whether Christ has seen Abraham The Jews say thou hast not for thou art not yet fifty Years Old Thou art much posterior to him But I tell you says Christ I am so far from being posterior that I am anterior to him Before he was I am Now we must judge of the answer by the question The one ought to have relation to the other or else it is all cross purposes which must not so much as be thought of here To deal candidly do the Jews ask Christ whether he is so much later then Abraham in time or only in the decree of God It is certainly in time Thou art not yet fifty Years Old Therefore Christ speaks also of a priority of time and not of decree Before he was I am Besides admitting of that decree Christ could not have said that he was in the decree before Abraham For Abraham in whose seed all nations were to be blessed was in the decree before the seed it self Abraham's coming into the World was in the decree before Christ's appearing in the Flesh This Author has cited St. Austin but neither his words nor the place where they are to be found If he means in his tracts on the Gospel of St. John He will find that he has made use of this Text to confirm an Hypothesis which runs through all his writings that God having decreed to save Mankind in the Mediator Jesus He is the first of the Elect the first of the decree and in that sence consequently before Abraham and all Men besides but this still upon the supposition of the Union of the two Natures in his Person which if these Gentlemen had observ'd they durst not so much as have nam'd him nothing in the World overthrowing their Doctrine so effectually as this The 1. Pet. 1.20 and Rev. 13.8 are altogether foreign to the question They regard his Office but not his Person His mediation in the behalf of us Sinners but not his Nature The 3d Part of the Answer that the Jews did not apprehend Christ and that he did not intend or care they should is a Proposition which if admitted ruines the whole Oeconomy of the Gospel It makes the God of Incomprehensible Mercies to be guilty of the most refin'd sort of Cruelty to proffer the Patient a Medicine which must undoubtedly Cure him and at the same time to make him incapable of taking it Certainly they cannot but see the horrour of such an Answer Before I leave this Text I must take notice of the words of the Author spoken of Abraham with so much caution and to so little purpose He saw it says he as coming not as present He foresaw as he desir'd the time that it should be The nature of Prophecy is to make present to the sight of the Prophet that which by being future is wholly out of his reach It is that which makes it miraculous But in the case of Abraham he did not only desire but had a clear Revelation of the day of Christ He saw it and the ineffable prospect of the glory of the Messias and of the Infinite Blessings Mankind was to receive by him fill'd him with an incredible Joy This is the true sence of the place But what can more substantially evince the Pre-existence of Christ before all things than that all things are created by him That he has given Being to whatsoever exists That he is not only their Creator but also their Preserver and that whatsoever exists is maintain'd and supported by him What will become of that poor assertion which fixes his Existence to the first moment of his Conception if it can be made plain that he was before any thing that is and existed before any thing did exist For the effect naturally supposes the Pre-existence of the cause Any work that is done implies the being of the Workman who did it and if the World is created by Christ If the Scripture fully and clearly teaches him to be the Creator of the World The Socinian foundation must be sandy and ruinous The Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews 1st Chap. v. 2. says positively that Christ made the World He has in these last dayes spoken to us by his Son by whom also he made the Worlds 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But here we are stop't short by the Author of the Brief Hist pag. 41. who tells us That Grotius the irrefragable Grotius says that we translate ill by whom and that we should read for whom That it was a Maxim amongst the Jews that the World was made for the Messias If this fails he tells you that others insist that this is an allegory that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be translated Ages by which are meant the Gospel Ages or times Thus sinking Men grasp at any thing that appears let it be shadow or substance With what considence can Men substitute a reading contrary to all the Translations extant which read by whom Per quem says the old latin the Syriac and all the Fathers To prove the truth of their Translation they have an empty notion that it was believ'd amongst the Jews that the World was made for the Messias which indeed is the opinion of a few late Rabbins follow'd in this by Grotius who in his interpretation of the Scripture has wholly departed from the ancient Jews Whereas if these Gentlemen desire it It will be made out that it is the constant tradition of the Jews that the World was made by the word the Son of God This destroys the Allegory to all intents and purposes and really it is so raw and so dragg'd that it easily destroys it self If there were no place but this for the Creation of the World or of the Worlds or of the Ages for these are all one they might with more colour fly from the letter to the Trope But we may say that there is scarce any thing in the Scripture more inculcated than this Through Faith says St. Paul Heb. 11.3 We understand that the Worlds were fram'd by the word of God Heb. 1.8 But unto the Son he says thy Thorne O God is for ever and ever ....... and thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth and the Heavens are the work of thy hands They shall perish but thou remainest and they shall wax old as does a garment and as a vesture shall thou fold them up and they shall be chang'd but thou art the same and thy Years shall not fail There is then 1st A general assertion of the Apostle We believe that all that is has been made by the word and this as a true Creator without any pre-existent matter So that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear 2ly He brings the Almighty speaking to the Word to his Son and thou Lord in the beginning hast laid the foundation of the earth Is this a Trope an Allegory or a reality Is it a real or a Metaphorical founding of the earth
