man, I have set thee as a watchman to the house of 
 Israel." — .5. This phrase occurs, Dan. vii. 13, in a con- 
 nexion in which it has been understood both by Jews 
 and Christians to signify the Messiah. " I saw in the 
 night visions, and behold, one like the Son of Man came 
 with the clouds of heaven : — and there was given him 
 dominion -and glory, and a kingdom. '* The expression, 
 however, may possibly signify nothing more than a person 
 in human form ; and it is observable, that as in the inter- 
 pretation of the vision the other symbols are explained, 
 not of persons but of empires, so this symbol of a human 
 figure is explained not of an individual,, but of the king- 
 dom of the saints, of the Most High. See ver. 1 8. 22. 
 27. — 6. Christ speaks of himself emphatically as the 
 Son of Man ; by which form of expression it is probable 
 that he not only means to describe himself as a proper 
 human being, but to insinuate that he was himself that 
 Messiah whom they understood to be foretold by the pro- 
 phet Daniel. That the phrase ' Son of Man' was regard- 
 ed as nearly equivalent to that of Messiah, is apparent 
 
 from 
 
252 
 
 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 from John xii. 34, " We have heard from the Law that 
 Christ abideth for ever ; and how sayest thou then that 
 the Son of Man must be lifted up ? Who is this Son of 
 Man ?" The expression, however, is ambiguous ; and our 
 Lord perhaps chose to adopt it when speaking of himself 
 ill public, in order to excite attention to his claim, and at 
 the same time to avoid an explicit declaration that he was 
 the Messiah, which he generally declined during his per- 
 sonal ministry. 
 
 VIL Christ appeared as a man, with all the attributes 
 2nd feelings of a human being ; and he was universally 
 regarded as such by those who saw and conversed with 
 him. 
 
 1. Jesus was born into the world like other men. John 
 xviii. S7, " To this end was I born." — 2. He had a mean 
 education, and probably followed the occupation of a 
 carpenter. Mark vi. 3, " Is not this the carpenter ?" 
 John vii. 15, " Kow knoweth this man letters, having ne- 
 ver learned ?" — 3. He felt, conversed, and acted as a 
 human being. 1.) Filial duty and affection: John xix. 
 23, 27, while suspended on the cross, he committed his 
 mother to the care of the beloved disciple. — 2.) Joy : 
 Luke X. 21, " In that hour, Jesus rejoiced." — 3.) Sorrow 
 and tears: John xi. 35, " Jesus wept." — 4.) Indignation: 
 Mark iii. 5, " And when he had looked around on them 
 with anger, being grieved for the hardness of their 
 heart." — 5.) Friendship : John xxi. 20, " The disciple 
 whom Jesus loved." — 6.) Human actions are attributed 
 to him : Acts x. 28, " He went about doing good." — 7.) 
 He conversed as a human being : Luke xxi v. S2, " Did 
 not our heart burn withhi us while he talked with us by 
 the way ?" 
 
 4. Our Lord sustained the infirmities of human nature, 
 and suffered and died like other men. 1.) He suffered 
 hunger and thirst : Luke iv. 2, " And when the days were 
 
 ended. 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CriRIST. 233 
 
 ended, he was afterwards hungry." — John xix. 28, " lie 
 saith, I thirst." — 2.) Weariness and fainting : John iv. G, 
 " Jesus being wearied with his journey, sat thus on the 
 well." — 3.) Want of the necessaries of life : Luke ix. 58, 
 " The foxes have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, 
 but the Son of Man hath not where to lay his head." — 
 4.) Agony and death : Luke xxii. 44, " And being in 
 an agony, he prayed more earnestly.'* xxiii. 46, " He 
 said. Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit. And 
 having said this, he expired." 
 
 5. He was regarded and treated as a human being by 
 those who associated and conversed with him. Matt. xiii. 
 .54, " Whence hath this man this wisdom and these mighty 
 works ? Is not this the carpenter's son .? Is not his mo- 
 ther called Mary ; and his brethren, James, and Joses, and 
 Simon, and Judas ; and his sisters, are they not all with 
 us ? Whence, then, hath this man all these things ? And 
 they were offended in him." Luke xxiii. 47, " Now, 
 when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified Gcd, 
 saying. Certainly this was a righteous man." 
 
 These facts constitute the strongest possible presump- 
 tion that Jesus of Nazareth was a proper human being, a 
 man like other men. Nor is it at all necessary for the es- 
 tablishment of this fact that the Scriptures should, as Dr. 
 Price suggests, declare that Jesus was a man, and nothing 
 more than a man ; any more than it would be necessary 
 in order to prove the humanity of Moses or Elijah, to say 
 of those great prophets, that they were men, and no more 
 than men. The fact establishes itself by its own notorie- 
 ty and the common sense of mankind, unless rebutted by 
 evidence far more clear and unequivocal than any which 
 ever has been, or, I will venture to say, ever can be pro- 
 duced to the contrary, 
 
 VIII. The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews d*- 
 rectly asserts, and from the necessity of the case argues, 
 
 that 
 
254 ARGUMENTS To PROVE THE [Part I, 
 
 that Christ;, in order to accomplish the purposes of his 
 mission, should be a man, and not a being of an order su- 
 perior to the human race. Heb. ii. 5 — 18. 
 
 The word angel being ambiguous, and the writer hav- 
 ing used it, in the course of his argument, (chap, i.) to 
 establish the superiority of the founder of the new dispen- 
 sation to all former prophets and messengers of God ; in 
 order to guard his readers against a conclusion into which 
 they might be led by the ambiguity of the language, he 
 sets iiiuiself directly to prove that this distinguished teacher 
 was not, and could not be, an angelic being, but was a 
 real suflering man. It is no objection t,o this interpreta- 
 tion that he now uses the word ' angef in a different sense 
 from what he had before done, without giving notice of 
 the change. Such inaccuracies of style are not uncom- 
 mon in the Sacred Writings : and this author had before 
 availed himself of the equivocal sense of the word ^ angel/ 
 chap. i. 7. 
 
 Ver. 5. " God hath not subjected to angels the succeed- 
 ing age of which we speak." And having shown that 
 in the Book of Psalms, man is described as a being a little 
 inferior to angels, he adds, ver. 9, " We see Jesus who 
 was made a little inferior to angels ;" or, in other wordy, 
 a human being. He then proceeds to state the expedience 
 that the deliverer of mankind from death should himself 
 be a suffering man ; after which he draws the conclusion, 
 ver. 14, 1.5, " Since, therefore, the children are partakers: 
 of flesh and blood, he also, himself likewise," or, com- 
 pletely, in perfect conformity, t.oc^octv'Kyic-u-jc, see Peircej 
 " was partaker of the same," i. e. he was as truly, pro- 
 perly, and compktely a human being, as any of those 
 whom he came to rescue from the fear of death. " Which 
 fear," as he goes on to observe, ver. 16, "did not lay 
 hold on," could not extend to, " angels, but did lay hold 
 on," did extend to, and seize, " the seed of Abraham 5." 
 
 f See Theolog. Repos. vol. v, p. 1(54 } and Improved Version in Ice, 
 
Sect. rJ.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 25,'^ 
 
 It was right for him therefore " in all things," x^Tct t«vt£>;, 
 in every respect without exception, *' to be" not to be 
 7nade, see Wakefield, " like unto his brethren." (j, d. 
 Had angels been subject to the fear of death, an angel 
 might have been seift to save them : but as men alone are 
 subject to this terror, it was expedient that one who was 
 properly a human being should be commissioned to deliver 
 them from it^. 
 
 Thus it appears, not only that the Christian Scriptures 
 do not teach the pre-existence and divinity of Jesus Christ, 
 but that the writer of the Epistle to the Hebrews, as though 
 he had foreseen the errors and corruptions of later times, 
 argues expressly against It, and proves that it would have 
 been inexpedient that the Saviour of the world should 
 have been any other than a suffering human being. 
 
 IX. The great body of primitive christians, both Jews 
 and Gentiles, for the two first centuries and upwards, 
 were Unitarians, and believers in the simple humanity of 
 Jesus Christ 7, 
 
 This is an argument of great weight in the controver- 
 sy concerning the person of Christ : for the doctrine which 
 the first christians held must have been that which the 
 first preachers taught. 
 
 The iirst impression of the first believers, of those who 
 were personal witnesses to the facts related in the gospels, 
 mast have been, that Jesus of Nazareth was one of the 
 
 '^ It is hardly necessary to point out the gross mistranslatinn of this 
 text \v the public version ; viz. " he took not on him the nature of 
 angels." Every intelligent reader knows that the words will not 
 admit of this construction. Archbishop Newcnine's translation is, 
 " Christ helpeth not angels." See Doddridge, Teirce, and Sykes in 
 loc. Imp. Version and notes. 
 
 ^ This is a fact which Dr. Priestley has, I think, established beyond 
 all dispute in his History of the Corruptions of Christianity, in his 
 Controversies with Badcock and Bishop Horsley, and, above all, in 
 his learned, laborious, and invaluable work, The History of Early 
 Opinions concerning the Person of Chi ;-t, 
 
 human 
 
266 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part T. 
 
 human race, selected from the rest of mankind as a pro- 
 phet of God, disriiiiTuished from all other prophets by 
 the importance of his doctrine, the frequeiicv and splen- 
 dour of his miraculous works, and, above all, by his re- 
 surrection from die dead. This is the opinion which all 
 would naturally entertain concerning Christ, till they were 
 further instrurted in the sublime doctrines of his pre-ex- 
 istence and divinit^ 
 
 To modern christians, who, from habit and association, 
 read the books of the New Testament as if they had been 
 composed by one person, or by a few persons writing in 
 concert, the difficulty seldom occurs of accounting for 
 the omission of the doctrines of the pre-existence and di- 
 vinity of Jesus Christ by the majority of the writers, and 
 partic darly by three out of four of the historians of his 
 life. But to the ancients, who were more familiar with 
 the idea that these books were written at different times, 
 in different places, with different views, by different au- 
 thors, '.iid for different churches, the objection occurred 
 in its full force ; and they could find no better solution of 
 the difficulty than by ascribing this extraordinary omission 
 to " the prudent caution," and " praiseworthy timidity 8/* 
 of the apostles and evangelists, in not divulging a doctrine 
 so offensive to the Jews, and so dangerous to the Gen- 
 tiles9. These reasons, though perhaps the best that could 
 be offered, will not satisfy a modern inquirer : but the 
 
 ® " p^sra TfoXKyji t'TjS cvvscrsuj^." Athanasius. — '•' Si' sTraiy8[j.Evr^v. 
 SsiXiccv." Chiysostom. 
 
 ^ See p. 244, note ; also p. 245. Origen says, " John alone intro- 
 duced the knowledge of the eternity of Christ." Opp vol. ii. p. 4'iS. 
 — Eusebius says, " John began the doctrine of the divinity of Christ." 
 Hist. hb. iii. c 24. — See Dr. Priestley, Hist. Early Op. vol. iii. p. 125. 
 127^.— " The apostle does not speak plainly concerning the deity of 
 Christ, because polytheism abounded, and lest he should be thought 
 to introduce many gods." Thcopliylact in 1 Tim. ii. 5, — See Prieit- 
 ley, ibid, book iii. chap. vi. 
 
 fact 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 25? 
 
 fact remains the same. The doctrine of Christ's pre- ex- 
 istence and divinity was not taught plainly till the apostle 
 John wrote his gospel, which Lardner places A. D. 68, 
 and Jones and others later than A. D. 90. lo But what the 
 apostles did not teach, the first christians did not beUeve. 
 The christian church therefore must have been Unitarian, 
 at least till the apostle John wrote his gospel. 
 
 But there is no evidence that any change took place in 
 the sentiments of the great body of christians in conse- 
 quence of the publication of St. John's gospel. He is 
 said by Irenasus to have written against the Gnostics, and 
 by Origen, and others who came after him, to have writ- 
 ten against the Ebionites also^i. That the apostle wrote 
 with much indignation and asperity against the former is 
 manifest. Against the Docetas, a sect of Gnostics who 
 taught that Jesus was indeed the Christ, but that he was 
 a man in appearance only, and not in reality, the apostle 
 writes, 1 John iv. 3, " Every spirit that confesses not that 
 Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,'* /. e. vv'ho confesses 
 that Jesus is the Christ, but who denies that he is a real 
 man, " is not of God. It is the spirit of antichrist." And 
 against those Gnostics who acknowledged Jesus to be a 
 real man, but who denied him to be the Christ, maintain- 
 ing that Christ was one of the celestial ^ons or emanations, 
 who descended into Jesus at his baptism, but deserted him 
 at his crucifixion, the apostle writes, 1 Johnii. 22, "Who 
 is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ ?" No 
 such language as this is to be found in the writings of this 
 apostle concerning the Unitarians. And the supposition that 
 John wrote the introduction to his gospel against the Ebio- 
 nites, or Unitarians, is clearly confuted by the fact that the 
 expression " in the beginning," which introduces the gospel 
 
 »" Lardner's Hist, of Evang. vol. i. p. 38/. 889. ed. i. 
 *' See Priestley, ibid, book i. chap. iii. sect, 5, Q ; also vol. iii. 
 p. 124. 
 
 S of 
 
258 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 of John^ signifies almost uniformly in the apostle's writings, 
 not the beginning of time, but the beginning of the go- 
 spel dispensation. But as it is conceded that Unitarians 
 abounded in the apostolic age; if John did not write 
 against them, it is highly probable that he agreed with 
 them : for few trinitarians will now deny that the heresy 
 of the Ebionites was at least as dangerous, and as deserving 
 of animadversion, as that of the Gnostics. And so no 
 doubt would the apostle have thought, had he believed 
 the present popular doctrine concerning the person of 
 Christ. 
 
 The ancient Unitarians always maintained that theirs 
 was the prevailing doctrine in the church till the time of 
 Victor bishop of Rome, about A. D. 200, who excom- 
 municated Theodotus of Byzantium, a learned Unitarian. 
 This assertion of the Unitarians is contradicted, but not 
 disproved, by Eusebius and others '\ 
 
 The early Unitarians being the mass of believers, few 
 of whom were philosophers and speculative men, had not 
 many writers among them, and few of their works are now 
 extant ^^. All that we knov/ of them is from the writings 
 of their adversaries. It is however certain that they 
 abounded in the apostolic age ; and that they long con- 
 stituted a very large proportion, and probably even the 
 majority, of believers, may be reasonably inferred from 
 their having no appropriate name ; also from their not 
 having been excommunicated like the Gnostics, and brand- 
 ed as heretics, which they certainly would have been if 
 Arians or Trinitarians had at that time possessed the as- 
 cendancy. The respect with which they are mentioned 
 
 '* Euseb. Hist. lib. v. cap. 28. Priestley, ibid, book iii. chap. xv. § 1. 
 
 •' The Clementine Homilies, supposed to be written about the time 
 of Justin Martyr, are the production of an Unitarian, and are almost 
 the only Unitarian treatise of ecclesiastical antiquity now extant. 
 See Prieatleyj ibid. vol. i. p. 113. 
 
 by 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 2.59 
 
 by Justin Martyr, the first who taught the divinity of the 
 Logos, plainly indicates that their numbers were not to be 
 despised. In his Dialogue with Trypho the Jew, his oppo- 
 nent says : " This doctrine, — that Christ was a God ex- 
 isting before the ages, and then born a man, — is not only 
 extraordinary, but ridiculous." Justin replies : " I know 
 that this doctrine appears strange, and especially to those 
 of your race (Jews) : but it will not follow tiat he is not 
 the Christ, though I should not be able to prove that he 
 pre-existed as God, and that he became a man by the 
 Virgin. It will be right to say that in this only I have 
 been mistaken ; and not that he is not the Christ, though 
 he should appear to be a man born as other men are, and 
 to be made Christ by election. For there are some of 
 our race (^Gentiles) who acknowledge him to be Christ, 
 but hold that he was a man born like other men. With 
 them I do not agree, nor should I do so, though ever so 
 many being of the same opinion should urge it upon we^f ; 
 
 because 
 
 '* " 0<V, 8 a-v'/nQsij.a.i, sS' av itXsis-oi, tavra i^oi So^a<ra,vTac, sittoibv. 
 Quibus ego non assentior, neqae, etiamsi raulto plures essent, assen- 
 tirer." Thirlby, p. 235, not. — "To whom I could not yield my as- 
 sent } no, not even if the majority of christians should think the same:" 
 Badcock, in the Monthly Rev. for Jane 1783, who considers it as a 
 declaration that the majority of christians coincided in opinion with 
 Justin himself — "To whom I do not assent, though the majority 
 may have told me that they had been of the same opinion : " Mr. Cappe, 
 who in his vindication of Dr. Priestley contends, that the words pro- 
 perly express that the majority of christians held opinions contrary to 
 those of the writer. — At any rate., and whatever be the meaning of 
 Justin, how different the language of this virtuous and candid, though 
 mistaken writer, from that of the angry opponents of t' "ne doc- 
 trine in modern times ! '' If your opinion is true," sai,^ .. ic of Dr. 
 Priestley's early and zealous antagonists, " I will throw my Bible into 
 the fire." But what says the venerable martyr in a similar c:ase ? " If 
 your doctrine be true, it only follows that I am mistaken as to thepre- 
 existence and deity of Jesus : but he is still the Christ, though he be- 
 came so only by election." What occasions this remarkable difference 
 between Mr. Venn and Justin Martyr r The true reason is this : Mr. 
 Venn wrote in an age when Trinitarianism was triumphant, and Uni- 
 tarianism in disgrace : Justin Martyr wrote at a time when Unitari- 
 
 s 2 anism 
 
260 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 because we are commanded by Christ himself not to obey 
 the teachings of men, but what was taught by the holy 
 prophets and himself." This is plainly the language of 
 one who wishes to conciliate regard to a novel and offen- 
 sive opinion, which might possibly be erroneous; and not 
 of one who advocates the cause of a triumphant majority. 
 
 The testimony of Origen, who wrote in the beginning 
 of the third century, to the proper Unitarianism of the 
 body of Jewish christians in his time, is direct and full. 
 " The Vt'ord Ebion,** says he, " in the Jewish language 
 signifies poor : and those of the Jews who believe Jesus 
 to be the Christ are called Ebionites" And in his Com- 
 mentary upon Matthew, he introduces a distinction among 
 the Jews who believed in Christ ; " some thinking him 
 to be the son of Joseph and Mary, and others of Mary 
 only and the divine Spirit, but not believing his divinity.'* 
 And in another passage he speaks of the Ebionites of both 
 sorts, as not receiving the Epistles of Paul ^5, 
 
 Eusebius, who wrote a century afterwards, confirms 
 the testimony of Origen concerning the Ebionites. "Those 
 by the ancients called Ebionites, think meanly," says he, 
 *' concerning Christ : for they think him to be merely a 
 
 anism was held in honour, and the pre-existence and divinity of 
 Christ were novel and obnoxious opinions. After all, I must confess 
 that I am not quite satisfied with any one of the translations of these 
 learned writers. The true version of this celebrated passage appears 
 to me to be the following : " With whom I do not agree : nor should 
 I, even though the majority, who are of the same opinion with me, 
 'Ta.vra [t^oi So^a(ravrss, had affirmed it," — "Tavra, So^a^siv aXKrjKois, 
 eandem habere opinionem." Xenoph, ap. Constantin. Lex. in Verb. 
 — It is probable that Justin here particularly alludes to the fact of the 
 miraculoub conception, which was at that time pretty generally credit- 
 ed by the Gentile christians. And this was the subject last mentioned, 
 that Christ was a man born as other men. He can hardly be supposed 
 to refer to the pre-existence and divinity of the Logos, which he had 
 just acknowledged to be a strange doctrine, irapah^os o hoyo(, both 
 to Jewish and Gentile believers, though principally to the former. 
 
 1' Origen in Cels. lib. ii. p. 56. Coram, in Matt. vol. i, p, 427- 
 Edit. Huet. i« Cels. lib. vi. p. 274. Priestley, ibid. yol. iii. p. l66. 
 
 man 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 261 
 
 man like other men, but approved on account of his vir- 
 tue, being the son of Mary's husband. Others, called 
 by the same name, do not deny that the Lord was born 
 of a virgin and of the Holy Spirit ; but, disallowing that 
 he pre-existed as God, the Logos, and wisdom, they were 
 perverted to the impiety of the former." He adds, that 
 " they observed the Jewish Law, and used only the Go- 
 spel according to the Hebrews i^." 
 
 To this argument it has been objected, that the Ebio- 
 nites were merely a sect of Hebrew christians ; that 
 they coincided with the Nazarenes in their adherence to 
 the Law, for which both sects were deemed heretical by 
 the Gentile christians ; but that the orthodoxy of the 
 Nazarenes in other points, and particularly concerning the 
 person of Christ, was unimpeached. Also, that both the 
 sects united constituted but a small part of the body of 
 Jewish christians '7. 
 
 It is alleged in reply, that a church of orthodox Jew- 
 ish christians, distinct both from Nazarenes and Ebionites, 
 is a thing unknown to ecclesiastical antiquity ; that Na- 
 zarenes was a title of contempt applied by unbelieving 
 Jews to christians in general, and to those of their own 
 
 '* Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. iii, c. 1"] . Priestley, ibid. p. l63. I have 
 a little altered Dr. Priestley's translation, to what appeared to be both 
 more literal and more pertinent. 
 
 " See Huet. in Origen. Comment, not. p. ']\. Mosheim de Reb. 
 Christ, ante Constant. Saec. ii. \ 39. Horsley against Priestley, Lett. 6. 
 Grotius and Vosaius thought that the Nazarenes coincided with that 
 sect of Ebionites which acknowledged the miraculous conception. 
 Grot, on Matt. i. 8. See Huet. ibid. Dr. Horsley, however, is con- 
 strained to admit, upon the authority of a passage cited by Dr. Priestley 
 in his second set of Letters, that Epiphanius charges the Nazarenes as 
 erring with the Ebionites in their opinion concerning the person of 
 Christ, But as Joannes Damascenus in his book De Haer. expressly 
 says, that the Nazarenes confessed Jesus to be the Son of God, the 
 learned writer still charitably pleads for the orthodoxy of the sect. Dr. 
 Horsley's Tracts^ p. 144, note. 
 
 nation 
 
262 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 nation in particular *8 ; that Eblonites was the title by 
 which the body of Je-aibh believers was distinguished by 
 Gentile christians till the time of Epiphanius, who is the 
 first writer that attempts, though unsuccessfully, to make 
 a distinction between the Ebionites and the Nazarenes'Q; 
 and that from the similarity, or even identity, of their doc- 
 trine concerning the person of Christ j from their mutual 
 adherence to the rites of Moses ; and, above all, from their 
 agreement in using the Hebrew gospel of Matthew only, 
 it is highly probable, and with very few exceptions only 
 it is agreed among the learned, that the Ebionites and 
 Nazarenes were the same sect, or that they varied with 
 very few and slight shades of difference^o. 
 
