together with a continuation of it till the present time. And then the words will plainly signify thus much: 'Do you question how I could see Abraham, who am not yet fifty years old? Verily, verily, I say unto you, before* ever Abraham, the person whom you speak of, was born, I had a real being and existence (by which I was capable of the sight of him), in which I have continued until now.' In this sense certainly the Jews understood our Saviour's answer, as pertinent to their question, but in their opinion blasphemous; and therefore "they took up stones to cast at him." (John viii. 59.)

This literal and plain explication is yet farther necessary; because those who once recede from it, do not only wrest and pervert the place, but also invent and suggest an answer unworthy of and wholly misbecoming him that spake it. For (setting aside the addition of the light of the world, which there can be no shew of reason to admit),+ whether they interpret the former part (" before Abraham was") of something to come, as the calling of the Gentiles, or the latter ("I am") of a preexistence in the divine foreknowledge and appointment; they represent Christ with a great asseveration, highly and strongly asserting that which is nothing to the purpose to which he speaks, nothing to any other purpose at all; and they propound the Jews senselessly offended and foolishly exasperated with those words, which any of them might have spoken as well as he. For the first interpretation makes our Saviour thus speak : 'Do you so much wonder how I should have "seen Abraham,' who am "not yet fifty years old?" (John viii. 57.) Do ye imagine so great a contradiction in this? I tell you, and be ye most assured that what I speak unto you at this time, is most certainly and infallibly true, and most worthy of your observation, which moves me not to deliver it without this solemn asseveration ("Verily, verily, I say unto you"), before Abraham shall perfectly become that which was signified in his name, "the father of many nations," (Gen. xvii. 4.) before the Gentiles shall come in," I am." Nor be ye troubled at this answer, or think in this I magnify myself: for what I speak is as true of

* So the Æthiopic Version: Amen dico vobis, priusquam Abraham nasceretur, fui ego;' and the Persian: Vere, vere vobis dico, quod nondum Abraham factus erat, cum ego eram.'

+ This is the shift of the Socinians, who make this speech of Christ elliptical, and then supply it from the 12th verse. "I am the light of the world." Quod vero ea verba, Ego sum, sint ad eum modum supplenda, ac si ipse subjecisset iis, Ego sum lux mundi, superius e principio ejus orationis, ver. 12., et hinc quod Christus bis seipsum iisdem, Ego sum, lucem mundi vocaverit,ver. 24.et 98.deprehendi potest.' Catech, Racov. Sect. iv. c. i. p. 57. Where

as there is no ground for any such connexion. That discourse of the light of the world was in the treasury, ver. 20. that which followeth was not, at least appeareth not to be so. Therefore the ellipsis of the 24th and 28th verses is not to be supplied by the 12th, but the 24th, from the 23d, iy in Tav ärædiv elu, and the 28th, either from the same, or that which is most general, his office, iy ɛiju ó Xgorós. Again, ver. 31. it is very probable that a new discourse is again begun, and therefore if there were an ellipsis in the words alleged, it would have no relation to either of the former supplies, or if to either, to the latter; but indeed it hath to neither.

you, as it is of me; before Abraham be thus made Abraham, ye are. Doubt ye not therefore, as ye did, nor ever make that question again, whether I "have seen Abraham". The second explication makes a sense of another nature, but with the same impertinency: Do ye continue still to question, and that with so much admiration? Do you look upon my age, and ask, "Hast thou seen Abraham ?" I confess it is more than 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 myself in this, for ye were so.' 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 impertinences 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 impertinent 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 incapable of any such interpretations we must adhere unto that literal sense 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 created it. That he preached to those before the flood, is evident by the words of St. Peter, who saith, that Christ "was put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit; by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison, which sometimes were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the Ark was a preparing." (1 Pet. iii. 18-20.) From which words it appeareth that Christ preached by the same 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, were such as were disobedient. Thirdly, That the time when they were disobedient, was the time before the flood, while the ark was preparing.* It is cer

* Απειθήσασί ποτε, ὅτε ἅπαξ ἐξεδέχετο ἡ τοῦ Θεοῦ μακροθυμία ἐν ἡμέραις Νώε.

tain then that Christ did preach unto those persons, which in the days of Noah were disobedient, all that time "the long-suffering of God waited," and 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 St. 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 St. 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 whom the apostles preached, were ny of those of whom St. 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 personally had appeared on earth, and actually preached to that old World; but by the ministry of a prophet,* by the sending of Noah, the eighth preacher of righteousness: (2 Pet. ii. 5.)† yet to do any thing by another

t I have thus translated this place of St. Peter, because it may add some advantage to the argument: for if Noah were the eighth preacher of righteousness, and he were sent by the Son of God; no man, I conceive, will deny that the seven before him were sent by the same Son and so by this we have gained the pre-existence of another thousand years. However, those words, ἀλλ ̓ ὄγδοον Νῶε δικαιοσύνης κήρυκα ἐφύλαξε, may be better interpreted than they are, when we translate them, but saved Noah the eighth person, a preacher of righteousness. For, first, if we look upon the Greek phrase, čydoos Nãe, may not be the eighth person, but one of eight, or Noah with seven more; in which it signifieth not the 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 Eschylus, v.

