of man, that is, a man, was in heaven, who without all controversy was not eternally pre-existent.' So they.

1. It is expressly affirmed, that Christ was in heaven, be fore his coming into the world. And if we evince his preexistence to his incarnation, against the Socinians, the task will not be difficult to prove that pre-existence to be in an eternal Divine nature against the Arians. It is sufficient as to our intendment in producing this testimony, that it is affirmed, that Christ v ρórepov in heaven, before his coming forth into the world; in what nature we elsewhere prove.

2. It is said indeed that the Son of man was in heaven, which makes it evident, that he who is the Son of man, hath another nature, besides that wherein he is the Son of man. wherein he is the Son of God. And by affirming that the Son of man was in heaven before, it doth no more assert that he was eternal, and in heaven in that nature, wherein he is the Son of man, than the affirmation that God redeemed his church with his own blood, doth prove, that the blood shed was the blood of the Divine nature. Both the affirmations are concerning the person of Christ. As he who was God, shed his blood as he was man; so he who was man, was eternal, and in heaven, as he was God. So that the answer doth merely beg the thing in question; viz. that Christ is not God and man in one person.

3. The insinuation here of Christ's being in heaven as man, before his ascension, mentioned in the Scripture, shall be considered, when we come to the proposal made of that figment by Mr. Biddle in his chapter of the prophetical office of Christ. In answer to the other testimonies recited, they thus proceed towards the latter end of their chapter, concerning the person of Christ.

X

'Q. What answerest thou to John iii. 13. x. 36. xvi. 28. xvii. 18.

* Uhi vero Scriptura de Christo ait, quod de cœlo descendit, a patre exivit, et in mundum venit. Joh. iii. 13. x. 36. xvi. 28. xvii. 18. quid ad hæc respondes?

Ex iis non probari divinam naturam hinc apparere, quod primi testimonii verba, descendit de cœlo, possint figurate accipi, quemadmodum, Jac. i. 17. Omne datum bonum et donum perfectum desursum est, descendens a Patre luminum: et Apoc. xxi. 2. 10. Vidi civitatem sanctam, Hierusalem novam, descendentem de cœlo a Deo, &c. Quod si proprie accipi debeant, quod nos perlibenter admittimus, apparet non de alio illa dicta, quam de filio hominis, qui cum personam humanam necessario habeat, Deus natura esse non potest. Porro, quod Scriptura testatur de Christo, quod Pater eum miserit in mundum, idem de Apostolis Christi legimus in iisdem verbis citatis superius. Quemadmodum me misisti in mundum, et ego misi eos in mundum ; Joh.

Thata Divine nature is not here proved, appeareth, because the words of the first testimony, he came down from heaven, may be received figuratively, as James i. 17. Every good and every perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights and Rev. xxi. 2. 10. I saw the holy city Jerusalem coming down from God, But if the words be taken properly, which we willingly admit, it appears, that they are not spoken of any other than the Son of man, who seeing he hath necessarily an human person, he cannot by nature be God. Moreover, for what the Scripture witnesseth of Christ, that the Father sent him into the world, the same we read of the apostles of Christ in the same words above alledged as John xvii. 18. As thou hast sent me into the world, I have sent them into the world. And these words, Christ came forth from the Father, are of the same import with he descended from heaven. To come into the world is of that sort, as the Scripture manifests to have been after the nativity of Christ; John xviii. 37. where the Lord himself says For this I am born, and come into the world, that I might bear witness to the truth: and. 1 John iv. 1. It is written, many false prophets are gone forth into the world. Wherefore, from this kind of speaking, a divine nature in Christ cannot be proved; but in all these speeches only what was the divine original of the office of Christ, is described.'

1. That these expressions are merely figuratively to be expounded, they dare not assert; nor is there any colour given that they may be so received from the instances produced from James i. 17. and Rev. xxi. 2. for there is only mention made of descending, or coming down, which word we insist not on by itself, but as it is conjoined with the tes timony of his being in heaven before his descending; which takes off all pretence of a parity of reason in the places compared.

