Page images
[ocr errors]

tinued). with me from the beginning. Thus Nonnus, 'Ez agxãs yela TES Rw Inútoges šefw. John. 6. 24. "Oto gv sidsy idxae te 'inošs &xisin inn. When the people saw that Jesus was not there. Nor only doth s. John use thus the prerent tense for that which is paft, but as frequently for that which is to come. For as before, TocTV xe voy ket'i näy ever To on the contrary to mixegin wegvov pedes omãr cips, John 7. 33. and #8 dpi éya, enő wy • Alexovó frös ison; John 12. 26. 14. 3. 17.24. Wherefore it is very indifferent whether (John 7. 34.) we read, # i sya, or us. For Nonnus seems to have read it sipes by his tranflation, ris áteato weg odocow and the question, Wä sr@ méines won esteak; news they understood it so: for this ople, though of a present form, is of a future fignification. Hefych. Eius;

cód. And so it agreeth with that which follows, John 8. 21.078 igu iwdyw, Onsis y ducate saber. If we pead sini, as the old translation, ubi ego sum, it will have the force of around, and agree with the other, üye om 8 timer

ya. ac vuess its' Howsoever it is clear, S. John ufeth the present sipi either in relation to what is paft, or what is to come, and is therefore to be interpreted as the matter in hand requireth. And certainly the place now under our consider ration can admit no other relation but to the time already paft, in which Abraham lived. And we find the present tense in the same manner joined with the Aorist elsewhere : as Plal9o. 2. weg og ógn afumbluar, rj what lan egiten ylü si ain sullóki, sci dirà añv, ľws og añv @ Cu 6. What can be more parallel than, weg Tð önce gforbliñou, to wei Apocra ales, avid cu el, to, ég á fimi; in the same manner, though by another word, weg olgu ndegat liwan, we z wymowy Byo vão, afurçć pees Prov. 8. 25.


maintaineth, and the nature of the place absolutely requireth, that it should not here denote a present being, but a priority of existence, together with a continuation of it till the present time." And then the words will plainly fignify thus much :. do you question how I could see Abraham, who am not yet fifty years old ? Verily, verily, I fay unto you, * Before ever Abraham, * So the # the person whom you speak of, was born, I had a real being and existence, thiopick Ver

ence, fion, Amen (by which I was capable of the sight of him) in which I have continued un- dico vobis, til now. In this sense certainly the Jews understood our Saviour's answer, priufquam Aas pertinent to their question, but in their opinion blasphemous; and there-ceretur, fui

* braham naffore they took up stones to cast at him.,..

ego ; and the This literal and plain explication is yet farther necessary ; because those Persian, Vere,

vere vobis diwho once recede from it, do not only wrest and pervert the place, but also co, quod invent and suggest an answer unworthy of and wholly misbecoming him nondum Athat spake it. For (setting aside the addition of the light of the world, erat, cum ego

braham factus which there can be no † Thew or reafon to admit ;) whether they interpret eram. the former part (before Abraham was) of something to come, as the call. This is the Jing of the Gentiles, or the latçer (I am) of a pre-existence in the divine Socinians, foreknowledge and appointment; they represent Christ with a great asseve- who make ration highly and strongly asserting that which is nothing to the purpose to Christelle which he speaks, nothing to any other purpose är all; and they propound cal, and then the Jews senfelesly offended and foolishly exasperated with those words, Supply it from

''the 12th Verse. which any of them might have spoken as well as he. For the first inter- I am the light pretation makes our Saviour thus to speak : Do you so much wonder how of the world. I should have seen Abraham, who am not yet fifty years old ? Do ye image

má Quod verò

ca verba, Ega gine so great a contradiction in this? I tell you, and be ye most assured fum, fint ad that what I fpeak unto you at this time is most certainly and infallibly eum moduni. true, and most worthy of your observation, which moves me not to deli- ti ipfe fubjever it without this folemn asseveration, (Verily, verily, I say unto you) ciffet iis, Égo Before Abraham shall perfectly become that which was signified in his name, iubernura

& sum lux munthe father of many Nations, before the Gentiles shall come in, I am. Nor principio ejus be ye troubled at this anfwer, or think in this I magnify my self: for what orationis, v. I speak is as true of you, as 'cis of me; before Abrahání be thus made quod Chrißus Abraham, ye are. Doubt ye not therefore, as ye did, nor ever make that bis seipsum question again, whether I have seen Abraham. The second explication iifdem, Ego