 As a further objection to the testimony of Origen, it 
 has been stated by Mosheim, and after him by Dr. Hors- 
 ley, that after the destruction of Jerusalem by Adrian, 
 
 •^ " Ipso nomine nos Judaei Nazarenos appellant per eum." Tertull. 
 adv. Marcion. p. 418. — See also Agobardi, Opp. p. 63. This seems to 
 be Jerome's meaning in the expression •' quos vulgo Nazaraeos nun- 
 cupant," cited by Dr. Priestley, vol, iii. p. 171 ; and in his contro- 
 versy with Dr. Horsley. q. d. What we call Ebionites are the same 
 ^vith those Minei, or sectaries, among the Jews whom they commonly 
 call Nazarenes. 
 
 '" This controversy concerning the testimony cf Epiphanius was 
 carried on with great animation between Dr. Horsley and Dr. Priest- 
 ley, till the former was constrained to concede the point, thougn with 
 a very ill grace, in the manner stated in the last note but one 
 
 *" See Jones on the Gancn, vol. i. p. 385— 387- This learned writer 
 vithout hesitation at^irms the Nazarenes and Ebionites to have been 
 tlie same. Huet, and after him Dr. Horsley, contend that they were 
 difFcrent, because Epiphanius, Hser. xxix. § 7> says, "I do not know 
 whether, like Cerinthus and Merinthus, they believe Christ to be a 
 mere man, or whether, as the truth is, they maintain that he was born 
 of the holy spirit and Mary." See Huet. Not. in Orig. p. 74. This 
 hesitation of Epiphanius amounts, in Dr. Horsley's estimation, " to the 
 unwilling confession of a base accuser," that the Nazarenes were be- 
 lievers in the divinity of Christ. See Horsley's Tracts, p. 2^', and 144. 
 The learned prelate, however, in the very same page, is obliged to 
 inake an " unwilling confession" of his own error. Dr. Priestley has 
 stated the argument at length, and very satisfactorily, in Hist, of Early 
 Opinions, book iii. chap. 8. 
 
 ■who 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 263 
 
 who forbad the Jews from coming within sight of the 
 place, and who founded a colony in the vicinity, to which 
 he gave the name of ^lia, the great body of orthodox 
 Jewish believers, who had hitherto observed the rites of 
 Moses, at once abandoned these rites, and resorted in 
 great numbers to the new city, in order to participate in 
 the privileges of the Julian colony ; that they joined the 
 church of Gentile christians which was formed there j that 
 Origen could not have been ignorant of this circumstance; 
 and consequently that his account of the Hebrew chris- 
 tians must have been a wilful falsehood. 
 
 This strangehypothesis of the sudden defection of agreat 
 body of people, and those people Jews, from the customs 
 of their ancestors, which had been held sacred for more 
 than sixteen centuries, and of their instantaneous intimate 
 union with a community of people whom they had always 
 been accustomed to shun with horror, and to whose lan- 
 guage they must have been entire strangers-^, is so incre- 
 dible in itself, so contradictory to every known principle 
 of the human mind, so unsupported by authority from 
 ecclesiastical writers, so repugnant to historic evidence, 
 and involves so unjust and cruel an aspersion upon one of 
 the most unblemished characters of christian antiquity, 
 that it will not bear a moment's examination ; and the very 
 statement of the case carries its own conlutation^s. 
 
 It being thus established by competent evidence, that 
 the great body of Jewish christians at I he end of the se- 
 
 *' Adrian's colony probably consisted of Greeks j and Sulpitiiis Seve- 
 rus says " that Mark, a Gentile, was then appointed bishop at Jerusa- 
 lem." Hist. p. 245, 
 
 ^* This curious fabric of a church at jElia of orthodox Hebrew chris« 
 tianSj who had abandoned the ceremonies of the Law, rests solely upon 
 the affirmation of Mosheim, supported by that of Dr. Horsley, but 
 destitute of every shadow of support from christian antiquity. This, 
 however, being the principal, and almost the only important topic of 
 discussion between Dr. Horsley and Dr. Priestley, a brief review of 
 this famous controversy will be given in the Appendix to^this Section. 
 
 cond 
 
264 ARGUMENTS To PROVE THE [Parti. 
 
 cond century were believers in the proper humanity of 
 Jesus Christ, and this testimony remaining whollv uncon- 
 tradicted, there being no proof whatever that any church 
 of orthodox Jews ever existed ; it follows by direct con- 
 sequence that the Jewish church must have been Unita- 
 rian from the very beginning : for a change so great as 
 that from believing the deity of Christ to the belief that 
 he vsras a mere man, the son of Joseph and Mary, could 
 not have taken place in so short a time ; and if it had 
 happened, it must have occasioned much violent contro- 
 versy, of which some notice could not but have been ta- 
 ken by the historians of the church. But no such con- 
 troversy is upon record, therefore it never existed. The 
 inference clearly follows, that the first Jewish converts 
 believed, and consequently that the first christian missio- 
 naries taught, that the Father was the only true God, and 
 the proper object of worship, and that Jesus Christ was a 
 mere human being, the faithful servant and honoured 
 messenger of God 23. 
 
 The direct evidence of the Unitarianism of the great 
 body of Gentile christians, even as low down as the Coun- 
 cil of Nice, is, if possible, still more clear and satisfactory 
 than that of the Jewish believers. In the first rank is 
 Origen. "There are some," says this learned writer in 
 his Commentary upon John, " who participate of ' the 
 Word that was in the beginning, the Word that was with 
 God, and the Word that was God ;' — ^but there are others 
 who ' know nothing but Jesus Christ, and him crucified:' 
 ' the Word that was flesh.' Thinking that it is the whole 
 doctrine of the Word, they only know Christ according 
 
 " Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 210. Dr. Priestley says, that in the whole 
 course of his reading he never met with the mention of more than 
 one orthodox Jewish christian ; his name was Joseph. Epiphanius says, 
 he met with him at Scythopolis, where all the rest of the inhabitants 
 were Arians. Page I89. 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 265 
 
 to the flesh. Such is the multitude of those who 
 ARE REPUTED AS BELIEVERS^*.'* And again, " The mul- 
 titudes, ra 7rK7i9'/j, of believers are instructed in the sha- 
 dow of the Word, and not in the true Word of God^s,'* 
 Tertullian's testimony is most explicit and unequivocal. 
 " The simple, or rather the well-meaning, not to say the 
 unwise and unlearned, who always form the B/fAjo- 
 RiTY OF BELIEVERS, siuce the vcry rule of faith transfers 
 them from the many gods of the world to the one true 
 God, not understanding that the one God is indeed to be 
 believed, but with his own ceconomy,(f. e. distribution 
 into three persons,) are startled at the oeconomy. They 
 presume that the number and arrangement of the trinity 
 is a division of the unity. They therefore hold out that 
 two, or even three gods are taught by us : but they as- 
 sume that they are the worshipers of one God. We, say 
 they, HOLD the monarchy. Even the Latin clowns 
 shout so loudly for the monarchy, that you would sup- 
 pose they understood it as well as they pronounce it. But 
 the Latins learn to shout for the Monarchy, and even the 
 Greeks themselves are unwilling to understand the ceco- 
 nomy26." 
 
 This remarkable testimony of Tertullian to the zea- 
 lous Unitarianism of the majority of believers, never has 
 
 '* " rsto Ss sri to rtXrfidi tuiv Ti'sn'/rsoxsya; voiii^oy.£vuv." Coram, 
 in Joh. V. 2. p. 49. 
 
 ** Comment, ibid. p. 52. See also p. g ; and Priestley, ibid. p. 262. 
 
 *^ Simplices enim quippe, ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotae, q.vje 
 MAJOR SEMPER cREDENTiuM PARS EST, quoniam et ipsa regula fidei 
 a pluribus diis seculi, ad unicum et deum varum transfert : non intelli- 
 gentes unicum quidem sed cum sua ceconomia esse credendum, expa- 
 vescunt ad oeconomiam. Numerum et dispositionem trinitatis^ divi« 
 sionem praesumunt unitatis...Itaque duos vel tres jactitant a nobis prae- 
 dicari, se vero unius Dei cultores praesumunt. ..Monarchiam, inquiunt, 
 tenemus. Et ita sonum vocaliter exprimunt etiam Latini, etiam opici^ 
 ut putes illos tam bene intelligre monarchiam, quam enunciant, Sed 
 monarchiam sonare student Latini, ceconoraiam intelligerenolunt etiam 
 Grasci." Tertull. ad Prax. sect. iii. p. 502. Priestley, ibid. p. 265. 
 
 been 
 
266 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Part I. 
 
 been invalidated, and never can. It is the reluctant tes- 
 timony of an uavvilling witness, extorted from him by the 
 notoriety of the fact, the force of which he is anxious to 
 diminish as far as in his power^, not by denying the num- 
 bers, but by disparaging the understandings of the Unita- 
 rians. Vv^ith this the argument lias nothing to do. The 
 fact is, that in the time of TertuUian, at the end of the 
 second century, as far as that learned writer's knowledge 
 extended, the major pars credcntium, ' the majority of 
 believers,' shuddered ( e.^ipavescunt) at the doctrine of the 
 trinity, as an infringement of the apostolic faith, and as 
 introducing the worship of three Gods. A id to express 
 their abhor;ence of the new philocophlc doctrines, both 
 Greeks and Latins zealously and loudly proclaimed their 
 attachnie.it to the great doctrine of the divine unity, or, 
 as they very properly expressed it, -f the Monarchy, the 
 sole, undivided, unrivalled government of God. All this 
 TertuUian tells us, and all this TertuUian knew. His ex- 
 pressions plainly indicate that he must have been not un- 
 frequently the distressed and mortified witness of the un- 
 popularity of the trinitarlan doctrine, and of the clamorous 
 and triumphant zeal of the Unitarian crowd. 
 
 The manner in which Dr. Horsley attempts to evade 
 this clear and decisive testimony of TertuUian is pitiable in 
 the extreme. He translates the passage thus : " Simple 
 persons (not to call them ignorant and idiots), who always 
 make the majority of beUevers, because the rule of faith 
 carries us away from the many gods of the heathen to the 
 one true God, — startle at the ceconomy," &c. The im- 
 propriety of rendering " idiots," idiots, the Archdeacon 
 certainly knew, nor, to say the truth, does he lay much 
 stress upon the word. But his remarks and comment 
 upon the passage are most extraordinary. He first ob- 
 serves, in direct contradiction to the plainest fact, " that 
 TertuUian alleges that what credit the Unitarian doctrine 
 
 obtained 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 267 
 
 obtained was only with the illiterate, nor with all the ilh'- 
 terate, but with those only, who were ignorant and stupid 
 in the extreme." The learned writer must surely have 
 supposed his readers to be bereft of common understand- 
 ing ; especially when he presumes to add the following 
 most extraordinary observation : " To preclude the 
 PLEA OF NUMBERS," says he, " Tertullian remarks that 
 the illiterate will always make the majority of believers." 
 How being the majority can preclude the plea of num- 
 bers, is beyond a plain man's understanding to compre- 
 hend. The learned writer then proceeds to exhibit an ex- 
 position of TertuUian's very clear and intelligible language. 
 Tertullian says, " Simple persons, not to say ignorant and 
 idiots, who always make the majority of believers," &c. 
 This is the archdeacon's own translation. His exposition 
 follov/s. *' Some simple people take alarm at the notion 
 of a plurality of persons in the unity of the Godhead, 
 Simple people did I say ? I should have said ignorant and 
 dull. When it is considered that persons of mean en- 
 dowments must always be the majority of a body collected 
 as the church is, from all ranks of men, it were no wonder 
 that the followers of the Unitarian preachers were more 
 numerous than they really are." " It is no testimony," 
 adds the learned dignitary, " to the popularity of your fa- 
 vourite opinions. It is a charge of ignorance against your 
 party ; of such ignorance as would invalidate the plea of 
 numbers if it were set up." That a person of talents and 
 learnings who had a character to lose, should hazard such 
 an assertion as this in the teeth of his own translation of 
 TertuUian's words, is truly extraordinary. But what must 
 that cause be which needs such a method of defence ^7 ? 
 
 Aihanasius, 
 
 " See Hors]ey*s Tracts, Lett. ix. p, I/S. Dr. Priestley, in his Re- 
 ply, expresses his astonishment at the unwarrantable liberty which Dr, 
 Horsley had taken in the limitation which he gives to the indefinite 
 
 language 
 
268 ARGUMENTS TO PROVE THE [Parti. 
 
 Athanasius, in his Treatise against Paul of Samosata, a 
 celebrated Unitarian, says, " It grieves even now those 
 who stand up for the holy faith, that the multitude, rag 
 TToXAj^f, and especially those of low understanding, should 
 be infected v/ith these blasphemies." " This," Dr. Priest- 
 ley observes, " is, like that of Tertullian, the language of 
 complaint : and it is not the doctrine of Arius, but that of 
 Paulus Samosatensis, that is here complained of -8." 
 
 From this induction it appears that the great body of 
 unlearned christians continued to hold Unitarian principles 
 not only to the time of Origen and Tertullian, but even 
 to that of Athanasius and Jerome, after the Council of 
 Nice. But if this fact be proved, it is a strong presump- 
 tion that Unitarianism was the doctrine of the first chris- 
 tians, aQd also, of the apostles and first teachers of Chris- 
 tianity. For what they taught all would at first believe, 
 and the unlearned would be the last to change. Specu- 
 
 language of Tertullian. This he justly calls ^' a gross misrepresenta- 
 tion," and adds, " I really wonder at your assurance in this." He af- 
 terwards accuses his learned adversary of ignorance or misrepresenta- 
 tion in translating " idiotae," idiots, and asks him " in what lexicon, 
 ordinary or extraordinary, he finds this sense of the word." See Dr, 
 Priestley's Second Letters, p. 62, 63. Upon this verbal error, which 
 did not materially affect the argument, it was needless for Dr. Priest- 
 ley to have dilated so much. Dr. Horsley saw his advantage ; and he 
 was too dexterous a disputant not to avail himself of the opportunity 
 ■which Dr Priestley gave him by his loud and reiterated complaints 
 upon this s ibject, of diverting the attention of the -reader from the 
 main question, his gross misrepresentation of Tertullian, by a laboured 
 defence of himself from this trifling charge ; and to this end he takes 
 the pains to write a long dissertation at the end of his volume of Tracts 
 to prove ihat " idiota" may be rendered idiot. And in this way he 
 contrives to leave an impression upon the minds of superficial readers, 
 that he has gained an advantage over Dr. Priestley even in this clear and 
 unequivocal passage trom Tertullian. 
 
 '* See Athanasii 0pp. vol. i. p. 5gl. Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. 269. 
 Jerome is also supposed to allude to the Unitarians when he says that 
 *' simple believers, simpUces credentium, did not understand the Scrip- 
 lures according to their majesty. And that to them the ground of the 
 people of God brought forth hay, as to the heretics it produced thorns." 
 ^ieron. Opp. vol. iv. p. 118. Priestley, ibid. p. 27O. 
 
 lative 
 
Sect. 12.] PROPER HUMANITY OF CHRIST. 269 
 
 lative persons are always the first to begin an alteration in 
 public opinion. If the public opinion is right, speculative 
 men are the first who introduce error: if it be wrong, they 
 are the first to reform and correct it. The change in the 
 mass of the unlearned is gradual and slow : but generally, 
 in process of time, it follows the direction of the learned. 
 What is now the popular doctrine was once confined to 
 the philosophers, and made its way by very slow degrees, 
 and with great difficulty, among the common people. The 
 corruptions of Christianity were introduced by the learned 
 and inquisitive. And by the learned and inquisitive the 
 reformation was begun. By persons of this description it 
 is still carried on, and is visibly, though slowly, advancing 
 in opposition to the clamours of the ignorant, and to the 
 artifice or violence of the interested. That truth by its 
 native energy, aided by time, will eventually prevail, there 
 can be no reasonable doubt : and when it has once re-es- 
 tablished its glorious empire, there Is no ground to appre- 
 hend that the age of darkness will return again. The pre- 
 judlces which now obstruct Its progress will then all ope- 
 rate in Its favour : while the universal diffusion of know- 
 ledge, and the continually accelerated progress of human 
 improvement, will oppose an insurmountable and eternal 
 bar to the return of those gross errors and abominations 
 which have for so many centuries been the disgrace of 
 reason, and the bane of Christianity. 
 
270 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 APPENDIX TO SECT. XII. 
 
 ABSTRACT OF THE CONTPv.OVERSY BETWEEN DR. 
 PRIESTLEY AND DR. HORSLEY CONCERNING THE EX- 
 ISTENCE OF AN ORTHODOX CHURCH OF HEBREW 
 CHRISTIANS AT tELIA, WHO HAD DEPARTED FROM 
 THE JEWISH RITUAL. 
 
 Dr. Priestley having asserted upon the authority of 
 Origen, that " the Jews who believed in Jesus were called 
 Ebionites ; that these Ebionites were of two sorts, one of 
 them believing the miraculous conception, the other not, 
 but all of them considering Christ as a mere mani ", — 
 
 Dr. Horsley in reply, after endeavouring to show that 
 Origen's words might be interpreted differently, proceeds 
 in a very triumphant tone to remark, " Let his words be 
 
 taken as you understand them. 1 shall take what you 
 
 may think a bold step. I shall tax the veracity of your 
 witness — of this Origen. I shall tell you that whatever 
 may be the general credit of his character, yet in this bu- 
 siness the particulars of his deposition are to be little re- 
 garded, when he sets out with the allegation of a notori- 
 ous falsehood. He alleges of the Hebrew christians in ge- 
 neral, that they had not renounced the Mosaic law. The 
 assertion served him for an answer to the invective which 
 Celsus had put in the mouth of a Jew against the converted 
 Jews, as deserters of the laws and customs of their ances- 
 tors. The answer was not the worse for wanting truth, 
 if his heathen antagonist was not sufficiently informed in 
 the true distinctions of christian sects, to detect the false- 
 hood The fact is, that after the demolition of Jerusa- 
 
 * Priestley's Lett, to Horsley, p. ]8. 
 
 lem 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 2?! 
 
 lem by Adrian, the majority of the Hebrew christians, who 
 must have passed for Jews with the Roman magistrates, 
 had they continued to adhere to the Mosaic law, which to 
 this time they had observed more from habit than from 
 any principle of conscience, made no scruple to renounce 
 it, that they might be qualified to partake in the valu- 
 able privileges of the iElian colony, from which Jews 
 were excluded. Havinp^ thus divested themselves of the 
 form of Judaism, which to that tmie they had borne, they 
 removed from Pella and other towns to which they had 
 retired, and settled in r^reat numbers at JElm. The few 
 who retained a superstitious veneration for their law, re- 
 mained in the north of Galilee, where they were joined 
 perhaps by new fugitives of the same weak character from 
 Palestine. And this was the beginning of the sect of the 
 Nazarenes. But from this time, whatever Origen may 
 pretend to serve a purpo-ie, the majority of the Hebrew 
 christians forsook their law, and lived in communion with 
 the Gentile bishops of the new-modelled church at Jeru- 
 salem. All this I affirm with the less hesitation, being 
 supported by the authority of Mosheim. From whom in- 
 deed I first learned to rate the testimony of Origen in this 
 particular question at its true value-." 
 
 One would conclude from the manner in which Dr. 
 Horsley appeals to the testimony of Mosheim, that, having 
 first, from his own extensive researches into ecclesiastical 
 history, made this notable discovery of a Jewish church at 
 -(Elia, he was confirmed in his judgement by finding that 
 Mosheim had also made the same discovery. But the 
 truth is, that the learned dignitary, placing implicit confi- 
 dence in Mosheim*s testimony, having borrowed all the 
 circumstances related by that celebrated historian, and 
 mixed up a little of his own, has stated with great parade, 
 and as incontrovertible fact, a narrative most improbable 
 in itself, and utterly destitute of foundation in ecclesiastical 
 antiquity. 
 
 Dr. Priestley, astonished beyond measure at a discovery 
 
 * Horsley's Tracts, p. 156. I quote from the Collection of Tracts 
 published by the Bishop of St. David's, 17B9. 
 
 so 
 
272 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 SO perfectly new to him, and so contrary to every thing 
 which he had himself met with in his laborious researches, 
 indignant likewise at the outrageous attack upon the un- 
 sullied character of the illustrious Origen, immediately, 
 with his accustomed ardour, sets himself to examine the 
 evidence of this extraordinar}-- narrative. The only autho- 
 rity referred to by the learned archdeacon was a book not 
 very commonly to be met with in England, Mosheim de 
 Reb. Christianorum ante Constantinum. This book not 
 being at that time in Dr. Priestley's possession, he looked 
 into Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, in which it appears 
 that the learned author expresses himself with much 
 greater caution than in his former work, being probably 
 aware that his authorities would not bear him out in the 
 facts, or rather, the conclusions which he had formerly 
 stated 3. Dr. Priestley, not being apprized of this differ- 
 ence in the two works of Mosheim, concluded rather has- 
 tily, that the additional circumstances originated in the ex- 
 uberant invention of the archdeacon. 
 
 " Struck," says he, " with this extraordinary narration 
 of a transaction of ancient times, for which you refer to no 
 authority besides that of Mosheim, I looked into him: but 
 even there I do not find all the particulars that you men- 
 tion. He says nothing of the Jewish christians having ob- 
 served their laws more from habit than from any principle 
 of conscience ; nothing of their making no scruple to re- 
 nounce their law in order to partake in the privileges of 
 
 ^ The account given by Mosheim in his Ecclesiastical History, 
 (cent. 2. part ii. ch. v.) is as follows : " When the Emperor Adrian 
 had razed Jerusalem, entirely destroyed even its very foundations, and 
 enacted laws of the severest kind against the whole body of the Jewish 
 people, the greatest part of the Christians who lived in Palestine, to 
 prevent their being confounded with the Jews, abandoned entirely the 
 Mosaic rites, and chose a bishop named Mark, a foreigner by nation, 
 and consequently an alien from the commonwealth of Israel. This 
 step was highly shocking to those whose attachment to the Mosaic 
 rites was violent and invincible j and such was the case of many. These, 
 therefore, separated themselves from their brethren, and founded at 
 Pera and in the neighbouring parts particular assemblies, in which the 
 law of Moses maintained its primitive dignity, authority, and lustre.'* 
 See Dr. Maclaine's Translation, vol. i. p. 212. 
 
 the 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLKY. 273 
 
 the iElian colony ; nothing of any Jewish christians re- 
 moving from Pella, and settling at 7Elia ; nothing of the 
 retiring of the rest to the north of Galilee ; or of this new 
 orig-in"of the Nazarenes there. For all these particulars 
 therefore, learned Sir, you must have some otner autho- 
 rity, in petto, besides that of Mosheim, and you ought to 
 have produced it." He then proceeds to state how im- 
 probable it was that any great body of men, much less 
 Jews, should suddenly change their opinions, customs, and 
 habits. " You might just as well suppose," says Dr. P. 
 " that all the Jews in Jerusalem began to speak Greek, as 
 well as abandoned their ancient customs, in order to enjoy 
 the privileges of the iElian colony. And you would have 
 this to allege in your favour, that from that time the bishops 
 of Jerusalem were all Greeks, and the public offices were 
 no doubt performed in the Greek language*." 
 