where to rest He has found this in Grotius and has taken it up for want of something more solid If this way of criticising is allow'd there is nothing in Scripture capable of a litteral sence A warm Fancy and a great deal of Confidence will make the Sacred Book a continu'd Metaphor How easy would it be to do that with the first Chapter of Genesis which those Gentlemen have done with this and indeed with any thing in Scripture which is never so litteral He has cited Athanasius and Cyril but not the places where they read Modell'd Till they are quoted what can be said to it is that it cannot but be known even to them that both these Fathers with all the ancients and even the Arrians themselves acknowledge Christ the Creator of the natural World But if Grotius The Jesuit Selmero and Montanus have read Modell'd I cannot see what advantage comes to their cause from the rendrings of private Men. All the Greek Copies read Created The old Latin Created All the publick Translations that I know in the World read Created I am not sensible that there is any one place in Scripture where the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not render'd Creation and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Creator Nor do I understand why it should be Modell'd here and not every where else Must we say Rom. 1.21 That the invisible things of him from the Modelling of the World are clearly seen and not from the Creation Rom. 8.19.21 The earnest expectation of the thing Modell'd waits for the manifestation of the Children of God The Modell'd it self shall be deliver'd from the bondage of corruption For the whole Modellship groaneth and travelleth untill now must we say 1 Pet. 4.19 committ the keeping of their souls to him as unto a faithful Modeller Many more instances of this kind might be produc'd which if thus translated and why not thus in other places as well as here are down right impertinence But granting that rare word Modelling still it does not ruine but suppose the Pre-existence He is before all things and by him all things consist The things spoken of here are not reduc'd only to the preaching of the Apostles It includes that of the Prophets and reaches to all the Types of the Messias The Figures were to be Modell'd as well as the realities Not only the Generation which comes after Christ is sav'd by him but also that which preceeded him Christ then being the Saviour was to be the Modeller of both David and Solomon were Figures of Christ He must therefore have been before them to Modell them Joshua and Moses are said by all the Fathers to have been eminent Types of the Holy Jesus He must then of necessity have preceeded him to Modell him Adam was also a Figure of Christ and consequently to be Modell'd by him The natural Heaven and Earth are a shadow of the new Heavens and the new Earth wherein dwells righteousness Therefore Modellable by the Saviour Therefore he must have existed before them to Modell and to speak this Author 's own words to order dispose and prepare them to answer those great ends for which they were created I will say to the acute Author of this History once for all what the Answerer to Doctor Wallis tells that Reverend Person pag. 17. This may be call'd a fineness He means a finenesse a subtlety a querk nor an accurate reasoning or a solid and true Answer And pag 18. But so it is that they that maintain a false Opinion must answer to the present Exigent sometimes this thing sometimes the contrary Only truth is stable coherent consistent with it self always the same I will end this Letter with that wise reflexion and so remain SIR Your Most humble Servant L. THE Third LETTER SIR WHAT has been said concerning the Pre-existence of Christ is enough to overthrow the Socinian System and supposes his Pre-eternity We have this advantage that the one proves the other For if nothing is before time but what is Eternal there being no duration conceivable by us but Time and Eternity shewing that Christ existed before Time it self was implies his Eternal Being That by him all things were created the Arrians themselves could not deny forc'd to it by the great evidence of the Texts alledg'd before But whatsoever creates is infinite in the general confession both of Divines and Philosophers It supposes an unlimited power in the agent which nothing can resist and every thing must obey at whose Call matter is produc'd and presents it self to be actuated into what form he pleases But if whosoever creates is infinite and Almighty and whosoever is infinite and Almigthy is also Eternal The same Texts which so evidently prove the Creation of all things by him do also prove his Eternity But even passing by all this I presume to say that if Christ's Eternal Being is not clearly and plainly deliver'd in Scripture there is nothing plain or clear in the World I will begin by the 1st of St. John An Authority of that weight and extent that all that is dispersed in the other Books of the Sacred Writers concerning the nature of Christ seems to be collected in this There is no complaint here of mutilation of Sentences of alteration of words As it was deliver'd at first so it has been preserv'd a clear and a lasting testimony of this Sacred Doctrine I admire what makes the Author of the Answer to Mr. Milbourn pag. 20 21. so angry with St. Jerom for saying that at the request of the Asiatick Bishops St. John Writ his Gospel to assert the Divinity of Christ which this Father pretends not to assure upon his own credit but that of the Church's History This Author says That Irenaeus 200 Years older then St. Jerom is silent about it That Origen the great searcher of the Monuments of Antiquity gives no such account and Eusebius himself who has preserv'd what is said here of Origen who besides had read Hegesippus and whatever History St. Jerom could have read says that the design of St. John in writing his Gospel was to supply the omissions of the other three Evangelists Yet after all this the learned World knows that St. Jerom was a serious and a candid Person of a temper not to impose or be impos'd upon of a quick apprehension vast parts prodigious reading well acquainted with the affairs of the Eastern Church and of whom it is not imaginable that he would either cite a Book which he had not seen or give credit to a History that had not been genuine and authentick The answerer calls it in vain A Legend a Fiction a great Romance of an Ecclesiastical History cited by St Jerom and seen by no body but himself No Man of sence or learning will believe any thing of this A negative proof goes a great way but it must be better grounded then this Irenaeus does not say it it is true but he says nothing to the