"sum, lucem makes a sense of another nature, but with the same impertinency. "Do ye mundi vocacontinue still tó question, and that with so much admiration? Do you look verit, v: 24. upon my age, and ask, ft thou feen Abraham? I confess 'tis more thane

an & 28. depre

Catech. Racou. Whereas there is no ground for any such connection. That discourse of the light of the world was in the treasury, V. 20. that which follower b. was not, at least appeareth not to be fo. Therefore the ellipfis of the 24. and 28. verfes is not to be fupplied by the 12, but the 24, from the 13. iya in of vabiy time, and the 28, either from the same, or that which is most general, his office, eyed siner • xersos. Again, $.31. 'tis very probable that a new discourse is again begun, and therefore if there were an ellipsis in the words alledged, it would have no relation to either of the former supplies, or if to either, to the latter; but indeed it bath to neither.


eighteen hundred years since that Patriarch died, and less than forty since I was born at Bethlehem : but look not on this computation, for before

Abraham was born, I was. But mistake me not, I mean in the foreknowledge and decree of God. Nor do I magnify my self in this, for ye were fo. How either of these answers should give any reasonable satisfaction to the question, or the least occasion of the Jews exasperation, is not to be understood. And that our Saviour should speak any such impertinencies as these interpretations bring forth, is not by a Christian to be conceived. Wherefore being the plain and most obvious sense is a proper and full answer to the question, and most likely to exasperate the unbelieving Jews; being those strained explications render the words of Christ, not only im

to the occasion, but vain and useless to the hearers of them ; being our Saviour gave this answer in words of another language, most probably uncapable of any such interpretations: We must adhere unto that literal fense already delivered, by which it appeareth Christ had a being, as before John, so also before Abraham, (not only before Abram became Abraham, but before Abraham was Abram) and consequently that he did exist two thousand years before he was born, or conceived by the Virgin.

Thirdly, we shall extend this pre-existence to a far longer space of time, to the end of the first world, nay, to the beginning of it. For he which was before the Flood, and at the Creation of the world, had a being before he was conceived by the Virgin. But Christ was really before the Flood, for he preached to them that lived before it ; and at the Creation of the world, for he crea

ted it. That he preached to those before the Flood, is evident by the words 1 Pet. 3. 18, of S. Peter, who faith, that Christ was put to death in the Flesh, but quick19, 20.

ned by the Spirit ; By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison, which sometimes were disobedient, when once the long-suffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the Ark was a preparing. From which words it appeareth, that Christ preached by the fame Spirit by the virtue of which he was raised from the dead: but that Spirit was not his Soul, but

something of a greater power. Secondly, that those to whom he preached Anubrozdí were such as were disobedient. Thirdly, that the time when they were dif30%, teá obedient was the time before the Flood, while the Ark was preparing. It is παξ εξεδίχε ο juos to certain then that Christ did preach unto those persons which in the days of regovuice c Noah were disobedient all that time the long-suffering of God waited, and guiogis Nãe.

consequently, so long as repentance was offered." And it is as certain that he never preached to them after they died; which I shall not need here to prove, because those against whom I bring this Argument deny it not. It followeth therefore, that he preached to them while they lived, and were disobedient; for in the refusing of that mercy which was offered to them by the preaching of Christ, did their disobedience principally consist. In vain then are we taught to understand S. Peter of the promulgation of the Gospel to the Gentiles after the Holy Ghost descended upon the Apostles, when the words themselves refuse all relation to any such times or persons. For all those of whom S. Peter speaks, were disobedient in the days of Noah. But none of those to whom the Apostles preached, were ever disobedient in the days of Noah. Therefore none of those to which the Apostles preached were any of those of which S. Peter speaks. It remaineth therefore that the plain interpretation be acknowledged for the true, that Christ did preach unto those Men which lived before the Flood, even while they lived, and consequently that he was before it. For though this was not done by an immediate act of the Son of God, as if he perlonally had appeared on earth, and actually preached to that old world; but

by the * ministry of a Prophet, by the fending of Noah, a the eighth preacher * Propheta of righteousness: yet to do any thing by another not able to perform it ab ipfo ha

obentes dowithout him, as much demonstrates the existence of the principal cause, as if num in illum he did it of himself without any interveniug instrument.


