words, unquestionably, refer not to the origin of the world, but to the first promulgation of the gospel-and it can be proved by innumerable instances, that the substantive verb u, both in the present and past tenses, must signify to represent. "Thus when Christ says, this bread or is my body-this cup or is my blood; and when Paul says, Gal. iv. 25, this Agar or is Mount Sinai in Arabia; and v. 26, the Jerusalem from above ETH is Sarah; or in all these places, means represents.—Oros nv å λoyos must signify that the word was only a representative of God, or spake and acted in his name, and by his authority; whether the term 90s be understood of the true God, or of one commissioned and empowered by him.-If it be maintained that the Apostle John's assertion og nyo λoyos proves the Word or Jesus Christ to be truly God, the affirmation of the Apostle Paul, 1 Cor. x. 4. n de wetga nv ô Xgiorós, that rock was Christ, equally proves him to be an inanimate rock; and the assertion of Christ αυτός εστιν Ηλίας this is Elias, proves John the Baptist to be really Elias."

Whatever views Unitarian writers take of this subject, they have the merit at least of being intelligible. Not so our Athanasian friends. The instant they approach the first verses of John, they plunge headlong into an abyss of absurdities. They at once ascribe personality and Supreme Deity to the word, and thence it follows, that we must understand the Evangelist thus, In the beginning was the word, which word was the Supreme Deity; and the Word, that is the Supreme Deity, was with Godthat is with the Supreme Deity. And the Word was God, that is the Supreme Deity was the Supreme Deity! What man of common sense can suppose that the Apostle wrote to be understood thus? If the Word was a person and that person God, he must be God in a different sense from that God with whom he was, or else he was God in the same sense, a coequal and associate. This seems to be admitted and maintained, for we are told that one of them is God the Son, and the other God the Father-and each of them is God Supreme! Whence, it indubitably follows, that we have two Gods Supreme, (where is the third ?) contrary to the whole tenor of Scripture, which teaches that we have but one. Moreover, to affirm that one God was with another God, is to contradict the positive declaration of Jehovah himself that with him there is no God. "1, even 1, am HE, and there is no God with me.- -Deut. xxxii. 39. The Lord he is God; there is none else besides him.”—iv. 35. "Thus saith Jehovah-I am the first, and I am the last; and besides me there is no God: I know not any."—Isaiah, xliv. 6, 8.

SECTION NINTH.

No proof in Scripture that Christ is eternal and self-existent.

They who maintain what they call the Supreme Deity of Christ, miserably torture and misapply Scripture to support their hypothesis. But in vain do they labour to shew that he was possessed of any single attribute which properly belongs, in the highest sense, to Jehovah. The first proof of this position shall be taken from their attempts to prove him eternal and selfexistent, by a passage in the first chapter of the Hebrews.The object of the author, in this chapter, being to exalt Christ above all the preceding prophets and inspired messengers of God, he asks unto which of them did God at any time, say, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee? And again, I will be to him a Father and he shall be to me a Son? And again, when he bringeth in the first-begotten into the world, he saith, and let all the angels (or inspired messengers) of God worship him, (or do him homage.) And of the angels, (or messengers) he (or rather the Scripture) saith, who maketh his angels spirits (winds,) and his ministers a flame of fire. But unto the Son he saith, thy throne, O God, is (or God is thy throne) for ever and ever: a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of thy kingdom." Thus are intimated the stability and equity of the Messiah's reign. The next verse assigns the reason of Christ's exaltation, and of his favour with the Father. Thou hast loved righteousness and hated iniquity; therefore God, even THY GOD, hath anointed thee with the oil of gladness above thy fellows. Here ends the supposed address of the Father to the Son.The author of the Epistle then bursts into an apostrophe to Jehovah, borrowed from the 102d Psalm. "And thou, Lord, in the beginning, hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the works of thine hands: they shall perish; but thou remainest; and they all shall wax old as doth a garment; and as a vesture shalt thou fold them up, and they shall be changed: but thou art the same, and thy years shall not fail." These words, Trinitarian writers inform us, are applied to Christ, but by whom, except by themselves, is not very apparent. If they are to be considered as a continuation of the Father's address to the Son, then does one eternal being tell another eternal being, the palpable truism that his years shall not fail! Reason and common sense cannot discover any meaning or object in this; to say nothing of the unscriptural idea involved in such a supposition, that instead of the Eternal One, there are Eternal Two. We conclude then that the passage is not a continuance of the Father's address to the Son, but an apostrophe of the writer to the Father. The connexion of the ideas, indeed, is by no means perspicuous. The style is very elliptical, often