 Dr. Priestley proceeds to observe, that the words of Sul- 
 pitius Severus, a writer of the fourth century, to which 
 Mosheim refers, by no means support his or Dr. Horsley's 
 narrative. He only says, that " because the christians were 
 thought to consist chiefly of Jews, Adrian ordered a co- 
 hort of soldiers to keep constant guard, and drive all Jews 
 from any- access to Jerusalem : which was of service to the 
 christian faith : for at that time they almost all believed 
 Christ to be God, but with the observance of the law : the 
 Lord so disposing it, that the servitude of the law should 
 be removed from the liberty of the faith and the church. 
 Then was Mark the first bishop of the Gentiles at Jerusa- 
 lem 5." The authority cited by Mosheim being so little 
 relevant to his purpose, Dr. Priestley afterwards consulted 
 Eusebius and other ancient writers, who, though they give 
 an account of the expulsion of the Jews, say not one word 
 of the Jewish christians abandoning the Mosaic ritual. 
 And he concludes with Tillemont and Fleury, that the 
 christian Jews were expelled equally with the rest, and that 
 the church which was formed at iElia consisted wholly of 
 
 * Letters to the Archdeacon of St. Alban's, Lett. 4. 
 
 * Su)[)it. Sever. Hist, Sac. lib, ii. c. 31. Dr. Priestley, ibid. p. -11. 
 
 T Gentiles. 
 
274 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 Gentiles. He expresses great indignation at the unfounded 
 charge against Origen's character; and ends his letter with 
 the severe remark, " unless you can make a better apology 
 for yourself than I am able to suggest, you will be consi- 
 dered by impartial persons as a falsifier of history, and a 
 defamer of the character of the dead, hi order to serve 
 your purpose/* 
 
 The learned dignitary, who, to say the truth, was inno- 
 cent of the charge alleged, who was misled by the great 
 authority of Mosheim, and who really meant nothing more 
 than the common ruse cle guerre of passing off Mosheim's 
 discoveries for his own, probably presuming upon security 
 from detection by the scarcity of the book, deeply resented 
 and vehemently repelled Dr. Priestley's unfounded accusa- 
 tion. In the second chapter of his Remarks upon Dr. 
 Priestley's Second Letters, after laying in the prudent pre- 
 caution, that " whoever attempts to make out a consistent 
 story from ancient writers, will find himself under a neces- 
 sity of helping out their broken accounls by his own con- 
 jeclures^'' he proceeds to the humble confession, that he 
 had in fact advanced nothing but what he had borrowed 
 from Mosheim. And not knowing at the time that his 
 opponent had consulted the wrong reference, for, in truth. 
 Dr. Priestley had not acknowledged it, Dr. Horsley, with 
 much plausibility, retaliates the charge of wilful misrepre- 
 sentation upon his adversary. '* If he opened Mosheim in 
 the place to which I referred,'* says our indignant respond- 
 ent, " he rnu.sL know that I have added no circumstances 
 to Mosheim's account but what every one must add in his 
 own imagination. He must know that these circumstances 
 in particular, which he is pleased to mention among m^ 
 additions, are aflirmed by Mosheim. The conflux ot He- 
 brew christians to yElia ; the motive which induced the 
 majority to give up their ancient customs, namely, the de- 
 sire of sharing in the privileges ot theyElian colony ; and 
 the retreat of those who could not give their ancient cus- 
 toms up to remote corners of the country : these were 
 Mosheim's assertions before they were mine: and Dr. 
 Priestley either knows this, or pretending to separate .Mos- 
 heim's 
 
DR. IIORSLEY AKt) DR. PRIESTLEY. 275 
 
 helm's account from my additions, he hath not taken the 
 trouble to examine what is mine and what isMosheim's." 
 
 So it is that the truth comes out between these learned 
 polemics. Dr. Horsley, after having peremptorily stated 
 that " THE FACT IS SO, which I affirm with the less hesi- 
 tation, being supportI'D by the authority of Mosheini,'* 
 is now reduced to the humiliaring acknowledgement that 
 he had advanced nothing but what he had borrowed froni 
 Mosheim. And Dr. Priestley having consulted a wrong 
 reference, unjustly taxes the venerable archdeacon with 
 being a bold falsifier of history, and defamer of the dead, 
 when he was in hct nothing more than the humble, and 
 we may charitably hope, the uninformed plagiary of the 
 falsehood and defamation of another. 
 
 The archdeacon, however, was sufiiciently sensible that 
 in the estimation even of willing judges, his justification of 
 himself from the charge of Dr. Priestley would not en- 
 tirely acquit him from that of adopting implicitly the er- 
 rors of Mosheim : or, as he himself correctly expresses it, 
 p. 364!, having " related upon the authority of Mosheim, 
 what Mosheim relates u'pon none." He very properly, 
 therefore, proceeds to study eccclesiastical history for him- 
 self; and after eighteen months' hard labour (p. 410) he 
 at length produces the following new and most satisfac- 
 tury demonsl ration of the existence of this famous church 
 of orthodox Hebrew chrlbtiaiis at ^lia, who had aban- 
 doned the Mosaic ritual. 
 
 First, the learned dignitary states in form six distinct 
 propositions (p. 364); the fust three of which are undis- 
 puted facts, and the three last, gratuitous assumptions. 
 I'he first asserts the existence of a Hebrew church of the 
 circumcision at Jerusalem or Pella, " till the dispersion of 
 the Jt>ws by Adrian." — 'i. That '- upon this event a chris- 
 tian church arose at iElia." — 3. " 1 his was a Greek: 
 church governed by bishops of the uncircumcision." All 
 these were allowed facts. — 4, The fourth proposition as- 
 sumes, that " the observation of the Mosaic law by the 
 primitive church of Jerusalem was a matter of mere habit 
 and national prejudice^ not of conscience. A matter of 
 
 T 2 conscience 
 
276 REVIEW OF TFIE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 conscience it could not be, because of the decree of the 
 apostolical college, and the writings of Paul"...." and the 
 notion that Paul could be mistaken in this point, is an im- 
 piety which I cannot impute to our holy brethren, the 
 saints of the primitive church of Jerusalem." It did not, it 
 seems, occur to the venerable archdeacon that the apostolic 
 decree related wholly to ths converted Gentiles: that St. 
 Paul bears his testimony only against the imposition of the 
 Mosaic ritual upon proselytes from heathenism ; and that 
 at any rate, " our holy brethren, the saints of Jerusalem," 
 are known to have disregarded the writings of Paul, be- 
 cause he spoke slightingly of the obligation of the law. — 
 5. That in these " good christians, motives of worldly in- 
 terest, which would not overcome conscience, would over- 
 come mere habit." — And 6. " That a desire of partaking 
 in the privileges of the ^liiian colony would be a prevailing 
 motive with the Plebrcw christians to lay aside their an- 
 cient customs." " These things," says the learned arch- 
 deacon, " I TAKE FOR GRANTED." And thesc things the 
 German professor had taken for granted before him in 
 that long note to his Ante-Constantine history, which is 
 the grand store-house from whence the English Theolo- 
 gian derives all his knowledge of the jlillian church. 
 
 But as the profound Editor of the Works of Newton 
 "was well appri;i;ed that taking things for granted, though 
 the most easy. Is not always the most satisfactory mode of 
 proof, he now proceeds to state his direct evidence of the 
 origin of his favourite church. And judiciously passing 
 over with very slight notice the fore-cited passage of Sulpi- 
 tius Severns, which passage, however, is the principal mine 
 from which Mosheim draws his precious discoveries, the 
 archdeacon hints at the testimony of Orosius, a historian of 
 the fifth century, who says that " the Jews were forbidden 
 to enter Jerusalem, the freedom of the city being granted to 
 Christians only." This testimony, however, is very pro- 
 perly dismissed, as little more than " a feather in the scale," 
 p. 367 ; and the learned writer advances to his Seventh 
 proposition, p. 373, which affirms, 
 
 7. " That a body of orthodox christians of the Hebrews 
 
 were 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 277 
 
 were actually existing in the world much later than the 
 time of Adrian." 
 
 Passing by the testimony of Origen, whom he had be- 
 fore denounced as the asserter of a notorious falsehood, the 
 venerable dignitary rests the whole proof of his proposi- 
 tion upon the authority of Jerome. This learned father, 
 in his commentary upon Isaiah, relates two expositions of 
 chap. ix. 1 ; of which expositions he ascribes the one to 
 the Hebrews believing in Christ, the other to the Nnza- 
 renes. A critic of less acumen than the Archdeacon of 
 St. Alban's would have been at a loss to discover any proof 
 of his seventh proposition, and much more of the marvel- 
 lous account of the sudden revoludon in the Hebrew 
 church in the reign of Adrian, and of their settlement at 
 iElia, in these few words from the Commentary of Jerome. 
 But Dr. Horsley was not a scholar of the vulgar class. He 
 strenuously argues, p. S74<, that the Hebrews described by 
 Jerome as believing in Christ, must have been orthodox 
 believers. " For this description of them," says he, " with- 
 out any thing to distinguish their belief from the common 
 belief of the church, without any note of its error or im- 
 perfection, is a plain character of complete orthodoxy." 
 Also, " the distinction of them from the Nazarenes, made 
 by St. Jerome, is a plain proof that they were not ob- 
 servers of the Mosaic law." 
 
 Dr. Priestley in his reply, (Third Letters, p. 25,) pro- 
 ducing the whole passage from Jerome, has made it ap- 
 pear probable that the Nazarenes, and the Hebrews be- 
 lieving in Christ, were the same persons; that Jerome only 
 meant to diversify his phraseology, and that the interpre- 
 tations which the archdeacon represents as different, are in 
 effect the same. But let this pass. /Ve give him Jerome^ . 
 We will admit, even upon this slender evidence, and the 
 archdeacon's arbitrary interpretation, in defiance of all pro- 
 bability, and in contradiction to the whole tenor of history, 
 that in the age of Jerome, placed by Lardnerin A. D. S9'2, 
 there existed a considerable body of orthodox Hebrew 
 
 f "I give him Origen." Horsley's Tracts, p. 374. 
 
 christians^ 
 
278 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 christians, who had abandoned the customs of their fore- 
 fathers. But how does this prove that '250 years before, 
 the majority of Hebrew christians had suddenly, and at 
 once, deserted the ritual of Moses in order to enjoy the 
 privileges of the -^fElian colony ? This great difficulty did 
 not escape the notice of the shrewd polemic. And the 
 solution of it is so appropriate, and so trulv characteristic 
 of the learned v/riter's manner, that I will give it in his 
 own words, p. 375. " If the orthodox christians of the 
 Hebrews, actuailv existing somewhere in the world, from 
 the reign of Adrian to the days of St. Jerome, were not 
 members of the church of iElia. dwelling at iElia, and in 
 the adjacent parts of Palestine, Dr. Priestley, if he be 
 
 so PLEASED, MAY SEEK THEJR SETTLEMENT." 
 
 Dr. Priestley, hov^evcr, notwithstanding this most clear 
 and satisfactory account of the origin of the orthodox 
 church at 7Elia, returns the bill with an indorsement of Z^- 
 noramus : '"' Before you can show," says he, p. 28, " that 
 this passage in Jerome is at all to your purpose, you must 
 prove the three following things : iMrst, that the Plebrews 
 believing in Christ were different from the Nazarenes : 
 secondly, that the former were completely orthodox : and 
 thirdly, that those orthodox Jewish christians resided at 
 Jerusalem. And it appears to me that not one of these 
 suppositions is at all probable." 
 
 The venerable archdeacon, then advanced for his great 
 merits to the bishoprick of St. David's, in condescension 
 either to the infirmity, or to the argument of his oppo- 
 nent, in his Reply, abates a little of his lofty language ; 
 and in the last of the Disquisitions, annexed to the repub- 
 lication of his Tracts, p. 490, he admits " that St. Je- 
 rome's evidence goes barely to the proof" of his seventh 
 proposition, namely, ' that a body of orthodox christians 
 of the Hebrews was actually existing in the world much 
 later than the time of Adrian.' St. Jerome's evidence," 
 says his Lordship, " is brought for the proof ot this pro- 
 position SINGLY. And the existence of these orthodox 
 Hebrew believers in the time of St. Jerome being thus 
 proved by St. Jerome's evidenccj the probability of the fact 
 
 that 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRir.STLEY. 279 
 
 that they resided at TEIia, and that such a body had been 
 settled at iElia from the time of Adrian downwards, rests 
 upon my six former positions." 
 
 These positions have been ah-eady stated, and tlie atten- 
 tive reader may perhaps recollect, though his Lordship has 
 not reminded him of it, that these six propositions are in- 
 troduced, p. 36'i-, with the following remarkable words: 
 
 " I TAKE FOR GRANTED THESE THING-S." And in Order 
 
 to impress the circumstance more strongly upon the read- 
 er's mind, after having stated the three first propositions, 
 concerning which there was no dispute, he introduces thje 
 three following with a repetition of the same remark. For 
 
 AGAIN, I TAKE FOR GRANTED. 
 
 The v^hole fabrick, then, of this famous church of or- 
 thodox Hebrew christians at /Elia, who abandoned at once 
 the institutions of Moses in order to enjoy the privileges of 
 the JElian colony, rests solely upon the testimony of Je- 
 rome, more than i'50 years afterwards, to this single fact, 
 that in his time there were " Hebrews who believed in 
 Christ.*' And by the learned writer's own frank and liberal 
 concession, all the rest is TAKEN FOR GRANTED. 
 
 The venerable champion of the uncircumcised Hebrew 
 church, having thus arranged his invincible arguments, 
 proceeds, p. 376, with a most edifying and imposing gra- 
 vity, and the most intrepid assurance, to state his grand 
 conclusion. " Upon these foundations, which a stronger 
 arm than Dr. Priestley's shall not be able to tear up, stands 
 the church of orthodox Jewish christians at Jerusalem." 
 — Upon these foundations, would I say, let it stand. No 
 force of arm can be necessary to overturn an edifice which 
 the first passing breeze will sweep from the surface of the 
 earth. 
 
 The difficulties of the learned dignitary do not however 
 end here. Dr. Priestley's unfortunate m.istake, in consult- 
 ing the wrong book, involved his antagonist in another 
 embarrassment, from which all his ingenuity in helping 
 out a broken story has not been able to extricate him with 
 credit. 
 
 Among 
 
280 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 Among other indisputable facts, and which the archdea- 
 con alleges, p. 157, in order to confirm his charge against 
 Origen, this is one ; " that the majority of Hebrew chris- 
 tians," having renounced the Mosaic law, '* that they 
 might be qualified to partake in the valuable privileges of 
 the ^lian colony," they '• removed from Pella and other 
 towns, to which they had retired, and settled in great num- 
 bers at iElia." This migration of the Hebrew christians 
 from Pella to JEWa. is stated by Mosheim in his Ante-Con- 
 stantine history ; bat upon more mature reflection and 
 better information, it had been omitted in the general 
 Ecclesiastical History, which alone Dr. Priestley had con- 
 sulted. This, therefore, is one of the facts which he sus- 
 pects his reverend opponent to have forged, and of which 
 he challenges him to produce a proof; which challenge 
 gave rise to the above-mentioned mortifying confession, 
 this was " Mosheim's assertion before it was mine." But 
 as Mosheim's bare assertion, though re-echoed in the pom- 
 pous language of the archdeacon of St. Alban's^, would not 
 be generally deemed sufficient, independently of evidence 
 from antiquity, to impeach the hitherto spotless character 
 of the great Origen, the archdeacon proceeds to cite the 
 testimony of Epiphanius, referred to by Mosheim : a re- 
 ference which if he had had the prudence or the good 
 fortune to have consulted before he had published his 
 affirmation, he would at least have expressed himself with 
 greater caution. " The Hebrew christians," says the 
 learned dignitary. Tracts, p. 370, "after Adrian's 
 SETTLEMENT OF THE JEhiAii COLONY, returned from 
 Pella, whither they had retired from the distresses of the 
 war, to JE\h. It happens that this fact, of which Dr. 
 Priestley does me the honour to make me the inventor, 
 is asserted by Epiphanius." And in truth, Epiphanius, in 
 the passage cited by the archdeacon, uses these very words: 
 " The disciples of the disciples of the apostles had return- 
 ed from Pella to Jerusalem, and taught there. For when 
 the city was about to be taken by the Romans, all the 
 disciples had-been forewarned by an angel to leave the 
 
 city. 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 281 
 
 city. These went and dwelt in the above-mentioned Pella, 
 beyond Jordan; but, returning after the desola- 
 tion OF /ERUSAi,EM, worked miracles.'* 
 
 This is a plain, and, leaving the miracles out of the ques- 
 tion, not an improbable narrative. What can be alleged 
 in contradiction to this explicit testimony of Epiphanius ? 
 Nothing that I know of, save one or two little diificulties 
 relating to the chronology of the event. I'hese, indeed, 
 the learned dignitary foresaw ; and with wise precaution 
 he earnestly deprecates " any cavils wiiich ignorance or 
 fraud (he might have added, or truth) may raise about 
 the chronology of the return." The fact is, and the 
 archdeacon does not deny it, that the desolation of Jc ru- 
 salem, of which Epiphanius speaks, was that by Titus, 
 
 A. D. 70, MORE than sixty YEARS LEFORK THE CO- 
 LONY OF ^Elia EXISTED7. " But this," says the learn- 
 ed dignitary, p. 371, " is a matter of no importance. It 
 is sufficient for my purpose that these returned christians 
 were residing at Jerusalem, or more properly at -ZElia, at 
 the same time that Aquila resided there as overseer of the 
 emperor's works." So then, we are now to believe that 
 these Hebrew christians, who *' returned in great numbers 
 to JE\h after Adrian s settlement of the iEiian colony," 
 who abandoned the rites of Moses, and placed themselves 
 under a Greek bishop, and worshiped in an unknov/n 
 tongue, that they might be qualified to partake of the va- 
 luable privileges of the ^lian colony, were the very same 
 persons who had quitted Jerusalem to avoid the calamities 
 of the siege by Titus sixty years before! Now if we 
 allow that at the time of their retreat they were upon an 
 average twenty years of age, they must have been four- 
 score at the time of their return. And it is really quite 
 edifying to figure to one's self these illustrious Octogena- 
 
 ^ The emperor Adrian began his reign in August, A. D. 11 7, and 
 died in July, A. D. 138. The Jewish war broke out in the four- 
 teenth year, and was finished in the eighteenth. It was in this period 
 that Jerusalem was totally demolished, and the colony of ^lia was 
 founded. MWa. was begun in A. D. 162. See Basnage., 
 
 lies. 
 
282 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN ' 
 
 ries, " our holy brethren, the saints of the primitive 
 church of Jerusalem," upon the first intelligence of the 
 rood news, havSting away from Pella and the north of 
 Galilee, where they had been passing threcKcore years in 
 obscurity and tranquillity, and in heroic defiance of the 
 most inveterate attachments and of the habits and prc^u- 
 diccs of fourscore, abandoning at once the rites of their 
 forefathers, and the forms, and even the language, of the 
 devotions to which they had been ever accustomed, in or- 
 der to obtain, What? — the valuable privileges and immu- 
 nities of the oElian colony ! And how gratifying must it 
 be to every pious mind to learn, upon the high authority 
 of Epiphanius, that after all the fatigues and hazards of 
 their journey, they were still in a flourishing state, teach- 
 ing and working miracles uith great effect, at the time 
 when x^quila, who was converted by them, was superin- 
 tendant of Adrian's works^! 
 
 But here again there is another little chronological stum- 
 bling-block, which it is necessary either to remove or to 
 step over. Taking the account as it stands in Epipfva- 
 niuSj the only authority, such as it is, for the fact in ques- 
 tion, this Aquila, who was converted by the miracles of 
 the orthodox Hebrevv' christians, was employed by Adrian 
 as overseer of the works at Jerusalem in the thirteenth 
 year of his reign. But the Jewish war did not break out 
 till the fourteenth year, and was terminated in the eigh- 
 teenth ; so that the Hebrew christians, with whom Aquila 
 conversed, were those who were resident at Jerusalem 
 hefore its desolation by Adrian, not those who, after 
 Adrian's settlement of the ^lian colony, returned from 
 Pella," and abandoned the rites of Moses to enjoy the pri- 
 vileges of iElia. His Lordship, however, when pressed 
 with this objection by his acute opponent, after piteously 
 complaining of the uncivil attempt to embarrass the argu- 
 ment with chronological difficulties, against which he had 
 
 exAJcwv ^avaoLTwy. Epipli. de Pond, et Mens. 
 
 entered 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 2-63 
 
 entered so earnest and necessary a caveat 9, proceeds in 
 his usual way to help out the broken story by his own con- 
 jectures. *' I maintain,'* says he, p. S7l, note, " that there 
 is no reason to believe that the Hebrew christians quietlv 
 settled at ^lia before the Jewish rebellion were included 
 in Adrian's edict for the banisliment of the Jews." From. 
 this it should seem, that "our holy bretiircn" never 
 moved from the place of their abode during the war of 
 Adrian ; but prudently embracing the first opportunity 
 of discarding the Mosaic ritual, they were at once admit- 
 ted to the privileges of the 7Elian colony. His Lordship 
 forgets, or at least he presunles that his readers will foi-- 
 get, that, upon the authority of Mosheim, he had before 
 sent them all to Pella, and to the north of Galilee, till 
 after the demolition of Jerusalem by Adrian ; and that 
 this is stated, p. ]5(i, 157, as one of the indisputable facts 
 in confirmation of the charge against Origen. TJpon se- 
 cond thoughts, the learned prelate kindly consents to 
 keep these aged and pious brethren at home, and only 
 requires that, lest they should " pass for Jews with the 
 Roman magistrates, they should renounce the Mosaic 
 law." Whether the easy simplicity of the Roman magis- 
 trates was really imposed upon by the specious artifice of 
 " our holy brethren," or whether their good nature, at 
 the hazard of incurring the emperor's displeasure, winked 
 at the pious fraud ; or finally, since, by the tesdmony of 
 the bishop's great authority, St. Epiphanius, miracles had 
 not yet ceased in the Jerusalem church, whether their 
 eyes might not he holdcn so that they did not knoiv them, 
 does not appear lo. The bishop acknowledges, p. 366, 
 
 that 
 
 ° "Dr. Priestley has treated this testimony of Epiphanius just as I 
 expected, and indeed predicted.. ..the caution which I gave the public 
 not to be abused by cavils about chronology is but too much justified 
 by the event." Bishop Horsley's Tracts, p. 3/2, note. — A less saga- 
 cious disputant than the Bishop of St. David's might naturally expect 
 from so acute an opponent as Dr. Priestley, an attack in that quarter 
 which he was conscious that he had left so much exposed. 
 
 " It might have been deemed officious in Dr. Priestley to have put 
 the question-. How were these lioly and prudent brethren disposed of 
 
284 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 that " no promise of any particular immunities was made 
 to Jewish christians upon condition that they renounced 
 the Jewish law." But presuming, which is not improba- 
 ble, that the Hebrew christians had taken no part in the 
 rebellion, he supposes that the emperor mig/it, distinguish 
 between rebels and good subjects. He then takes for 
 granted, that the emperor did make this distinction ; and 
 assumes, without a tittle of authority from ecclesiastical 
 antiquity, that they abandoned the Mosaic insdtute, be- 
 cause, " if they had not discarded the Jewish rites, they 
 might have been mistaken for Jews," and been debarred 
 the immunities of the ^lian colony. In this forlorn and 
 deplorable condition, resting wholly upon gratuitous as- 
 sumption, unsupported by history, and contradicted by 
 chronology, is this learned prelate constrained finally to 
 leave this his favourite church. Siill, however, he is un- 
 willing absolutely to give it up. " The disturbed founda- 
 tions of the church of JEHa are," says he, p. 499, " again 
 settled. I could ivisli to trust them to their own solidity 
 to withstand any future attacks." 
 