715.

ment at Athens, but one of the three remarkable laws left at Eleusis by Triptolemus. So Porphyrius: dari dè nai Tesπτόλεμον Αθηναίοις νομοθετῆσαι, καὶ τῶν νόμων αὐτοῦ τρεῖς ἔτι Ξενοκράτης ὁ φιλόσοφος λέγει διαμένειν Ἐλευσῖνι τούσδε· Γονεῖς τιμᾷν Θεοὺς καρποῖς ἀγάλλειν· Ζῶα μὴ σίνεσθαι. De Abstinent, ab Anim. Esu, 1. iv. ad fin. Which words are thus translated by St. Jerome, 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 residere scribit; Honorandos Parentes, Venerandos Deos, Carnibus non vescendum.' adv. Jovinian. 1. ii. col. 528. Where we see 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: Καὶ τὰς Σεμνὰς θεάς αἷς ἐκεῖνος ἱεροποιὸς καταστὰς δέκατος aurés. From whence we must not collect that the person 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 isgorac waiting on the Zepeval Seal, and no more, of which num

not able to perform it without him, as much demonstrates the existence of the principal cause, as if he did it of himself without any intervening instrument.

The second part of the argument, that Christ made this World, and consequently had a real being at the beginning of it, the Scriptures manifestly and plentifully assure us. For the same Son, "by whom in these last days God spake unto us, is he, by whom also he made the worlds." (Heb. i. 2.) So that as "through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God," (Heb. xi. 3.) so must we also believe that they were made by the Son of God.* Which the apostle doth not only in the entrance of his epistle deliver, but in the sequel prove. For shewing greater things have been spoken of him than ever were attributed to any of the angels, the most glorious of all the creatures of God; amongst the rest he saith, the Scripture spake," Unto the Son, Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever. And not only so, but also, Thou, Lord, in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work 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." (Heb. i. 8. 10-12.) 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 Psalmistt plainly to the former, of which he had said

ber that man was one. After this manner speak the Attic writers, especially Thucydides. And so we may understand St. 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, secondly, the original oydoov may possibly not belong to the name or person of Noah, but to his title or office; and then we must translate ὄγδοον Νῶε δικαιοσύνης anguna, Noah the eighth preacher of righteous

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.

* It being in both places expressed in the same phrase by the same author, δι ̓ οὗ καὶ τοὺς αἰῶνας ἐποίησεν, Heb. i. 2. πίστει νοοῦμεν κατηρτίσθαι τοὺς αἰῶνας ῥήματι Θεοῦ.

The answer of Socinus to this conjunction is very weak, relying only upon the want of a comma after Kai in the Greek, and Et in the Latin. And whereas it is evident that there are distinctions, in the Latin and Greek copies after that conjunction, he flies to the ancientest copies, which all men know were most careless of distinctions, and urgeth that there is no addition of rursum or the like after et, whereas in the Syriac translation we find expressly that addition :

expressly, "but unto the Son he saith." As sure then as "Thy throne, O God, is for ever and ever," was said unto the Son; so certain it is, "Thou, Lord, hast laid the foundations of the earth," was said unto the same. Nor is it possible to avoid the apostle's connexion by attributing the destruction of the heavens, out of the last words, to the Son, and denying the creation of them out of the first, to 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 shall destroy the heavens, must withal 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 destroyer. Wherefore being the words of the Psalmist were undoubtedly spoken of and to our Saviour (or else the apostle hath attributed that unto him which never belonged to him, and consequently the spirit of St. Paul mistook the spirit of David); being to whomsoever any part of them belongs, the whole is applicable, because they are delivered unto one; being the literal exposition is so clear, that no man hath ever pretended to a metaphorical: it remaineth as an undeniable truth, grounded upon the profession of the Psalmist, and the interpretation of an apostle, that the Son of God created the World. Nor needed we so long to have insisted upon this testimony, because there are so many which testify 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 decline the force of them. If they speak so plainly and literally of the work of creation, that they will not endure any figurative interpretation, then they endeavour to shew that they are not spoken of the Son of God. If they speak so 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 alleged 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 shewed it spoken to the Son of God, that it is beyond all possibility of gainsaying.

Thus having asserted the creation acknowledged real unto Christ, we shall the easier persuade that likewise to be such, which is pretended to be metaphorical. In the Epistle to the Colossians we read of the Son of God, "in whom we have redemption through his blood:" (Col. i. 14.) and we are sure those words can be spoken of none other than Jesus Christ. He therefore it must be, who was thus described by the apostle; "who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every