runt. Bari.abe Fpift. & 2 Pet. 2. 5. I have thus translated this place of S. Peter, because it may add some advantage to the argument: fir it Noah were the eighth Preacher of Righteousness, and he were sent by the Son of God; no man, I conceive. will deny it the seven before him were sent by the same son: and so by this, we have gained the pre-existence of another 1000 years. However those worils, analogdoor Na Dixclowing xáguxe épinage, may be better interpreted than they are, when we franllate them, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness. For, first, if we look upon the Greek Pbrale.

y Nãs, may not be the eighth person, but one of eight, or Noah with seven more ; in which it flanifesh not ibe order in which he was in respect of the rest, but only con-signifieth the number which were with him. As when we read in the supplices of Æschylus, To g5 Texóv ]Ww C1500s, Teltov tódo cu Secuiors dinas géloor) melisoline, we must not understand it, as if Honour due to Parents were the third Commandment at Athens, but one of the three remarkable Laws left at Eleusis by Triptolemus. So Porphyrius, Deri Örg Teló neuloy 'Aelwachois vonobeTöru, reg op vórwy w reas to Eevor PTT, Pixócopa dilue despues 'Ensurive ti's od roves tirãr Oirs xuberois clonaev Zwc civeat. De abftinent. I. 4. K bich words are thus translated by St. Hierom, who hath made use of most part of that fourth Book of Porphyrius: Xenocrates Philosophus de Triptolemi legibus apud Athenienses tria tantum præcepta in Templo Eleusinæ refidere fcribit ; Honorandos Parentes, Venerandos Deos, Carnibus nch vescendum. adv. Jovinian. I. 2. Where we fee Honour due to Parents the first precept, though by Eschylus called the third, not in respect of the order, but the number. Thus Dinarchus the Orator, Και τας Σεμνας θεας ας κάνει με ρ9ποιος καλαςας δεκαλG- αυτός. From whence ue mut not collect that the beron of whom he speaks was the tenth in order of that office, so that nine were necessarily before or above him, and many more might be after or below him, but from hence it is inferred, that there were ten is 09 Oloi waiting on the suyas Secci, and no more, of which number that man was one. After this manner speak the Attick Writters, especially Thucydides. And ro we may understand s. Peter, that God preserved Noah (a preacher of righteousness) with seven more, of which he deserveth to be named the first, rather than the last or eighth. But, fecondly, the Ordinalóg dooy may possibly not belong to the name or person of Noah, but to his title or office ; and then we must translate, or doov NõE o ixonocuirs creuxa, Noah the eighth preacher of righteousness. For we read at the birth of Enos, that men began to call upon the name of the Lord. Gen. 4. 26. which the ancients understood peculiarly of his person : as the LXX. ŠTO ŽATITEV TINERE at To óyouce Kveis ao Oig, and the vulgar Latin, lite cæpit invocare nomen Doinini. The Jews have a tradition, that God sent in the Sea upon mankind in the days of Enos, and destroyed many. From whence it seems Enos was a Preacher or Prophet, and so the rest that followed him; and then Noah is the eighth.

The second part of the Argument; that Christ made this world, and confequently had a real being at the beginning of it, the Scriptures .inanifestly and plentifully assure us. For the fame Son, by whom in these last days God Hel. 1. 2. Spake unto us, is he, by whom also be made the worlds. So that as through Heb. 11.3. faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, lo 'must we t also believe that they were made by the Son of God. Which the f It being in Apostle doth not only in the entrance of his Epistle deliver, but in the fe- both placesex

pressed in the que prove. For shew greater things have b en of him than ever been

er same phrase by were attributed to any of the Angels, the most glorious of all the Creatures the same auof God; amongst the rest he faith, the Scripture spake a Vnto the Son, thy thor di es ne ta's

Ο αιώνας εποίηThrone, O God, is for ever and ever. And not only so, but also, Thou, -20, Heb. 1.7. Lord, in the beginning haft laid the foundation of the earth, and the hea- vises vos pelos vens are the work of thine hands. They shall perish, but thou remainelt : matngreat tas and they all shall wax old as doth a garment ; and as a vesture shalt thou Org.*** fold them up, and they shall be changed; but thou art the same, and thy "Heb. 1. 8,10,

