opinion of some of the ancient writers of the church, who had a philosophy, that was a mixture of Pythagorism and Platonism. Nevertheless, this supposition, that God had employed the Son in former times, before the gospel, is overthrown by the very first words of the apostle in the epistle to the Hebrews," God, who at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken unto us by his Son." It is also inconsistent with the apostle's arguments to care and circumspection, steadfastness and perseverance, which follow afterwards. Heb. ii. 1, 2, 3, "Therefore we ought to give the more earnest heed to the things which we have heard. For if the word spoken by angels was steadfast, how shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him?" See likewise ch. iii. 1," For this man was counted worthy of more honour than Moses," ver. 6. But Christ, as a Son, "over his own house."

Still it may be said, that nothing but the pre-existence of the soul of Christ can suit those expressions of his being "sent from God," and "coming from God."

To which I answer, that the account here given by me is well suited to all such expressions in their utmost latitude, according to the style of scripture. For we may be all said to be sent by God into the world, without the supposition of a pre-existent soul. Especially are prophets sent from God. But above all Jesus is most properly "the sent of God," as he had the highest and most important commis

sion.

So John i. 6, "There was a man sent from God, whose name was John." Nevertheless none suppose, that John the Baptist came directly from heaven: but only, that he was inspired, and had a divine command to appear in the world, and bear witness concerning the Christ, who would come presently after him.

And the commission which our Lord gave to his apostles, is expressed by himself after this manner. John xvii. 18, "As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I sent them into the world." And xx. 21, "As my Father has sent me, so send I you."

66

But, as before said, Jesus is "the sent of God," as he had the highest commission. John iii. 34," He whom God has sent, speaketh the words of God." Chap. iv. 34, “ My meat is to do the will of him that sent me.' Chap. v. 38, "Ye have not his word abiding in you. For whom he has

sent, ye believe not." See also ver. 23, 24, 30, 34, 36. And x. 36,"Say ye of him, whom the Father has sanctified, and sent into the world, Thou blasphemest, because I said, I am the Son of God?" And in the history of the cure of the blind man, recorded in the ninth chapter of the same gospel, at ver. 7, " And said unto him: Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, which is by interpretation, Sent." Probably here is an allusion to our Lord's character, as "the sent of God." And there may be an intimation intended, that he is the Shiloh, spoken of in Gen. xlix. 10.

There are some other texts needful to be taken notice of here, John xiii. 3, "Jesus knowing that he was come from God, and went to God," or año Ɖeov eğŋλ0e. xvi. 27, “For the Father himself loveth you, because ye have loved me, and have believed that I came out from God," oτi εyw #apa TOV Deoν eğŋov. ver. 28, "I am come forth from the Father, and am come into the world. Again, I leave the world, and go to the Father.” Εξηλθον παρα του πατρος. This expression is explained in chap. viii. 42. Whence we perceive, that thereby is intended our Lord's divine commission. "Jesus said unto them: If God were your Father, ye would love me. For I proceeded forth, and came from God. Neither came I of myself, but he sent me." 'Eyw γαρ εκ του Θεου εξήλθον, και ηκω, κ. λα

The reproaches and contradictions which our Lord met with, and the sufferings of his death, are often set before us. But if the Logos, that high and exalted spirit, in the Arian sense, was the soul of Christ: this part of his humiliation, in clothing himself with an human body, would have been frequently represented and described in the clearest and most emphatical expressions.

Here, if I mistake not, is a proper place for setting down those observations upon this scheme, which reason may suggest, and were passed over before.

In the first place, I do not apprehend it possib'e that so glorious and perfect a spirit should undergo such diminution by being united to a human body, as to become thereby unconscious, or to be greatly enfeebled. I think, that if this spirit were to animate, and take upon it the part of a soul in a human body; its power, cogitation, and knowledge would subsist and remain, even in its infant state. In short, the human body would be swallowed up by this great soul. That soul would exert itself in the body, and sustain it with all facility, without rest, food, or any other

• Voyez cette façon de parler expliquée ci dessus, ch. viii. 42, par la mission. Lenfant upon John xvi. 27.

refreshment, against all pain and uneasiness, and every kind of infirmity. This, I say, would be the case, supposing so great a being to take upon it a human body. If an angel (as is supposed) can move with agility a material vehicle, made dense enough to be sensible to human eyes; what influence would not this powerful Logos have over the grossest human body? But this is not agreeable to fact, as represented in the New Testament: for there Jesus is said to have "increased in wisdom” as he grew up. And he had hunger and thirst, and was wearied with journeying, and had all the sinless infirmities of the human nature, and was subject to death.

But secondly, supposing this humiliation to be possible, I think, it could not be reasonable. It is not reasonable that so great a Being should submit to unconsciousness, or any such like debilitation. Consequently, it cannot be required by God. It is incongruous to all just notions of things, that any other spirit, beside a human soul, should be made subject to the infirmities of human flesh.

I forbear mentioning some things, which appear to me consequences from the Logos (in the Arian sense of that term) being the soul of our blessed Saviour. And, as they are not mentioned, they need not affect you, unless they should occur to your thoughts.