 But though the right reverend polemic thus sued for 
 peace, his active and determined adversary would neither 
 desist from the contest, nor grant him quarter. After 
 having stated in his Letters to the Lord Bishop of St. 
 David's, p. 53, " that all the accounts of the destruction 
 of Jerusalem by Adrian are absolutely inconsistent with 
 the supposition of any such church ;" that " they all say 
 that no Jew, without making any exception in favour of 
 christian Jews, was allowed to remain in the place, and 
 they expressly speak of the new church as consisting 
 wholly of Gentiles, who made use of the Greek language;'* 
 and appealing once more to the concurring opinion of 
 Fieury and Tillemont, he adds, " to this mass of evidence 
 from the clearest facts and the strongest probabilities, 
 
 during the interval when "■ Jerusalem was no more," and while MXisi 
 ■was building at another place ? But, no doubt, his Lordship would 
 have referred him to his former most ingenious and satisfactory reply, 
 p, 375: "If they were not dwelling at _^liaj Dr. Priestleyj if he be 
 60 pleased^ may seek their settlement." 
 
 your 
 
DR. noRSLEY AND DR. PRIF.STLEV. 29,.'» 
 
 your Lordship opposes a mere idle rtory picked up by 
 Epiphanius, of Aquihi being appointed by Adrian to su- 
 perintend the works at Jerusalem, and being converted to 
 Christianity ;" and he reminds the bishop that, " accord- 
 ing to Epiphanius, this must have happened before the 
 war began.'* " Your Lordship,'* he concludes, " may 
 well say that I have embarrassed your argument with 
 chronological difliculties ; and when chronology is against 
 a man, he is naturally against chronology.'* 
 
 In reply to the bishop's concluding remark, Dr. Priest- 
 ley says, p. 57, " My Lord, in humble imitation of your 
 Lordship's style, I will say, the foundations of your church 
 of Trinitarian Jews at Jerusalem, after the time of Adrian, 
 are again, and I will venture to say for ever, overturned : 
 and a church, the foundations of which w^ere attempted 
 to be laid on the grossest calumny, and on the ruins of 
 the fiurest character that christian history has to exhibit, 
 v/ould not expect any better fate. And it has fallen where 
 it ought to have done, on the head of the architect." He 
 adds, " If your Lordship should make a fresh attempt to 
 rebuild this favourite church, I hope you will lay its foun- 
 dations deeper than on an idle story of Epiphanius, — Also 
 condescend to give some small degree of attention to the 
 humble subject of chronology. Otherwise, how pom- 
 pously and magisterially soever your Lordship may write, 
 a plain tale will be sufficient to put you down." Dr. 
 Priestley concludes with a spirited challenge to the newly- 
 created bishop to resume the controversy. " Come 
 forth then again, my Lord, and to all your powers of lan- 
 guage be pleased to add those oi argument. To use your 
 own high platonic language, Come forth with the full 
 projection of all your energies, and, if possible, overwhelm 
 me at once." • 
 
 To this animated challenge the right reverend adver- 
 sary made no reply. The oracle was silent. The war- 
 fare was accomplished. The prize was won. And both 
 the contending parties retired from the field equally well 
 satisfied with the result of the conflict; Dr. Priestley with 
 his VICTORY, and Dr. Horsley, with his MITRE. 
 
 NOTE, 
 
286 REVliiW OF THE CONTROVEE.SY BETWEEN 
 
 NOTE. 
 
 The other questions which were agitated by these keen and learned 
 jjolemics were of very subordinate importance. The venerable arch- 
 deacon having pledged himself to prove that the divinity of our Lord 
 was the belief of the very first christians, appeals in his Eighth Letter, 
 TractSj p, J 64, to a work of great antiquity, under the title of the 
 Epistle of Barnabas, which, thougli it is admitted not to have been 
 written by the companion of Paul, the learned writer contends to have 
 been a production of the apostolic age, and addressed by a Hebrew 
 christian to his Jewish brethren. From this epistle he cites the fol- 
 lowing passage : " The Lord submitted to suffer for our souls, although 
 be be the Lord of the whole earth, unto whom he said the day before the 
 world was finished. Let us make man after our image and likeness." 
 He adds two or three other passages of the same import. He then 
 remarks, that the writer mentions this doctrine "as an article of their 
 common faith ; he brings no arguments to prove It ; he mentions it 
 as occasion occurs, without showing any anxiety to inculcate it, or any 
 apprehension that it would be denied or doubted." And he trium- 
 phantly concludes, "This, Sir, is the proof which I had to produce. 
 It is so direct and full, that if this be laid in one scale, and your whole 
 mass of evidence drawn from incidental and ambiguous allusions in 
 the other, the latter will fly up and kick the beam." 
 
 To this argument Dr. Priestley replies in the second of his Second 
 Series of Letters to Dr. Horsley, by reminding his antagonist of the 
 doubts entertained by many learned men of the genuineness of this 
 epistle, and of the certainty of numerous interpolations, and those such 
 as respect the very subject in question. Adding, "I must see other 
 evidence than this from Barnabas, before I can admit that the divinity 
 or pre- existence of Christ was the belief of the apostolic age." 
 
 This reply sufficiently invalidates the testimony of the pseudo-Bar- 
 nabas. But an answer still more satisfactory is supplied by the learn- 
 ed Jeremiah Jones, who was not, as Dr. Horsley states. Tracts, 
 p. 127, "the tutor of the venerable Lardner," but the relation and pu- 
 pil of the very learned Samuel Jones of Tewkesbury ; who was also 
 the tutor of Maddox bishop of Worcester, Butler bishop of Durham, 
 and Seeker archbishop of Canterbury ; to which catalogue we may 
 add the name of a person who was fully their equal in literary cele- 
 brity, and, if not restrained by principles of conscience, had been equal 
 in ecclesiastical dignity, thelearned and pious Dr. Samuel Chandler, many 
 years the able and admired pastor of the highly respectable presbyterian 
 congregation of the Old Jewry. Jeremiah Jones, who, to the great loss 
 of theological literature, died young, in the second volume of his 
 
 admirable 
 
DR. HORSLEY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 287 
 
 admirable Treatise on tlie Canon of Scripture, republished a few yonrs 
 ago bv the University of Oxford, part iii. ch. 3/, after a very full and 
 inripartial inquiry into the subject^ states it as his opinion, which he sub- 
 stantiates by abundant evidence, "that the epistle was written not by 
 Barnabas, nor by any other Jew, but by some person who was ori- 
 ginally a Pagan idolater ; that it is an apocryphal book, and was never 
 read in thechurches till the time of Jerome; that it contains niany asser- 
 tions which are absolutely false, and a great number of trilling, silly, and 
 idle things." And upon the whole he concludes, from its having been 
 cited " only by Clemens Alexandrinus and Origen, that it was forged 
 at Alexandria ; and because there are so many pious frauds In it, that 
 it was the forgery of some such person as corrupted llie Ixjoks of the 
 Sibyls, and that it was written about the middle of the second centu- 
 ry." Such is the direct, full, and decisive evidence derived by tlic 
 archdeacon from the testimony of Barnabas to the orthodoxy of the 
 primitive Hebrew church. IVe give him this Barnalas'. 
 
 I cannot conclude this long note without adding a word or two 
 upon the subject of Origen's much-injured character. The archdeacon 
 had charged this venerable man with " the allegation of a notorious 
 falsehood," in asserting that the Hebrew christians in his time had 
 not abandoned the law of their ancestors : Tracts, p. 156". Of this 
 heavy charge he adduced the existence of his far-famed church at 
 iElia as a proof. But soon discovering that the foundations of this 
 church were too weak even for its own support, and much more to 
 bear tlve weight of this new and unprecedented attack upon the ve- 
 racity of Origen, and being anxious to repel the severe retort of Dr. 
 Priestley, that he was "a defamer of the dead," the learned dignitary 
 applied himself with great industry to look out for some plausible con- 
 firmation of his criminatory allegation. And the success of his re- 
 searches was worthy of the cause. Two passages only are produced 
 by the archdeacon. Tracts, p. 350, to state which, in the reverend ac- 
 cuser's own translation, is to demonstrate the futility of tlie charge. 
 
 " In the second book of the Answer to Celsus, Origen says, It is my 
 present purpo.se to evince Celsus's ignorance ; who has made a Jew 
 say to his countrymen, to Israelites believing in Christ, Upon what 
 motive have you deserted the law of your ancestors ?....And how con- 
 fusedly does Celsus's Jew speak upon this subject, when he might 
 have said more plausibly, Tti^avcvrspov Some of you have relinquish- 
 ed the old customs upon pretence of expositions and allegories. Some 
 again expounding, as you call it, spiritually, nevertheless observe the 
 institutions of our ancestors. But some, not admitting these exposi« 
 
 ' " I shall tax the veracity of your witness — of this Origen." Hors- 
 ley, p. 150. 
 
 tions_, 
 
288 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY BETWEEN 
 
 tions, are willing to receive Jesus as the person foretold by the prophets, 
 and to observe the law of Moses according to the ancient customs." 
 
 " In these words," continues the archdeacon, " Origen confesses 
 all that I have alleged of him. He confesses, in contradiction to his 
 former assertion, that he knew of three sorts of Jews professing Chris- 
 tianity. ...one of whom had relinquished the observance of the literal 
 precept." 
 
 But where is this self-contradiction to be found ? Celsus ignorantly 
 charged all the Hebrew christians with having deserted the customs 
 of their ancestors. Origen, who knew (hat few or none of them had 
 dotie so, Replies, that Celsus's Jew would have talked not more truly, 
 but more plausibly, more consistently with his assumed character, 
 and more like the truth, if he had only said that sovie had relinquished 
 their old customs, while the majority adhered to them. But the bishop 
 says in his laboured reply to Dr. Priestley's Defence of Origen, Tracts, 
 Disq. V. " Plausibility and truth, in this use of the word plausibility, 
 are the very same thing." They might be so in his Lordship's voca- 
 bulary, but they are not so in common acceptation. To say that his 
 Lordship's assertions are plausible, is very difterent from allowing that 
 ihose assertions are true. Dr. Priestley, in the first of his'J'hird Series 
 of Letters, supposes that Origen might allude to a few who had relin- 
 quished their ancient customs, though the majority had not. But 
 this supposition, though not improbable, is by no means necessar)' to 
 justify the character of Origen. 
 
 Afiother passage, upon which the archdeacon places his finger, ibid, 
 n, 353, as substantiating his charge against Origen, is in the first book 
 <jf the reply to Celsus. Origen, defending the translation of Isa. vii. 
 14, "Behold a virgin shall conceive," alleges that the word Alma, 
 which the LXX. translate * virgin,* and otreis 'a young woman,' is 
 put too, AS THEY SAY, in Dcuterouomy xxii. 23, 24, for ' a virgin.' " 
 
 The fact is, that in all our present copies the word Ahna, n:2bi% 
 does not occur in Deuteronomy, but another word, nhnn, which al- 
 ways signifies ' a virgin.' And the archdeacon charges Origen with 
 prevarication for citing the te.\t in this doubtful manner. " Was it 
 unknown to the compiler of the Hexapla what the reading of the 
 Hebrew text in his own times was ? If he knew that it was what he 
 would have it thought to be, why does he seem to assert it upon hear- 
 say only ? If he knew not, why did he not inform himself? " 
 
 In truth, it is difficult to say why Origen uses this indefinite phrase. 
 His copy might differ from (he modern ones, or his judgement might 
 be doubtful, or he might possibly have forgotten at the instant what 
 the exact reading was, and his copy might not be at hand for him to 
 consult ; but whether any or noae of these suppositions be correct, 
 
 surely 
 
DR. HORSI.EY AND DR. PRIESTLEY. 289 
 
 surely no human being but the Archdeacon of St. Albans would have 
 ventured upon surh feeble grounds to have taxed the character of the 
 great and venerable Origen with notorious falsehood*. " What an 
 :i[ipetite," says Dr. Priestley, " must a man hiive for calumny, who 
 c;in seize upon such a circumstance as this to gratify it !" Third Series 
 of Letters, p. 15. 
 
 ' Nor is it to be supposed that the archdeacon himself would have 
 preferred so serious a charge upon such frivolous pretexts, had he not 
 Iven completely misled by the visions of Mosheim. For had the 
 fable of the Hebrew orthodox church at TElia been true, Origen must 
 liave known it, as he resided for some time in the vicinity ot Jerusa- 
 lem, and he would in that case have merited the imputation of a want 
 of veracity. But tliis ground being untenable, and the learned digni- 
 tary having alleged his accusation of the venerable Father in such broad 
 and unqualihed terms, he probably thought it necessary in vindicalioQ 
 of his own character to search for other proofj of his charge against 
 that of Origen: with what success the reader is now competent to 
 judge. 
 
 The reader may now likewise form a just estimate of the truth of 
 a curious observation in a late Quarterly Review, that " Dr. Priestley 
 was regarded as a giant in tbeoiogical controversy, till he was van- 
 quished by a giant greater than himself." How far Bishop Horsley, 
 conscious as he evidently was of the infirmity of his argu ent, which 
 he in vain endeavoured to conceal under the pomp and colouring of 
 his language, would have relished the equivocal compliment of the 
 same Reviewers in their critique upon his posthumous sermons, that 
 " his principal forte was Theology," may not be so easily ascertained. 
 
 To the liberal and enlightened author of the masterly " Dissertation 
 upon the Evangelical Sects," m the last Number of this Literary 
 Journal, the Unitarians in common with the rest of their non-con- 
 formist brethren, are under great obligation, for his manly and unequi- 
 vocal avowal of the grand principles of religious liberty, and his indig- 
 nant reprobation of persecution in every form. While the Unitarians 
 can boast of their Lardneis, Lindseys, Jebbs, Wakefields, andTyrwhits, 
 and many other names living and dead, whose claim to literary cele- 
 brity would not have been deemed equivocal had they imbibed their 
 learning in royal college- or national institutions, they can forgive the 
 sarcasm of the worthy Reviewer thnt their doctrine "appeals to the 
 vanity of the half-learned, and the pride of the half-reasoning." But 
 they cannot suppress their astonishment that this able critic, who does 
 not appear to be an enemy to revelation, should, in reply to a most 
 judicious and important observation of the Barrister, " that Christ ne- 
 ver required faith in his disciples, without first furnishing sufficient 
 evidence to justify it," have ventured to affirm that the Barrister 
 "makes this assertion in direct contradiction of many plain texts, and 
 of the whole spirit of the whole gospels." We indeed have not so 
 learned Christ. 
 
 The candid writer, allowing that Unitarianism is " the most harm- 
 
 u less 
 
290 REVIEW OF THE CONTROVERSY, ECT. 
 
 In the fifth Disquisition annexed to his Collection of Tracts, Dr. 
 Hoisley, then Bishop of St. Davids, labours, but without success, to 
 establish his impeachment of Origen's character upon the ground of 
 these two passages, from his answer to Celsus ; and having convicted 
 Dr. I'riestley of two or three trifling inaccuracies, he concludes with the 
 following illiberal reflection : " This art, which Dr, Priestley is so apt 
 to employ, of reducing an argument, by well-managed abridgements, 
 to a form in which it may be capable of refutation, indicates so near 
 a resemblance between the characters of Origen and his Hyperaspistes 
 in the worst part of Origen's, that perhaps I might not be altogether 
 unjustifiable, were I to apply to the Squire the words which Mosheim 
 so freely uses of the Knight; ' Ego huic testi, etiamsi jurato, qui tam 
 manifesto fumos vendit, me non crediturum esse confirmo.' " 
 
 Dr. Priestley, disdaining to enter any further into the defence of 
 Origen's character, in reply to the above calumnious insinuations of 
 the bishop against himself, says. Fourth Series, p. 85, "To this con- 
 junclion of myself with Origen I heartily say, Amen. May my cha- 
 racter be that of this great man with all its faults, and then it will be 
 as far removed as I wish it to be from that of the present Bishop of 
 St. Davids, whom I scruple not once more to call, as I have abun- 
 dantly proved the truth of the accusation, a falsifier, though 1 believe 
 not a wilful falsifier, of history, and a defamer of the character of the. 
 dead." 
 
 less of all heresies," declares his opinion that " it never can become 
 a popular doctrine." The writer of this note once entertained the same 
 opinion ; and that at a time when, from a conviction of the truth of 
 the Unitarian doctrine, he thought it his duty to make an open pro- 
 fession of it. He has since learned from experience to place more 
 confidence in the energy of Truth when proposed in a plain and undis- 
 guised form. If the critique was written by the respectable author to 
 whom it is attributed by common ruinour, he will permit the writer of 
 this Note to lay claim to a more convenient station for observing the 
 progress of Unitarianism, than the P»cvie\ver, with all his acknowledged 
 talents and resources, can possess in the "antres vast and desarts idle" 
 of the North. I'he Unitarians do not complain of decreasing numbers 
 and emptj' chapels. Their want is that of popular, enlightened, and 
 faithful ministers to large and crowded auditories. And the philoso- 
 phic Reviewer may, if he pleases, smile at the tbnd credulity of the 
 writer while he avows his firm conviction, that the only effectual 
 check which can be given to that torrent of absurdity and enthusiasm 
 which threatens to overwhelm the country, and which excites just 
 alarm in every considerate mind, is, not by opposing nonsense (o non- 
 sense, and fanaticism to fanaticism, but by the calm, dignified, and 
 irresistible progress of reason, truth, and virtue j by the prevalence of 
 Unitarian principles, of the Lancasterian system of education, and of 
 a iitm, temperate^ and truly primitive christian discipline. 
 
PART THE SECOND. 
 
 A SUMMARY VIEW OF THE VARIOUS OPINIONS WHICH 
 HAVE BEEN ENTERTAINED CONCERNING THE PER- 
 SON OF CHRIST, AND OF THE ARGUMENTS FOR AND 
 OBJECTIONS AGAINST EACH. 
 
 SECTION I. 
 
 THE PROPER UNITARIAN SCHEME, OR THE DOCTRINE 
 OF THE SIMPLE HUMANITY OF JESUS CHRIST. 
 
 J. HE Unitarian doctrine is, that Jesus of Nazareth was a 
 man constituted in all respects like other men, subject to 
 the same infirmities, the same ignorance, prejudices, and- 
 frailties — descended from the family of David, the son of 
 Joseph and Mary, though some indeed still adhere to the 
 popular opinion of the miraculous conception — that he 
 was born in low circumstances, having no peculiar advan- 
 tages of education or learning, but that he was a man of 
 exemplary character, — and that, in conformity to ancient 
 prophecy, he was chosen and appointed by God to intro- 
 duce a new moral dispensation into the world, the design 
 of which was to abolish the Jewish ceconomy, and to place 
 believing Gentiles upon an equal ground of privilege and 
 favour with the posterity of Abraham : in other words, he 
 was authorized to reveal to all mankind, without distinc- 
 tion, the great doctrine of a future life, in which men 
 shall be rewarded according to their works. 
 
 u 2 It 
 
292 UNITARIAN DOCTRINE [Part II. 
 
 It does not appear that Jesus was at all conscious of the 
 honour and dignity for which he was intended till after 
 his baptism, when the Holy Spirit was communicated to 
 him in a visible symbol, and when he was miraculously 
 announced as the beloved Son of God, that is, as the 
 great prophet or Messiah whom the Jews had been taught 
 to expect ; after which, in the course of his public mini- 
 stry, he occasionally spoke of himself as the Son of Man 
 and the Son of God. 
 
 After his baptism, it is generally believed by the Uni- 
 tarians, that he spent some time in the wilderness, where 
 he was fully instructed in the nature of his mission, and 
 invested with voluntary miraculous powers, which, by the 
 visionary scene of his temptation, he was instructed to 
 exercise, not for any personal advantage, but solely for 
 the purposes of his mission. Many, however, conceive 
 thiit Jesus never performed a miracle but when he was 
 prompted to it by a divine impulse. It has been main- 
 tained by some learned men, that during the period of his 
 residence in the wilderness Jesus was favoured with di- 
 vine visions, in which, like the apostle Paul, (2 Cor. xii.) 
 he apprehended himself to be transported into heaven ; 
 and that the language which he uses concerning his de- 
 scent from heaven is to be explained by this hypothesis : 
 but the generality of Unitarians interpret these expres- 
 sions of his divine commission only, and the perfect know- 
 ledge with which hewas favoured, aboveall otherprophets, 
 of the will of God concerning the moral state of men, 
 and the new dispensation which he was appointed to in- 
 troduce. 
 
 The Unitarians generally believe that Jesus, having ex- 
 ercised his public ministry for the space of a year, and 
 perhaps a little more, suffered death publicly upon the 
 cross, not to appease the wrath of God, not as a satisfac- 
 tion to divine justice, not to exhibit the evil of sin, nor in 
 
 any 
 
Sect. 1.] STATED AND EXPLAINED. 298 
 
 any sense whatever to make an atonement to God for it ; 
 for this doctrine in every sense, and according to every 
 explanation, they explode as irrational, unscriptural, and 
 derogatory from the divine perfections ; but as a martyr 
 to the truth, and as a necessary preliminary to his resur- 
 rection. And they hold that it was wisely ordered, to 
 preclude cavils, that his death should be an event of great 
 public notoriety, and inflicted by his enemies. 
 
 The Unitarians also believe that Jesus was raised to life 
 by the power of God, agreeably to his own predictions, 
 on the third day, and that by this event he not only con- 
 firmed the truth and divinity of his mission, but exhibit- 
 ed in his Ovvn person a pattern and a pledge of a resur- 
 rection to immortal life ; for which reason he is called the 
 nrst-born of the whole new creation, and the first-begot- 
 ten from the dead. ' 
 
 The Unitarians further believe, that after having given 
 sufHcient proofs to his disciples, for forty days, of the truth 
 of his resurrection, he was in a miraculous manner with- 
 drawn from their society, a circumstance which is descri- 
 bed as an ascension into heaven ; and that, in a few days 
 after this event, the holy spirit was communicated to his 
 apostles in a visible symbol on the day of Pentecost, by 
 which they were endued with the gift of speaking various 
 languages which they had never learned, and were fur- 
 nished with many other gifts and powers by which they 
 were qualified to propagate the Gospel in the world, and 
 to exhibit a most satisfactory and public proof of the tct 
 surrection of their master from the dead. 
 