11, 12. years shall not fail. Now whatsoever the person be to whom these words were spoken, it cannot be denied but he was the Creator of the world. For he must be acknowledged the maker of the earth, who laid the foundation of it; and he may justly challenge to himself the making of the Heavens, who can say they are the work of his hands. But these words were spoken to the Son of God, as the Apostle himself acknowledgeth, and it appeareth out of the order and series of the Chapter; the design of which is to declare the supereminent excellency of our Saviour Christ. Nay, the conjunction And refers this place of the Pfalmift | plainly to the former, of which he had said expreslly, fThe Answer but unto the Son be faith. As sure then as Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and of Socinus to

a this Conjunever, was said unto the Son: fo certain it is, Thou, Lord, hast laid the foun-fhion is very dations of the earth, was said unto the fame. Nor is it possible to avoid the weak, relying

only upon the want of a Comma after Kod in the Greek, and Et in the Latin. And whereas it is evident that there are distinctions in the Larin and Greek Copies after that Conjunction, he flies to the ancientest Copies, which all men know were moli careless of distinctions, and urgeth that there is no addition of rursum or the like after Et, whereas in the Syriack Translation we find exprely that addition Zinn



Apostle's connexion by attributing the destruction of the Heavens, out of the
lait words to the Son, and denying the Creation of them, out of the first, tó
the same. For it is most evident that there is but one person spoken to, and
that the Destruction and the Creation of the Heavens are both attributed to
the same. Whosoever therefore shall grant that the Apostle produced this
Scripture to shew that the Son of God ihall destroy the Heavens, must with-
al acknowledge that he created them: whosoever denieth him to be here
spoken of as the Creator, must also deny him to be understood as the De-
stroyer. Wherefore being the words of the Pfalmift were unde
ken of and to our Saviour, (or else the Apostle hath attributed that unto him
which never belonged to him, and consequently the spirit of S. Paul mi-
stook the spirit of David ;) being to whomsoever any part of them belongs,
the whole is applicable, because they are delivered unto one ; being the li-
teral exposition is so clear that no man hath ever pretended to a metaphori-
cal: it remaineth as an undeniable truth, grounded upon the profession of
the Pfalmist, and the interpretation of an Apostle, that the Son of God crea-
ted the world. Nor needed we so long to have insisted upon this testimo-
ny, because there are so many which testifie as much, but only that this is of
a peculiar nature and different from the rest. For they which deny this truth
of the Creation of the world by the Son of God, notwithstanding all those
Scriptures produced to confirm it, have found two ways to avoid or de-
cline the force of them. If they speak so plainly and literally of the work
of Creation, that they will not endure any figurative interpretation,
they endeavour to thew that they are not spoken of the Son of God. If
they speak fo expressly of our Saviour Christ, as that by no machination
they can be applied to any other person, then their whole design is to make
the Creation attributed unto him appear to be merely metaphorical. The
place before alledged is of the first kind, which speaketh so clearly of the
Creation or real production of the world, that they never denied it : and I
have so manifestly thewed it fpoken to the Son of God, that it is beyond all
possibility of gain-faying.

Thus having asserted the Creation acknowledged real unto Christ, we shall

the easier perfuade thar likewise to be such which is pretended to be metaphoCol. 1. 14. rical. In the Epistle to the Colossians we read of the Son of God, in whom

we have redemption through his blood; and we are sure those words can

be spoken of none other than Jesus Chrift. He therefore it must be who Col. 1.15,16, was thus described by the Apostle ; who 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 in earth, visible and invisible; whether they be thrones cr 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 confift. In which words our Saviour is expressly stiled the *The firfborn * first born of every Creature, that is, begotten by God, as the † Son of his of every crea- in

nacions, before any thing proceede ture is taken wove, antecedent

I from by Origen for him, or was framed and created by him. And that precedency is presentdeclaring the

che ly proved by this undeniable Argument, that all other emanations or proDivinity of ductions came from him, and whatsoever received its being by Creation, Christ, and wa

was by him creared. Which assertion is delivered in the most proper, full, used by him arabyaletin and pregnant expressions imaginable. First, in the vulgar phrase of Mofes, opposition to as most consonant to his description; for by him were all things created that his Humanity are in heaven, and that are in earth; signifying thereby, that he speaketh to express the fame.

