Father; ὁ Θεός, and παντοκράτωρ. He quotes Irenæus, as saying that "God commanded the Word," &c. and then brings a sentence out of another part of his book, to shew that "he who commands is greater and superior to him who is commanded;" applied by Irenæus to quite another purpose: but this is fair dealing, in comparison of what we sometimes meet with. He asserts in a note, (p. 84,) that "it is a solecism and absurdity in language to say, "that all things were made (dià Toũ Oecũ) by him "who is God absolutely, or the supreme God." But, absurd and solecistical as it may seem to this great critic in language, it is such as scripture uses; and such too as is sometimes used by those who write Greek in the greatest purity and perfection: as he might have seen, would he have consulted the authors referred to in the Importance f.

HEB. i. 8, 9, 10.

The ninth verse of this passage Dr. Waterland understands of the Son" considered as man, and in "his state of humiliation." But our author appeals to the ancients: let us hear them. Irenæus says"The Spirit hath characterized both the Persons “with the title God; both the Son who is anointed,

66

and, &c." Irenæus calls them both God, therefore he interpreted the unction of the divine nature; though, in the ninth chapter of the same book, he plainly interprets the unction of the Spirit's rest

* Defence, p. 110; Second Defence, p. 185, 513; Third Defence, p. 114. Clemens does not make the Son a creature, see Second Defence, p. 95.

Importance, &c. p. 487.

66

66

ing on the human nature 8-" Origen says, that the prophet declares that this God, whose throne is "for ever and ever, is anointed by God, who is his "God." To make Origen consistent with himself, we may render his TOUTOV TOY Oeov, this Person, who is God, is anointed, viz. in his human nature; for so he expressly interprets the unction elsewhere of the soul of Christ as anointed h." And Eusebius of "Cæsarea," (N. B. the authorities cited in the Importance, p. 490, are as good or better than Eusebius,)" "he who is declared to be God-is anointed "by another greater God," &c. False translation ! The true rendering of ὑφ' ἑτέρου μείζονος Θεοῦ καὶ πα τρὸς αὐτοῦ κεχρισμένος ἐλαίῳ is, “being anointed with "oil by another [Person] who is greater, his God "and Father :" and it is not said in what respect the Father is greater, or in what capacity the Son was anointed.

As to the next quotation from Eusebius, he has taken the liberty to alter the text (as he did before with Hilary) without intimating any thing of it to his readers. The whole period is this,-Aiónep ènì τούτῳ ἔχρισέ σε, ὦ Θεὲ, ὁ ἀνωτάτω καὶ μείζων αὐτὸς, ὁ καὶ σοῦ Θεὸς, ὡς εἶναι καὶ τὸν χριόμενον καὶ τὸν χριόντα (changed by our author into καὶ τοῦ χρισμένου τὸν χριόντα) πολὺ πρότερον, πάντων μὲν ὄντα Θεὸν, καὶ αὐτοῦ δὲ διαφερόντως τοῦ

g Nam secundum id quod Verbum Dei homo erat, ex radice Jesse, et filius Abrahæ, secundum hoc requiescebat Spiritus super eum, et ungebatur ad evangelizandum humilibus, lib. iii. cap. 9. p. 185. ed. Ben.

h Dilectionis ergo merito ungitur oleo lætitiæ, id est anima Christi cum Verbo Dei unum efficitur. Ungi namque oleo lætitiæ, non aliud intelligitur quam Spiritu Sancto repleri,-Пepì 'Apxv, lib. II. cap. v. sect. 4. p. 91. ed. Ben.

χρισμένου. Xproμévov1. This is the success of his appealing to the ancients; two of them witness against him, and the third, after much hacking and mauling, does not speak plainly up to his purpose. I will refer him now, ex abundanti, to Clemens Alexandrinus, who is also express for the unction being κατὰ σάρκα.

With regard to the 10th and following verses. Thou, Lord, in the beginning, &c. he is very confident that "the reason of the thing and all the an"cients are on his side, in the application of the pas

sage to God, the Father of Christ." P. 90. T apply the words to Christ, he pretends, is to make St. Paul contradict himself, who says, ver. 2. that God made the worlds (dià) by his Son, &c. But he shall hear Dr. Clarke; "These words, spoken of God

66

by the Psalmist, and applied thus to the Son by "the apostle, are a paraphrase of what he had said "above, ver. 2.1" What Dr. Clarke calls a para phrase, this worthy gentleman calls a contradiction: and an interpretation which the doctor thought barely possible, he is very positive is the right one: "Un"less possibly" (continues the doctor) "they be in"tended as a description of the immutability of the "Father, for a confirmation and assurance of what "he had declared in ver. 8, 9." Every intelligent reader will perceive, that there is great reason to

i Dem. Evang. lib. iv. cap. 15. p. 181. ed. Paris. 1628. ed. Steph. Lut. 1545, p. 115.