 The Unitarians maintain, that Jesus and his apostles 
 were supernaturally instructed as far as was necessary for 
 the execution of ;:heir commission, that is, for the revela- 
 tion and proof of the doctrine of eternal life, and that the 
 favour of God extended to the Gentiles equally with the 
 Jews J and that Jesus and his apostles, an .1 others of the 
 
 primitive 
 
294 UNITARIAN DOCTRINE [Part II. 
 
 primitive believers, were occasionally inspired to foretel 
 future events. But they believe that supernatural inspi- 
 ration was limited to these cases alone ; and that when 
 Jesus or his apostles deliver opinions upon subjects un- 
 connected with the object of their mission^ such opinions, 
 and their reasonings upon them, are to be received with 
 the same attention and caution with those of other per- 
 sons in similar circumstances, of similar education, and 
 with similar habits of thinking. 
 
 The Unitarians admit, that the Scriptures of the Old 
 and New Testament, and especially the latter, contain au- 
 thentic records of facts, and of divine interpositions ; but 
 they utterly deny the universal inspiration of the writers 
 of those compositions, as a qualification to which indeed 
 they make no pretension, and of which they offer no proof; 
 and the assertion of which tends only to embarrass the 
 evidences of revelation, and to give advantage to its ene- 
 mies. And they judge of the genuineness, of the mean- 
 ing, and of the credibility of these works, exactly in the 
 same way as they judge of any other ancient writings. 
 
 Many of the Unitarians believe that Jesus continued to 
 maintain, occasionally at least, some personal and sensible 
 connexion with the church during the apostolic age, which 
 he expressly promised to do (Matt, xxviii. 20) ; and in 
 this way they account for the continuance of those mira- 
 culous gifts and powers which were exercised in his name 
 while the apostles lived, and also for occasional personal 
 appearances and interpositions which have never occurred 
 since : but it is believed that he is now withdrawn from 
 all sensible intercourse with this world, though some have 
 conjectured that he may still be actually present in it, and 
 attentive to its concerns. 
 
 The Unitarians believe, that Christ is appointed to raise 
 the dead and to judge the world. With regard to the 
 former, it is believed that he will be the instrument of his 
 
 Father's 
 
Sect. 1.] STATED AND EXPLAINED. 295 
 
 Father's power. With respect to the latter, whether the 
 declarations concerning it are to be understood literally 
 or figuratively, whether Jesus will be personally invested 
 with some high official character, or whether nothing more 
 is intended than that the final states of men shall be award- 
 ed agreeably to the declarations of his Gospel, cannot, 
 they think, at present be ascertained. Probably, as is 
 usual with prophetic language, the event will be very dif- 
 ferent from what the literal sense of the words would lead 
 us to expect. But whatever be the meaning of the de- 
 claration, the part which Jesus will bear in it will, they 
 are confident, be no more than what may properly be al- 
 lotted to a human being, (John v. 27 ;) and in the exe- 
 cution of which his apostles and disciples will, it is said, 
 be associated with him. Matt. xix. 28. 1 Cor. vi. 2, 3. 
 
 The Unitarians, while they bow to the authority of 
 Jesus as the great Prophet of the Most High, and receive 
 with implicit submission whatever appears to them to have 
 the sanction of divine authority j while they regard the 
 character of Christ as the most complete and the most in- 
 teresting that was ever exhibited to the world ; while they 
 feel themselves under indispensable obligation to obey the 
 precepts of his Gospel, and, after his example, to diffuse 
 to the utmost of their ability the knowledge of truth and 
 the practice of virtue; disavow all those personal regards 
 to Christ, and direct addresses to him, either of prayer or 
 praise, which properly fall under the definition of religious 
 worship, as unfounded in reason, unauthorized by Scrip- 
 ture, derogatory from the honour of the Supreme Being, 
 the only proper object of religious homage, and as in a 
 strict and proper sense polytheistical and idolatrous. And 
 in this case, the Unitarians, so far from being conscious 
 of any wilful derogation from the honour due to Christ, 
 whom they acknowledge and Venerate as their Lord and 
 Master, are fully persuaded that they act in perfect con- 
 formity 
 
296 ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF [Pai't II. 
 
 formity to his authority and example, and in a manner 
 of which he would himself te?tify the most entire appro- 
 bation if he were to appear in person upon earth. 
 
 They who believe in the proper humanity of Jesus 
 Christ claim the title of Unitarians, not only because cus- 
 tom, the arbiter of language, has ever since the Reforma- 
 tion annexed, and till very lately limited, the appellation 
 to that denomination of christians, but more especially, 
 because they conceive that they are almost the only body 
 of christians who practically maintain the important doc- 
 trine of the divine Unity in its full and just extent, and 
 who exclude every creature, without exception, from every 
 degree of participation in those attributes, works, 
 and HONOURS, which reason and revelation ascribe and 
 appropriate to the only God. 
 
 The Unitarians think it superfluous to produce any ar- 
 guments to prove that a person who is repeatedly called 
 a man, who had every appearance of a human being, who 
 was born, who grew, who lived, who conversed, who felt, 
 who acted, who suffered, and who died like other men, 
 who was universally believed to be a man by all who saw 
 and conversed with him, and was addressed and spoken 
 of as a human being by all his contemporaries, whether 
 friends or enemies, was really what he appeared and af- 
 firmed himself to be, truly and properly a man, and no- 
 thing more than a man. This is a fact which must be 
 admitted without hesitation, unless the most unequivocal 
 and decisive evidence can be produced to the contrary. 
 And they think that a fact so astonishing, and so contrary 
 to experience and analogy, as the incarnation of a supe- 
 rior spirit, is not to be received upon the authority of oblique 
 hints, or of obscure, figqrative, and ambiguous phrase- 
 ology, but that it is reasonable to expect that the evidence 
 
 of 
 
Sect 1.] THE UNITARIA^J DOCTRINE. 297 
 
 of such a fact should be clear and decisive in proportion 
 to its antecedent improbability. 
 
 Now the Unitarians profess, that after having carefully 
 consulted and examined the Scriptures, they can find no 
 such clear and satisfactory evidence. They observe, that 
 there is no allusion at all to the supposed pre-existent state 
 and superior nature of Jesus Christ, in three of the evan- 
 gelists, or in the history of the Apostles' preaching, and 
 of the first plantation of the Gospel contained in the Acts 
 of the apostles ; and that John is a very mystical writer, 
 abounding in harsh metaphors and symbohcal phraseology, 
 very different from the simpHcity which characterizes the 
 other evangelists. Nor can they discern any traces of that 
 surprise and astonishment which must have seized the 
 m!nds of the disciples and companions of Jesus when it 
 was first revealed to them that the master with whom they 
 had so frequently and familiarly conversed, was the Lord 
 their Maker, or at least a great celestial spirit in a human 
 shape. 
 
 The Unitarians also plead, that by a diligent investiga- 
 tion of the Scripture language, by examining the connex- 
 ion in which particular phrases occur, by a careful com- 
 parison of different passages, and by making Scripture its 
 own interpreter, it is not difficult to show that the few 
 phrases which, in contradiction to the general current of 
 the Sacred Writings, are supposed to teach the superior na- 
 ture and pre-existent state of Christ, if such texts are ge- 
 nuine, may justly be understood, and, by the established 
 rules of fair and liberal criticism, ought to be interpreted 
 ill a sense consistent with his proper humanity. 
 
 Particularly, they profess to prove that those passages 
 in which Jesus represents hiuiself as having descended 
 from heaven, signify nothing more than the divine origi- 
 nal of his doctrine : that where he is represented as the 
 maker of all things, the new creation only is intended, 
 
 that 
 
298 ARGUMENTS IN FAVOUR OF [Pait II. 
 
 that is, the new state of things which he was commis- 
 sioned to introduce into the moral world ; and that the 
 creation of natural objects is no where attributed to Christ. 
 Also, that if the title God be ever applied to Christ in the 
 New Testament (which some deny), it is only in the sense 
 in which Moses is said to have been a god to Pharaoh, 
 that is, as being invested with a divine commission, and 
 a power of working miracles in proof of it. They also 
 observe, that the same, or even stronger expressions are 
 applied to christians in general than those from which the 
 deity of Christ is usual 1 inferred. They maintain that 
 the creation and support of the natural world and its in- 
 habitants is uniformly ascribed to God ; and that there is 
 no evidence whatever to prove that Christ was personally 
 concerned in any of the former dispensations of God to 
 mankind, either to the patriarchs or to the Jews, but that 
 the contrary is explicitly and repeatedly asserted in the 
 Scriptures. 
 
 The Unitarians maintain that those peculiar expressions, 
 from which, what is called the doctrine of the eternal ge- 
 neration of the Son is inferred, may be clearly proved to 
 signify nothing more than the superior dignity of his pro- 
 phetical character as the promised Messiah, and the chief 
 of the prophets of God. 
 
 They also remark, that the apostles, when speaking of 
 Christ after his resurrection and ascension, use a kind of 
 unqualified language concerning his person, which no 
 Arian or Trinitarian would now adopt without much ex- 
 planation and caution : such as, no doubt, the apostles 
 themselves would have used, had they believed in the pre- 
 existence or deity of Christ. 
 
 Lastly, it has been stated by Dr. Priestley with irresis- 
 tible evidence, that the Jewish christians almost universally, 
 and a very great majority of the Gentile christians in the 
 two first centuries, were believers in the proper humanity 
 
 of 
 
Sect I.] THE UNITARIAN DOCTRINE. 299 
 
 of Jesus Christ ; some admitting and others rejecting the 
 circumstance of his miraculous conception : and these pri- 
 mitive believers, having received the christian doctrine 
 from the apostles and their immediate successors, must 
 have had the best means of interpreting that obscure phra- 
 seology which in later ages has been applied to the sup- 
 port of those unscriptural opinions with Vt'hich the vanity 
 of heathen philosophy has corrupted and debased the pu- 
 rity and simplicity of the christian faiths 
 
 Against the Unitarian doctrine it is objected that onr 
 inquiries are to be directed not into the opinions of tl>e 
 early christians, whether converts from Judaism or hea- 
 thenism, for they were men fallible and prejudiced like our- 
 selves, but into the natural and obvious meaning of the 
 Scriptures ; — that the Scriptures were written for the use 
 of plain illiterate men, and are therefore to be understood 
 in their most obvious and popular sense ; — that, although 
 it might not fall in with the design of every one of the 
 sacred writers to discourse upon the pre-existence or di- 
 vinity of Jesus Christ, nevertheless, this doctrine is taught 
 in various passages of the New Testament in the clearest 
 and most unambiguous language, such as cannot be wrest- 
 ed to any other meaning but by a mode of interpretation 
 Vv^hich would reduce every thing to uncertainty, and make 
 all language useless ; — that this great doctrine is taught 
 not in one or two-passages only, or left to be inferred 
 
 ' See^ upon this subject, Haynes on the Attributes of God. Lard- 
 ner on the Logos. Cardale's True Doctrine concerning Christ. Lind- 
 sey's Apology and Sequel. Conversations on Christian Idolatry. Dr. 
 Priestley's History of Corruptions of Christianity, History of Early- 
 Opinions, and Defences of Unitarianism. Cappe's Critical Remarks 
 on Scripture, 2 vols, Simpson's Essays on the Language of Scripture. 
 Belsham's Reply to Wilberforce, and Letters on Arianism. Dr. Car- 
 penter's Unitarianism the Doctrine of the Gospel. The Notes to the 
 Improved Version of the New Testament are intended chiefly to ex- 
 hibit the most approved interpretations of the Unitarian expositors. 
 
 from 
 
300 OBJECTIONS URGED AGAINST [Part IL 
 
 from an equivocal expression here and there, but that it 
 is expressly asserted in a G;reat number of texts in the 
 New Testament, and in a great variety of phraseology, 
 and that it is frequently alluded to and reasoned upon as 
 an unquestionable fact •, that, one positive assertion of Je- 
 sus, or of his apostles inspired, or informed by him, is 
 sufficient to overthiovv every objection which may be urged 
 from the antecedent improbability of the fact, or from 
 its contrariety to the general analogy of nature and course 
 of events, an objection which is equally applicable to all 
 other miracles ; — that, it is gratuitous assumption to affirm 
 that the only object of the mission of Christ was to teach 
 the doctrine of a future life, a doctrine which was so ge- 
 nerally acknowledged, and which is so easily proved by 
 rational deduciion, as almost to supersede the necessity of 
 divine revelation for this purpose alone ; — that, the mind 
 revolts at the idea of a human creature being appointed 
 to the high ofnce of raising the dt-ad and judging the 
 world, while the obvious propriety of assigning the oflices 
 of redeemer and judge to him v/ho was the maker of the 
 world, who supports and governs it, and who was the 
 medium of all the moral dispensations of God to mankind, 
 forms a strong presumptive argument in favour of the 
 pre existent state and dignity, and of the superior nature 
 of Jesus Christ ; — and finally, that this doctrine is so plain- 
 ly revealed in the Scriptures, that although it nray have 
 been called in question by a few speculative or interested 
 men at diiTerent periodS; from very early times, it has ne- 
 vertheless commanded the belief of the great body of pro- 
 fessing christianV, from the first promulgation of the chris- 
 tian religion to the present day. 
 
 It is further objected, that it is very arbitrary and un- 
 Vs/arrantable in the Unitarians to strike out of the Scrip- 
 tures whatever they find in it which is inconsistent with 
 their own principles and hypotheses, and which they can- 
 not 
 
Sect. 1.] THE UNITARIAN DOCTRINE. 001 
 
 not explain away, and particularly the history of the mi- 
 raculous conception in Matrhev and Luke ; — that it i^; 
 very derogatory from the respect and veneration which is 
 due to Cinist to represent his character as liable to trailry 
 and infirmity, to restrict his inspiration, and to charge 
 him with prejudice and error ; — that to deny the plenary 
 inspiration ot the apostles, and of the other writers of the 
 New Te5tament, is to make revelation useless, by invol- 
 ving it in ambiguity and uncertainty : — and that as to the 
 circumstance of saints being assessors with Christ in the 
 high oflice of judging the world, both men and angels, 
 whatever may be intended by these declarations, it is very 
 evident from the slight and incidental manner in which 
 one of these events is mentioned, and from the great so- 
 lemnity and frequency with which the other is announced, 
 that they are to be understood in different senses ; and 
 that in one case the expressions are to be taken literally, 
 aftd in the other figuratively. 
 
 It is also represented as great arrogance in the advo- 
 cates for the simple humanity of Jesus Christ to appropri- 
 ate to themselves the title of Unitarians, an honourable 
 name, to which it is contended that all christians have a 
 just claim, the Trinitarians asserting a unity of essence in 
 a trinity of persons; the highest Arians pleading that they 
 contend for the existence or one God alone, from whom 
 the Logos, who created and supports the universe, derives 
 all his attributes and powers, and in whom all the respect 
 and homage which is paid to this divine person ultimately 
 terminates ; and the lower Arians vindicating their claim 
 to the title of Unitarians, because though they admit that 
 the world is made and governed by Christ, who v.-ns in- 
 vested with power and authority for this purpose by the 
 Father, yet they regard the Father as the sole object of 
 all religious worship and homage. 
 
 The 
 
302 RLPLY TO OBJECTIONS [Part II. 
 
 The Unitarians reply, that though they do not contend 
 for the infallibility of the primitive christians, they never- 
 theless think, that as it has been proved that a majority 
 of the unlearned christians in the two first centuries were 
 believers in the proper humanity of Jesus Christ, this fact 
 forms a very strong presumption that such was the doc- 
 trine taught by the apostles. The believers in the chris- 
 tian religion could be under no temptation to derogate 
 from the honour of their master, and we know that they 
 had very strong inducements to magnify his rank and 
 dignity beyond the limits of truth, the disciples of Christ 
 having from the beginning been exposed to disgrace and 
 ridicule, as the followers of a crucified Nazarene. It is 
 also much more probable that learned and philosophizing 
 christians would introduce new and refined speculations 
 concerning the person of Christ, than unlettered men in 
 low circumstances, who commonly content themselves 
 with plain facts, and adhere stiffly to old opinions. 
 
 That they reject with indignation the charge so often 
 and so unjustly alleged, of mutilating or corrupting the 
 Sacred Text in order to render it subservient to their views 
 and principles : they affirm that their only aim is to di- 
 stinguish the genuine text from apocryphal interpolation ; 
 and that whenever they mark a passage as spurious cr 
 doubtful, the grounds of their objection to it are fairly 
 stated : and they are willing to rest the validity of their 
 conclusion upon the evidence produced. 
 
 That they acknowledge that the Scriptures were written 
 for the instruction of the illiterate as well as of the learned j 
 and they believe that all which is essential either to doc- 
 trine or practice is sufficiently intelligible even to the mean- 
 est ca}:«city : 
 
 That, nevertheless, there is a degree of obscurity neces- 
 sarily attached to ancient writings, and that a phraseology 
 which is familiar and perfectly intelligible in one age and 
 
 country, 
 
Sect.].] AGAINST UNITARIAN DOCTRINE. £03 
 
 country, may be extremely ambiguous and obscure in 
 another, where the habits of thinking and modes of ex- 
 pression may be very different : 
 
 That many of those passages upon which the doctrine 
 of the pre-existence of Christ, of his superior nature, and 
 of his voluntary incarnation, as it is called, is founded, were 
 not intended to be readily understood even by the persons 
 to whom they were immediately addressed ; our Lord 
 himself upon various occasions in his public discourses, 
 and particularly in those recorded by John, adopting a 
 mystical language in order to conceal his true meaning 
 from the Jews, who accompanied him from secular and 
 unworthy motives, to disgust them with his doctrine, and 
 to drive them from his presence : and it is highly probable 
 that the language of Jesus upon these occasions was under- 
 stood by his disciples in a sense perfectly consistent with 
 his proper humanity. The apostle Paul likewise, in his 
 epistles, frequently makes use of a highly figurative phra- 
 seology in order to insinuate a doctrine, viz. the rejection 
 of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, which he did 
 not always think it prudent to mention in direct and un- 
 equivocal terms, lest he should give unnecessary offence. 
 The truth of this observation is v/ell known to all who 
 are conversant with that apostle s writings : 
 
 That to object to an interpretation as unnatural and 
 far-fetched, is only, in other words, to say that to the ob- 
 jectors the interpretation is unusual ; for the meaning of 
 language being perfectly arbitrary, a sense which may be 
 very familiar, and appear perfectly natural, to one, may 
 to another seem harsh and forced : 
 
 That the Unitarians deny that they are justly charge- 
 able with attempting to wrest and to distort the sense of 
 the Scriptures, in order to adapt them to their own sy- 
 stem ; but on the contrary they contend, and they produce 
 evidence to prove, that, according to the rules of fair and 
 
 liberal 
 
304 REPLY TO OBJECTIONS [Part II. 
 
 liberal criticism, the sense in which they explain obscure 
 and disputed texts is the true sense of the sacred writers. 
 And though they readily admit that one positive unequi- 
 vocal declaration either of Christ or his apostles authori- 
 zed and instructed by him, would be sufficient to set aside 
 all the presumptions arising from the antecedent impro- 
 bability of the fact, that, nevertheless, this improbability 
 is to them a reason vi'hv they are very slow in yielding 
 assent to any evidence short of the most express and un- 
 questionable testimony, and why they are disposed to ex- 
 amine with the utmost rigour whatever is advanced in 
 proof of a fact so unlikely, so unusual, so contrary to all 
 analogy, and in their estimation of so little use. And 
 they solemnly profess, that, after the most diligent and 
 impartial inquiry, they can find no such explicit and un- 
 equivocal assertions of the pre-existence and deity of Christ, 
 nor indeed any evidence whatsoever of these extraordinary 
 doctrines : 
 
 That, notwithstanding all that may have been advan- 
 ced by ancient or by modern writers to solve the difficulty, 
 it still appears to the Unitarians utterly unaccountable that 
 Matthew, Mark, and Luke, who undertook to write every 
 thing concerning the history and the doctrine of Jesus of 
 which it was needful that his disciples should be inform- 
 ed, and the latter ot whom hns also written an account 
 of the mission and doctrine of the apostles after their mas- 
 ter's ascension and the gift of the Holy Spirit, by which 
 they vi'ere fully instructed in the objects of their mibsion, 
 should have omitted a fact so material, and so honour- 
 able to their master, as that of his superior nature and pre- 
 existent state, if they had been acquainted with it ; nor is 
 it to be supposed that they would have concealed this fact, 
 from that unworthy timidity and disgraceful caution which 
 the early ecclesiastical writers have imputed to them : 
 
 That the divinity, or even the pre-existence of Jesus 
 
 Christ 
 
Sect. 1.] AGAINST UNITARIAN DOCTRINE, 305 
 
 Christ was the prevailing doctrine of the majority of chris- 
 tians for the first and second centuries, the Unitarians do 
 not allow ; and evidence of the contrary has been pro- 
 duced, v»'hich has not been, and which cannot be, invalida- 
 ted. But they admit that these doctrines, together with 
 other corruptions of the christian religion, were early 
 taught by philosophic christians, who were ashamed of a 
 crucified leader, and of the simple doctrine of Christianity; 
 and that they were gradually introduced, and have long 
 prevailed in the church j and that they are now professed 
 by a very great majority of christians. This fact, how- 
 ever, no more proves the truth of these doctrines, than it 
 proves the truth of the real presence of Christ in the sa- 
 crament, which is to this day the creed of the majority of 
 christians. And they hope that, as the christian religion 
 has by the energy of truth purified itself from the gross 
 corruptions of Popery, it will go on to clear itself from all 
 remaining errors, till it is gradually brought back to that 
 purity and simplicity with vt^hich it first appeared in the 
 world : and they regard it as the indispensable duty of 
 every friend to christian truth and to human happiness, to 
 contribute to the utmost of his power, by all prudent, just, 
 and honourable means, to the removal of that rubbish by 
 which the progress of the Gospel is so much impeded. 
 
 The Unitarians do not presume to say that God might not, 
 if he had pleased, have revealed other doctrines to mankind 
 by Jesus Christ besides that most important one of a future 
 life. But they profess, that, after reading the New Testa- 
 ment with the greatest attention, this doctrine appears to be 
 the one great object of the christian revelation, which is ia 
 this view most worthy of God, and most beneficial to men. 
 
 For how lighdy soever some may regard the revela- 
 tion of this doctrine, and how clearly soever they may 
 imagine it to be inferred from the appearances of nature, 
 it is well known that antecedently t o the appearance of Jesus 
 Christ the fashionable philosophy of the heathen world 
 
 X had 
 
S06 REPLY TO OBJECTIONS [Part IL 
 
 had rejected It altogether : that the few who professed to 
 expect a future life supported their opinion by evidence 
 the most irrelevant and unsatisfactory ; that the vulgar, 
 who were the firmest believers, entertained notions con- 
 cerning it the most gross and absurd ; that the doctrine 
 was seldom or never applied to any valuable moral pur- 
 pose ; and that even the Jews themselves formed very 
 confused and contracted opinions concerning the rewards 
 and punishments of a future life. Nor could this state 
 of opinion well have been otherwise, considering that the 
 future existence of man depends upon his resurrection 
 from the dead ; and consequently, that whatever argu- 
 ments the phsenomena of the moral world might suggest, 
 upon which however the heathen philosophers laid little 
 stress, they would be in a great measure counterbalanced 
 by the improbability of a fact so contrary to experience 
 and analogy as a resurrection from the grave. This is 
 the objection which Christianity is calculated to remove, 
 and which it has in fact so completely obviated, that, what- 
 ever doubts or differences may have subsisted amongst 
 christians concerning other articles of faith, none have ever 
 called in question the doctrine of a future life. 
 