abstruse; nor is it easy to trace in it an uninterrupted current of thought. Notwithstanding, some circumstances lead us very decidedly to affirm that the verses in question, are addressed here by the author, as they were originally by David, to Jehovah. Their object in the Psalm from which they are borrowed, was to confirm the truth, "that the children of thy servants shall continue, and their seed shall be established before thee." With a similar view are they cited here, to prove from the permanence and immutability of the eternal ONE, the durable nature of the spiritual kingdom which he established by the agency of the Son. What Hebrew, and the Epistle is to Hebrews, could possibly suppose them applicable to any one but his own Jehovah, the Father everlasting, who, in the beginning, created the heavens and the earth-"who stretcheth forth the heavens alone, that spreadeth abroad the earth by himself?—Is. xliv. 24. Emlyn observes that this, though a new citation, is not prefaced with but unto the Son he saith, as v. 8, or with and again, as v. 5, 6, and ii. 13, but barely, And thou Lord. Now the God last mentioned was Christ's God who had anointed him; and the author thereupon, addressing himself to this God, breaks out into the celebration of his power, and especially of his unchangeable duration." The same learned divine proceeds to shew "that no one ancient writer ever applied the words to Christ, during the three first centuries; and Dr. Waterland does not pretend that they were ever so applied till the fourth or fifth." The verses which precede the passage in question show, as clearly as language can well express, the inferiority and subordination of Christ. They tell us that God hath spoken by him, and of course he is God's agent or minister, whom he hath appointed heir of all things-by whom he hath made the Eons, or Ages, not the worlds composing the material system, as some erroneously imagine, but that particular dispensation of which Christ was the author; a truth of some im

*

This translation may

Heb, i. 2-" By whom also he made the worlds," mislead the English reader, not only into a belief that Christ was the instrument by which the Creator formed this earth, but also a plurality of worlds; where the word Alava; has been clearly shown not to refer to the material system at all, but to that particular dispensation of which Christ was the author. Wakefield and Doddrige render the term ages, and the Latin Vulgate, and the Latin rendering of the Syriac and Arabic, is "sæcula."

"Atay in the New Testament, whether in the singular or plural, always denotes some portion of time. The plural number is often used by the Hebrews for the singular superlative; and in the epistle to the Hebrews it is often used to express the superior excellence of many particulars relative to the Christian covenant. In four chapters of this epistle the Greek plural is rendered nine times in the singular in the English version. Alavas in Heb. i. 2, should also be rendered in the singular, viz. the age, by way of eminence and distinction, meaning the age of the Messiah." See this subject fully and most satisfactorily illustrated by Simpson, in his Essays on the Language of Scripture.

H

*

portance for us to understand. Even the address of the Father to the Son, in the 8th and 9th verses, demonstrates the superiority of the former. This address is borrowed from the xlv Psalm, and was originally a part of Solomon's Epithalamium, on his marriage with Pharaoh's daughter; and a small portion of this "Song of Loves," as it is characteristically entitled, is, in this chapter of the Hebrews, very properly accommodated to Christ, who, as well as Solomon, was a son, or descendant, of David. If the words were applicable to Solomon, much more were they applicable to Christ, for "behold a greater than Solomon is here!" Dr. Young, a scholar and divine, not less distinguished by profound erudition than by elegance of taste, renders the words in the Psalm, "thy throne, O PRINCE;" and this translation, assuredly, conveys the meaning of the original much more truly than our common English version.

However just and appropriate the application of these verses to Christ, they can have none to the Eternal and Almighty ONE. He has no God-he cannot be appointed to any office ;-appointment implies a greater and a less; he cannot be made the agent of any other he cannot be anointed-and he can have no fellows.