I now proceed to the introduction to St. John's gospel. For I believe, you may be of opinion, that I must not pass it by entirely, notwithstanding its difficulty. I will therefore explain it briefly, or a part of it at least, according to the best of my ability; still willing, however, to receive further light from any one that shall afford it.

"In the beginning was the Word." By "beginning," I think, cannot be intended the beginning of the gospel, but of the creation, or rather always, from eternity," was the Word. And the Word was with God:" that is, was always with God, though not fully manifested, till these last days of the world." And the Word was God." Kat Θεος nyo Aoyos. Which sometimes has been rendered thus: "And God was the Word." But there are learned men, who say, that then the Greek would have been, Kat o eos ny Aoyos: and, that the article being joined with Aoyos, therefore that is the antecedent, and our translation is right. Here I had been wont to submit to what Dr. Clarke says,

P 1 John i. 2, "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." 1 Tim. iii. 16, "And, without controversy, great is the mystery of godliness. God was manifest in the flesh."

66

The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity, P. I. numb. 535. Of these words there are only three interpretations. The 'first is, that the Word was that same person, whom he was 'with. And that is both a contradiction in terms, and also 'the ancient heresy of Sabellius.' But now that does not move me. I am of opinion, that God here is the same God that was mentioned before. St. John useth a gradation. First he says, "the Word was" always, before all time. Then he adds:" and was with God:" and lastly, that he was God" himself. What follows confirms this interpretation, ver. 3, "All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made." Who should this be, but God the Father, the one living and true God, and Author of life, and all being? Are there more creators than one? Would any Jew, or disciple of Jesus, ascribe the creation of the world to any but God, or his reason, or understanding, or discretion, his wisdom, his power, his word, his spirit, which is the same as God himself? Ver. 10," He was in the world, and the world was made by him." This needs no comment. Ver. 11, "He came to his own, and his own received him not." I pray whose people were the Jews, but God's, his, who styled himself Jehovah ? He now came, in Jesus, to his own people. But they received him not.

St. John therefore intends the one true God, not any inferior deity.

Shall I show this more particularly from other places of his gospel? It is observable, that St. John, out of the many discourses of Jesus, (a great part of which he has omitted, as appears from ch. xx. 30, 31. ch. xxi. 25.) has selected those, in which our Lord speaks very expressly of the commission, which he had received from the Father, and of his near and intimate union with him.

In all the gospels our Saviour ascribes his miracles to the Father, particularly in Luke xi. 20, and Matt. xii. 28. And the people do the same. "And when the multitude saw it, they marvelled, and glorified God, which had given such power unto men." Matt. ix. 8.

But in none of the gospels is this done so frequently, and so expressly, as in St. John's. Chap. v. 9, " The Son can do nothing of himself, but what he seeth the Father do:"

The creation of the world is always ascribed to the one living and true God, in the Old and New Testament. Gen. i. Exod. xx. 11. Job xxvi. 13, xxxviii. 4. Ps. xxxiii. 6. cxxxvi. 5-10. cxlvi. 5, 6. Is. xlii. 5. xlv. 12. li. 13. Jer. x. 12. li. 15. and elsewhere. Acts iv. 24. xiv. 15. xvii. 24. Rev. iv. 811. x. 6. xiv. 7.

and onward to ver. 27, and ver. 30-32, and ver. 36, 37, chap. viii. 18, "The Father that hath sent me, beareth witness of me." Ver. 28, 29, "When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know, that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself: but that as the Father has taught me, I speak these things. And he that sent me, is with me. The Father hath not left me alone. For I do always the things that please him." Ver. 42, " For I proceeded forth, and came from God. Neither came I of myself, but he sent me." Ver. 54," It is my Father that honoureth me, of whom ye say, that he is your God." Ch. x. 35, “ The works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me." Ver. 29, 30, "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all. And no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

This appears also in the discourses of others, recorded in this gospel, chap. iii. 2. Nicodemus says, "Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God. For no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him." And ch. ix. 30, “Herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not whence he is. And yet he hath opened my eyes." Ver. 33, "If this man were not of God, he could do nothing."

All these texts seem to me sufficient to satisfy us, that by "the Word," which St. John says, " was in the beginning, and was with God, and was God," he does not mean a being separate from God, and inferior to him, but God himself, or the wisdom and power of God, which is the same as God, even the Father, who alone is God, nor is there any other.

If by the Word, in the introduction to his gospel, St. John had intended a being separate from God, and inferior to him; it is reasonable to expect, that he should be mentioned again afterwards. But nothing of that kind appears. He speaks indeed of " the Son, and the only begotten Son of God." But thereby is not meant "the Word," but the inan Jesus, the Messiah, in whom" the Word," that is, the power and wisdom of God, resided.

I now therefore proceed, ver. 14. "And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us:" that is, as before shown, And the Word was made man, or took upon him the human nature.' "And we beheld his glory the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth." That is, And we beheld in Jesus such power and wisdom, that we could not doubt his being the Messiah.' That St. John intends the Lord Jesus, is evident from what he adds in the 15th verse. "John bare witness of him, and