 The Unitarians, who regard Jesus Christ as the son of 
 Joseph and Mary, do not consider this circumstance as in 
 the least degree derogatory from his prophetical charac- 
 ter, any more than it derogates from the character and 
 mission of Moses, of Elijah, or of Isaiah, that these pro- 
 phets were born in the natural way. Nor is the doctrine 
 of the proper humanity of Christ at all implicated in the 
 question concerning the miraculous conception. 
 
 They maintain that it no more derogates from the au- 
 thority of Christ, than it does from that of Moses, that his 
 inspiration should not extend beyond the proper objects 
 of his mission, and that in other cases he should entertain 
 the same Opinions, and be liable to the same misconcep- 
 tionsj as his countrymen and those amongst whom he was 
 
 educated. 
 
Sect. 1.] AGAINST UNITARIAN DOCTRINE. 307 
 
 educated. Also, that the character of Jesus should have 
 been gradually formed to that high degree of dignity and 
 excellence which is exhibited In his history, by the prac- 
 tice of virtue and by the diecipline of his sufferings, is far 
 more probable in itself, more agreeable to the language 
 of the Scriptures, more honourable to Christ, and more 
 useful as an example to his followers, than if he were by 
 nature and necessity a perfectly holy and impeccable be- 
 ing, incapable of being influenced by temptation of any 
 kind, and consequently in no respect similar to his follow- 
 ers, or capable of exhibiting to them a proper example of 
 virtue in a state of probation. 
 
 With respect to the plenary inspiration of the apostles 
 and of the writers of the Old and New Testament, the 
 Unitarians contend that it is a privilege to which they 
 themselves never made any pretensions ; that it is a fact 
 which can never be proved j that to maintain this point 
 is to derogate from the credibility of the sacred books, 
 and to involve the defenders of it in inextricable difficul- 
 ties, and even in palpable absurdities. And to the trite 
 and frivolous objection, — that if all be not inspired it would 
 be impossible to distinguish what is of divine authority 
 from what is merely human, — it is sufficient to reply, that 
 the difficulty is no greater than that of distinguishing out 
 of a number of books equally pretending to divine autho- 
 rity, those which are inspired from those which are not 
 so, which, nevertheless, the advocates for plenary inspira- 
 tion profess themselves able to do by the exercise of their 
 understanding in judging of evidence. 
 
 Further: to maintain that the office of judging the 
 world is to be understood literally when attributed to Christ, 
 and figuratively when attributed to hia apostles and disci- 
 ples, is a mere gratuitous distinction, unsupported by argu- 
 ment, and advanced, without any authority, solely for the 
 purpose of getting rid of a difficult) . 
 
 X 2 In 
 
SOS REPLY TO OBJECTIONS, ETC. [Part IL 
 
 In reply to the outcry which has of late years been 
 raised against the advocates for the proper humanity of 
 Jesus Christ, for having appropriated to themselves the 
 honourable title of Unitarians, to the exclusion not only 
 of Trinitarians, but even of the great body of the Arians, 
 it may be observed, That the controversy is only about a 
 name, and therefore not deserving of that warmth with 
 which it has of late been conducted. — That the title was 
 first given to the Socinians^ when it was not regarded in 
 so honourable a light as at present, and that custom has 
 limited it almost universally to those who believe in the 
 proper humanity of Christ.— That it is defined by modern 
 Unitarians to signify those christians who do not ascribe 
 to a created being attributes, works, or worship, which 
 reason and revelation appropriate to God alone. — -The 
 Unitarians regard creation and providence as works of 
 God, performed by his immediate act, without the inter- 
 vention of any second or instrumental cause : This they 
 believe to be the doctrine both of reason and of revelation. 
 — They cannot therefore, consistently with these princi- 
 ples, apply the title of Unitarians to those christians who 
 ascribe these divine Vi'orks to Jesus Christ, though such per- 
 sons may at the same time, however inconsistently, decline 
 addressing religious homage to the Lord their Maker. 
 
 Their Arian brethren ought not to be offended at this 
 limitation of the title of Unitarian. For it is upon simi- 
 lar ground that the middle class of Arians deny it to the 
 high Arians, who are worshipers of Christ, but who never- 
 theless contend for the proper unity of God : and these 
 again deny it to the Trinitarians, who zealously maintain 
 the unity of the Godhead, though distinguished by a tri- 
 nity of persons 2. 
 
 * That Arians were not always so ambitious of passing muster with 
 the Unitarians as they seem to be at present, will appear from the fol- 
 lowing 
 
Sect. 2,] THE SOCINIAN SCHEME. 309 
 
 SECTION II. 
 
 THE SOCINIAN SCHEME. 
 
 J. HE Socinlans maintained that Jesus was a human being, 
 at least that he had no existence previous to his miracu- 
 lous conception. But they appear to have believed that 
 his body was made of a substance superior to that of other 
 men, that he might be capable of sustaining the glory of 
 that state to which he was advanced after his resurrection. 
 They maintained, that after having been declared at his 
 baptism to be the Messiah, he retired into the wilderness, 
 where he was admitted to some peculiar intercourse with 
 the Supreme Being, and was occasionally taken up into 
 heaven, to be instructed in the nature and purposes of 
 his mission, and in all that he was to do and to suffer in 
 the discharge of it. And it is by this hypothesis that they 
 explain all those texts in which mention is made of 
 ascending into, or of descending from, heaven. 
 
 -After having fulfilled his ministry, he was publicly 
 crucified. The Socinians deny that the death of Christ 
 is in any degree a satisfaction for sin ; but they allow that 
 he is said to expiate sin, inasmuch as by his death he ac- 
 quired that universal empire which authorizes and ena- 
 bles him to deliver his faithful disciples from the punish- 
 ment of sin. But every idea of compensation to divine 
 
 lowing extract of a letter, now in my possession, from a learned Arian, 
 William Whiston, to another learned Arian, James Peirce, dated 
 Cambridge, July 16, 17O8 : "Your letter a little surprised me, to 
 find myself supposed to be a Socinian or Unitarian. I never was, 
 nor am now, under the least temptation of such doctrines. — I hope 
 you will do me the favour to be one of the examiners of my papers. 
 7;ijl which time you will do kindly to stop so false a report." 
 
 justice 
 
SIO THE SOCINIAN SCHEME [Part II, 
 
 justice they reject, as unworthy of the perfections of God, 
 and contradictory to the plainest declarations of Scripture. 
 
 The Socinians believed that Jesus Christ, after his re- 
 surrection and ascension into heaven, was invested with 
 universal and unlimited authority ; that all mankind, the 
 righteous and the wicked, the living and the dead, were 
 made subject to his government ; and that he was advan- 
 ced to rule over angels of every order and degree, whether 
 good or evil, and indeed over the whole created universe. 
 
 In consequence of this exaltation, and by the cippoint- 
 nient of the Father, he is now become the proper object 
 of religious worship and invocation, even of the very same 
 kind of worship which is addressed to God himself; andi 
 that for this reason, as well as on account of the dignity 
 and authority to which he was exalted, he is called God 
 by the sacred writers. 
 
 The Socinians further taught, that at the final consum- 
 mation of all things Jesus Christ would again return to 
 raise the dead, to judge the world, to reward the virtuous 
 with eternal life and happiness, and to consign the wicked 
 to adequate punishment. 
 
 This denomination of christians flourished in Poland 
 in the sixteenth century. They took their name from 
 Laslius Socinus, a nobleman of Sienna in Italy, and from 
 Faustus Socinus his nephew, who were able and zealous 
 advocates for the Socinian doctrine, and who, together 
 with others equally zealous and enlightened, were very 
 successful in spreading these tenets in Poland and Tran- 
 sylvania. 
 
 There was a great difference of opinion amongst the Soci- 
 nians concerning the propriety of praying to Christ. Faus- 
 tus Socinus strenuously maintained it, and declares them 
 to be no christians who refuse to worship Christ, what- 
 ever profession they may make of believing in him. Fran- 
 cis David, a preacher of note in Transylvania, taught that 
 
 Jesus, 
 
Sect. 2.] STATED AND EXPLAINED. 311 
 
 Jesus was put to death by the Jews contrary to the inten- 
 tion of the divine Being, who meant that he should be 
 their king ; and that since his resurrection and ascension 
 he is placed in a state in which he is totally unacquainted 
 with every thing that passes in the world, and consequent- 
 ly that he cannot be the proper object of religious wor- 
 ship. Socinus was sent for to convince Francis David of 
 his error ; but, not being able to accomplish his purpose, 
 and he still persisting to teach, both publicly and private- 
 ly, that to worship Jesus Christ was exactly the same 
 thing as worshiping the Virgin Mary and other saints, 
 was thrown into prison by order of the prince of Tran- 
 sylvania, where he died soon afterwards, a melancholy 
 proof that persecution is not limited to any party. Soci- 
 nus himself, though a great and good man, is not altoge- 
 ther clear from the suspicion of having been accessary to 
 the sufferings of Francis David. 
 
 It v/as the uniform opinion of the Soclnians, that the 
 Holy Spirit was the energy of God exerted in the mira- 
 culous gifts and powers communicated to the apostles and 
 primitive believers, and not a conscious intelligent agent, 
 either created or divine. 
 
 Against the doctrine peculiar to the Socinians it has 
 been objected, That the personal ascent of Jesus into hea- 
 ven is not in itself probable, and is indeed founded upon 
 the puerile supposition that heaven is a particular district 
 of the universe where God resides and manifests his glory 
 in a peculiar and sensible manner ; — that, had this local 
 ascent and descent been a literal fact, there can be no 
 doubt that other evangelists would have mentioned it be- 
 sides John, as they have related his temptation and his 
 transfiguration ; — that such a local ascent could be of no 
 use, as the divine Being might have communicated the 
 knowledge of his will to Jesus while he lived in this world, 
 as easily and as distinctly as if he had been transported to 
 
 the 
 
312 THE sociNiAN SCHEME. [Part IT. 
 
 the remotest regions of the universe ; — that the phrases 
 'ascending to,' and ' descending from, heaven.' as applied 
 to Jesus, are pecuHar to St. John, and that there is no 
 great difficuhy in explaining them in a mystical and figu- 
 rative sense, like many other of the bold and metaphorical 
 expressions which occur so frequently in the writings of 
 that evangelist. 
 
 Also, that the advancement of a human being to the 
 government of the whole created universe, exalting him 
 above all the supposed orders of the celestial hierarchy, 
 and making him the proper object of religious worship, 
 and this for doing nothing more than any other human 
 being, aided by the same power, might have done, is a 
 fact, in its own nature, barely possible, and in its circum- 
 stances in the highest degree improbable, contrary to all 
 experience and analogy, not to be admitted but upon the 
 most explicit and irresit^tible evidence ; and though not 
 involving a contradiction so palpable as the Athanasian 
 doctrine, it is nevertheless almost equally incredible, and 
 ■would, if it were taught in the New Testament, constitute 
 one of the strongest objections against the truth and di- 
 vine authority of the christian religion. 
 
 These objections are so obvious, and of such weight, 
 that the Socinian doctrine now is universally exploded, at 
 least in this country. 
 
 The doctrines of the old Socinians are contained in the 
 Bibliotheca Fratrum Polonorum ; including the works 
 of Faustus Socinus, Crellius, Slichtingius and Wolzoge- 
 nius • also, in those of Przipcovius, and Brenius. See 
 also Dr. Toulmin's Life of Socinus. 
 
 SECTION 
 
Sect. 3.] LOW ARIAN SCHEME. 31'. 
 
 SECTION III. 
 
 THE LOW ARIAN SCHEME. 
 
 J. HIS hypothesis maintains that the soul which animated 
 the body of Jesus was a pre-existent spirit, but of what 
 order or degree of the celestial hierarchy is not known. 
 It is however denied that he had any concern in the for- 
 mation of the world, or in the administration of providence 
 antecedent to his supposed incarnation. It is maintained, 
 that in consequence of his sufferings and death he is now 
 advanced to great personal dignity and authority, and that 
 he will hereafter appear to raise the dead and to judge 
 the world. The Low Arians in general deny that the 
 death of Christ was a satisfaction for the sins of men; and 
 some of them maintain that he died only as a martyr and 
 an example, and that his death is an expiation for sin solely 
 as being a means of virtue : while others use language 
 upon this subject which seems to imply that this event had 
 some mysterious design, and answered some purposes un- 
 der the divine government which they do not, or cannot, 
 explain. 
 
 They are unanimous in rejecting the worship of Christ, 
 and the personal existence of the Holy Spirit. 
 
 This denomination of christians is in the strictest sense 
 Unitarian: they ascribe neither attributes, nor works, 
 nor honours to Christ, which reason and revelation appro- 
 priate to God ; and they differ from other Unitarians 
 solely, or chiefly, in assigning an earlier date to the exist- 
 ence of Jesus. 
 
 The Low Arian hypothesis is founded upon a literal 
 acceptation of those texts in which Jesus is said to have 
 
 descended 
 
Slr/H LOW ARIAN SCHEME [Part 11. 
 
 descended from heaven, while, at the same time, a figu- 
 rative sense is annexed to those passages which are by the 
 great body of christians understood to represent him as 
 the creator, or former, the supporter and governor of the 
 world, and the medium of all the moral dispensations of 
 God to mankind. 
 
 This hypothesis Is Improperly called Arlan, having no 
 affinity with the true Arian scheme in any article but the 
 comparatively unimportant one, of the pre-existence of 
 Christ. In all other respects it coincides v;ith proper 
 Unitarianism. And to the title of Unitarians the advo- 
 cates of simple pre-existence, however erroneous in this 
 particulai*, have an unquestionable right. 
 
 Thb hypothesis has been embraced by many learned 
 and respectable individuals ; but it has not yet found a 
 learned public advocate. The following are the princi- 
 pal objections against it : 
 
 1. That this doctrine is perfectly novel in the history 
 of opinions concerning the person of Christ j it was never 
 heard of before the eighteenth century. 
 
 2. The hypothesis itself is of no use, and therefore It 
 is in theory Incredible. A pompous miracle Is supposed 
 to be performed to introduce a spirit of a superior ordec 
 into the world, to accomplish no purpose but what might, 
 for any thing that appears, have been equally well accom- 
 plished by a human being acting under a divine coni- 
 n^ssion. 
 
 S. It seems very arbitrary and unreasonable to take 
 those texts In a literal sense which speak of the descent 
 of Jesus from heaven, and to give a figurative interpreta- 
 tion to those passages which, In language equally direct 
 and explicit, represent him as the maker and governor of 
 all things, and the medium of divine dispensations. 
 
 4. The phrase ' descending from heaven' was certain- 
 ly in use at the time when the New Testament was writ- 
 ten. 
 
Sect. 3.] STATED AND OPPOSED, 31.5 
 
 ten, to express the divine authority of a person or doc- 
 trine, (see Luke xx. 4 j) and that the disciples of Christ 
 understood it in this sense, is evident from their not express- 
 ing any astonishment at the discovery of so extraordinary 
 and unexpected a fact, as that of the superior nature and 
 dignity of their Master, and from their having continued 
 to converse with him after this supposed discovery upon 
 the same terms of ease and familiarity as before. 
 
 5. The expression ' descending' or * coming down 
 from heaven,' even if it were to be understood literally, 
 would not necessarily prove the pre-existence of Christ, 
 but might be explained either upon the principles of the 
 Polish Socinians, who supposed that Christ was really 
 taken up to heaven to be instructed in the duties of his 
 office, or upon the hypothesis of some modern Unitarians, 
 who have thought that Christ, hke Paul, was favoured 
 with a visionary scene, in which he imagined himself to 
 be transported into paradise. 
 
 SECTION IV. 
 
 ^ THE PROPER OR HIGH ARIAN HYPOTHESIS. 
 
 X HIS hypothesis maintains that the Son of God, who is 
 also called the Logos, is a creature made out of nothing, 
 inferior to the Father, and in all respects dependent upon 
 him and subject to him : that the Logos was the instru- 
 ment of God, some say, in the creation of all things, others 
 in the formation of this world from matter already cre- 
 ated by God ; some add, of this planetary system, and 
 some, of all worlds and systems j and th^t he is the Maker 
 
 of 
 
316 HIGH ARIAN SCHEME [Part II. 
 
 of angels and archangels, and of the whole material and 
 intellectual universe. 
 
 But whether he performed these works by his own pow- 
 er, and according to the dictates of his own intellect and 
 wiiL or whether he was merely the passive instrument of 
 the Supreme Being, acting entirely under his direction in 
 all things, is a question which does not seem to have been 
 thoroughly examined and discussed, and concerning which 
 no determinate opinion has been formed. 
 
 It is likewise maintained that to this great Being is de- 
 legated the administration of providence, that he upholds 
 all things by the word of his power, and that by him all 
 things consist, the whole created universe being sustained 
 by his energy. Also, LiK.t he was the medium of the di- 
 vine dispensations to the pauiyrchs and to the Jews, ap- 
 pearing, as most of the supporters of the Arian hypothe- 
 sis assert, though some deny it, to Abraham and to his 
 chosen descendants under the name and character of Je- 
 hovah, the angel and representative of the Supreme. 
 
 This glorious spirit is supposed to have animated the 
 body of Christ ; and it is asserted, that during his incar- 
 nation and personal residence in this world, his attributes 
 were in a considerable degree quiescent or suspended : 
 but it is not positively decided whether he retained the 
 consciousness of having existed in a former and more ex- 
 alted state, or whether he performed miracles by his own 
 power, or at the suggestion and by the power of the Fa- 
 ther ; the advocates for this system being commonly in- 
 consistent not only with each other, but with themselves, 
 upon this subject, in consequence of not having paid sufli- 
 cienc attention to it, and of not having made up their 
 minds about it. 
 
 The supporters of the Arian hypothesis maintain that 
 Christ is with propriety called a man, as having been a 
 spirit united to a human body j perceiving and acting by 
 
 the 
 
Sect. 4.] STATED AND EXPLAINED. SI? 
 
 the medium of corporeal organs, agreeably to the usual 
 definition of a human being, and to the familiar use of 
 the word in various passages both of the Old Testament 
 and the New. 
 
 This glorious spirit is represented as having descended 
 into this world not solely to instruct men in moral and 
 religious truth, and to excite them to virtuous practice ; 
 nor merely to reveal the doctrine of eternal life, and to 
 exhibit a proof and pattern in his ov/n person of a resur- 
 rection from the dead ; but to accomplish certain purposes 
 by his sufferings and death, which could not have been 
 effected by the humiliation and sufferings of any inferior 
 being. In this view the death of Christ is sometimes de- 
 scribed by the advocates for this hypothesis as an atone- 
 ment for sin, as a satisfaction to the justice of God, as an 
 affecting exhibition of the evil and demerit of sin, and of 
 the displeasure of God against it, or as a most highly 
 meritorious act of filial obedience. 
 
 The Arians further maintain, that after the resurrection 
 and ascension of Christ, he resumed the dignity and au- 
 thority of which he had divested himself during the peri- 
 od of his incarnation, was reinstated in his office of gover- 
 nor of the world, and invested with the government of 
 the church ; that he now sustains the character of high- 
 priest and intercessor ; that he conducts the affairs of the 
 world in subserviency to the interests of the church ; that 
 he exercises a special guardianship over every individual 
 christian ; that he reigns over the living and the dead ; 
 that at the appointed season he shall return to raise the 
 dead, to judge the world, and to assign to the righteous 
 and to the wicked their respective states of happiness or 
 misery ; and finally, that, after this grand transaction, he 
 is to resign the mediatorial kingdom to the Father. 
 
 Till lately, it was the uniform and, indeed, consistent 
 doctrine of those who held the Arian hypothesis, that 
 
 Christ 
 
31^ ARGOMBNTS IN FAVOUR OF [Part II. 
 
 Christ is the proper object of adoration and invocation, and 
 religious addresses to Jesus were not uncommon j but this 
 practice seems now to be very generally abandoned. 
 
 Arian divines have usually been advocates for the pro- 
 per personality of the Holy Spirit, who is commonly re- 
 presented by them as inferior to the Son, but superior to 
 all other creatures, and as acting in subordination to the 
 Logos in the ceconomy of redemption. But this doc- 
 trine is now very generally given up ; and the Holy Spirit 
 is regarded by almost all learned christians, who are not 
 Trinitarians, merely as a divine energy. 
 
 The following are the principal arguments in favour of 
 the proper Arian hypothesis : 
 
 That it is perfectly agreeable to the analogy of nature 
 that one being should be made the instrument of commu- 
 nicating existence and happiness to other beings, and that 
 God usually conducts his dispensations towards his crea- 
 tures by the intervention of subordinate agents : 
 
 That it is expressly taught in the christian Scriptures 
 that Christ existed with the Father before the world be- 
 gan ; and particularly that it is affirmed of him, and of no 
 other prophet, that he came down from heaven : 
 
 That there are many passages in the New Testament 
 which teach that the Logos, the Son of God, was the 
 Maker, the Supporter, the Governor, and the Redeemer 
 of the world ; that it is his office to administer the affairs 
 of the church ; and that he is appointed to raise the dead, 
 and to judge all mankind according to their works : 
 
 That these great works and this high authority do not 
 necessarily infer the supreme divinity of the author or 
 possessor of them, is evident from the express declaration 
 of Jesus, that his Father is greater than he ; that he is 
 inferior to the Father in knowledge, in power, and in good- 
 ness i alsoj that he is derived from, and is wholly depen- 
 dent 
 
Sect. 4] THE HIGH ARIAN SCHEME. 319 
 
 dent upon, the Supreme Being for his existence, and for 
 all his powers : 
 
 That the doctrine which the Arians hold concerning 
 the important design of the death of Christ, is confirmed 
 by numerous passages in the Scriptures, especially of the 
 New Testament, in which that event is represented as ful- 
 filling purposes under the divine government beyond that 
 of any human being, and as being the great anti-type of 
 the expiatory sacrifices of the Levitical law. 
 
 The Arians also observe, that titles and characters are 
 ascribed to Christ; that regards are claimed by him, and 
 homage is paid to him, which would be highly improper 
 and unbecoming if he were only an exalted man : 
 
 That there was a peculiar propriety in appointing the 
 same glorious person to be the redeemer of the world, and 
 the final judge of all mankind, who was the original ma- 
 ker and governor of the world^, and the medium of all the 
 former dispensations of God to the human race. This 
 supposed harmony of the divine dispensations is repre- 
 sented by the friends of the Arian hypothesis as a strong 
 presumptive argument in its favour. 
 
 Finally, it is maintained, that the great dignity and au- 
 thority of Jesus Christ on the one hand, and his derivation 
 from, and entire dependence upon, the Father on the other, 
 was the prevailing doctrine of the first and purest ages of 
 the christian church. 
 
 The Arian hypothesis is opposed by the following ob- 
 jections: 
 
 That this hypothesis is equally inconsistent with the 
 proper deity and the proper humanity of Jesus Christ ; 
 for the Maker of the world in a human form could not 
 with propriety be called a man : 
 
 That if the Logos be the maker, supporter, and gover- 
 nor of the world, he must be supreme God ; for there is 
 but one former, preserver, and director of all : 
 
 That 
 
S20 OBJECTIONS AGAINST [Part II. 
 