2. All that follows is a perfect begging of the thing in

xvii. 18. Ea vero verba, quod Christus a Patre exierit, idem valent, quod de cœlo descendit. Venire vero in mundum, id ejusmodi est, quod Scriptura post nativitatem Christ: extitisse ostendit; John xviii. 37. ubi ipse Dominus ait, Ego in hoc natus sum, et in mundum veni, ut testimonium perhibeam veritati. Et 1 Joh. iv. 1. Scripm est, multos falsos Prophetas exiisse in mundum. Quare ex ejusmodi loquendi is natura divina in Christo probari non potest. In omnibus vero his locutioniquam divinum muneris Christi principium fuerit, duntaxat describitur.

question; because Christ is the Son of man, it follows that he is a true man; but not, that he hath the personality of a man, or a human personality. Personality belongs not to the essence, but the existence of a man. So that here they do but repeat their own hypothesis, in answer to an express testimony of Scripture against it. Their confession of the proper use of the word, is but to give colour to the figment formerly intimated, which shall be in due place (God assisting) discovered.

3. They utterly omit, and take no notice of that place, where Christ says, he so came from heaven, as that he was still in heaven; nor do they mention any thing of that, which we lay greatest weight on, of his affirming that he was in heaven before; but merely insist on the word descending, or coming down, and yet they can no other way deal with that neither, but by begging the thing in question.

4. We do not argue merely from the words of Christ's being sent into the world, but in this conjunct consideration, that he was so sent into the world, as that he was in heaven before, and so came forth from the Father, and was with him in heaven before his coming forth, and this our catechists thought good to oversee.

- 5. The difference of Christ's being sent into the world, and the apostles by him, which they parallel, as to the purpose in hand, lies in this, that Christ was so sent of the Father, that he came forth from the Father, and was with him in heaven before his sending, which proves him to have another nature, than that wherein he was sent the similitude alledged consists quite in other things. Neither,

6. Doth the Scripture in John xviii. 37. testify, that Christ's sending into the world was after his nativity, but only that the end of them both, was to bear witness to the truth. And indeed, I was born, and came into the world, are but the same, the one being exegetical of the other. But his being born, and his coming into the world, is in the testimonies cited, plainly asserted in reference to an existence that he had in heaven before. And thus as our argument is not at all touched in this answer, so is their answer closed as it began, with the begging of that which is not only questioned, but sufficiently disproved; namely, that Christ was in his human nature taken up into heaven and instructed in

the will of God, before his entrance upon his prophetical

office.

And this is the whole of what they have to except against this evident testimony of the Divine nature of Christ. He was in heaven, with the Father, before he came forth from the Father, or was sent into the world; and karà ảλλo kaì alo, was in heaven, when he was in the earth, and at his ascension returned thither where he was before. And so much for the vindication of this second testimony.

John vi. 62. is the second place I can meet with in all the annotations of Grotius, wherein he seems to assert the union of the human nature of Christ with the eternal Word: if he do so. It is not with the man that I have any difference, nor do I impose any thing on him for his judgment; I only take liberty, having so great cause given, to discuss his

annotations.

There remains one more of the first rank, as they are sorted by our catechists, for the proof of the eternity of Christ, which is also from John viii. 58. Before Abraham was I am,' that they insist on.