of the same Creation. Secondly, by a division which Mofes never used, as Exstopps se ev toãs évwéw, ori ai név tives cici Quvad tä с' van 'Ivog w09767648 walons xlitews, as ,, 'Elw eins sj odos, se schádeta seg (wri, rj ai Tótons aanhoices' ui ö rõ xa7' autor nos ufus évoir, ais , Nui ö ME SIGTE dnxtbūve, avogatov os mensa desav opir dendanud. lib. 2. adv. Celfum. f In relation to che precedent words, of alonus auty, for that jos dileta antos was the jos a mózexu.



describing the production only of corporeal substances : left therefore those
immaterial beings might seem exempted from the Son's Creation, because
omitted in Moses his description, he addeth visible and invisible ; and left
in that invisible world, among the many degrees of the celestial Hierarchy,
any Order might seem exempted from an essential dependence upon him, he
nameth those which are of greatest eminence, whether they be thrones, or
dominions, or principalities, or powers, and under them comprehendeth all
the rest. Nor doth it yet fuffice, thus to extend the object of his power by
asserting all things to be made by him, except it be so understood as to ac-
knowledge the fovereignty of his Person, and the authority of his Action.
For left we should conceive the Son of God framing the World as a mere
instrumental cause which worketh by and for another, he sheweth him as
well the final as the efficient cause ; for all things were created by him and
for him. Lastly, whereas all things first receive their being by creation,
and when they have received it, continue in the same by virtue of God's
conservation, in whom we live, and move, and have our being ; lest in
any thing we should be thought not to depend immediately upon the Son
of God, he is described as the Conserver, as well as the Creator ; for he
is before all things, and by him all things confift. If then we consider
the two lalt cited verles by themielves, we cannot deny but they
compleat description of the Creator of the World ; and if they were fpo-
ken of God the Father, could be no way injurious to his Majesty, who
is no where more plainly or fully set forth unto us as the Maker of the

Now although this were sufficient to persuade us to interpret this place of the making of the World, yet it will not be unfit to make use of another reason, which will compel us so to understand it. For undoubtedly there are but two kinds of Creation in the language of the Scriptures, the one literal, the other metaphorical; one old, the other new ; one by way of formation, the other by way of reformation. If any man be in Christ he is 2 Cor. 5. 17. a new creature, faith S. Paul; and again, In Christ Jesus neither cir- Gal. 6. 15. cumcifion availeth any thing, nor uncircumfion, but a new creature. In- and 5. 6. stead of which words he had before, faith working by love. For we are the Ephef. 2. 10. workmanship of God, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God. bath before ordained that we should walk in them. From whence it is evident, that a new creature is such a person as truly believeth in Chrift, and manifesteth that faith by the exercise of good works; and the new Creation is the reforming or bringing man into this new condition, which by nature and his first Creation he was not in. And therefore he which is so created is called a new man, in opposition to the old man, which is corrupt according Ephef. 4. 22, to the deceitful lusts : From whence the Apostle chargeth us to be renewed 23, 24. in the spirit of our mind, and to put on that new man, which after God is Col. 3. 10. created in righteousness and true holiness; and which is renewed in known ledge, after the image of him that created him. The new Creation then is described to us as consisting wholly in * renovation, or a translation from * Apcové mises or a worse unto a better condition by way of reformation; by which those ay orcówrisas which have lost the image of God, in which the first man was created, are ne rema

or the new man restored to the image of the same Gcd again, by a real change, though not r@, armarvos substantial, wrought within them. Now this being the notion of the new divêqwn. Th

firsi dverek's Creation in all those places which undoubtedly and confessedly speak of it, , the last it will be necessary to apply it unto such Scriptures as are pretended to require o dvaxasvá metethe same interpretation. Thus therefore I proceed. If the second or new. rame. Suidas. 'Avexaétoris, o davéwois nélig ö s cvanaiywais: which is the language of the New Testament.' This Renovation being thus called καινη κλίσις, the Ancients framed a proper word for it, which is, ανάκλισις· ν και γίνε και πάνων τ ω ανθρώπους και τ' Yuxli xj Ty To Carece xocxây dvosgeris. Just. qu. Refp. ad Græcos. This new creation doth fo necessarily infer an altera. tion, that it is called by S. Paul a Metamorphosis; melapopošto tñ araxauyaog tõ voos vuwy. Rom. 12. 2.



« PreviousContinue »