 That if the Logos is Jehovah, he must be the supreme 
 Jehovah, for there is but one Jehovah : 
 
 That to admit two objects of religious worship, though 
 the homage paid to one is called supreme, and that to 
 the other subordinate, is wholly unauthorized and un- 
 scriptural, and is, properly speaking, polytheism and 
 idolatry : 
 
 That it is more probable that the union of so exalted 
 a spirit as the Logos with a human body would render 
 the material system impassible and immortal, than that 
 the attributes of the Logos would by such an union be 
 degraded to a level with the faculties of other human be- 
 ings: 
 
 That the Arian hypothesis excludes the divine Being 
 from almost all concern in the formation and government 
 of the universe, and weakens the regards due to him from 
 his creatures ; while, on the other hand, it tends to fill 
 the mind with disquieting apprehensions, by representing 
 the administration of the universe as in the hands of a be- 
 ing of limited wisdom, power, and benevolence : 
 
 That the Arian doctrine is vague and ambiguous ; it 
 being a matter of great doubt amongst the advocates for 
 this hypothesis, whether the Logos made and governs the 
 world by the exertion of his own uncontrolled will and 
 power, or whether he acted by direction from, and in im- 
 mediate subordination to, the divine Being who supplied 
 him with power for the occasion : whether in his incar- 
 nate state he retained any consciousness of his pre-existent 
 glories ; whether, and in what sense, and to what degree, 
 his attributes were quiescent ; whether he performed his 
 miracles by his own or by his Father's power ; and whe- 
 ther he raised himself to life. Also, in what way the pre- 
 servation and government of the universe was conducted 
 while its proper maker and governor was reduced to the 
 state of a human being, and even of an infant : 
 
 That the doctrine of atonement and vicarious suffering, 
 
 in 
 
Sect, 4.3 THE H.GIT ARIAN SCIIEKIE. 521 
 
 in every sense of it, and under every explanation, is irra- 
 tional, unscriptural, and repugnant to the perfections of 
 God: 
 
 That the Avian hypothesis is absolutely inconsistent 
 with the Scripture account of the exaltation of Christ as 
 the reward of his sufferings; the dignity and authority to 
 which he is now advanced being no greater than what he 
 originally possessed : 
 
 Moreover, that the doctrine of a created Logos is not 
 the doctrine of the two iirst centuries : that it was first 
 suggested at the latter end of the third or the beginning 
 of the fourth century ; and that, when first published, it 
 excited general attention and alarm, and gave rise to a 
 very long and vehement controversy. It cannot therefore 
 be the doctrine of the Scriptures. 
 
 Against the hypothesis, that the Logos was the former 
 but not the creator of the v.^orld, and which limits his en- 
 ergy and jurisdiction to this planet, or to the solar system 
 only, and which denies him to be the proper object of 
 religious worship, it has been objected : 
 
 That there is no foundation either in reason or Scrip- 
 lure for maintaining that the maker and governor of the 
 world is a different person from him by whom matter was 
 created : 
 
 That upon this hypothesis it may justly be asked, whe- 
 ther, if spirits are immaterial beings, God was the creator 
 of immaterial substance, and the Logos formed it into 
 spirit : 
 
 That there is no appearance in nature which should 
 lead us to conclude that the being who made this system 
 is different from the being who made other systems ; for 
 that the created universe, as far as our observation extends, 
 appears to be one grand, connected, harmonious whole ; 
 from the ijiiimense extent of which, and from the mutual 
 
 Y relation 
 
322 SEMI-ARIAN SCHEME [Part II. 
 
 relation and connexion of its various systems, and clusters 
 of systems, according to the latest discoveries of Dr. Her- 
 schel, we are naturally led to infer the existence of one 
 only omnipresent, intelligent, omnipotent, and governing 
 uill : 
 
 That those texts which are understood to ascribe to 
 Christ the formation and government of the world, if rhey 
 are to be interpreted literally, and as relating to the natu- 
 ral world, cannot reasonably be limited to any thing short 
 of the whole created universe: " for without him," it is said, 
 *' was not any thing made that was made : All things w^ere 
 made by him and for him:" 
 
 And lastly, that if Christ be the creator, supporter, and 
 governor of this world only, continually present with us, 
 acquainted with our wants, hearing our prayers, and able 
 to help us, he must of necessity be the proper object of our 
 religious homage : he is " the Lord our Maker," whom 
 we are required to worship ; nor can it be more unreason- 
 able to pray to Christ, than to ask a favour of any other 
 friend who is present with us, or accessible to us^ 
 
 SECTION V. 
 
 THE SEMI-ARIAN SCHEME. 
 
 JL HIS hypothesis maintains that the Son of God is the 
 eternal voluntary production of the Father's power ; that 
 he derived his existence from the Supreme Being in an 
 incomprehensible manner, different from and superior to 
 
 ' Whiston, Emlyn, Peirce, and Dr. Price were the learned and able 
 advocates of Arianism in the last century. 
 
 all 
 
Sect. 5.] STATED AND EXPLAINED. 323 
 
 all created existence ; that he possesses all communicable 
 attributes, and is equal to the Father himself in all things 
 excepting necessary existence ; that he is the delegate of 
 God in the creation and government of the universe, and 
 the medium of all the moral dispensations of God to man- 
 kind ; that he appeared under the name and character 
 of Jehovah to the patriarchs, and gave out the law to 
 Moses at mount Sinai : and finally, that it was this glori- 
 ous spirit which animated the body of Jesus. 
 
 In favour of this hypothesis it has been alleged. 
 
 That the Scriptures ascribe all divine attributes to the 
 Son, excepting self- existence, which is necessarily incom- 
 municable. 
 
 That eternity itself is predicated of the Son ; and that 
 an eternal derivation of existence involves no contradiction. 
 For if God has been eternally omnipotent, he might from 
 eternity exercise the power he possesses. To deny this 
 would be a contradiction in terms : 
 
 That the Logos is repeatedly and expressly called God, 
 and is represented as the creator, preserver, and governor 
 of all derived beings without exception. *' Without him 
 was not any thing made which was made :'* 
 
 That he is every where represented as deriving his ex- 
 istence from, and acting in subordination to, the Father ; 
 That, nevertheless, he is never expressly called a creature, 
 nor represented as having been made out of nothing ; nor 
 is it any where said that there was a time when the Son 
 did not exist, as the Arians positively teach : 
 
 It is particularly insisted upon, that he is called * only- 
 begotten,* which implies a mode of derivation peculiar to 
 the Son, different from and far superior to the mode in, 
 which creatures in general are brought into existence. 
 
 Finally, it is strenuously insisted upon, that this doctrine 
 was held by all the Anti-nicene fathers, who, while they 
 earnestly plead for the pre-existence, voluntary derivation, 
 
 Y 2 and 
 
324 SEMI-ARIAN SCHEME. [Part II. 
 
 and entire subordination of the Son, peremptorily deny 
 him to be a created being, nor would they allow that there 
 ever was a time when he did not exist. And indeed the 
 great alarm which was universally excited when this doc- 
 trine was first published by Arius, proves almost to demon- 
 stration that the hypothesis of a Logos created out of no- 
 thing was perfectly novel, and unheard of before. 
 
 The principal and eminently learned advocates of this 
 hypothesis of an eternally-derived but uncreated Logos, 
 are Dr. Samuel Clarke the rector of St. James's, and Dr. 
 Daniel Scott. 
 
 It is obvious to remark that this scheme is open to all 
 the objections which may be urged against the proper 
 Arian hypothesis : besides that it involves many difficul- 
 ties peculiar to itself. 
 
 The distinction between generation and creation, as acts 
 of the divine power and will, and the very supposition of 
 an intermediate mode of existence between a self-existent 
 and a created being, is arbitrary, unintelligible, and un- 
 scriptural, not to say contradictory and absurd. 
 
 The title of Son, as applied to Christ, has no relation 
 to the metaphysical mode of his existence : it was con- 
 ferred upon him at his baptism, as a designation of his 
 official character of Messiah. 
 
 The expression ' only-begotten ' is peculiar to the ei'an- 
 gelist John, who uses it in the same connexion, and no 
 doubt in the same sense, in which the other evangelists 
 use * beloved ;' which means nothing more than that Je- 
 sus was the chief of all the prophets of God, and highly 
 favoured above all others by the extent of his authority 
 and the superiority of his miraculous gifts and powers. 
 
 Lastly, the advocates of this hypothesis mistake thedoc- 
 ti'ine of the primitive ecclesiastical writers, who, though 
 they never taught, nor even thought of, the creation of 
 the Logos, did not regard this glorious person as a per- 
 manently 
 
Sect. 6.] THE INDWELLING SCIIENLE. 325 
 
 manently derived intelligent agent, distinct from the Fa- 
 ther, but as an attribute of the Supreme Being, first oc- 
 casionally, and afterwards permanently personified i. 
 
 SECTION VI. 
 
 THE INDWELLING SCHEME. 
 
 i HIS hopothesis represents the Logos as a created being. 
 Dr. Watts seems to have regarded him as of the order of 
 human spirits^ but as having existed previously to the for- 
 mation of the world ; coinciding so far in opinion with 
 the low Arians. Dr. Thomas Burnet and Dr. Doddridge 
 assign to him the attributes and rank of the high Arian 
 Logos, and represent him as the maker of the universe, 
 and the medium of all divine communications. 
 
 In this Logos the Father is supposed to dv/ell by an 
 intimate union, analogous to that of the soul and body ; 
 and in consequence of this union, or inhabitation of the 
 Father, the attributes and works of God may be predi- 
 cated of the Log^os, and divine honours are due to him. 
 
 This hypothesis is thought by its advocates to reconcile 
 In the easiest and the most satisfactory manner the proper 
 deity of Christ with the proper unity of God, as in this 
 case the Son is God only by the Father's godhead. 
 
 It is also considered as the best means of reconciling the 
 inferiority of the Son with his proper deity ; because, upon 
 this hypothesis, he possesses a created as well as a divine 
 nature. 
 
 The Indwelling Scheme, as it is called by its advocates, 
 is chiefly supported by those texts in which the miracu- 
 
 ' Priestley's Early Opinions^ book ii. chap. 2. 
 
 lous 
 
326 THE INDWELLING SCHEME. [Part II. 
 
 lous works of Christ are ascribed to the power of the Father 
 dwelling in him, John xiv. 9—11 : which teach that he 
 and the Father are one, John x. 30. But the principal 
 stress is laid on Col. ii. 9, " In him dwelleth all the ful- 
 ness of the Godhead bodily \** that is, say the advocates 
 for this hypothesis, fully, really, and substantially ; not in 
 shadows and symbols, like the Shechinah, or cloud of 
 glory upon the ark, but in his essence and person. 
 
 Of the advocates for this hypothesis, some, as Dr. 
 Watts, deny the personality of the Holy Spirit ; others, 
 with Dr. Doddridge, believe the Holy Spirit to be a cre- 
 ated being, inferior to the Logos, but, like him, inhabited 
 by the Deity, and therefore one with God. 
 
 This hypothesis seems to have been first advanced by 
 Dr. Thomas Burnet, in the b?ginning of the eighteenth 
 century : it was adopted and defended by Paul Maty, a 
 Dutch divine, A. D. 1724; but it made little progress 
 upon the continent. In England the indwelling scheme 
 was supported by Dr. Watts and Dr. Doddridge, and 
 was a favourite hypothesis with the disciples of that school : 
 at present it has not many advocates. 
 
 The following are the principal objections against the 
 iudwelling scheme. 
 
 1 . That, like the low Arian hypothesis, it is perfectly 
 new, and was never heard of till the eighteenth century. 
 
 2. That it will by no means answer the purpose for 
 which it is proposed and supported ; namely, to reconcile 
 the proper deity with the inferiority and proper humanity 
 of Christ. For as the Son and Spirit were created beings, 
 there was a time when they did not exist ; consequently 
 they are not eternal, therefore they are not divine. 
 
 3. The hypothesis itself, so far as it differs from Ari- 
 anism, is reducible to an absurdity. 
 
 If by the indwelling deity be meant that the uncreated 
 substance of the Supreme Being is so united with the cre- 
 ated 
 
Sect. 7.] THE SABELLIAN SCHEME. S27 
 
 ated substance of the Logos, as to form one compound 
 substance ; and that the uncreated consciousness of deity- 
 is so united to the created consciousness of the Logos, as 
 to form one consciousness only ; so that the self-existent 
 God and the created Logos united form one compound 
 person, distinct both from God and the Logos; — 
 though this doctrine does indeed secure the deity of the 
 Son, it at the same time involves an absurdity too gross 
 to be allovi^ed by any considerate mind, and equal to any 
 thing either in Athanasianism or in transubstantiation. But 
 if by the inhabitation of deity in the Logos, nothing more 
 be intended than that the will of the Son in all respects 
 coincides with the will of the Father, that the doctrine 
 which he taught was inspired by the Father, and that the 
 miracles he performed were wrought by the power of the 
 Father ; or, in fine, any thing short of a personal substan- 
 tial union with the Father ; — this kind of indwelling is 
 perfectly similar to that which all Arians, Socinians, and 
 even Unitarians have always maintained, and is in fact 
 giving up the deity of the Son and the Spirit. 
 
 SECTION VII. 
 
 THE SABELLIAN SCHEME. 
 
 1 HIS hypothesis assumes that Father, Son, and Spirit, 
 are different names for the same being, the only living and 
 true God ; who, as Maker and Governor of the world, is 
 called Father ; as dwelling in the man Christ Jesus to au- 
 thenticate his mission, to impart his doctrine and to per- 
 form his miracles, takes the name of Son ; and as the 
 inspirer of the apostles, the author of spiritual gifts, and 
 
 the 
 
S28 THE SWEDENBORGIAN DOCTRINE. [Part I L 
 
 the sanctifier and comforter of christians, is called the 
 Holy Spirit. 
 
 This is said to have been the doctrine of SabelHus bi- 
 shop of Pentapolis in Africa, also of Paul of Samosata 
 bishop of Antioch. for which he was deposed in a council 
 held at Antioch A. D. 269. 
 
 The epithet Sabellian being obnoxious, no person at 
 present chooses to assume it : but it is evident that this 
 doctrine differs only in words from proper Unitarianism, 
 or from what is called Nominal Trinitarianism, as will 
 be hereafter explained. 
 
 The Unitarians allow that God is often called the Fa- 
 ther; and sometimes the Spirit or God is used for God 
 himself. But the character of Son is never applied to 
 the Supreme Being : it belongs eminently to Jesus as the 
 Messiah, the first begotten from the dead, the first of the 
 human race who, in consequence of a resurrection from 
 the grave, has been put into possession of the promised 
 inheritance. 
 
 SECTION VOL 
 
 THE SWEDENBORGIAN DOCTRINE. 
 
 1 HIS system maintains that there is but one God ; that 
 he existed from all eternity in a human form ; that to ac- 
 complish the redemption of men and angels he assumed 
 and animated a human body, and that his union to it be- 
 came perfect by means of trials and conflicts ; that the 
 trinity commenced at the incarnation, God himself being 
 the Father, the human body the Son, the joint operation 
 of both the Holy Spirit. Christ suffered to redeem the 
 world from the power of evil angels. The Swedenbor- 
 gians believe that the last judgement took pl^ce, in the 
 
 spiritual 
 
Sect. 8.] TFIE SWEDENBORGIAN DOCTRINE. 329 
 
 spiritual world, A. D. 17-57, and that the spiritual king- 
 dom of Christ commenced on the 19th of June 1770. 
 
 They deny the doctrine of the resurrection in its literal 
 sense, and believe that men, when they die, enter upon 
 the spiritual world, and are clothed with a vehicle which 
 they call substantial, in opposition to material. They 
 imagine that the spiritual world so nearly resembles the 
 present state, that it can with difficulty be distinguished 
 from it. The inhabitants eat and drink, and marry ; they 
 have houses, palaces, and cities ; they carry on trade and 
 commerce ; they possess gold, silver and jevt'els, books, 
 writings, and the like : but every thing is in a more per- 
 fect state than in the material world. 
 
 They also maintain that the whole Scripture, excepting 
 the Book of Acts and the Epistles, have a twofold mean- 
 ing, the natural and the spiritual : this they call the doc- 
 trine ol correspondences : and they believe that the spiri- 
 tual meaning was never understood till it was revealed to 
 Emanuel Swedenborg. 
 
 This strange doctrine Vv'as the reverie of Emanued Swe- 
 denborg, a Swedish baron, who was born A. D. 1689, 
 and died 1 772. It is said to have been embraced by great 
 numbers of persons upon the continent, and some of very 
 high rank : but in this country, where freedom of discussion 
 is allowed, it can hardly be expected to make many pro- 
 selytes. The Swedenborgians call themselves the New 
 Jerusalem Church. 
 
 As the truth of this system depends upon the inspiration 
 of Emanui^l Swedenborg, who appears to have been an 
 honest visionary, who fancied that he was indulged with 
 occasional intercourse with the spiritual world, it is need- 
 less to enter into any argument upon the subject ^ 
 
 ' See Dr. Priestley's Letters to the New Jerusalem Church 5 and 
 Proud and Hindmarsh's Replies to Priestley : also Swedenborg's Uni- 
 versal Theology, No. 734. 
 
 SECTION 
 
530 TRiriiEiSM. [Part II. 
 
 SECTION IX. 
 
 TRITHEISM. 
 
 This is the doctrine of three equal independent infinite 
 beings, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It is so diametri- 
 cally opposite to the doctrine of the divine Unity so ex- 
 plicitly taught in the Jewish and Christian Scriptures, and 
 even to the dictates of right reason upon this important 
 subject, that however near the doctrine of the Realist 
 Trinitarians may be thought to approximate to it, Trithe- 
 ism is expressly disavowed by almost all modern writers 
 upon the subject. It is said to have been maintained by 
 John Ascunage, a Syrian philosopher of the sixth centu- 
 ry ; and to have been supported by John Philoponus, a 
 grammarian of high reputation in Alexandria. 
 
 SECTION X. 
 
 TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE. 
 
 J. HE doctrine of the Trinity maintains that the Father is 
 God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is God, three 
 equal persons in the same divine substance, and yet there 
 are not three Gods, but one God : or, in other words, that 
 *' there are three persons in the Godhead, the Father, the 
 Son, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one God, 
 the same in substance, equal in power and glory." 
 
 The following is a general view of the arguments in 
 favour of this doctrine. 
 
 1. That 
 
Sect. 10.] TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE. 331 
 
 1 . That Christ is expressly called God both In the Old 
 Testament and the New. 
 
 2. That he appeared to the patriarchs under the name 
 and character of Jehovah. 
 
 3. That titles appropriated to the Supreme Being are 
 applied to Christ, viz. Lord, Lord of hosts. Lord of all, 
 King of kings and Lord of lords, Alpha and Omega, First 
 and Last, God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 
 
 4. That of Christ it is explicitly declared that he was 
 in the beginning with God, and was God ; that in him 
 all the fulness of the Godhead dwells bodily, that is, sub- 
 stantially ; that he thought it no robbery to be equal with 
 God, or as God j that he and the Father are one ; and 
 that he is in a peculiar and appropriate sense the Son of 
 God, well beloved, and only-begotten. 
 
 5. That attributes appropriate to the Supreme Being 
 are ascribed to Christ, viz. eternity, omnipresence, omni- 
 science, omnipotence, and immutability. 
 
 6. That divine works are also ascribed to Christ, viz, 
 the creation, the support, and government of the world, 
 the resurrection of the dead, and the final judgement of 
 all mankind. 
 
 ' 7. That divine honours are challenged by him, and 
 divine worship addressed to him ; that he is represented 
 as the proper object of prayer, of thanksgiving, of obedi- 
 ence, of trust, of self-dedication, and of joy : also, that he 
 is joined with the Father in acts of social worship and in- 
 vocation, and in the doxologies of the heavenly world. 
 
 8. That the apostles uniformly address him, and speak 
 to him, and of him, under the impression of his proper 
 deity. 
 
 9. That the true and proper deity of Christ has been 
 the doctrine of the christian church from the earliest age, 
 which, with the exception of a very small number of indi- 
 viduals, has been uniform and unanimous in its profession 
 of this faith. 
 
 Against 
 
332 TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE [Part II. 
 
 Against this doctrine it has been objected : 
 
 1 . That if the Son and Spirit be each of them truly 
 and properly God, there must be more Gods than one ; 
 for it is a contradiction in terms to say, that there are three 
 distinct, intelligent, conscious agents, each of which is tru- 
 ly God, and yet that there is but one God. 
 
 2. That the proper deity of Christ is absolutely incon- 
 sistent with his proper humanity. It is impossible that 
 God should become incarnate, and sufler, and die : It is 
 equally impossible that he should so unite himself to a hu- 
 man soul, as to become one conscious person or intelligent 
 agent with it. But if the consciousness remains distinct, 
 they are, properly speaking, two distinct persons : and 
 Jesus Christ, who appeared in a human body as the in- 
 structor of mankind, who suffered and died upon the cross, 
 and who was raised again to life, was in no proper sense 
 God, but a mere man ; so that this doctrine, so far, co- 
 incides with the proper Unitarian scheme, and is incon- 
 sistent with the commonly-received opinion concerning 
 the atonement of Christ, and the satisfaction made to the 
 justice of God. 
 
 S. That to maintain concerning propositions which re- 
 late to the same individual person Christ, that some are 
 to be understood of his human nature only, some of his 
 divine nature alone, and some of his complex person as 
 God-man, is a mode of interpretation which theScripturess 
 neither teach nor warrant, which is contra ry to every rule 
 of sober and rational criticism, and which tends to convert 
 plain language into unintelligible jargon. 
 
 4. If Jesus is ever spoken of as God either in the Old 
 Testament or in the New, which some deny, it must be 
 in the same sense in which Moses is said to have been a 
 God to Pharaoh, and in which prophets and magistrates 
 are also called gods, that is, either as possessing authority, 
 or as acting under a divine commission, or as working 
 
 miracles. 
 
 5, That 
 
Sect. 10.] STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 333 
 
 5. That Christ is in no instance styled Jehovah : that 
 all arguments in proof of the ascription of this title to him 
 are fallacious in the extreme : and that there is but one 
 Jehovah, the true God, the only proper object of worship, 
 who never gave his name or his glory to another. 
 
 6. That the few passages in which the creation of all 
 things is ascribed to Chri.^t, are to be interpreted of the 
 moral world, and of the new creation, that new state and 
 order of things which was introduced by Christ. 
 
 7. The Unity, or equality of Christ with God, is in- 
 consistent with his exaltation as the reward of his obedi- 
 ence and sufferings. 
 
 8. The inferiority of Christ to the Father, the limita- 
 tion of his attributes, the derivation of his commission and 
 of all his miraculous powers from him, and his unlimited 
 subjection to him, are taught in the most direct and un- 
 qualified terms by Christ himself. The apostles of Christ 
 also uniformly teach his inferiority to the Father ; and 
 even after his resurrection and ascension they speak of 
 him as a man, without giving the least intimation that he 
 also possessed a superior and divine nature, or taking the 
 least pains to guard against being mistaken, though it is 
 acknowledged that the mass of believers at that time v/ere 
 strongly prejudiced against the doctrine of the divinity of 
 Christ. 
 