Sacred and Divine Mysteries The Church of Rome and some others have presum'd to go further and to six the manner of Christ's being in the Sacrament I demand then with what equity these Gentlemen can make that Objection and repeat it with as much earnestness as if they reason'd upon an undisputed Principle The Trinity and Incarnation we believe The How can it be we acknowledge incomprehensible We do the same of Christ's presence in the Sacrament The Revelation concerning all this is plain and express We pretend to no more It is disingenuous and obstinate to deny that any thing is because we cannot shew how it is Had we deny'd the presence of Christ in the Sacrament the Objection had been of some force But denying only Transubstantiation that is the manner of that presence it is altogether wide of the question Having done with this Author I pass to that of the Brief History who did not think this Answer of Mr. Milbourn's Adversary solid enough to embrace it But after some cursory animadversions on the Churche's Exposition shelters himself under Grotius's Wings and delivers that learned Man's Opinion It is needless to transcribe it all that he says pag. 26 27 28. amounting to this Grotius understands as we do the Creation here spoken of to be that of the Natural World He explains the words in the beginning as we do when God created all things or when all things began to exist He makes as we do that word to be not only Pre-existent but Eternal He understands as we do the word to be with God and to be God He reads as we do all things were made by him and for him He renders as we do The word was made Flesh acknowledging that Flesh is the usual Scripture Phrase for Man and saying also in the Explication of the 10th Verse that in process of time the word come to be Incarnate You will say then where does he differ from the Orthodox For as yet nothing appears contrary to the sence receiv'd in the Christian World He differs only in this that he makes this word to be only a property and an Attribute of God i. e. his Wisdom and Power but not a Divine Person I wonder that this Author would embrace an Exposition which really ruines all their little Criticisms their charming Allegories and brings the question to this only difficulty whether the word is no more than an Attribute or whether he is a Person Whatever Grotius in other places has done for these Gentlemen he has certainly given up the cause here by cleaving to the litteral sence of the words which indeed he could by no means avoid I will only propose these difficulties 1st If the word here is no more than an Attribute or Property how is he constantly spoken of here by he and him The world was made by him The world knew him not It is ridiculous to say that it is in the same manner that Prov. 9.1 Wisdom is said to build her House and David calls God's Commandments his Councellers Since in those places is a visible and a design'd Metaphor But Grotius owns here a real actual natural Creation of the World which admits of nothing Figurative 2ly If the word is no more than an Attribute of God what can be the meaning of the Evangelist In the beginning was the word and the word was God What is there in this so singular and to what can this lead us The Wisdom of God was before all things and the Wisdom of God was with God That is God was wise before the World was Created Certainly St. John means somewhat more than this Why not in the beginning was the Power the Mercy the Truth the Holiness of God For all this God was before things began to be 3ly What can be the design of this and the word was God Who ever heard any one say that Wisdom is God and Power is God Nor will it serve here to say as the Author of the History That all the Attributes of God are God or that the name Jehovah is attributed to Angels and that Moses is call'd God Either of these answers destroys the other For if the Attributes of God are God then Wisdom is the supreme God and not as the Angels or Moses Or if Wisdom is call'd Jehovah as the Angels and God as Moses then all the Attributes of God are not the Supreme God 4ly If the word is no more than an Attribute what can be made of this He was in the world and the world knew him not He came unto his own and his own receiv'd him not Living in the World unknown to the World coming to and rejected by Men cannot be said of Wisdom If it could bear that sence the Evangelist says nothing since before the Gospel before Moses before the Flood the Wisdom of God was despis'd by Men. 5ly The following words can never be spoken in the sence of an Attribute So many as receiv'd him to them gave he power to become the Sons of God even to them who believe on his name Can sence be made of wisdom giving us power or believing in the name of wisdom 6ly If wisdom is no more than a qualification how comes this and the word was made Flesh I remember that these Gentlemen value themselves much upon this notion of the Author of the Impartial Account of the word Mystery that they cannot believe the Trinity because they can have no notion of a Trinity I humbly beg a notion of Justice Prudence Holiness or as here Wisdom made Flesh I humbly beg a notion of an Attribute made Flesh 7ly And we beheld his glory the Glory as of the only begotten Son of the Father I again humbly beg to know whether the Attribute Wisdom is the only begotten Son of the Father I beg a notion of the Glory of God's Wisdom to be seen by human Eyes No says the Author you mistake it is the Glory of the Man on whom the word did abide But I must beg his pardon and tell him that this is too great an imposition on the sence of Mankind Any one who knows somewhat more than his A. B. C. knows that The word is the subject of all that is said here It is of the word that it is said that he was in the beginning that he was God that he was with God that he made the World that he was made Flesh that his Glory was seen as of the only begotten Son of God He must not He cannot admit the word to be the subject of all the other Propositions and deny him to be the subject of this I beg your pardon for having been so long on this Text. But the Answers of your Friends being of so great an extent though of so different a nature it was fit to shew how weak and unsatisfactory they appear I then prosecute the Argument and offer some others to your consideration I think that nothing proves the Eternity of God so