* Καὶ ὁ Κύριος ἡμῶν Χριστὸς, ἅγιος τῶν ἁγίων, ἐλθῶν καὶ πληρώσας τὴν ὅρασιν, καὶ τὸν προφήτην, ἐχρίσθη τὴν σάρκα τῷ τοῦ πατρὸς αὐτοῦ πνεύ Mari. Clem. Alex. Strom. 1. p. 394.

1 Scripture Doctrine, p. 96. third edit. That there really is no contradiction in this matter, see Dr. Waterland's Defence, p. 183; Second Defence, p. 181; Sermons, p. 48, &c. 56, 57, 59, 66, 68, &c.

peak thus diffidently of so harsh and unnatural an application. Socinians themselves are sensible of this, and therefore, applying the words to Christ, hey endeavour to evade the force of them, as well as they can, by other methods ". Had not they, as well as our author, a turn to serve, they would both allow, that the words are by the apostle applied to Christ, and that therefore, in consequence of this application, Christ is properly Creator of heaven and earth. His truly frivolous pretences were obviated before by Dr. Waterland", whom he is so good as to give us leave to consult upon this occasion; so little to the advantage of his cause, that he will be cautious how he grants such liberty for the future. The reasoning, which he says is very like, has no likeness at all. How is our Saviour's promising eternal life to his disciples (John x. 28, 29.) very like the apostle's arguing for the dignity of our Saviour himself, and his superiority to the angels? for that is the question, and not the stability or continuance of his kingdom. Let us now examine his ancients, who

m Particula et initio vers. 10. posita, novum adferri docet scripturæ testimonium, quo Christum angelis præstare ostendat. Schlichtingius et Crellius in loc.

" Defence, p. 95. Compare Sermons, p. 63, 64, 65. The doctor also refers to Surenhusius, who makes the application to Christ appear exceeding plain, ver. 7. πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ἀγγέλους λέγει, ver. 8. #pòs dè Tòv vidy, id est, λéye quæ ibi sequuntur; et ver. 10. Καί· id est, Καὶ πάλιν λέγει, πρὸς τὸν υἱὸν, (scilicet.) " Formula alle“gationis hic est Καὶ," &c. Βίβλος Καταλλαγῆς, μ. 600. But to plain common sense, nothing can make the thing more evident than it is of itself, and nothing can mistake it but affected learning under the influence of real prejudice. See also bishop Bull, Judic. Eccles. cap. v. sect. 8. and Wolfius, Curæ Philolog. et Crit. in loc. p. 612. Dr. Knight's Sermons, p. 51, &c.

are" all," he says, "on his side." He quotes Irenæus, Tertullian, Origen, and Eusebius. But what do these ancients say? that Heb. i. 10. is not applied by the apostle to Christ? No such thing. They consider not the words as quoted and applied in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and therefore, strictly speaking, are not interpreters of Heb. i. 10. To be more particular; Irenæus says nothing of the Father in particular, as opposed to the Son, but of the God of the Old Testament, which comprehends both Father and Son, according to Irenæus, in divers places P. Of both Irenæus and Tertullian he observes, that they understand the Son and Spirit to be the "hands of "God, by which," &c. But, were it his way ever to respond, he should have answered what Mr. Alexander has offered on that head, so far as it regards Irenæus. God made the world per semetipsum, and ipse a semetipso, &c. So that if he made it by his hands, (the Son and Spirit,) it is because they are, in a sense, the self of the Father. Tertullian in like manner, though he understood Psalm cii. 25. of the Person of the Father, as there called Lord, yet he took in both the other Persons as reckoned to him, and included in him, under the name of hands; interpreting hands by propriæ vires of the Father, valentia sua, intelligentia sua, sensus suus: which amounts to the same with Irenæus's interpreting per manus suas by per semetipsum.

Lib. iv. cap. 3. p. 230. ed. Bened.

P See Dr. Waterland's Sermons, p. 304; Second Defence, p. 66, 78.

9 Mr. Alexander's Essay on Irenæus, p. 27, 28. Compare Dr. Waterland's Second Defence, p. 80, 81. 60, 66.

Advers. Hermog. cap. 45.