In this place the pre-eternity of Christ is not only not expressed, being it is one thing to be before Abraham, and another to be eternal, but also it is not so much as expressed, that he was before the virgin Mary. For these words may otherwise be read; namely, Verily, verily I say unto you, before Abraham was made I am; as it appears from those places in the same Evangelist, where the like Greek phrase is used, chap. xiii. 19. xiv. 29.

y. In hoc loco non solum non exprimitur præ-æternitas Christi, cum aliud sit, ante Abrahamum fuisse, aliud, præ-æternum ; verum ne hoc quidem expressum est, ipsum ante Mariam virginem fuisse. Et enim ea verba aliter legi posse (nimirum hac ratione, Amen, Amen, dico vobis, priusquam Abraham fiat, ego sum) apparet ex iis locis apud eundem evangelistam, ubi similis et eadem locutio græca habetur, cap. xiii. 19. et modo dico vobis, priusquam fiat, ut cum factum fuerit credatis. Et cap. xiv. 29. et nunc dixi vobis priusquam fiat, &c. Quæ vero ejus sententia foret lectionis?— Admodum egregia: etenim admonet Christus Judæos, qui eum in sermone capere volebant, ut dum tempus haberent, crederent ipsum esse mundi lucem, antequam divina gratia, quam Christus iis offerebat, ab iis tolleretur, et ad Gentes transferretur. 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. constat et hinc, quod Christus bis seipsum iisdem verbis, ego sum, lucem mundi vocaverit, ver. 24. 28. ea vero verba, priusquam Abraham fiat, id significare quod diximus, e notatione nominis Abraham deprehendi potest; constat inter omnes Abrahamum notare patrem multarum gentium. Cum vero Abram non sit factus prius Abraham, quam Dei gratia, in Christo manifestata, in multas gentes redundaret, quippe quod Abrahamus unius tantum gentis antea pater fuerit, apparet sententiam horum verborum, quam attulimus, esse ipsissimam.

'Q. What then would be the sense of this reading?

'A. Very eminent. For Christ admonisheth the Jews, who would have ensnared him in his speech, that whilst they had time, they should believe in him the light of the world, before the divine grace which Christ offered to them, should be taken from them, and be carried to the Gentiles. But that these words, 'I am,' are to be supplied in that manner, as if himself had added to them, I am the light of the world, appears, because that in the beginning of his speech, ver. 12. he had twice in these words, 'I am,' called himself the light of the world; ver. 24, 25. and that these words, before Abraham be, do signify that which we have said, may be perceived from the notation of that word Abraham; for it is evident, that Abraham notes the father of many nations: seeing then that Abram was made Abraham, before the grace of God, manifested in Christ, redounded to many nations, for Abraham before was the father of one nation only, it appears that that is the very sense of the words which we have given.'

If our adversaries can well quit themselves of this evidence, I believe they will have no small hopes of escaping in the whole trial. And if they meet with judges so partially addicted to them and their cause, as to accept of such manifest juggling, and perverting of the Scriptures, I know not what they may not expect or hope for. Especially, seeing how they exalt and triumph in this invention; as may be seen in the words of Socinus himself, in his answer to Erasmus Johannes, p. 67. For whereas Erasmus says, 'I confess in my whole life, I never met with any interpretation of Scripture more wrested, or violently perverting the sense of it.' The other replies. I hoped rather that thou wouldst confess, that in thy whole life thou hadst never heard an interpretation more acute, and true than this, nor which did savour more of somewhat divine, or evidenced

7 Fateor me per omnem vitam meam non magis contortam scripturæ interpretationem audivisse; ideoque eam penitus improbo. Eras. Johan. Cum primum fatendi verbum in tuis verbis animadverti, sperabam te potius nullam in tua vita scripturæ interpretationem audivisse, quæ hac sit acutior aut verior; quæque magis divinum quid sapiat, et a Deo ipso patefactam fuisse præ se ferat. Ego quidem certe non leves conjecturas habeo, illum, qui primus ætate nostra eam in lucem pertulit (hic autem is fuit, qui primus quoque sententiam de Christi origine, quam ego constanter defendo renovavit) precibus multis ab ipso Christo impetrasse. Hoc profecto affirmare ausim, cum Deus illi viro permulta, aliis prorsus tunc temporis incognita, patefe cerit, vix quidquam inter illa omnia esse quod interpretatione hac divinius vider queat. Socin. disput. cum Eras. Johan. arg. 4. p. 67.