modes of speech feem to imply and set forth that he was one to whom the word of God came, John x. 34, 35, 36. And as Jefus Chrift, according to the language of those times, was ftiled God, or a God; fo, in that view of the cafe, he was both God and man in one and the fame perfon, which was likewife the cafe of all those men to whom the word of God came; they were men, and they were likewife deputed Gods to those to whom they were fent, like as Mofes was deputed to be a God unto Pharoah, Exodus vii. I. And as Jefus Chrift being this, was fufficient to answer all the purposes that were answered by him whilst he was an inhabitant of this globe, and as this is all that can be supported by proper evidence, or that can with any propriety be determined concerning him, whilft we retain our conclufions within the bounds of truth and fobernefs; so every thing beyond this must, of neceffity, and from the very nature of the thing, be very doubtful and uncertain. For as every thing beyond this is grounded on fuch phrafes or modes of fpeech as have no fixed or determined fenfe, but may be underftood or ufed in a literal or figurative fense; and as we have no certain rule tọ

judge

judge by, whether the language referred to is to be understood literally or figuratively; fo from hence it will follow, that every thing grounded on this language, which exceeds the bounds before mentioned, muft, in the nature of the thing, be very doubtful and uncertain. Thus Chrift faid, John viii. 58. Before Abraham was, I am, [or I was.] From these words it may be inferred, that Christ, as an intelligent being, existed antecedent to his conception in the womb of his mother; but then, this conclufion, as inferred from those premises, must be doubtful and uncertain For as Chrift, by a figure of fpeech, in this very difcourfe with the Jews, ver. 56. faid of Abraham, that he had feen his (viz. Chrift's) day; when at most Abraham could only have believed in the promise (supposing fuch promise had been made) concerning it; fo, by a like figure of speech, and with equal justness and propriety, Chrift may also have faid of himself, that he was before Abraham, when he only was in the purpose and intention of God, and was the subject of that promise which Abraham had believed in; and therefore, Chrift's pre-existence cannot certainly be inferred from the words or premifes before men

tioned.

tioned. The cafe, I think, is the fame in all other inftances of like kind. This is farther evident from the many controverfies that have take place among Chriftians, from the beginning, or near the beginning of Chriftianity down to this time, with regard to this fubject; in which controverfies each party have been perplexed with difficulties they could not easily get clear of; and this alfo fhews the doubtfulness and uncertainty of what has been contended for, when it has exceeded the bounds before mentioned. Befides, fome of the writers of the new teftament have taken upon them to affert that of Jefus Chrift, of which it does not appear that they had any thing to ground those affertions upon, and of which the Jewish writings feem to afford at least a prefumptive argument of the contrary. Thus John i. 1, 2, 3. In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. The fame was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not any thing made that was made. Ephef. iii. 9. Who created all things by Jefus Chrift. Coloffians i. 16, 17. For by him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, vifible

and

and invifible; 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 confift. Here thefe writers feem to fet forth, (or elfe it is fcarce conceivable what they intend) that the world was at first created, and is continually upheld by the power and agency of Jefus Chrift; but then, these writers do not produce any kind of evidence, nor do they shew what they had to ground thefe affumptions upon; and therefore, they must stand for nought. The Hebrew hiftorian, in his account of the creation of the world, reprefents it to have been performed by the immediate power and agency of the Supreme Deity, independent of the agency or co-operation of any deputed, minifterial and fubordinate God. Thus Genefis i. 1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth, &c. Here we fee the work of creation is afcribed to God in the fingular number, exclufive of any fubftitute or co-efficient. Again, at verfe 3. And God faid, let there be light; and fo many other inftances. And tho', at verfe 26. the mode of fpeech is changed, and God is feemingly reprefented as addreffing him'VOL' II.

in

T

felf

felf to another, or others, as co-efficients in the creation of man, viz. Let us make man in our image, &c. yet it is plain nothing more could be intended, than if it had been expreffed in the fingular number, as before 5 because God could not poffibly stand more in need of help, either by way of counsel or power, in the creation of man, than in the creation of any other animal, or in the creation of this planet with all it's other inhabitants; and because, when this hiftorian came to make a repetition of the work of man's creation, he dropped thofe plurals, and expreffed himself in the fingular number, as at verse 27. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him, male and female created be them. Here, it is plain, the hiftorian confidered the creation of man to be folely and fingly the work of God,exclufive of any substitute,or co-efficient ; for had he apprehended the cafe to be otherwife, and that God, in the creation of man, had acted either by a fubftitute, or with a co-efficient or co-efficients, then he would most certainly have expreffed himself to this effect; [fo God, by his fubftitute, or with his co partners, created man in their own image, in their image created they him,

male