Trinitarians find a proof of CHRIST'S SELF-EXISTENCE in his declaration to the Jews, John viii. 58, before Abraham was, I am. This expression, when properly understood, will be found in. capable of affording even the shadow of an argument in favour of that doctrine. What is meant by "the lamb slain from the foundation of the world?" Rev. xiii. 8. What does the Apostle teach when he says, "God hath chosen us before the foundation of the world?" Eph. i. 4. And again, he affirms of God, that he "hath saved us and called us, with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began." 2 Tim. i. 9.

With what propriety it is called a song of loves 7' 7' let the reader determine after he has contemplated its rich and glowing imagery-the bridegroom clad in his royal panoply, and the bride in her robes of wrought gold and needle-work, exhaling perfumes of myrrh, aloes, and cassia-the palace of ivory, and the bridal train of virgins. This Psalm is applied, like Solomon's song, by mystic divines, to the mystic union of Christ and his church. "The bridegroom," says Horsley, "is the conquering Messiah, the bride, the church catholic, or, perhaps, the church of the converted Jews, become the metropolitical church of all Christendom, and the virgin's companions are the other churches!" How erudite and instructive the lucubrations of mystic theology!

+ From being a Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, he was promoted to the bishopric of Clonfert but unfortunately for the cause of Biblical learning, did not long live to enjoy his episcopal honours.

The original word is elohim, commonly translated God. It is a striking instance of the application of the term to men of rank and distinction. As it is rendered 90s, God, in Heb. i. 8, it also happily exemplifies the subordinate sense in which the word God is sometimes to be understood.

How, it may be asked, could the lamb be slain before the creas tion, or we be chosen, called, and saved, and have grace imparted to us, before we came into existence ? An orthodox writer, Dwight, shall answer. Every being and every event which has been, or will be, with all their qualities and operations, existed in his (God's) mind; or in the beautiful language of David, were written in his book, and what day they should be fashioned, when as yet there was none of them." Yes, the inspired writers too, speak of that which in past ages was ordained to be, as having actually occurred; because its occurrence being determined by the immutable counsels of God, was as certain as if it had already 'come to pass. To a prophet under the influence of inspiration, what has been, and what shall be, is. To his gifted vision, those scenes which lie far behind, or far forward in the pilgrimage of time, seem to be brought nearer. The cloud brooding over them is, for a moment, dispersed. He contemplates them amidst a coruscation of celestial light, and he describes them not as the images of the past or future, but as the realities of the present.

Even in ordinary discourse, future events, deemed certain, are spoken of as already present. Jonathan said to David, “to-morrow is, (will be) the new moon." 1 Sam. xx. 18. Thus our Lord says, "Ye know that after two days is (will be) the passover, and the Son of Man is (will be) betrayed." Mat. xxvi. 2. "Ye have been (ors, literally, ye are) with me, from the beginning." John xv. 27. Past events are also spoken of as present, particularly by poets, historians, and all descriptive writers, and animated speakers. Thus, Stephen, speaking of the miracles wrought by Moses in achieving Israel's redemption from the bondage of Egypt, says, "This is that Moses." Acts vii. 37. Thus our Lord says, "Elias, indeed, doth first come," or is coming; for in the original, the present tense is used, and not the future, as in the common version, (Mat. xvii. 11;) whereas Elias, or John the Baptist, of whom the disciples understood that he spake, had long since arrived. Wakefield says, that "the peculiar use of the present tense, in the usage of Scriptural expressions, is to imply determination and certainty:" and therefore our Lord says, I am*

Id est eram, præsens pro imperfecto, Eram, Syrus: yw λov [ego eram] Nonnus. Sic in Græco Psalm, xc. 2. Пg vα opn yevvndnvær ov ei. [Antequam fierent montes tu es] Fuerat ante Abrahamum Jesus divina constitutione, înfra, xvii. 5. Apocal. xiii. 8—1 Petr. i. 20, Constat hoc, quia de ipso ipsiusqué Ecclesia mystice dictum erat, recente humano genere, futurum ut semen muliebre contereret caput serpentis, ut exponitur, Rom. xvi. 20. Unde • simul intelligitur huncce hominem Iesum majorem esse Abrahamo; quod ipse innuere quam prædicare mavult. Grot in loc.

"The reference which has to the conjunction we in John viii. 58, clearly shows, that the verb, though in the present tense, should be interpreted of the past, in which sense it frequently occurs.' -SIMPSON.