 9. The principal arguments of the Trinitarians are 
 founded upon mistranslations, misinterpretations, or cor- 
 ruptions of the Scripture. The famous text of the hea- 
 venly witnesses, 1 John v. 7, is a palpable forgery ; and 
 the expression ' God manifest in the fiesh,* 1 Tim. iii. 
 16, is very suspicious. ' That he thought it no robbery 
 to be equal with God,* Phil. ii. 6, is a gross mistransla- 
 tion : and the unity which subsists between the Father and 
 him is explained by himself to be the same which subsists 
 between him and his disciples, John xvii. 22. if the 
 
 fulness 
 
334! TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE [Part II. 
 
 fulness of the Godhead dwell in him, his disciples and 
 believers in general are said to be filled with the fulness 
 of Christ and of God. — At any rate, whatever may be, 
 meant by the fulness of Godhead dwelling in Christ, it 
 was no more than what " it pleased the Father should 
 dwell in him.'* 
 
 10. If the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are 
 the same being, there is no equality ; if they are distinct, 
 equal, co-ordinate persons, there is no proper unity. 
 
 11. The conduct of the apostles, and the familiarity 
 of the behaviour of the companions of Christ, during his 
 personal ministry, plainly prove that they had no concep- 
 tion of the divinity of his nature ; nor do their history or 
 their writings contahi any indication of the astonishment 
 which they could not but have felt when this amazing 
 fact was first disclosed to them. 
 
 12. The Jews, the inveterate enemies of Christianity, 
 never charge the apostles or their immediate successors 
 with introducing an idolatrous religion, though it is well 
 known that this charge was urged with great vehemence 
 by them as soon as the doctrine of the deity of Christ 
 was advanced in the christian church ; and that the com- 
 monly-received doctrine of the Trinity is to this day one 
 of the principal sources of the animosity, hatred, and con- 
 tempt which the Jews, the zealous advocates of the divine 
 unity, express against the christian religion. 
 
 13. Christ is not represented in the Scriptures as the 
 proper object of religious worship. He never requires it. 
 He even expressly prohibits religious invocation of him.- 
 self, John xvi, 23. Nor is there any proper example to 
 authorize religious addresses to him. 
 
 14. It is strenuously maintained that the doctrine of 
 the divinity of Christ was not known in the apostolic age : 
 that it was never admitted at all amongst the Jewish chris- 
 tians y and that it made very slow progress even amongst 
 
 tht' 
 
Sect. 10.] STATED AND ILLUSTRATED. 335 
 
 the Gentile believers ; so that in the time of Tertullian, 
 and even of Athanasius, a great majority of unlearned 
 christians were Unitarians : that the doctrine of the perso- 
 nification of the Logos was first introdaced by the Plato- 
 nic philosophers who embraced Christianity, and who were 
 ashamed of the simplicity of the doctrine of the Gospel, 
 and of the meanness and sufferings of its author ; also, 
 that the equality of the Son was not generally admitted 
 till after the Council of Nice, nor the personality and 
 equality of the Holy Spirit, till the fifth century. 
 
 Finally : The same mode of reasoning which is adopt- 
 ed to prove the doctrine of the Trinity is equally appli- 
 c:\hle to that of transubstantiation ; a few figurative ex- 
 pressions, literally interpreted, appearing to favour the doc- 
 trine, and the majority of believers having for many cen- 
 turies received it. And if Trinitarians plead that their doc- 
 trine is a sublime mystery, to be received and adored, but 
 not examined, this is no more than the plea of the Catho- 
 lic in behalf of his incomprehensible mystery of transub- 
 stantiation ^ 
 
 To obviate the objections against the popular doctrine 
 of the Trinity, various hypotheses have been advanced by 
 the advocates for that doctrine, who are all reputed to 
 agree in the same fundamental principle, and who do in 
 fact agree in the use of the same language with respect to 
 the person of Christ. The principal of these hypotheses 
 are those of the Realists, of the Nominalists, and of the 
 genuine Athanasians ; to which may be added the case 
 of those who, professing to believe the doctrine of the 
 Trinity, adhere chiefly to the language of Scripture, and 
 decline all explanation upon the subject. 
 
 ' " II y a bien de lieu de s'etonner, que des gens qui reconnoissent 
 les mysteres de la Trinite et de rincarnation retusent de reconnoitre 
 la presence rcelle, et la Transubstantiation, puisqn'on peut former de 
 plus grandes difficultes contre les premiers que centre le dernier, si 
 Ton veut suivre les sens et la raison seulement." Lettres Choisies de 
 M. Simopj p. 42. 
 
 1. The 
 
336 TRINITARIAN DOCTRINE [Part II. 
 
 I. The Realists. 
 
 These writers maintain that the Father, the Son, and 
 the Holy Spirit are three distinct, conscious, intelligent 
 agents or persons ; that the Son and the Spirit derive their 
 existence from the Father by eternal necessary emanation, 
 called generation as it respects the Son, and procession in 
 reference to the Holy Spirit ; and that with the single ex- 
 ception of self- existence, in regard to which the Father is 
 called the Root and Fountain of Deity, and is superior 
 both to the Son and the Spirit even as to their divine na- 
 ture, they are in all respects independent of him, and 
 equal to him, being necessarily- existent, and absolutely 
 perfect. 
 
 The distinct personality, together with the proper equa- 
 lity, and oeconomical subordination of the Son and Spirit, 
 are supposed to be maintained with peculiar advantage by 
 this hypothesis : and the Unity of the deity is thought to 
 be sufHciently preserved by the supremacy of the Father, 
 and the derivation of the Son and Spirit from the sub- 
 stance of the Father, by communication of the same es- 
 sence. 
 
 Some of the principal supporters of this doctrine amongst 
 the English divines, are Cud worth, Owen, Howe, Bull, 
 Sherlock, Waterland, and Horsley. 
 
 To this hypothesis it is objected, 
 
 1. That if the three persons are in all respects equal, 
 and all absolutely perfect, they are three gods; and that 
 this hypothesis is downright Tritheism. 
 
 2. That if one be supreme and the others subordi- 
 nate, if one be self-existent and the others derived, the 
 Son and Spirit cannot be absolute in all perfections ; and 
 therefore, in this view of the hypothesis, they cannot each 
 be truly God. 
 
 3. Hence it follows that the hypothesis of the Realists, 
 
 being 
 
Sect. 10.] THE NOMINALISTS. S37 
 
 being in one \'Iew inconsistent with the unity of God, and 
 in another view with the full equality and proper deity of 
 the persons, is inconsistent with itself and with the Scrip- 
 tures, and therefore cannot be true, 
 
 4. Besides the absurdity of supposing an absolutely 
 perfect being to have been in any sense derived, whether 
 by necessity or by a voluntary act, the very notion of the 
 peculiar and distinct modes of the emanation of the Son 
 and Spirit, the former by generation, the latter by proces- 
 sion or spiration, whether from the Father only, as is taught 
 by the Greek church, or from the Father and the Son, as 
 the Latin church inculcates, is unintelligible and unscrip- 
 tural. 
 
 II. TJie Nominalists. 
 
 These writers maintain that the Father, the Son, and 
 the Holy Spirit are three distinctions in the one self-exist- 
 ent Deity, analogous to the faculties of understanding, 
 will, and power in men ; to which three distinctions per- 
 sonal terms may be applied". 
 
 The principal advantage claimed by this hypothesis is, 
 that it preserves the proper Unity of God, while it main- 
 tains the divinity and equality of each of the three persons. 
 
 * Dr. Wall is, Savilian professor of mathematics at Oxford, in his 
 Considerations on the Trinity, p. 7, (I693,) speaks of it as " a silly 
 mistake, that a divine person is as much as to say a divinity, or a God, 
 •when indeed a divine person is only a mode, or respect, ox t elation of 
 God to his creatures. He bears to his creatures these three relations, 
 modes, or respects ; that he is their Creator, their Redeemer, their 
 Sanctifier : this is what we mean, and all that we mean, when we say 
 God is three persons. He hath those three relations to his creatures ; 
 and is thereby no more three Gods, than he was three Gods to the 
 Jews because he calls himself the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, 
 and the God of Jacob." 
 
 This truly Unitarian doctrine received the marked approbation of 
 the University of Oxford, while Dr. Sherlock's hypothesis, " that the 
 three persons of the Trinity were three distinct intinite minds," under- 
 went a public censure. With this modal hypothesis Mr. Lindsey sa- 
 tisfied himself to remain in the church and to use the liturgy, some 
 years after he became a Unitarian. Apol, p. 22S. 
 
 z Amongst 
 
S38 DOCTRINE OF THE [Part 11. 
 
 Amongst the ancients, Augustln, the celebrated bishop 
 of Hippo in Africa, was an advocate for this hypothesis ; 
 and amongst the moderns, Calvin, Hooker, Burnet, Wal- 
 lis, South, Baxter, and others. 
 
 Against this hypothesis it is objected, 
 
 1 . I'hat if by distinctions or persons attributes only 
 are meant, the term person is used in a sense very diffe- 
 rent from that which custom has established, and in a 
 manner u^hich must necessarily deceive those who are not 
 upon their guard against this unprecedented abuse of lan- 
 guage. 
 
 2. This hypothesis, in fact, annihilates the proper per- 
 sonality, and thereby the real existence of the Son and 
 Spirit ; and though the advocates of this hypothesis hold 
 the language of proper Trinitarians, yet, in ideas, they co^ 
 incide altogether with the Sabellians, or even with the 
 proper Unitarians. 
 
 3. This hypothesis converts a great part of the lan- 
 guage of the New Testament into unintelligible jargon. 
 Thus, when it is said that the Father sent the Son to be 
 the Saviour of the world, it is the same as saying that 
 one attribute or distinction of the Deity sent another attri- 
 bute or distinction of the Deity to be the Saviour of the 
 world. And when the Son prayed to the Father, one at- 
 tribute or distinction of the divine nature prayed to an- 
 other attribute or distinction of the divine nature. 
 
 4. If it should be maintained that the three persons in 
 the Godhead are three distinctions, or, as some have ex- 
 pressed themselves, three somewhats that are not to be 
 understood or explained, this is substituting words instead 
 of ideas, and is in fact little better than giving up the 
 question. 
 
 III. The proper jithanasian Scheme. 
 
 This hypothesis maintains that there are three distinct 
 persons, the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit j the 
 
 two 
 
Sect. lO.j PROPER ATHANASIANS. SS9 
 
 two latter eternal and necessary emanations from the Fa- 
 ther : the Son by generation, the Holy Spirit by proces- 
 sion : that tliey are in all other respects equal to each other, 
 but united together by a mutual penetration of each other s 
 substance, which is called Emperichoresis, or Circumln- 
 cession. See Ben Mordecai's Letters, p. 999. 
 
 This was the doctrine of Athanasius himself, and of 
 the Nicene fathers amongst the ancients, ai7d of Bishop 
 Bull amongst the moderns. It is supposed by Its advo- 
 cates to possess all the advantages of the doctrine of the 
 Realists : while, by the peculiar h3^pothesis of the Em- 
 perichoresis, it precludes the charge of Tritheism, 
 
 It is a great objection against this scheme, that the em- 
 perichoresis, or mutual penetration of the divine substances, 
 which is the grand peculiarity of it, is unfounded both in 
 reason and in revelation, and Is absolutely unintelligible. 
 
 If the hypothesis means to assert the existence of three 
 absolutely perfect beings, whose knowledge, power, and 
 will uniformly coincide, and who occupy the same Infinite 
 space, it is open to the celebrated objection of Locke and 
 WoUaston against a plurality of infinite beings: for two 
 or more such beings cannot even in Idea be separated or 
 distinguished from one being. Their existence therefore 
 can be of no use : it can account for no phsenomena, and 
 is utterly incredible and absurd. 
 
 It is well known that what is called the Athanaslau 
 creed does not express the doctrine of Athanasius him- 
 self, and^is a forgery of much later date. 
 
 From a comparison of the preceding schemes It is obvi- 
 ous to remark : 
 
 1. That however the advocates of the Real and No- 
 minal systems may agree in the use of the same language, 
 their ideas are in fact as widely distant as those of the 
 Unitarians and the Trithelsts ; one party maintaining that 
 there is but one God, whose three attributes are called by 
 
 z 2 different 
 
340 RfiMARKS UPON THE [Part IT. 
 
 different names, or who himself bears different names when 
 acting under different relations ; the other party affirming 
 the existence of three distinct infinite minds, participating 
 of the same nature and substance, equal in power and 
 glory. 
 
 2. The doctrine of the Trinity in every shape and 
 under every explanation is utterly incredible ; and the 
 admission of it among christians as an article of belief, and 
 a revealed truth, is to rational unbelievers a great objec- 
 tion against the divine origin of Christianity, and one of 
 the greatest impediments to its progress in the world. 
 
 The Jews, the Mahometans, and all serious believers 
 in the Unity of God, regard the doctrine of the Trinity 
 v-'ith abhorrence, as an infringement upon the most funda- 
 mental article of natural religion. 
 
 The nice distinctions, the metaphysical subdlties, and 
 the scholastic jargon, which have been introduced into 
 the Trinitarian controversy, naturally lead unbelievers to 
 conclude that Christianity is a system of abstruse specula- 
 tion rather than of useful practical truth j and therefore 
 that it cannot be of divine original. 
 
 Further : Intelligent unbelievers, and men of no reli- 
 gion, when they observe that persons, whose real sentiments 
 are so directly opposite to each other, as those of the Real- 
 ists and Nominalists, can nevertheless agree in the use of 
 the same ambiguous language to impose upon the simpli- 
 city of unlearned chrisdans, are easily led to conclude 
 that the teachers of Christianity are not themselves behev- 
 ers in its divine authority, but that they profess it as a craft 
 to maintain themselves at the expense of their deluded 
 followers. 
 
 Hence it may naturally be expected that mere statesmen, 
 who are indifferent to all religions, will conclude that Chris- 
 tianity, like other superstitions, may be usefully employed 
 as an engine of state j by a hypocridcal profession of which, 
 
 and 
 
Sect. 10.] DIFFERENT HYPOTHESES. ' 341 
 
 and a liberal support of a class of persons who shall be 
 authorized to teach the creed of the state, they may main- 
 tain a great political ascendancy over the minds of the 
 ignorant and superstitious vulgar. 
 
 Hence likewise, regarding all teachers of religion as hy- 
 pocrites or enthusiasts, they are disposed to oppress and 
 persecute those, who, animated with a truly christian zeal 
 to restore the religion of Jesus to its primitive purity, en- 
 ter their public and solemn protest against prevailing and 
 established errors, and to inflict pains and penalties upon 
 such persons, as disturbers of the public peace : thus fix- 
 ing upon the christian religion the stigma of persecution, 
 which is most opposite to its true nature, and exciting still 
 more strongly the prejudices of unbelievers against it. 
 
 3. From these considerations, and upon these princi- 
 ples, the Unitarians justify their exertions to detect the 
 corruptions of the christian doctrine, and to represent 
 Christianity in its true light, as the revelation of a future 
 life of reward and punishment, confirmed by the resur- 
 rection of Christ from the dead : a doctrine of the great- 
 est practiced importance, and in the reception of which all 
 christians are agreed. And till this reformation is accom- 
 plished, they have little hope that the christian revelation 
 will meet with general reception, or that any considerable 
 moral advantage is to be expected from those abstruse, 
 complicated, and unintelligible systems of faith which often 
 assume the name of Christianity, and of which the genuine 
 doctrine of Christ commonly constitutes a very limited 
 proportion. 
 
 IV. To avoid the difficulties attending all explanations 
 of the doctrine of the Trinity, a fourth class of professed 
 Trinitarians have contented themselves with adopting, as 
 they say, " Scripture language," at the same time declining 
 all explanation of the subject. 
 
 They 
 
342 TRINITARIANS DECLINE EXPLANATION. [Part 11. 
 
 They content themselves with observing, that the Scrip- 
 ture teaches that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit 
 are each of them truly God ; divine names, titles, and 
 attributes, works, and worship being ascribed to each. 
 They observe also, that the same Scripture likewise teaches 
 that there is but one God : each of these positions, there- 
 fore, must be in some sense true. But in what sense the 
 divine persons are three, and in what respect they are one, 
 is not explained ; it is therefore, say they, presumption 
 in any one to attempt it : and being a doctrine of pure 
 revelation, it ought to be left in the simplicity and obscu- 
 rity of the Scripture language. This hypothesis, there- 
 fore, affirms that the Father is God, the Son is God, and 
 the Holy Spirit is God; and yet there are not three Gods, 
 but one God. But it leaves it doubtful whether the per- 
 sonality of the Father, the Son, and the Spirit be a real 
 or a modal personality : that is, whether the three persons 
 be three distinct intelligent agents, or three modes, attri- 
 butes, relations or distinctions of the same intelligent Be- 
 ing- 
 
 Where nothing is affirmed, nothing can be denied : but 
 it may behove the advocates for the use of this ambiguous 
 and unmeaning phraseology to consider, 
 
 1. Whether they can seriously maintain that there is 
 any medium between the Real and the Nominal schemes : 
 in other words, whether they are not under a necessity of 
 admitting that the three persons in the Trinity either are, 
 or are not, three distinct intelligent agents. 
 
 2. Whether they can seriously bclievethat the Scriptures 
 have left it a matter of doubt whether there be three equal 
 intelligent beings, all of whom are the proper objects of 
 worship; or whether one Being alone is revealed as the 
 object of religious adoration, by whatever names or cha- 
 racters he may be described. 
 
 3. "Whether they are themselves seriously in doubt 
 
 concerning 
 
Sect. 10.] ON THE USE OF EQUIVOCAL LANGUAGE. S43 
 
 concerning the Scripture doctrine upon this subject ; and 
 whether this doubt arises from the obscurity of the Scrip- 
 tures, or fi'oni their own voluntary inattention to the sub- 
 ject, and their unwiHingness to take sufficient pains to gain 
 satisfaction upon a subject of such high importance. 
 
 4. Whether it be not a concern of the greatest mag- 
 nitude, and well deserving the most serious inquiry, to 
 determine whether the object of religious worship be one, 
 or three infinite beings. 
 
 3. Whether it be a mark of real respect to the Scrip- 
 tures to use their language without ascertaining its mean- 
 ing ; and whether this be not the way to keep themselves 
 and others in perpetual ignorance ; also, whether they 
 must not allow that it is the proper province of reason to 
 investigate the true sense of the Scriptures. 
 
 6. Whether the indisposition to inquire and to attain 
 clear and definite ideas upon a subject of such great and 
 acknowledged importance as the doctrine of the Trinity, 
 does not in some measure arise from an unworthy fear of 
 the result of these inquiries, and from a secret suspicion 
 that the question will not bear examination. 
 
 7. Let it also be very seriously considered, whether 
 the common use of ambiguous language, which will ne- 
 cessarily lead plain and unlearned christians to conclude 
 that there are three objects of religious worship, while 
 the person who uses such language is himself persuaded 
 that there is, or at least that there may be, only one, be 
 consistent with the true simplicity of the christian charac- 
 ter ; and whether it does not justly expose the person who 
 uses it to the charge of " handling the word of God de- 
 ceitfully/* 
 
 THE END. 
 
 Psirited by R. a-^d A. 'It-ulr., i^hui Lnn<;, L'iuilon, 
 
The following Works, ly the same Author, are sold ly 
 
 R. Hunter, Successor to Mr. Johnson, 
 
 St. Paul's Churchyard. 
 
 1. A SUMMARY VIEW of the EVIDENCE and PRACTICAL 
 
 IMPORTANCE of the CHRISTIAN REVELATION, in a Series of Discourses. 
 Second Edition. 4s. 
 
 2. LETTERS upon ARIANISM, and other TOPICS of META- 
 PHYSICS and THEOLOGY, in Reply to tiie Lectures of the Rev. B. Carpenter. 
 4s. 
 
 3. MEMOIRS of the late Reverend THEOPHILUS LTNDSEY, 
 
 M. A., including a brief Analysis of his Works ; together with Anecdotes and Let- 
 ters of eminent Persons, his Friends and Correspondents; and a general View of 
 the Progress of the Unitarian Doctrine in England and America. 8vo. 14s. 
 
 4. A REVIEW of Mr. WILBERFORCE'S TREATISE, 
 
 entitled A Practical View of the prevailing Religions System. of professed Chris- 
 tians. With a Preface in Reply to certain Animadversions upon former Editions 
 of this Review. Third Edition corrected. 6s. 
 
 5. The CLAIMS of Dr. PRIESTLEY in the CONTROVERSY 
 
 with Bshop H0RSLI':Y RESTATED and VINDICATED, in Reply to the Ani- 
 madverLiions of the Rev. Heneage Horsley, Prebendary of St. Asaph, annexed to 
 the late Republication of his Father's Tracts. 43. 
 
 6. The PROGRESS of INTELLECTUAL, MO'R AL, and RELI- 
 
 GIOUS IMPROVEMF.N I' dm ingtbepresent Reign, represented in a DISCOURSE, 
 delivered before the Unitarian Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, at 
 Essex-Street Chapel, on Thursday, ]\Iarcb 31, 1814, in Commemoration of the 
 Repeal of the Penal Laws against the Itnpugncrs of the Doctrine of the Trinity, 
 To which is annexed AN APPF^MDIX, containing a Summary Review of a Publica- 
 tion of the LordBisho[)of St. D.WID'S, entitled "A Brief Memorial, on the Repeal 
 of the 9 and 10 William III. &c." Boards, 5s. 
 
 /. LETTERS addressed to the Right Reverend the Lord Bishop 
 
 of LONDON, in Vindication of the Unitarians from the Allegations of His Lordship 
 in the CHARGE delivered to the CLERGY of the Diocese of LONDOxM at His 
 Lordship's Primary Visitation. Second Edition. 3s. 6d. 
 
 S. A LETTER to the UNITARIAN CHRISTIANS in SOUTH 
 
 WALES. To which are annexed : — 1 . Letters in Reply to the Bishop of St. David's 
 Letters to the Unitarians. — 2. A Review of the Bishop's Treatise entitled "The Bible 
 and nothing but the Bible the Religion of the Church of England :" and 3. An Esti- 
 mate of His Lordship's Qualilicalions as a Theological Polemic. Price 4s. 6d, 
 
 ^Iso, lately published, and sold by R, Hunter, 
 
 1. The NEW TESTAMENT, in an IMPROVED VERS.ION, 
 
 upon the Basis of Archbishop Nt wcome's New Translation, with a corrected Text, 
 and Notes Critical and Explanatory. The Fourth Edition, with Corrections and 
 Additions. 
 
 2. Dr. PRIESTLEY'S TRACTS in Controversy with Bishop Hors- 
 
 ley : to which are annexed Letters to the Bishops not before published. Price 
 10s. 6d. 
 
 3. THE BOOKofCOMMONPRAYER REFORMED, accord- 
 ing to the Plan of the late DR. SAMUEL CLARKE. Sixth Edition, 8s. 6d., un- 
 bound; I0s> 6d,, bound.